Iraqs National Day is a necessary weapon in fighting divisions – The National

Posted on by

Seventeen years after the fall of Saddam Husseins regime and the ensuing American-led occupation of the country, Iraq continues to suffer from the consequences of state collapse.

From dismantling the army and police forces, to redesigning the Iraqi flag, rushed decisions were taken in 2003 to erase the immediate past without much thought for the future. When Iraqs ancient past was under threat, as exemplified by the looting of the Iraqi National Museum and the use of sand from archaeological sites for American army sandbags, once again little thought was given to the wider impact on the country.

Among the decisions that were made by the Coalition Provisional Authority, the American-led civilian authority running Iraq in the immediate aftermath of the invasion, was the abolition of Iraqs National Day. For decades, National Day was July 17, 1968, marking the coup that brought the Baath party to power. Before that, National Day was July 14, marking the day that Abdulkareem Qassems military coup led to the killing of Iraqs royal family members in 1958 and the declaration of a republic.

Even after the Baathists designated July 17 as the new National Day, July 14 remained a national holiday. Both dates are highly politicised and were hardly symbols of national unity.

In 2003, a number of political parties wanted to declare April 9, the day Saddam Husseins regime fell, as the National Day, but that is equally contentious and was rejected by most Iraqis. However, the day is still a national holiday in Iraqs Kurdistan Region.

Since 2003, Iraq has not had a national day an apt metaphor for the targeted attempts to weaken Iraqs national identity

Today, Iraq averages more than 12 public holidays per year that are tied to religious occasions. Additional public holidays include New Years Day, Army Day, Labour Day and Nowruz, the first day of spring. Since 2017, December 10 has been marked as Victory Day, celebrated as the day ISIS was declared defeated and no longer in control of any Iraqi territory. However, it is a bittersweet day for those who lost loved ones, homes and livelihoods.

In effect, since 2003, Iraq has not had a national day an apt metaphor for the targeted attempts to weaken Iraqs national identity, often by political leaders who could not survive on a nationalist platform. Sectarian and ethnic divides were promoted over an Iraqi national identity.

With those divides came high levels of corruption and the erosion of state institutions. Iraqs Prime Minister, Mustafa Al Kadhimi, recognises the complexity of the problem and the impact of the weakening of Iraqs national identity on the countrys fortunes. Speaking to me in an exclusive interview last month, Mr Al Kadhimi said he is working to tackle sectarianism and corruption equally, while promoting nationalism as part of his reform programme. "We will use all the strength we have to push for the principles of patriotism and nationalism, he said.

Last week, Iraqs Cabinet agreed on a draft law to mark October 3 as Iraqs National Day, to be celebrated for the first time this year. It is a sensible choice of date, commemorating the day Iraq joined the League of Nations in 1932, independent of the British Mandate.

Iraqs Culture Minister Hassan Nazim explained that the importance of this day is that it is an official and international recognition of the establishment of the Iraqi state, to be among the first Arab (countries) to gain independence. However, the move still needs parliamentary ratification and is already contested.

The key battle here is that a number of prominent political parties work against the strengthening of Iraqi national identity, which would weaken their party programmes that rest on division and sectarianism.

Some say that other milestones in Iraqi history ought to be marked instead. And while reflecting upon history may bring alternative dates to mind, the declaration of Iraqs independence as a modern nation-state is the most appropriate. It is a date filled with national pride and does not favour one political party or entity over another.

Countries all over the world cherish their national day as a moment for citizens to rally around what binds them together rather than what divides them. The coronation of a king or queen, the birth of a revolution, the declaration of independence and a coming together of a number of regions under one flag have all been inspirations for different national days.

Mr Al Kadhimis move to impose a national day is part of his effort to unite Iraqis particularly younger ones in feeling pride in their heritage and their potential future. Declaring a national day and uniting people over national symbols of culture like poetry and art are important steps in helping Iraq heal its wounds and work towards guarding its sovereignty. One measure alone wont do it, but a concerted effort with measures like these can make the difference between a successful or failed state.

Francis Fukuyama, who has written extensively on identity, says that national identity has been pivotal to the fortunes of modern states. And while we must be weary of national identities that are exclusionary or dogmatic, they can be forged on commonalities that bring together diverse communities.

Fukuyama added in an article published in the Journal of Democracy in October 2018: an inclusive sense of national identity remains critical to maintaining a successful, modern political order. National identity not only enhances physical security, but also inspires good governance; facilitates economic development; fosters trust among citizens; engenders support for strong social safety nets and ultimately makes possible liberal democracy itself.

All of the characteristics listed by Fukuyama are part of the aspirations of young Iraqis. Perhaps the only contentious one is that tied to liberal democracy, as many of the attacks on Iraqs national identity were carried out under the guise of democracy. Good governance, economic development and trust among citizens are the pillars that must be stood up in Iraq in order for a path towards a truly representative liberal democracy to be found.

Mina Al-Oraibi is editor-in-chief at The National

Updated: September 7, 2020 07:02 PM

Continued here:

Iraqs National Day is a necessary weapon in fighting divisions - The National

Letter: Examining the 10 planks of socialism | Opinion – Victoria Advocate

Posted on by

The father of our Constitution, James Madison, made the observation that most nations fail by small incremental changes from within rather foreign invasions. Lately we have heard rhetoric about socialism. So lets examine socialism/communism according to Karl Marxs 10 planks.

1. Abolition of private property, by applying all rents of land to public purposes. This was the one that needed to be accomplished most.

2. Heavy progressive income tax.

3. Abolish all rights of inheritance.

4. Confiscate property of all emigrants and rebels.

5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of a national bank.

6. Centralisation of means of communication and transportation.

7. Extension of factories and production owned by the state.

8. Equal liability of all to work.

9. Combination of agriculture and manufacturing industries, redistributing populace over the country.

10. Free education for all children in public schools, combining education and industrial production.

Karl Marx believed that changing the social order, by force if necessary, may be necessary to effect the changes needed. We are not far from a socialist country, are we. Bottom line is the state owns or outrightly controls everything. In a manner of speaking government regulatory agencies are small scale socialist organizations, some would say tyrannical, because they fill the office of lawmaker, judge and enforcer.

All public servants swear an oath to the Constitution, which is an outline of limited government, established to protect God-given rights.

Think about this, if government only gets money from taxes, borrowing or printing more and you depend upon government to supply your needs, what will that leave you with?

Link:

Letter: Examining the 10 planks of socialism | Opinion - Victoria Advocate

We need police reforms, but none of this is simple – Olean Times Herald

Posted on by

Rioting and looting. Driving through crowds and shooting. These criminal acts, the work of extremists, threaten to drown out legitimate demands for reform of a damaged system.

There have been enough cases of police who have used egregiously excessive force against Black people, enough history of systemic bias predicated on race and enough blatant acts of racism by individuals that we should be able to see clearly that theres a need for a national reckoning.

We cant pretend that all police are perfect and beyond questioning. Nor should we pretend that all cops are bastards. These two diametrically opposed generalizations are the positions of extremists and in case you havent noticed, the extremists are the ones doing the shooting and instigating chaos.

Their actions are tantamount to violent, ugly tantrums, and will not bring us closer to solving the crisis in our public safety system.

Were not talking about defunding the police, a proposal thats both poorly named and short-sighted. Its poorly named because most advocates actually want some funding redirected to social services, not abolition of police. Its short-sighted, because moving the money around doesnt magically create the mental health and social services resources needed to address the myriad social problems that can contribute to crime.

A society without some form of policing will devolve into anarchy, and will most hurt people in poor communities, who will be beset anew by crime.

But we need reforms, and support for that concept is coming from all directions. We lost momentum in recent years for the nascent reforms, baby steps really, that began in 2015-2016. Will the momentum shift back now?

On Monday, Alabama football coach Nick Saban led his team on a march in Tuscaloosa in support of social justice. According to alabama.com, Saban and student athletes spoke in front of the same schoolhouse door where, in 1963, Alabama governor George Wallace resisted federal efforts to desegregate schools.

The problems of grinding poverty, trauma, exposure to crime, lead and other environmental toxins, unaddressed mental illness or a parental personality disorder, cannot be addressed properly by a 911 call during crisis.

Police officers are neither trained nor equipped to act as social workers or mental health professionals, and yet they have been forced into that role for decades now as those services have been cut. Many of them have tried to shoulder that burden, taking extra training in crisis intervention, making contacts with service providers.

And some just react badly when faced with a person in crisis. This is how we get police shooting deaf people or people in psychosis who fail to comply. It's why police have developed crisis intervention training, to provide officers with a different set of tools to handle a different set of problems.

But thats one piece of a complex puzzle. Militarization is another, and one which requires cultural change so police are not set against the public they are sworn to serve. The answers will not be easy. We'll need to cooperate, and to listen to each other.

Let us not go backward.

Tribune News Service

Continued here:

We need police reforms, but none of this is simple - Olean Times Herald

The Only Unavoidable Subject of Regret – Bacon’s Rebellion

Posted on by

by Erik Curren

Comedian John Oliver recently joined the chorus denouncing Americas founding fathers as unworthy of admiration because of their connection to slavery. This time, the target was George Washington.

Commenting on an episode of ABCs morning talk showThe View, in which Joy Behar said that statues of Washington deserved to stay up not only because hed won the Revolution but also because hed freed his slaves, Oliver sided with a show guestwho said that Behar was wrong, and that Washington was actually a horrible slaveowner.

White people like Behar seeking out misleadingly comforting versions of history is a pattern weve seen again and again this year, said Oliver.

Should Americans topple statues of George Washington? You bet, implied Oliver.

Since I share Olivers liberal political bent, I usually find his humor and political satire hilarious. But not this time.I was sad to see that Oliver has apparently jumped on the Twitter bandwagon to judge and condemn figures from the American past using current standards of woke social justice activism but employing very little actual history.

To paraphrase Albert Einstein, everythingshould be made assimpleas possible,butnosimpler. In trying to pander to a youth audience, Oliver has made a complex story too simple.

I predict that Oliver will soon learn, as his countrymen King George III and Lord Cornwallis did back in the Revolution, that if you want to take down George Washington, youd better deploy heavy artillery. And even then you may fail, as those estimable Englishmen did at Yorktown. John Oliver is no Cornwallis, and his ill-informed finger wagging was like a puny musket that appears to have gone off in his own face.

It would be a cheap shot to refer Englishman Oliver to thestory that Abraham Lincoln used to tell about Ethan Allen visiting England just after the American Revolution. Allen wound up dining at the home of a British aristocrat who thought it would be clever to hang a portrait of George Washington in his outhouse. Im sure Oliver would enjoy Ethan Allens reaction to his host after returning from the loo. For a laugh,watch Daniel Day-Lewis deliver the punchlinein this short clip from Steven Spielbergs wonderful biopicLincoln.

Fortunately, to get to the truth about Washington and slavery without trendy simplifications, theres no need for cheap shots. Mary Thompson, librarian at Mount Vernon, has condensed 30 years of research on George Washingtons relationship to slavery in her detailed but readable bookThe Only Unavoidable Subject of Regret: George Washington, Slavery, and the Enslaved Community at Mount Vernon.

Thompsons book is a primer on the economic and social life of the white and black community at Washingtons plantation home in the second half of the 18th century, covering such subjects as crops grown, farming innovations, white indentured servants, overseers (both white and black) and changes in the economy.

Thompson offers this context to tell a story of George Washington more nuanced than a social media meme or a punchline from a comedian.

Balancing Rigor and Care

Even if youre talking about George Washington, there was no such a thing as a good slaveowner. Slavery was inherently about making people work for free, torturing them when they didnt obey and separating families.

Thompson is clear that she admires Washington, referring to him as one of the greatest men who ever lived. But she does not candy coat Washingtons participation in slavery, which Thompson considers to be Americas original sin:

Was George Washington a good slave owner? or He was good to his slaves, wasnt he? To anyone looking at this book to provide those answers, let me just say upfront that some of the worst things one thinks about in terms of slavery whipping, keeping someone in shackles, tracking a person down with dogs, or selling people away from their family all of those things happened either at Mount Vernon or on other plantations under Washingtons management.

According to European visitors, former slaves and members of the Washington family alike, George Washington balanced expectations for long days of hard work with a concern for the happiness and good health of his enslaved workers.

Expecting others to embrace his own work ethic and punishing daily schedule, Washington was not an easy man to work for, whether you were black or white; a soldier, a free tradesman or an enslaved worker. But George Washington also cared for his people, especially at Mount Vernon, where one foreign visitor wrote that Washington dealt with his slaves far more humanely than do his fellow citizens of Virginia.

Thompsons conclusion is clear: Washington was not a horrible slaveowner but a better-than-average one. And theres plenty of evidence that the Father of Our Country also may have been a father of the budding abolition movement, in a quiet but especially effective way.

Thompson provides context that shows just how complex was the story of Washington and his enslaved workers. To judge the man, you must understand at least some of this context.

Her most interesting point is that, against all odds, over the course of his lifetime, Washington learned to hate slavery and decided to work for its end.

Slavery was thousands of years old by the time Europeans brought it to the New World, and Americans inherited the peculiar institution from the British.

It may be hard to understand today, where freedom is the norm and slavery is illegal in every nation on earth, but before the American Revolution, here and everywhere, freedom was the exception and unfreedom was the rule. As many as 75% of people who immigrated to the 13 British colonies that became the United States may have been unfree laborers, either slaves or indentured servants.

As a member of the Virginia gentry, Washington was born into a world where most work was done by bound workers and where most people thought that unfree labor, organized in a hierarchy with white householders at the top, wives and children in the middle and indentured and enslaved people at the bottom, was an eternal part of society.

Yet, letters and other documentary evidence that Thompson presents show that as George Washington matured, he learned to hate the institution of slavery and developed a strong desire to see it end on a national level.

To a visiting British actor, the retired president explained,

Not only do I pray for it, on the score of human dignity, but I can clearly foresee that nothing but the rooting out of slavery can perpetuate the existence of our union, by consolidating it in a common bond of principle.

Seeing how impractical abolition was during his lifetime, Washington at least wanted to free as many enslaved people under his control as he could.

This history is little known. And as more and more places take down statues of Confederate generals and other figures from history, Washington has become a target of renewed criticism for his role as a slaveowner.

Answering the Charges

As to the common criticisms leveled at George Washington today for alleged abuses of enslaved people, Thompson mostly exonerates Washington:

Yes, Washington did use teeth from enslaved people in his dentures. He bought teeth only from people who were willing to sell, a gruesome but common practice for poor people of all races in the 18th century. In the days before payday lending, people without property had few options to raise cash quickly. Poor people continued to sell their own teeth at least into the 19th century, as readers ofLes Miserables can attest.

This is wrong Washington freed all the slaves he could in his will. Only in a narrow technical sense can anyone argue with this: Only one enslaved person, William Lee, who served as attendant to Washington during the Revolution, was freed on Washingtons death in December of 1799. But 123 others at Mount Vernon were granted freedom in Washingtons will to be emancipated on Marthas death. However, following advice from friends, Martha decided to free all these people while she was still alive, about a year after Washingtons death. Another 40 slaves at a plantation in Tidewater Virginia controlled by Washington were ordered to be freed on a gradual schedule.

To claim that Washington didnt free slaves in his will based on the timing when the manumissions went into effect is fundamentally dishonest. The truth is, he freed more than 160 slaves in his will, which was a huge accomplishment not only because of the financial value lost to his heirs but because it was so unusual among Virginia planters to emancipate so many people at once. As Thompson explains, at the time, this rare act attracted criticism from influential white people, who thought that Washington had acted rashly. By contrast, prominent black leaders were overjoyed.

According to Thompson, it wasnt greed or hypocrisy but lack of funds that prevented Washington from acting on his documented desire to free slaves during his lifetime. After the Revolution, during which he worked for eight years without a salary, Washington came back to a nearly bankrupt farm operation at Mount Vernon with failing crops and mounting debts. As he worked to fix his finances, Washington also brainstormed various schemes to transition his enslaved workers from slavery to freedom. In the end, his will proved to be the best instrument to accomplish the emancipation project hed planned for more than a decade.

Theres no evidence that George Washington fathered West Ford, who claimed to be his son by an enslaved woman named Venus, or any children at all by women in the enslaved community of Mount Vernon. Mixed-race children there were fathered by white overseers, tradesmen and workers on the estate or else by white men living in the neighborhood.

Washington did in fact hunt down escaped ladys maid Oney (or Ona) Judge, going so far as to enlist government officials to locate her in New Hampshire to which she had fled, and urge her to return. Washington did not pursue Judge out of spite or greed. Other slaves who had escaped from Mount Vernon were sought with far less vigor than Judge.

Her case was special because Judge was Marthas special favorite and also because Judge, as part of Marthas dower slaves that she and George held in trust for the heirs of Marthas first husband Daniel Parke Custis, George and Martha stood to suffer a large civil penalty if they lost any of the dower slaves. Washingtons death in 1799 did not lift fears that Custis heirs might try to recapture her, but Judge remained free, enjoying a long life in New Hampshire until her death at age 75 in 1848.

Compared to other founding fathers and certainly compared to other Virginia landowners, Washington can hardly be called a racist. His views on slavery changed as he matured, and his respect for black people grew as he had contact with them in different situations especially as soldiers in the Revolution, where he not only agreed to accept black enlistment but then went on to desegregate the Continental Army. His famous meeting at his headquarters in Cambridge with theenslaved poet Phillis Wheatleyin 1776, whose work he praised and who he addressed in a letter as Mrs. Phillis, shows that Washington was ready to recognize the humanity and even accomplishment of enslaved people.

Thompson doesnt deal much with this issue, but its become common for people today to compare Washington with northern founders who didnt own slaves, so I wanted to share here what Ive learned from other sources.

No founding father had entirely clean hands when it came to slavery. EvenAlexander Hamilton, famous for denouncing the peculiar institution, made compromises with the slave economy in his work as an attorney in New York City. While serving his term as president,John Adams, who never owned any enslaved people and also often criticized slavery, may have rented slaves from local owners in the District of Columbia to work at the White House.

As to Ben Franklin, in 1775 he helped start thePennsylvania Abolition Society, but years earlier, as a young printer in Philadelphia, Franklin owned two slaves, George and King, who worked as personal servants. His newspaper, the Pennsylvania Gazette, commonly ran ads to buy and sellslaves.

And of course, these three, along with all other signers of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution from the North, acceded to the compromise with South Carolina and Georgia necessary to keep the nation together. It was a reluctant compromise though, not just for northerners, but also for George Washington, who applied the natural right of freedom to both whites and blacks and wanted slavery put on the road to quick extinction.

What if Washington Was Really an Abolitionist?

Was Washington a quiet activist to end slavery, not only at Mount Vernon, but throughout the United States? Thompsons book might make you think so.

After 1775, Washington stopped buying new slaves, according to financial records for decades of operations at Mount Vernon. Letters confirm that he did this because he did not want to commit himself further to an institution he wanted to get out of. Later, when he had money problems and began looking for assets that he could sell for ready cash to pay debts, Washington resisted selling off enslaved people as he thought it cruel to separate families.

After the war and during his presidency, Washington knew that with the high visibility of his public persona, he could not come out publicly for abolition. That would scare away South Carolina and Georgia whose representatives had made it clear that they would only join and stay in the federal union if they were allowed to buy and own slaves without interference from other states.

As Thompson explains,

If he had any doubts before about where the country stood on the issue of slavery, Washington could have had none after the Constitutional Convention: if the issue of abolishing slavery was pushed, the country would dissolve. While he could never bring himself to publicly lead the effort to abolish slavery, probably for fear of tearing apart the country he had worked so hard to build, Washington could, and did, try to lead by setting an example and freeing the people over whom he had control.

Yet, letters show that Washington quietly lobbied for an end to slavery gradual and legislated by government rather than immediate and done by individual slaveowners because it would be more acceptable politically. Washington feared that slavery would destroy the American union, and wanted the troublesome institution gone.

Though he was born and raised in the Virginia gentry, Washington identified more with states that were ending slavery, as six northern states did after the Revolution, than with those states that sought to continue it. According to Thomas Jefferson, Washington told Attorney General Edmund Randolph that if disagreements about slavery ever brought America to a civil war in the future, Washington said hed side with the North over the South.

Washington even entertained several projects to gradually manumit his slaves during his lifetime, including an idea to start a plantation for freemen in the South American colony of Cayenne (todays French Guiana) with the Marquis de Lafayette.

Explaining the quote in the title of Thompsons book, Washington wrote near the end of his life about his own connection to slavery,

The unfortunate condition of the persons, whose labor in part I employed, has been the only unavoidable subject of regret. To make the Adults among them as easy & as comfortable in their circumstances as their actual state of ignorance & improvidence would admit; & to lay a foundation to prepare the rising generation for a destiny different from that in which they were born: afforded some satisfaction to my mind, & could not I hoped be displeasing to the justice of the Creator.

White Critics and Black Fans

While a few of his fellow white people approved of Washingtons unusual decision to free all the slaves he could in his will, other prominent white leaders criticized Washington for acting rashly.

Pennsylvania jurist Horace Binney wrote that no good had come from [manumission] to the slaves, and that the State of Virginia was compelled to place restraints upon emancipation within her limits, for the general good of all. Years later, in a history of the Washington family, a distant relative described Washingtons decision to free his slaves as theworst act of his public life.

Some white writers claimed that Washingtons enslaved workers were better off in slavery and that they floundered in freedom. But Thompson explains that the people who settled near Mount Vernon in Fairfax County created a settlement called Free Town that became a model for black success in the 19th century.

That was partially due to the experience of working for George Washington. As Thompson writes, Through a largely undocumented and largely unrecognized high pressure stint of learning by doing, Mount Vernons enslaved laborers became some of the most skilled mixed-crop farmers, fisherman, and stock breeders in the region.

Many of the enslaved people freed by Washington had fond memories of Mount Vernon, and some freemen actually returned for years to volunteer their time to care for Washingtons tomb.

In a famous eulogy on Washingtons death in 1799,Rev. Richard Allen, a formerly enslaved Methodist minister in Philadelphia, recognized Washington as a leading ally for black freedom, Our father and friend.

Allen was one of the most famous black leaders in America at the time. Seventeen years later, in 1816, Allen would go on to found the first national black church in the United States, the African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church.

As Allen put it in his eulogy in 1799, because Washington opposed public opinion and instead followed this conscience by freeing his slaves in his will, he

dared to do his duty, and wipe off the only stain with which man could ever reproach himhe let the oppressed go freeand undid every burdenthe name of Washington will live when the sculptured marble and the statue of bronze shall be crumbled into dust for it is the decree of the eternal God that the righteous shall be had in everlasting remembrance.

Revisionist History, Revised

Thompson shares Richard Allens admiration for Washingtons actions against slavery and ultimately to free his own enslaved people. Yet, her sober prose style and abundant historical evidence makes a credible case that, along with everything else weve been taught about George Washington, the first president may turn out to be an unsung hero of abolition and even civil rights.

John Oliver says that Americans need a more accurate understanding of our history. If he really means that, then Oliver should get one of his staffers to read Thompsons book and write him up a summary. Then, Oliver should go back on TV and apologize to Joy Behar and the rest of us for lecturing us to go back to history class when it turns out that Oliver was really the slacker who hadnt done his homework.

The rest of us dont need to wait for John Oliver to rework his sloppy oral presentation and try for a better grade. As students of American history, we should all do our own homework and listen to historians rather than social media. Then well see that theres no comparison betweenstatues of historical figures that really should come down, like Confederate generals, and statues of George Washington and other founding fathers that should stay up.

Southern rebels like Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson and Jefferson Davis started a war to destroy the United States and to guarantee white supremacy for all time. Washington did the exact opposite. He fought to start and preserve the United States, the worlds first country dedicated to the idea that all men are created equal. Then, as his political ideas matured, Washington started working to apply revolutionary ideals of human freedom and dignity to Americans regardless of race.

As we reassess all dead white guys on horses from the American past, we may just find that George Washingtons reputation will rise, giving his story a new relevance for the problems of the 21st century. The founding father who seemed stiff and cold for so many years may turn out to have had a surprisingly warm heart and a soul with a thirst for justice.

Erik Curren writes about energy and the environment. This piece is republished with his permission from History News Network.

Related

See the rest here:

The Only Unavoidable Subject of Regret - Bacon's Rebellion

Rules, rules and more rules: it’s time we all calmed down – Independent.ie

Posted on by

How long will it be before a regulation-weary public needs to read a code of conduct before leaving the house?

ts not just Covid-19 which has fuelled this obsession. Just look what GAA referees have to contend with before a game: layers of rules which have destroyed Gaelic football.

What is it about the human psyche that when a group of people with authority sits down they feel the need to start issuing diktats? It would be so refreshing if one day such a group were to say: We have decided to leave well enough alone.

Every time a regulation is introduced, a freedom is taken away.

I recently witnessed a gutter being repaired some eight feet above ground level. It took three hours to erect a scaffold, 10 minutes to fix the seal on the gutter and another three hours to take the scaffold down. This is farcical and its everywhere.

In relation to Covid-19, everyone needs to calm down. People who had to endure rationing during the war had it far worse, and during the oil shortages in the 1970s people had to choose which journeys were essential and which were not.

During ESB strikes in the 1970s and 1980s people had to suffer long power cuts and improvise. While not diminishing what the world at large is enduring during this pandemic, it pales into insignificance compared with what war-torn countries in the Middle East have suffered over the past 20 years, or the populations in drought-stricken regions of Africa.

Radio presenters, when speaking about Covid-19, have resembled school headmistresses admonishing their pupils and praising the teachers pets.

People are now well versed in the dangers of Covid-19 and dont need to be reminded every 10 minutes about it.

Joseph Kiely

Letterkenny, Co Donegal

Staff have been heroic in the fight to get schools reopened

Many of us, as school leaders all around the country, have been bowled over by the level of co-operation, generosity of spirit and Trojan work done by our staff in recent days and weeks. Their contribution to getting our schools reopened has been immense.

The enormity of the challenges we have faced has been overcome by their sacrifice, resourcefulness and tough grind.

However, let no one underestimate the emotional toil it has taken on them and on all of us never mind the effect it will have on our students. In the past weeks, we have presided over the dismantling of integral aspects of school life. We have seen the stripping out of our school libraries, the tearing down of concert halls, the repurposing of sports halls, the abolition of our staff rooms the list goes on.

We are heartbroken. We have imposed these measures and many others reluctantly because they are what is required to get everyone back to school.

That has only been possible because of our greatest and most indefatigable resource: our staff. They are our heroes. We salute them and we thank them.

John McHugh

Deputy Principal, Loreto Secondary School, Bray, Co Wicklow

Barnier is shrewd enough not to be intimidated by Abbott

While we struggle through this pandemic we are now once again in the grip of Brexit talks.

The UK government has called on the expertise of the controversial former Australian prime minister Tony Abbott.

Why? Dominic Raabs attempt to promote Mr Abbott as some sort of guiding light for the UK government in its negotiations is one that, in my view, may come back to haunt them. Michel Barnier, the EUs main negotiator who has seen PMs come and go, will not be intimidated by somebody like Mr Abbott.

He is a much more shrewd and more experienced negotiator who will ensure that EU policy and its rules are at the core of any negotiations.

The sticking points are fisheries and state

aid. While there is a softening of the EUs position with regards to state aid, there is no softening with regards to fisheries and in Barniers words: There will be no economic partnership with the UK.

These warning shots across the UKs bows may well focus minds in the Tory government: their intransigent colonial strategy will not intimidate the EUs negotiating teams.

Even with the assistance of the controversial Mr Abbott.

Christy Galligan

Letterkenny, Co Donegal

Minister might hope for a dry few months ahead

One group Health Minister Stephen Donnelly could do without hearing just now... Wet Wet Wet?

Tom Gilsenan

Beaumont, Dublin 9

Read more from the original source:

Rules, rules and more rules: it's time we all calmed down - Independent.ie

Eviction Abolition: the Time is Now – CounterPunch.org – CounterPunch

Posted on by

I have several questions for you. Can you imagine a society where the prospect of a forced eviction is considered completely barbaric, and is virtually or entirely unheard of in practice? Can you imagine the United States becoming one of those societies? And have you joined a local community group that is considering these questions where you live?

Im a founding member of a new network I and others are working on expanding here in Portland, called Portland Emergency Eviction Response, which is basically a rapid response team to go participate in eviction defense actions, activated by text message, in the tradition of the telephone trees of the twentieth century, or the tin horns of the nineteenth century.

Id like to give you my answers to the questions I posed above.

Can I imagine a society where the class war is not carried out in such vicious ways, with millions of renters across the country getting evicted every year, with the disruption, dislocation, destruction and chaos that ensues in community after community, year in and year out?

Yes, thats easy. Many countries in the world already dont allow this feudal practice. I travel in them and perform in them regularly, and have done so for most of my adult life. There are many ways landlords can seek restitution aside from the forced eviction of tenants.

Can I imagine the US becoming one of those societies, where eviction doesnt happen?

Although it is currently a more unequal place than it has been since the Age of the Robber Barons, this fact is not only a curse for so many struggling in poverty, but its also an opportunity. As bad as the housing crisis was for both homeowners and renters before the pandemic hit, it is exponentially worse now, particularly since the federal government has been unable to take any meaningful action since the end of Pandemic Unemployment Assistance although the new move by the Centers for Disease Control to ban evictions for anyone making less than $99,000 until the end of the year at least kicks the can down the road until then, when the past rent will suddenly come due for tens of millions of people who will have avoided eviction until then. The patchwork of state and local eviction suspensions is now, finally, largely supplanted by a nationwide ban. But one which, like almost all the other temporary eviction bans, does nothing to address the underlying problems that existed prior to the pandemic, or the divisions that have been exacerbated by the pandemic. So unless further, major action is taken, everything now comes crashing down at the beginning of 2021, instead of this month.

With the situation being this bad, a lot of people are realizing that the capitalist system and the ever-increasing cost of housing that has been the situation for a long time now, but much more so since the last financial crisis, is untenable. People are no longer going along with the program. Landlords seeking to evict tenants, from New York to California, have faced spontaneous and angry gatherings of their neighbors, that have caused them to back off and go away. This is how it starts.

Even a criminally unequal society still requires a certain degree of the consent of the governed in order to function. Police brutality alone wont work not when the people being evicted increasingly include members of the extended families of cops across the country, just as they increasingly includes so many other segments of society, with Black and brown people being disproportionately impacted everywhere. People are spontaneously reacting against this madness when theyre confronted by it. Increasingly, clearly, the consent of the governed is being withdrawn.

This is why the time is now. This is why people who have been involved with every other political movement that has ever existed in my lifetime are back out in the streets today. All those folks involved with the global justice movement, Occupy Wall Street, the climate justice movement, and so on, also believe that Black lives matter, and that now is the time to fight back against institutional racism, and all the other institutions that perpetuate it, such as the police, and also the venture capitalists and their facilitators in the state legislatures across the country that allow for the kind of ethnic cleansing that has taken place in cities like Portland, where more than half of the Black population here has been priced out of the city since I moved into it.

I have seen the same thing happen in every city I have lived in in this country, and Im not the only one who is sick and tired of it. Being sick and tired is becoming widespread. There are only so many times one can experience this pattern before youve had enough moving into a diverse neighborhood, only to see it get whiter and whiter, until only the most recent newcomers with six-figure incomes can afford to live in it anymore, and the vast majority of Black and brown residents, along with the vast majority of professional artists and so many others, are once again forced out. The ranks of those who are fed up with this shit is growing fast.

Which brings me to my third question have you joined a neighborhood network of some kind?

Spontaneous outpourings by neighbors are essential, but we cant depend on that alone to end something like the phenomenon of forced eviction. Forced eviction was banned in Chicago during the last Great Depression in no small part because people organized eviction defense squads. Somewhat more recently in New York City, many squats and other buildings were saved through similar kinds of mobilizing even during the very authoritarian Giuliani administration in that city. In the UK, eviction defense actions in Glasgow were essential to fueling a successful rent strike and ultimately a nationwide rent freeze, a century ago.

History is full of such examples. Although for the bigger ones you sometimes have to go back a ways to find them, this is because of the con

fluence of circumstances people were facing at those times which bear so much similarity to today. Sudden economic crashes on top of an already terribly divided, stratified society, met by incompetent political leadership.

Changing the world always seems impossible at first, I hear. The obstacles always seem insurmountable at the outset. Getting started is the hardest part. But once one eviction has been prevented, and then another, momentum can build very quickly.

Those of us who are working on the initiative were calling Portland Emergency Eviction Response are looking at this basic approach: if you are facing eviction in the city of Portland and for whatever reason(s) you have decided you want to try to stay in your home and resist this eviction order, contact us, so we can be in touch well before the cops actually show up. When the police do eventually show up, which they tend to do on their own time, you tell us, and we activate the text mob. But first, if youre in Portland, you need to sign up, to this or another such initiative. If you do, youll meet some of the best people youve ever met, while youre defending someones home together.

Go to artistsforrentcontrol.org and scroll down to the bottom of the screen to sign up. Another world is possible, and another Portland is possible.

Read the original:

Eviction Abolition: the Time is Now - CounterPunch.org - CounterPunch

Firsthand accounts of 1902 womens political equality club discovered by Pittsford historians – RochesterFirst

Posted on by

PITTSFORD, N.Y. (WROC) While many people know Susan B. Anthony lived and worked in Rochester while fighting for womens rights, local historians recently discovered the role of Pittsford women in the suffrage movement. This year marks the 100th anniversary of the 19th amendment and theyre celebrating by sharing the stories of some of these women.

The purple signs scattered around the village of Pittsford are all part of the walking tour which tells all about the women who founded the Pittsford Political Equality Club back in 1902. Historians said theres a lot about Pittsford women that has never been uncovered until now.

Vicki Profitt is the deputy town historian in Pittsford. She said when she was transferring records from one office to another, she came across the clubs minute book from 1902, the year it was established. She said shes been studying Pittsford families for years but something was always missing from her findings.

I began to realize all these years Ive been researching so much has been about the men and so little about their wives or other women in the community who werent married, Profitt said.

After finding the firsthand accounts, she and other town leaders put together the tour which highlights the 14 women in the club. There are 14 stops including their homes, church, and the town hall where they would hold meetings. Theres also a cemetery tour where 10 of the members are buried.

It gave us more of an insight into these women, some of them had one child some of them had 10 children and they were able to set aside their personal life for just a little while so they could meet and talk about how important it was for women to have the right to vote and work together.

While suffrage was a main goal, many of the women were also involved in the abolition and temperance causes. Profitt said this project inspired her to dig deeper and highlight the accomplishments of women in her work.

Sadly some of these women never lived to see the 19th amendment ratified and they were working toward that goal and as we know 1920 when it was finally ratified across the country was just an amazing time for these ladies and Im sorry some of them didnt get the chance to see that.

The self-guided tour is open to everyone and the signs will stay up for at least a few more weeks. The tour takes about an hour and a half.

Read the rest here:

Firsthand accounts of 1902 womens political equality club discovered by Pittsford historians - RochesterFirst

Opinion: We must defund the police across the board in Ontario, Toronto, and U of T – Varsity

Posted on by

This past summer, social media timelines have been transformed into an ongoing memorial of Black and Indigenous people who have been lost at the hands of an indifferent white supremacist state. From the killing of George Floyd to the shooting of Jacob Blake, we have seen protests against policing and anti-Black racism erupt across this continent.

The public is demanding the protection of Black and Indigenous lives, but at times it feels as though these cries are unheard. The Louisville Metro Council has passed Breonnas Law, which will ban no knock warrants but Brett Hankison, Myles Cosgrove, and Jonathan Mattingly, the cops who killed Breonna Taylor, have not been arrested.

Closer to home, Ejaz Choudry, Chantel Moore, DAndre Campbell, and Regis Korchinski-Paquet, among others, have all died during police responses to mental health calls in recent months.

There are more names, more tragedies, and more stories of unfair and unnecessary loss piling onto one another. This unjustified violence is bound to continue without a total systemic overhaul, a complete reimagining of the state and its services. How can this be done both immediately and effectively? Black folks who have been at the forefront of this movement for years have delivered the answer to us on a silver platter, and white people are showing up late: we need to defund the police.

In Minneapolis, the site of George Floyds murder, city council members have already set motions in place to disband its police force. City Council President Lisa Bender has acknowledged that the current system of policing is not working. Bender claims that we need to listen to Black leadership and find support within communities.

The sentiments of Benders pledge have been echoed across North America, and an abundance of folks are calling for similar action in Canada. In Toronto, we have seen a half-hearted proposal by city councillors Josh Matlow and Kristyn Wong-Tam to temporarily cut the citys police budget by 10 per cent, which amounts to a $122 million reduction and even that motion failed.

Mayor John Tory has pushed for reform within police services rather than abolition, claiming that he refuses to support arbitrary cuts to the Toronto polices $1.22 billion annual budget. Torys sentiment was reflected by Torontos city council in their recent decision to forego budget cuts to police services, instead approving an incremental budget increase of up to $50 million to cover the cost of implementing body cameras.

The effectiveness of the use of body cameras has been widely criticized, therefore raising questions of whether this is an appropriate action on the councils behalf. It is already apparent that there is a staunch difference between action in Toronto and Minneapolis.

Though both municipalities have embedded histories of brutality against Black and Indigenous folks in their policing, only one of the cities is moving forward to dismantle such a violent structure. Why is this? What is stopping communities in Canada from taking steps toward defunding the police, even when there is so much violence and brutality perpetuated by the institution of policing?

The Police Services Act (PSA), which became law in Ontario in 1990, is responsible for the conduct of all police services operating in the province besides the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the establishment of the Special Investigations Unit (SIU).

This act provides context for our discussion on defunding the police in Ontario. Section four of the PSA states that adequate and effective police services must be provided in all Ontario municipalities, including crime prevention; law enforcement; assistance to victims of crime; public order maintenance, and emergency response.

Beyond these criteria, what is deemed to be adequate and effective in terms of policing is not clearly explained in the PSA. This complicates the disbandment of municipal police forces, but what if Toronto, for example, decided to disband its police force anyway? At what point would a budget cut be significant enough for it to be considered a breach of the PSA? It is unclear how great of a cut would threaten the status of police services as adequate and effective in any given municipality.

If a community in Ontario were to reduce its municipal police services beyond what is considered to be adequate and effective, the provincial government would intervene. According to section 19(1) of the PSA, the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) is responsible for providing police services in respect of the parts of Ontario that do not have municipal police forces.

The province has the authority to charge the municipality for the use of the OPP, placing the burden of the financial cost on the community. Unlike the city of Minneapolis, city councils in Ontario are unable to defund and dismantle their police forces without intervention from the provincial government.

Recent decisions made by Torontos city council further enshrine the police force that the PSA actively protects, and the public is not happy about it. The 16 of 24 councillors who opposed the budget cut have been called out for their actions, with citizens expressing their disappointment and disdain. This work that is being done by the public is integral to achieving tangible change within the system and imagining realities outside of it. Public demand brought discourse on police abolition to the table, and continued action will create spaces to continue that discussion.

It is important to note that one piece of provincial legislation is not the only barrier to defunding police services in Ontario. Racism is embedded in the foundation of this country in institutions of all scales. Therefore, it is necessary to put pressure on all scales in order to further the movement of justice for Black and Indigenous lives. It is also necessary to break down the conglomerate of these braided scales so that we can better understand and interact with them in constructive ways.

This includes the scale of academic institutions. The existence of a police force specifically dedicated to the University of Toronto, Campus Police, perpetuates and reproduces legacies of colonialism, surveillance, and violence against Black and Indigenous people.

In a recent open letter to U of T President Meric Gertler, faculty, staff, and students at the university brought attention to concerns surrounding Campus Police, noting the multiple experiences of students particularly racialized women who have been handcuffed after seeking mental health support.

The open letter reads, The calls to defund and abolish police are increasingly global and supported by research that shows us that policing does not make people safe. It is an institution premised on the assumed need for fear, domination, and force; it threatens, harms, and sometimes kills.

As students, we must recognize the problem of policing close to home and take action against it. Indeed, the open letter importantly calls for an end to Campus Police: The institution of the police is irredeemably racist and threatening to Indigenous and Black life. Therefore, the University of Toronto must end all partnerships with Toronto Police Services and all carceral institutions and work with members of the university and surrounding communities identified by staff, students, and faculty to foster safer campuses.

Anti-Blackness is intertwined into the very existence of policing, and therefore, if you commit to anti-racist work, you commit to abolishing oppressive institutions. If you are an Ontario resident, part of your anti-racism work may be to reach out to your local MPP and demand a repeal of the PSA. If you are a resident of Toronto, continue to voice your outrage and disappointment in recent decisions regarding police reform made by your local councillor.

And as a U of T student, support the demands calling on the administration to defund and abolish Campus Police.

Madeleine Reyno is a recent graduate from Victoria College with a specialist in human geography and a major in environmental studies.

More:

Opinion: We must defund the police across the board in Ontario, Toronto, and U of T - Varsity

Five at front of the queue for ‘biggest shake up since 1974’ – Local Government Chronicle

Posted on by

Five two-tier areas are reportedly being lined up by ministers to be at the front of the queue for reorganisation, LGC has been told, however talks with the government are yet to get fully underway.

Cumbria, Greater Lincolnshire, North Yorkshire, Somerset and Surrey are all said to be in the running to be announced as forerunners for the latest round of reorganisation alongside the publication of the local recovery and devolution white paper, now expected early next month. A number of Conservative councillors have told LGC it is likely to be unveiled as part of the partys virtual conference from 4 to 7 October.

Sources in areas involved in discussions with the government have told LGC ministers are keen to press ahead with the reorganisation agenda and postpone next years county council elections in these areas, but this means legislation would have to be laid before Parliament in October, creating a tight timetable for initial agreement.

The news follows a report in the Sunday Times this weekend that the white paper is set to set in train an even bigger shake-up of local government than the reforms that scrapped shire counties in 1974. The paper reported the white paper would mean a two-thirds reduction in councils in two-tier areas, with a 600,000 population cap on new councils and hundreds of new mayors in a bid to break Labour strongholds on local government in the north. However, a subsequent story in todays Times referred to "dozens" and the Sunday Telegraph reported 30 mayors.

Senior local government figures questioned some of the details in the article but said councils looking to reorganise were getting strong encouragement from the Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government. However, it is still not clear how committed Number 10 is to the controversy and upheaval it will bring among mainly Conservative councillors.

One source with knowledge of discussions in government said: The most interesting take away from this is the competing battle in government about the extent of how hard they are going to push this.

They said the suggestion of the creation of around 30 mayors sounded reasonable.

Chair of the District Councils' Network John Fuller (Con) agreed.

Thirty directly elected mayors is the number we are hearing from the government, yes.

He said the story this weekend, along with reports in the Sunday Telegraph about a return to historic county names were examples of anonymous briefing and kite flying around this issue that had characterised the summer.

Stewart Young (Lab), leader of Cumbria CC, said his county is one of the five the government is prioritising for restructuring. We wrote to Simon Clarke over a month ago asking him to issue a formal invitation but we havent yet had a reply, he said.

Carl Les (Con), leader of North Yorkshire CC, told LGC he was aware of the issue around the tight timescale for postponing elections but had had only informal discussions about the timetable for reforms with government.

He said: It is still our understanding that outline proposals will have to be submitted by the end of September and detailed proposals by the end of October.

We are working to that. But as yet we have not received an invitation for a proposal from the government. I would have hoped to have received it by now.

Lincolnshire CC leader Martin Hill (Con) told LGC there were rumours the council might receive a reply to its letter of request seeking to open discussions on a devolution deal for Greater Lincolnshire this week, two months after it was sent.

If/when the government sends us a decision well have to look at what the criteria are and what the government might look favourably on.

Asked about the deadline for postponing next years elections, a spokesperson for MHCLG said the government was looking at a range of options in relation to reform.

They said: We want to devolve and decentralise to give more power to local communities, providing opportunities for all areas to enjoy devolution. But there will be no blanket [abolition] of district councils and no top-down restructuring of local government.

The devolution white paper, which will be published this autumn, will set out our detailed plans and we continue to work closely with local areas to establish solutions to local government reform.

More:

Five at front of the queue for 'biggest shake up since 1974' - Local Government Chronicle

The Electoral College does not have to be eliminated, but it must be fixed – The Vermilion

Posted on by

As I write this article, there are about 60 some odd days until the presidential election. The candidates, as they were four years ago, are old, deeply flawed, diametrically opposed dudes that probably wont live long enough to see the next four years anyway. I will still vote as I hope every eligible voter will. I do this with the knowledge thatfor me and half of the people living in a majority of statesour votes will not matter. The simple reasoning being the system used to elect the president.

Yes, this is an article talking about the flawed system known as the Electoral College. The Electoral College is a system that depresses voter turnout, has elected 5 presidents who lost the popular vote, and whose creation was, at least in part, a compromise to give slave states more influence in the election of the president. This article is about the flaws in the system, but I will not advocate for its abolition. Instead, I want to offer a view of reform, of working within the current system to align it to our modern needs. I think the Electoral College could work better; it would certainly be imperfect and could still lead to a president being elected over the will of the people, but it could be astronomically better than what we have now.

So the first thing to understand is how it works. On Tuesday, Nov. 3, when people go to the polls or mail in their ballots, their votes will be collected, counted and certified, but no candidate will be awarded any electoral votes, as the people did not vote for a president, but rather electors who promise to vote for the president when the time comes. A month later on Monday, December 14th, the electors who were voted for by the people to cast their vote for their pledged candidate, will do so. Each state gets as many electoral votes as it has people in Congress (number of representatives, plus two senators), so California, for example, has 55 electoral votes (53 representatives, plus two senators), Louisiana has eight electoral votes (six representatives, plus two senators) and Vermont has three electoral votes (one representative, plus two senators). Each state, no matter how small, is entitled to three electoral votes, giving them unequal influence, since they often have more votes than they should.

Electors are often elected from their state in a winner-takes-all contest, meaning that whatever pledged candidate gets the most not necessarily a majority of popular votes gets all of that states electoral votes. Utah, for example, had a three-way contest in 2016. Donald Trump received only 46 percent of the vote, while Hillary Clinton received 27 percent and Evan McMullin received 22 percent. Even though 54 percent of the state voted against him, Trump still received all of the electoral votes, because he got a plurality of the popular vote.

This system has enabled 5 presidents to be elected despite a majority of the country voting against them; it happened in 1824, 1876, 1888, 2000 and 2016. Of those five, four that were elected this way were Republicans.

So how do we fix this? Many Electoral College apologists defend the system by stating that the Founding Fathers wanted the election of the president a step removed from the people so that a democratic mob would not install a populist demagogue, and an elite group could decide against the wishes of the people for their own good. While that is indeed what the Founding Fathers wanted, I need only point out that Donald Trump is the current President of the United States to show that is not how the Electoral College works in practice. I would also point out that electors are often not free to choose who they think should be president they are bound by state law, punishable by fines if they do not vote in accordance with how the people voted. The Supreme Court case Chiafalo v. Washington unanimously declared, Article II and the Twelfth Amendment give States broad power over electors, and give electors themselves no rights. Electors merely serve as conduits rather than decision-makers. But the Electoral College is the system that the Founding Fathers wanted, so it is the system I will work with.

The change that I think would alleviate most of these problems would be changing from a winner-takes-all system to a proportional system. This would mean that electoral votes would be allocated based upon the percentage each candidate received in each states popular vote. Sticking with the Utah example, Trump would have received three electoral votes, Clinton two and McMullin one. Or take California, a state where 30 percent of the population voted for Trump, yet where he received no electoral votes. Under this improved Electoral College, Clinton would get 34 electoral votes, Trump would get 17, Gary Johnson would get two and Jill Stein and Bernie Sanders would get one each. More peoples votes would actually go to who they wanted.

In addition to this, Electoral College votes should be based on the number of representatives alone, not coupled with the number of senators. This is because small states under the current system have bloated influence in the electoral college, due to them receiving more electoral votes than their populations alone would otherwise allow. Each electoral vote in Wyoming represents about 193,000 people, whereas in California each electoral vote represents about 718,000 people, meaning that each Wyoming electoral vote is 37 times more influential than Californias. How can we call ourselves democratic, when a central tenet of democracy is the principle of one man, one vote? Apologists again will say that the Electoral College exists so as to protect small states from having policy affecting them being dictated only from big states. But should the converse not also be true? Why should a large state like California be subject to the will of a state whose population is 682 times less than its own?

Proportional allocation of electoral votes also hurts our current two-party system as third parties are actually able to influence the election. Under this system, I no doubt think that contested presidential elections would be more likely to occur, thus throwing the election to the House of Representatives per the Twelfth Amendment. Here too I would change the system a bit. Currently, if a presidential election is thrown into the House, then a candidate needs to win an absolute majority of votes in order to win. The catch is that each state only gets one vote. Although there are 435 representatives, each states delegation would only get one vote, meaning a candidate would need 26 states in order to win. A more fair system would be that each representative themselves would vote for president, not the delegation as a whole. Under this system, a contested election would require a candidate receiving 218 votes an absolute majority of the total number of representatives in order to become president.

I do not think any one system is perfect, but some do work better than others. The changes I have proposed here would make the United States elections fairer, encourage participation and dismantle the harmful two-party system, but they will be unbelievably hard to implement as everything I have mentioned will require one or several constitutional amendments in order for states, electors and Congress to comply. I do not propose we rid ourselves of the Electoral College, but it must be changed to suit our current needs and ideals.

Original post:

The Electoral College does not have to be eliminated, but it must be fixed - The Vermilion

Proposal to regulate Netflix should be reason for MTRCB’s abolition – Bulatlat

Posted on by

By DANILO ARAA ARAO

(Bulatlat.com)

N.B. A campus journalist interviewed me on the proposal of the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board (MTRCB) to regulate video-streaming sites like Netflix. These are my answers.

Is it MTRCBs job to regulate platforms like Netflix? If so, why do you think they are implementing it just now?

Established in 1985 through Presidential Decree (PD) No. 1986, the MTRCB is an imposition by the late dictator. During that time, it was supposed to be a transitional body that would facilitate self-regulation in film and television.

Thirty-five years later, MTRCB is still around. Media self-regulation is not just weakened but is also compromised by the weaponization of laws and the bureaucracy. The move to regulate video-streaming sites like Netflix should be seen in the context of draconian measures to (1) monitor media production work (FDCP); (2) deny the franchise of ABS-CBN (NTC, HOR); (3) convict Rapplers Maria Ressa and Rey Santos, Jr of cyber-libel (RTC); (4) confiscate copies of Pinoy Weekly for allegedly being subversive (PNP); and (5) engage in red-baiting of certain media groups, including campus journalists (NTF-ELCAC).

Even if there are administration allies who also criticize MTRCBs apparent attempt to broaden its mandate, it cannot be denied that Duterte is the primary enabler of the government machinery to control media content. His tirades against Philippine Daily Inquirer, ABS-CBN and Rappler (especially during the 2017 SONA) have been interpreted by many government officials as marching orders to harass and intimidate not just the practice of journalism but also other media-related sectors like entertainment.

In your opinion, should Netflix really need to be regulated? Why or why not?

There should be no attempt to regulate video-streaming services like Netflix because the Internet already has several layers of filtering that can be done by clients/subscribers and service providers. Just like in other forms of media, online media or digital media should be self-regulated. Any attempt by government to regulate media content would be a violation of the constitutional provision that prohibits abridging the peoples basic freedoms.

Do we see any politically-motivated nuances, agenda in this proposal?

The attempt to single out Netflix reminds us of how the government handled the denial of franchise of ABS-CBN, not to mention the pending cases against Rappler. MTRCB can always claim that the proposal to regulate video-streaming sites is not related to these issues. But the context should be clear to those who know the origins of MTRCB and how it has functioned as a censorship body in the guise of review and classification.

If permitted to do so, what do you think will be its implication to the wide Filipino audiences patronizing the unhampered contents in the platform before?

Choices shall be limited to what the MTRCB wants. We should recall that there had been many films in the past that the MTRCB tried to block that turned out to be critically acclaimed, if not award-winning Schindlers List, The Piano, Bridges of Madison County, to name a few. Locally, the film Dukot (Desaparecidos) was initially given an X rating for its political content, and it was only when the picture of then President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo was covered in one scene that it got an R-13 rating. These are just examples of how review and classification have been misused and abused (even weaponized) through the years.

Do you think that this is a media, content freedom issue?

This is definitely a media freedom issue. Ten years ago, I argued that MTRCB should be abolished in an essay that is included in my latest book Obhetibong Kritisismo (UPD Sentro ng Wikang Filipino, 2019). I still maintain that advocacy.

Are there media, entertainment-related laws that this proposal might violate?

A lawyer would be in a better position to discuss legal implications. Suffice it to say that the MTRCBs IRR clearly states that it shall review and classify motion pictures, television programs and related promotion materials and commercials for TV and cinema, applying as general standard contemporary Filipino cultural values. From a Media Studies perspective, MTRCB is violating its own mandate to focus only on film and television and is trying to extend its influence online. That it tries to have its own interpretation of the already nebulous term contemporary Filipino cultural values makes it worst.

Here is the original post:

Proposal to regulate Netflix should be reason for MTRCB's abolition - Bulatlat

The British state has been debased so why is it still lecturing Scotland? – The National

Posted on by

BRITISH democracy likes to see itself as among the cleanest and least corrupt in the world, run by good chaps whose word can be taken in good faith and is their bond. This was always part myth, but increasingly what passes for democracy in the UK not only no longer confirms this in any way, but the whole system is not in good health.

This has been confirmed by the shock waves of Brexit, Boris Johnson and his government and their disastrous record on Covid-19 but it goes much deeper and the malaise is much more serious.

The challenges to democracy in the UK are many. There is the rise of corporate power and money alongside the emergence of businessmen (it is always men) who think their wealth allows them to bend, shape and break rules; the issue of dark money funding a host of right-wing causes including UK think tanks and the inadequacy of legislation and regulation in keeping up with the changing political and technological world.

This environment is the subject of a new book Democracy For Sale: Dark Money And Dirty Politics by Peter Geoghegan which deserves to be widely read and debated, and taken as a wake-up call. It looks at the state of the UK while also drawing from the rise of authoritarian right-wing politics in the US with Donald Trump and Viktor Orbn in Hungary.

Geoghegan, based in Glasgow, believes that what has gone wrong is not just about legislation or regulation not being adequate. Rather, he contents: This is not just a process point. There is a much bigger picture. There is a crisis in representation and democracy in the UK. Politicians and even the public make light of it by constantly comparing ourselves with the US and thinking because of this that we are fine.

He cites a study from earlier this year: In a Cambridge University 2020 study I cite in the book the two countries with the highest dissatisfaction in their politics were the UK and US. What do these two share in common? A first-past-the-post system which encourages being polarised and which says to many voters that their vote doesnt count.

Even more fundamental is what UK and US capitalism and society have become: More than this there is the influence of money and power and being able to buy access to politicians and decision-makers. The crisis of democracy can be seen across the world but is particularly pronounced in the UK and US.

The litany in recent years in the UK of democratic abuse is a long one. There was the breaking of electoral law by the Brexit campaign Vote Leave and the Nigel Farage-led Leave.EU. There was businessman Arron Banks and the mysterious origins of the millions he gave the Leave side in the Brexit campaign, still never fully explained. And there was the strange case of the role of the DUP in Northern Ireland acting as a front for Leave monies to get round British electoral regulations a story Geoghegan was central to breaking.

The DUP case saw the loophole in Northern Ireland electoral law (which allowed donations to be kept secret) used to funnel 435,000 from the mainland, under the cover of the DUP to the Leave campaign, via a front called the Constitutional Research Council and Scottish Tory Richard Cook. The law in Northern Ireland has subsequently been changed but this was a classic story of right-wing skullduggery and finding legislative gaps to exploit in a way never intended.

There is the secretive funding of right-wing think tanks in the UK. Bodies such as the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), Centre for Policy Studies and Policy Institute who present themselves as respectable and position themselves to be influential with politicians.

Mark Littlewood, head of the IEA, is unapologetic in the way he talks with deliberate obfuscation about who funds the body he heads up.

There are issues around charity law with most think tanks claiming charity status and being subsidised by the taxpayer: an irony probably lost on the Taxpayers Alliance. There is a direct correlation between the rise of corporate power and inequality in the UK and US and the emergence of a market of right-wing think tanks jockeying for position and influence and peddling simplistic deregulation and corporatisation as the answer which coincidentally suits their secret funders.

These set-ups have had a disproportionate impact on Conservative Government politics in the past decade savaging the nanny state and regulation and posing a fantasy world of free competitive markets. This is an ideologically dogmatic view which handily reinforces the financial self-interest of the businesses who underwrite them in a set of incestuous, questionable relationships they all prefer to keep from public eyes.

Policy Exchange was the venue for Matt Hancocks recent announcement of the abolition of Public Health England (a stance long advocated by the think tank). Its replacement by a new body the National Institute for Health Protection which will be centralised and corporate-business friendly and led by the hapless, but loved by the Tory Governments Baroness Dido Harding.

There is the shameless dispersal of public contracts and monies during the pandemic to outsourcers such as Serco and Deloitte and a host of significant awards to entities with Tory and Brexit connections. These all involve multi-million-pound deals with no scrutiny or accountability and shrouded in secrecy, due to the catch-all defence by UK ministers of corporate confidentiality.

One symbol in the decline of public standards and rise of systemic corruption is the House of Lords: now the second biggest legislature in the world, only beaten in size and patronage by China. The debasement of the Lords a place once dominated by hereditary peers went into hyperdrive with the creation of life peers appointed by the sitting PM, which has made it even more grotesque and an affront to democratic norms. It is a place that failed politicians turned out by voters are recycled and achieve an afterlife as legislators Tories and former secretaries of state Michael Forsyth and Zac Goldsmith, LibDem Lynne Featherstone and Scottish Labours Katy Clark being examples.

BORIS Johnsons recent list of peers included family and friends. The additions of Claire Fox (former Revol-utionary Com-munist Party-turned-Brexiteer) and Ruth Davidson (who will take up her seat next year), was just another milestone in its decline into farce and national disgrace. And this list was not as bad as it could have been, with several Tory donors knocked off the list by the appointments committee.

Tony Benn calculated that the seven PMs pre-Thatcher Clement Attlee to Jim Callaghan saw the creation of 639 peers: 19 per year. Thatcher presided over 216 peers (18 per year) before it exploded under Blair to 386 (38 per year). Figures from the House of Lords show that in the 50 years since life peers were created in 1958, 1242 peers were created (24 per year).

These figures illustrate the acceleration of patronage into the Lords which has been used to create a substitute political class which takes us to Boris Johnsons list that will unfortunately not be the last word in how low standards can go.

This is the British state which is playing hardball on a future indyref saying that it isnt democratic or responsible to have another vote. It underlines that the UK has no proper processes for deciding on referendums and how they are held; the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 (which created the Electoral Commission) being long out of date and from an analogue pre-digital era of politics. Witness the shambles and political chicanery of the Brexit vote and yet the UK governing class think they can still lecture others.

Just as the UK has to stop comparing its democracy with the US and having a false sense of complacency, so Scotland has to stop comparing itself with the state of the UK and feeling that everything is above board.

Scotland does not have the debasement of political and public culture seen around Westminster but it has practices which are cause for alarm. For example, one way by which corporates, business interests and insiders exert influence is via lobbying government.

Our regulatory system is not as robust and transparent as it could be according to Willie Sullivan, head of Electoral Reform Society Scotland, with it having a nod to the principle that we should know who, when and why rich and powerful interests seek to influence public policy and legislation in their favour, with a statutory public register of lobbying. But critically it allows for all kinds of exemptions and ways round the legislation, he says: It excludes emails, phone calls, Zoom (unless the camera is on) and any meetings where the lobbyist has been invited in by the politician.

The Lobbying Register Act is currently being reviewed by Parliament, something Sullivan welcomes, but there has to be wholesale change in how we see such vested interests work, observing: Trust in our institutions is a basis of democracy and if we cant see who is influencing public policy then trust is difficult.

DEMOCRACY is under attack the world over, including in countries which pride themselves on their democratic principles and traditions, such as the UK and US. Donald Trump is threatening to run a horse and cart through the US presidential election and do literally anything, including inciting violence, to remain in the White House.

In the UK no parliamentary inquiry was held into the abuses of the Brexit vote, while the scale of dodgy Russian oligarch monies at the top of politics and the Tories is a national scandal which should shame the governing party but which until now they have been able to minimise, delaying and then burying the report on Russian interference into UK politics.

There is urgent need for reform of UK democracy. It wont come from the Tories who gain from the current rotten ancien regime.

Labour and the LibDems have shown consistently the inadequacy of their reform credentials. Indeed, the Tories want to make the system even less fair with talk of abolishing the Electoral Commission and curbing judicial review which saw significant victories against government overreach on Brexit and reasserting the absolutism of parliamentary sovereignty. Watch out Scotland and everyone on that.

The UK is not in a healthy state but this is a global contest as campaigner George Monbiot says: Without strong civic institutions, society loses it power. From the point of view of global capital, thats mission accomplished.

After a week when Apples market value passed that of the entire FTSE 100 at $2.3 trillion there is an international struggle between the forces of an increasingly unapologetic monopoly capitalism and the forces of democracy who have to restate the case for markets and corporations being held legally and ethically accountable.

The British state wants all of us to feel powerless and helpless in the face of the corporate leviathan. But the first act of resistance is recognising the collective power we have which the elites fear. We have tamed irresponsible capitalism before and can do again. To do so we need to recognise the widespread threat to democracy and act to renew it.

Continued here:

The British state has been debased so why is it still lecturing Scotland? - The National

Coup 53 recounts the role of British intelligence in overthrowing Mosaddegh government in Iran – WSWS

Posted on by

By Jean Shaoul 3 September 2020

Coup 53 is an engrossing documentary about British and American skulduggery in Iran in the 1950s, which was aimed at protecting their lucrative oil and geostrategic interests in the region and preventing the Soviet Union from gaining influence.

Co-written, produced and directed by Iranian-born Taghi Amirani, the documentary is co-written and edited by Walter Murch, renowned for his work on such films as The Godfather, The Conversation, Julia, Apocalypse Now, The English Patient and The Talented Mr. Ripley.

Coup 53 recounts the role of MI6, Britains international spy agency, in the 1953 Anglo-American coup that ousted Irans nationalist Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh and ushered in 26 years of a murderous dictatorship under Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. For decades, the Shah, along with Israel and Saudi Arabia, policed the working class and the oppressed in the oil-rich region in the service of US imperialism.

While it is well known that America was the leading force behind the coup that removed Mosaddegha leading proponent of nationalizing the oil industryand restored the Shah, the extent of Britains role is less fully understood.

In a virtual question-and-answer session following his films premier, Amirani explained that he wanted to tell the truth and clear the air about Britains role. It was the most critical experience with regard to relations with West in the history of Iran and remains a persistent irritant in Tehran-London relations.

Coup 53 provides a devastating picture of Britains colonial arrogance, racism and blatant disregard for basic democratic rights and norms as it sought to preserve its most valuable overseas asset.

The film focuses on the role of Norman Darbyshire, a MI6 operative, making use of the transcript of an interview he gave to researchers for Granada TVs 14-part series End of Empire, of which the events surrounding the coup formed one episode screened in 1985. Aged about 30 at the time of the coup, Darbyshire (who died in 1993) was a fluent Farsi speaker and had served with the Special Operations Executive in Iran during World War II before joining MI6. The actor Ralph Fiennes speaks his words.

The Granada film, while revealing MI6s role, did not film or show the interview with Darbyshire or the interview with his CIA counterpart, Stephen Meade. Coup 53s makers believe this was the result of MI6 pressure and censorship since key parts of the transcripts were missing. Amirani eventually obtained the transcript from the British Film Institutes archive where the End of Empires research papers were stored. It is now available online.

The work involved was immense, expanding from the expected six months to four years, in part because of lack of funding, as no official organizations would touch the film. Murch had to edit 532 hours, more than double what I handled on Apocalypse Now, down to two hours.

Amiranis film and Darbyshires evidence demonstrate the degree to which bribery, planting propaganda pieces in newspapers, incitement, assassinations and coups were and remain Britains modus operandi.

However, while the film provides details of the coup, it is less clear about the economic context, the Cold War and the political line of the various political movements in Iran.

By 1950, Britain was under pressure from Iran to emulate the 50/50 profit sharing deal Aramco, the US oil company, had signed with the Saudi government. The rapacious 1933 Agreement had created a cash cow for Britains oil companythe largely state-owned Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC), now known as BPwith the UK government receiving about 116 million (4.2 billion in todays terms) in the years 194850. Iran saw little benefit from its oil, which fed into mass popular opposition to Britains decades-long imperialist domination of the country.

As the film details, despite Britains extensive payouts to ensure a sympathetic Majlis (Parliament) that would agree a minor amendment to the 1933 agreement, and to newspapers to discredit its opponents, Mohammad Mosaddeghs National Front, which was opposed to the deal, won several seats in the 1950 elections.

Mosaddegh had the support of the Tudeh Party (Party of the Masses of Iran), the successor to the Communist Party of Persia and Irans first mass political party. Tudeh had tens of thousands of members, led the Central Council of Federated Trade Unions (CCFTU), with more than 275,000 members, and had strong influence, including in the British-occupied south and Abadan, the centre of AIOCs operations. Despite being banned by the Shah in 1949, it was a powerful political force, shaking Irans political elite by leading a general strike in Khuzistan and sympathy strikes in other cities.

The Tudeh Party followed the Stalinist line of the two-stage revolutionthat Iran as a semi-colonial and economically backward country was not yet ripe for a socialist revolution and therefore the working class could not fight for political power. It never put forward an independent perspective for the Iranian working class, but tied the latter to the coattails of Mosaddegh and the national bourgeoisie, which opposed popular demands for land reform and the abolition of the monarchy.

As Coup 53 explains, Britain refused to consider any proposals for profit sharing amid growing demands for AIOCs nationalization, until a leading cleric issued a fatwa against government officials who had given away the countrys assets. But this minor shift in policy was too late. In the tumult that followed the assassination of the pro-British prime minister, Haj Ali Razmara, Mosaddegh issued a call for AIOCs nationalization that was to lead to his own ascendency to power.

Britain only abandoned plans to launch a military invasion to seize AIOCs oil refinery in Abadan when faced with opposition from the Truman administration in the US, which feared this would jeopardise American oil interests in Saudi Arabia and play into the hands of the Soviet Union.

The film relates how in June 1951, following Irans seizure of AIOCs main office near Abadan, Britain began blockading the port city, preventing oil tankers from leaving the refinery, leading to the shutdown of the oil industry and immense economic dislocation and hardship. In October, the Mosaddegh government expelled AIOCs Abadan staff from Iran.

Facing similar opposition to its interests in Egypt and the Suez Canal, the incoming Conservative government under Winston Churchill began to consider the military operation against the Mosaddegh government in Iran that is the subject of Coup 53.

Darbyshire insisted that MI6 wanted to get rid of Mosaddegh because it believed that even if his government, which included a member of the Tudeh Party, signed an agreement favourable to the British, it would ultimately come under Soviet influence. He said, Eventually they [the US and Britain] would have been forced to have considered getting rid of him to prevent a Russian takeover. I am convinced that was on the cards.

But while Mosaddegh used Tudeh support to pressure the Shah and the British, this bourgeois politician from a large landowning family was acutely aware of the potential threat from the left.

Darbyshire described an early attempt in 1952 to oust Mosaddegh, explaining, My brief was very simple. Go out there, dont inform the ambassador, and use the intelligence service for any money you might need to secure the overthrow of Mosaddegh by legal or quasi-legal means. He had to abandon his plans and decamp to Cyprus when Mosaddegh got wind of the plot and expelled Britains diplomats and officials in October 1952.

The US only became interested in a coup following Egypts CIA-backed Free Officer coup in 1952. President Dwight Eisenhower appointed John Foster Dulles as his secretary of state in 1953. Dulles, a keen advocate of push back against the Soviet Union and the Communist parties around the world, initially took a dim view of Britains colonial arrogance that played into the hands of the nationalists and Stalinists.

However, the increasing turmoil within Iran convinced the US that whichever anti-British faction won, Washington would face an ever more intransigent regime and the growing influence of the Tudeh Party whose demonstration on July 21, as Darbyshire said, was far larger than the nationalist. He began working with the CIA team under Kermit Kim Roosevelt Jr. (the grandson of President Theodore Roosevelt) in May 1953, with the coup signed off by both governments in July.

After a false start that led to the Shah fleeing to Rome and crowds of protesters under the Tudeh Partys leadership taking to the streets in opposition to the attempted coup, Mosaddegh called in the pro-Shah army, which turned on Mosaddegh, arrested him and installed General Fazlollah Zahedi as prime minister on August 19.

The coup consolidated the power of the Shah, ushering in one of the cruelest regimes on the face of the earth. Mosaddegh was put on trial and kept under house arrest until his death in 1967. Members of the Tudeh party and other oppositionists suffered terrible persecution for their support of the deposed premier, the man who had set the army on them. Many were executed.

For Britain, it was a hollow victory as AIOC was forced to join a new consortium with five American companies, leaving it with only a 40 percent stake, less than the 50/50 deal that might have averted the conflict. But that did not stop Britain from attempting other coups and assassinations, including several attempts to assassinate Egyptian President Nasser, the 1956 invasion of Egypt to seize the Suez Canal, overthrow Nasser and install a more pliant regime and an abortive attempt to overthrow the Syrian government in 1957.

The Iranian coup became the blueprint for a succession of CIA plots, some with MI6 support, to foment coups and destabilize governments around the world during the Cold War, while the boycott of Irans oil became the template for modern-day sanctions.

The Iranian events, including the role of Mosaddegh and the Tudeh Party, confirmed that the only viable basis for opposing imperialism is the revolutionary mobilization of the workers and toilers of Iran and the Middle East, based on an appeal to their democratic and social strivings and orientated to the working class in the US and the other imperialist centres.

Information for showings of Coup 53in the UK is available here on the film's web site. For showings in other countries click on the Watch Now link on the menu bar.

Read more:

Coup 53 recounts the role of British intelligence in overthrowing Mosaddegh government in Iran - WSWS

Governments have failed to protect the incarcerated during pandemic – Policy Options

Posted on by

In July 2020, the NGO International Penal Reform reported that most countries have failed to protect detained individuals against COVID-19. Their failure to adequately respond to the early calls of international human rights and health organizations to take swift action led to the infection of at least 102,537 people deprived of their liberty in 88 countries, and at least 1,569 prisoners dying in 36 countries. This is illustrative of the level of marginalization incarcerated people face worldwide and the equity gaps prevalent in most societies.

Canada is one of the countries that has not only failed to take robust action and ensure the protection of those in custody, but also implemented measures that further harmed prisoners. If the federal and provincial governments are committed to closing equity gaps and to advancing public health objectives, it must learn from its failures and do better as we head towards new waves of the pandemic.

Second, the implementation of preventative measures has proven difficult in jurisdictions that did not engage in sufficient depopulation. Social distancing has generally not been possible. In federal prisons, communal eating, food serving and group activities have not been suspended in all institutions. Incarcerated people were not given masks and not all officers have worn personal protective equipment when engaging with prisoners.

The Office of the Correctional Investigator reported that while CSC has worked towards hiring more healthcare personnel, there was still such a shortage that, for example, one institution dealing with an outbreak had only two nurses available (one more than pre-pandemic) and one part-time physician for nearly 200 people. While there is limited information emerging from provincial institutions, reports indicate that at least some provincial prison systems failed to follow public health guidelines in their institutions.

Third, isolation was a common response to the pandemic, despite international organizations warning that segregation and lockdowns are not sufficient to prevent spread and may have devastating mental health consequences on prisoners. Provinces like Quebec and Ontario have engaged in holding people in their cells for 24 hours daily.

The government has already failed many times in addressing the issue of segregation outside of the international spotlight when a pandemic was not looming.

In the federal institutions where there were active outbreaks, even individuals who were not presumed infected were held for up to 24 hours in their cells. When permitted to go outside their cell for 20 minutes each day, they had to choose whether they would call their family, their lawyer or take a shower. In institutions with no presumptive COVID-19 cases, individuals were allowed outside between two to four hours daily. Thus, at times, this regime has been in breach of international norms and human rights, according to which prolonged isolation (more than 14 days of being locked up for 22 hours or longer in a cell) and indefinite isolation (without a clear end) constitute torture. This should come as no surprise. The government has already failed many times in addressing the issue of segregation outside of the international spotlight when a pandemic was not looming. Most recently, the 2019 changes the federal government has made to its solitary confinement regime is seen by many as window dressing.

These failures led to serious consequences. In Canada, there were outbreaks in five federal prisons. In May 2020, the rate of infection in federal prisons was over 13 times higher than in the community. Two deaths were reported. Federally incarcerated women have been the most affected by the infection. The rate of infection in womens penitentiaries was 77 times higher than among women in the community. Provincially, there have been outbreaks in Ontario and Quebec prisons, with a significant number of people being infected and one death reported.

From a public health perspective, this failure has devastating downstream consequences. First, allowing hot spots of infection to grow impedes the successful flattening of the curve and prolongs the life of the pandemic in the community. Second, incarcerated people are more likely to have severe complications from COVID-19 due to a higher than average prevalence of pre-existing conditions, which in turn will be taxing on the healthcare systems. Third, the measures taken, in particular lockdowns and lack of communication with families, negatively affects the mental health of incarcerated individuals, increasing the chances of substance overdose and the frequency of self-harm incidents. This could bring about increased unrest in prisons, stretch healthcare resources, and will generally have harmful effects on prisoner health. Finally, COVID-19 may have severe and long-lasting consequences on health, especially for those at higher risk. Therefore, there are heightened concerns regarding the higher rates of infection in people who will ultimately return to marginalized communities in a more fragile state of health than when they entered prison.

The measures taken, in particular lockdowns and lack of communication with families, negatively affects the mental health of incarcerated individuals, increasing the chances of substance overdose and the frequency of self-harm incidents.

For those conducting prison work, the impact of COVID-19 on prison populations and the refusal of some governments to take meaningful measures to protect them come as no surprise. These are the by-products of the pre-COVID-19 shortcomings of the correctional systems and of the broader criminal and social justice practices that have perpetuated equity gaps in the society, including overreliance on incarceration, inadequate healthcare, and the general disregard for prisoner well being and prisoner rights.

Social and health inequities have long been feeding the prison systems. In turn, prisons are now cracking under the pressure of the pandemic, and the spill-outs impact all of society. The current crisis has shown how connected prison and social justice issues are to public health. Returning to normal should not be an option; instead, sweeping reforms that ensure Canadas (and other countries) ability to equitably protect everyone in the case of a public health crisis are needed.

Some of the much-needed long-term reforms that are intrinsically connected to imprisonment and well-being of criminalized people include universal basic income, better healthcare, better child support and other community supports for marginalized people, as well as sentencing reforms (such as the abolition of mandatory minimum sentences) that will effectively reduce the overreliance on incarceration and increase diversion and community sentences.

In the short term, during a second pandemic wave, the governments should use the tools available to them to identify and release incarcerated individuals who are low-risk and have significant health needs and provide them with community support.

There are numerous options available for releasing different eligible individuals, including parole, parole by exception, statutory release, releases for Indigenous individuals, temporary absence passes and the royal prerogative of mercy. None of these mechanisms has been used, for instance, to release federally incarcerated people during the first wave of COVID-19.

Finally, all correctional systems should review their pandemic protocols and compare them against the recommendations of international health and human rights agencies, as well as community public health measures. The implementation of these protocols must be supervised by public health agencies.

This article is part of theAddressing Vulnerabilities for a More Equitable Pandemic Responsespecial feature.

Photo:The Matsqui Institution, as seen on April 11, 2015, is a federal medium-security prison facility in Abbotsford, British Columbia.Shutterstock/By Eric Buermeyer

See the rest here:

Governments have failed to protect the incarcerated during pandemic - Policy Options

COVID-19 in College: Students recovered from COVID-19 share experiences as year begins – UW Badger Herald

Posted on by

In the past few months, much of the college experience has been reduced to watching. Watching Netflix, watching online lectures and watching higher education rapidly change. By the time this story is to be published, the University of Wisconsin is set to begin the Fall 2020 semester, guided by the Smart Restart plan to safely bring students back to campus to continue their degrees amidst a global pandemic.

Just weeks earlier, however, UW students and the rest of the world watched peer institutions attempt to do the same.

The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill abruptly shifted all undergraduate courses to remote instruction as several students became infected a week after beginning in-person classes. Syracuse University and Purdue University suspended students for attending large gatherings in violation of each institutions campus health guidelines. The University of Notre Dame closed public spaces and moved classes online to stop the spread of the virus their student newspaper begged their peers Dont make us write obituaries. And while New York University students lamented their meager quarantine meals on TikTok, Michigan State University canceled classes before they even began.

UW has not experienced any of these struggles yet, but as UW students watch peers at other institutions struggle to navigate college and avoid falling ill, its easy for students to wonder, What if that was me?

UW students who have tested positive and recovered from COVID-19 know the answer to this question, even as they continue to navigate an uncertain future.

Lets Get Physical

The five students interviewed for this story are in no way a representative sample of possible COVID-19 experiences, severity or side effects. According to the World Health Organization, 80% of COVID-19 infections are mild or asymptomatic. If this sample were representative, one of these students would have suffered a severe case of COVID-19 yet, all five said they had mild cases.

Senior Hallie Butterer thought she had a cold. Her roommate, Alissa, who requested to be addressed by her first name only, was tested because she had a known contact. She did not experience symptoms until a few days into isolation.

Basically, I was asymptomatic, Alissa said. I had some chest pain, and like, a sniffle.

Butterers symptoms similar to a cold, complete with sinus pain and headaches evolved into chest pains days into her isolation.

It kind of felt like someone was sitting on your chest all day long, Butterer said. And then I lost my sense of smell and taste. But that was the extent of my symptoms.

According to research by Vanderbilt University Medical Center, up to 80% of people who test positive for COVID-19 complain of losing their sense of smell or taste. In fact, a recent study based on retrospective data indicated those who have a normal smell function during COVID-19 were more likely to be hospitalized and placed on a ventilator. Only two students interviewed reported losing smell and taste.

UW senior Courtney Degen said she was frustrated by the loss of those senses. Degen experienced a consistent sore throat, headaches and congestion, and reported feeling sick to the point she couldnt get out of bed and needed frequent naps for a few days.

I think for me, the biggest thing was loss of taste and smell. Thats something Ive really never experienced before, Degen said. I could not even smell perfume if I sprayed it on my hand. It was crazy. And that was really frustrating. Everything I ate just tasted like mush.

COVID-19 can cause a wide range of symptoms, the most common being fever, dry cough and fatigue. As scientists learn more about COVID-19, however, theyve discovered less common symptoms. COVID-19 may cause gastrointestinal issues. These symptoms may be precursors to more common symptoms, like fever and respiratory issues, according to Mayo Clinic.

UW senior Genessi Bryant experienced unusual symptoms like nausea and loss of appetite. These symptoms are present in less than 10% of those who test positive for COVID-19, according to a meta-analysis published in the medical journal Gastroenterology. Though these symptoms came and went, Bryant is still experiencing some symptoms long after her COVID-19 diagnosis.

Ive only tried to work out, I want to say like three times and I usually do HIIT workouts, Bryant said. And I definitely felt the effects like the respiratory effects even when Im going up the five flights of stairs to my apartment.

Bryant is not alone. A recent report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that 35% of individuals who had COVID-19 and self-treated their symptoms were not at their usual level of health within two or three weeks after testing. For people ages 18 to 34 with no underlying health issues, 20% still felt symptoms weeks after testing.

In late June, Vice President Mike Pence said it was a good thing around half of the new COVID-19 cases in America were young adults because they were less at risk of becoming severely ill than older people. But recent medical research and anecdotal evidence suggest mild COVID-19 cases can still bring on long-term side effects, even in young people without underlying health issues.

Its almost like a blow to your ego to be in your 20s and healthy and active, and get hit with this thing and think youre going to get better and youre going to be OK. And then have it really not pan out that way, said Fiona Lowenstein, a COVID-19 survivor, in an interview with The Guardian.

A Pandemic Mentality

The mental health epidemic among college students is nothing new, but just like many other societal issues, COVID-19 has exacerbated its negative effects. Several studies have shown a connection between social isolation and loneliness to poor mental and physical health. The widespread experience of loneliness is associated with a reduced lifespan and a higher risk of mental and physical illnesses.

Research on the psychological effects of quarantine during other past disease outbreaks, such as Chinas quarantine during the SARS outbreak in 2003 and the ebola outbreak in many west African countries in 2014 finds quarantines may correlate to mental health downturns.

Butterer said she felt anxious and frustrated during the first four days of her isolation, until her roommate, Alissa, tested positive and returned to the apartment to quarantine with her. Though she wasnt completely alone during her illness, Butterer was still anxious.

I did have a lot of anxiety knowing that I had it because its pretty scary to look on the news when the news is saying This many people have died and these people are on ventilators, Butterer said. Knowing that I had [coronavirus] made me really, really nervous even though I knew I was going to be fine. But just looking at the news and it saying there were 130,000 coronavirus deaths Im like oh my god, that could be me. That was a little frightening and scary for me.

The anxiety in those with COVID-19 is often paired with guilt. Many feel guilty for having such mild symptoms while others have severe cases, while some, like Butterer and Alissa, felt guilty for potentially exposing their family, friends and other acquaintances to the disease.

Degen lived this reality her sister was the first in her immediate family to test positive for COVID-19, and she and her father tested positive soon after. Though she did not test for COVID-19 when the rest of her family did, Degens mother spent a few days in the hospital after having trouble breathing she eventually tested positive. She recovered, though she still grapples with frustration surrounding the disease.

It is difficult for me to wrap my head around the fact people dont believe the virus is real or dont understand the extent of the virus and how dangerous it really is, Degen said. [Coronavirus] may be hard to wrap your head around until youve experienced it. But having seen my mom go to the hospital over this, its really difficult for me to understand how people can be so selfish and misinformed about the situation.

Though negative mental health effects during COVID-19 are common, Bryant maintained a positive attitude during her illness. As a self-described extrovert, Bryant did struggle with the isolation period, but found the extended time alone good for personal and spiritual growth and connecting with family via FaceTime. Bryant said it was nice to be forced to calm down and be alone with herself to engage in self-reflection.

Director of Marketing and Health Communications at University Health Services Marlena Holden said UHS is still fully operational to meet the mental health needs of all students, whether they have COVID-19 or not.

We are still planning on providing all of the same services, its just going to look different, Holden said. So for example, in mental health services, they were able to pivot quickly this spring to provide all tele-mental health services. And we were able to meet about 80% of the same demand the same time last year. And we will continue that in the fall.

Recent graduate Kara Erickson advised students allow themselves to mourn the experiences they lose throughout the pandemic, though they may seem small compared to the greater problems the pandemic has caused. And though so much is changing, there is still fun to be had.

Erickson said the at-home graduation her roommates threw her was more special than a regular commencement and suggested students still find ways to celebrate safely.

Its totally valid to mourn some of the things that youre losing during this time, Erickson said. Try to adapt as much as you can and be creative in the ways you celebrate birthdays or graduation.

So, What Now?

Recovering from COVID-19 is a task within itself. After that, of course, comes the constant adaptation of navigating college during a global pandemic. For nearly all students, this semester will look profoundly different.

Just as students watch higher education change, recent and soon-to-be graduates watch the job market rise, fall and evolve. For Erickson, the coming months will consist of searching for a job in the nonprofit sector.

According to a report from Johns Hopkins University, the nonprofit sector lost more than 1.6 million jobs from March through May equivalent to 13% of all nonprofit jobs in America. Ericksons primary interest is working with youth arts programming, but she understands the large toll COVID-19 has taken on the industry.

I feel bad applying for jobs in the nonprofit world right now. I feel like I should be volunteering my time rather than looking for a paid position on a lot of these places, Erickson said. It would be awesome to get a paid position there. But its just such a year. Its just a weird thing to be like Things are terrible, but do you need another worker?

For students whose education depends on fieldwork, the upcoming academic year remains in limbo as well. Butterer, who is in her final year of studying for a Bachelor of Social Work degree, will fulfill her field placement online. Though she will be working with a real social work agency, she will assist clients virtually.

Butterer said her agency seemed prepared to meet the needs of clients virtually. But, she is still concerned about the learning curve she may face in trying to get to know her clients, getting them the services they need, all while trying to keep everyone safe by conducting her fieldwork online.

Bryant is still waiting for information on her practicum with the School of Education. Education majors need a full semester of student teaching before licensure but whether that semester will be online or in-person remains to be seen, especially when dealing with different school districts. Still, Bryant seemed fairly optimistic about the School of Educations handling of the situation.

Their main goal is to get us licensed and graduated on time, Bryant said. Im OK with just sitting here and waiting for it. Theyre trying to move so many pieces at a time theres just so many little cogs to this clock.

Not all students are as understanding. At least 100 lawsuits have been filed against multiple colleges and universities as students demand refunds after schools pivoted to remote learning at the beginning of the pandemic. Several UW students have called for a reduction in tuition because they believe online learning is not as valuable as in-person instruction.

The Teaching Assistants Association, the graduate student union on campus, advocates for lowering the cost of tuition for the duration of the pandemic, in line with lower operating costs, since fewer students are on campus. They also advocate for the abolition of mandatory fees for students because many resources on campus, like the Wisconsin Unions or recreation centers, are reduced or inaccessible to students. Degen, though an undergraduate student, feels similarly.

Its hard because I understand that students want to go back to campus and campus, to some extent, needs to open to make money, Degen said. But at the same time, I think [UW] really needs to weigh those options and think about whats the safest option, not whats going to save you the most money.

The coronavirus pandemic will continue to irrevocably change higher education for the foreseeable future. As UW students begin a semester like no other, many fear getting sick, while others mourn the in-person interactions that make the UW experience what it is.

Still, others remain hopeful.

Its all about finding the silver lining in every day, but taking it day by day, Bryant said. Thats probably the best thing [to do].

View original post here:

COVID-19 in College: Students recovered from COVID-19 share experiences as year begins - UW Badger Herald

Hungarian Press Roundup: No Compromise in Sight over Theatre and Film University – Hungary Today

Posted on by

As the controversy over the restructuring of the University of Theatre and Film rages on, the political debate has escalated into a full-fledged culture war between the government and the opposition. Both sides rule out the possibility of compromise.

Hungarian press roundup bybudapost.eu

Related article

Following the resignation of the leadership of the University of Theater and Film Arts (SZFE), a demonstration was organized by the students on the eve of the new system entering into force. They later barricaded themselves inside the university building in a protest against the forced restructuring, that in their view results in total loss []Continue reading

Magyar Nemzets Bence Apti accuses the outgoing leadership of the University of Theatre and Film (SZFE) of left-wing liberal ideological bias and propaganda. Apti writes that the mad-lib professors at SZFE have incessantly criticized the government and advocated gay marriage and transgender rights as well as migration. In addition, they expected students to follow their ideology and political leanings, whilst silencing right-wing and conservative students. Apti concludes by claiming that it was the previous leadership of the SZFE that launched a political and ideological attack on the university thirty years ago when they took over the institution.

On Vasrnap, Kristf Trombits calls for a regime change in culture. Trombits finds it justified for conservative nationalists to demand a greater presence in cultural institutions. The conservative pundit writes that right-wing individuals purged from cultural life under Communism are still in a minority, as the pre-2010 left-wing liberal governments failed to break the monopoly of Communist cultural elites. Trombits believes that Christian conservatives need to confront the current left-leaning elites in order to claim back their role in Hungarys cultural life.

In Magyar Demokrata, Lszl Szentesi Zldi interprets the resistance to the new SZFE leadership as an effort by liberal, Communist, anarchist, feminist and homosexual elites to preserve their power positions in cultural life. The pro-government commentator also labels the current liberal cultural elite as the successors of Communists. Szentesi Zld proclaims that the battle for cultural domination is no longer a fight between the governing party and the opposition, but rather a matter of Hungarian culture, thinking and way of life. No compromise is therefore possible between the two camps. Either liberals maintain their domination in culture, or those that put the national interest first take over, Szentesi Zld concludes.

444.hus Mrton Bede praises the students of the SZFE for occupying the university in protest against the governments restructuring plans and the new leadership. The liberal commentator thinks that both the editorial staff of Index (who collectively resigned fearing government interference with editorial policies) and SZFE students set a good example for Hungarians as they show that the government should be resisted in an uncompromising way. Bede hopes that the revolt of the students and the resignation of leading faculty members will cause the government a powerful headache and will also become the first sign of a more general resistance against the government.

Magyar Narancs in a first-page editorial also celebrates the SZFE students determination to fight to the last bullet. The liberal weekly suggests that the student revolt may not last long, but even if they fail, they will have shown a good example by trying to resist a government that wants to plunder everything.

On Mrce, Mrk Losoncz goes so far as to claim that the protest of the SZFE students is relevant for the whole country or even the world. The alt-left blogger contends that public universities belong primarily to students, and therefore they should be the ones to decide how the universities are managed, and by whom. Losoncz likens the governments restructuring plan to capitalist privatization, claiming that the government intends to hand over the university to its acolytes and friends. He hopes that students taking part in the protests will taste grassroots democracy and collective decision-making, and also that they will set an example for others, how to resist the government.

Npszavas Pter Nmeth calls for organized resistance against what he calls a piecemeal takeover of all important institutions by the government. The left-wing journalist acknowledges that we are not in 1944, and there is no open dictatorship in Hungary, but thinks nonetheless that those threatened by the government need to join forces, otherwise the government will hunt them down one by one. After the Central European University, the research network of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences and now the Theatre and Film University, further institutions will be targeted, he believes.

Related article

A pro-government commentator accuses students occupying the Theatre and Film University of political bias. A left-wing pundit calls for dialogue. Hungarian press roundup bybudapost.eu Background information: students protesting against the restructuring of the University of Theatre and Film occupied the university building on Monday night, and say they intend to stay there. Several faculty members []Continue reading

Featured photo via Theatre and Film University Students Unions Facebook page

Read the original here:

Hungarian Press Roundup: No Compromise in Sight over Theatre and Film University - Hungary Today

Slow Joe Biden is a few fries short of a Happy Meal: Howie Carr – Boston Herald

Posted on by

As he left for Wisconsin Tuesday, President Trump said this of his doddering opponent:

Biden doesnt know hes alive.

That was just Tuesdays back of the hand. POTUS has also said that the 77-year-old Biden is not all there.

And that hes not playing with a full deck.

Not to mention, He doesnt know where he is.

And, no doubt in the coming days, the president will inform us that Slow Joe is a few fries short of a Happy Meal, not to mention three bricks shy of a load.

But why has Trump come to the conclusion that Joe Biden, never known as the sharpest knife in the drawer or the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree, no longer has anything left on his fastball as hes rounding third on the back nine while approaching the checkout counter?

(Did I miss any? Do you see it easy it is to get into the rhythm of these dismissals?)

Perhaps Trump was watching Joe on TV in Pittsburgh Monday at his live event, in which he appeared in a cage, in what was in fact an almost empty auditorium.

And the Democrat nominee delivered yet another, well, Biden-esque oration:

COVID has taken this year just since the outbreak, has taken more than 100 years look, heres the lives its just its just, I mean, think about it, more lives this year than any other year for the past hundred years.

May we quote you on that, Mr. Vice President?

Every time his handlers lead him gently out of his basement, Dementia Joe steps in it.

Sometimes he confuses his wife and his sister. Or he forgets who he is (Im Joe Bidens husband) or the office hes running for (Senate? President?) or the offices hes held (hes said Congress when he apparently meant the city council).

Hes confused the name of viruses (Luhan, N1-H1). He thinks 40 people were shot at Kent State, not four. Hes said 150 million have been killed by firearms since 2007, that 120 million have died of the virus, that 720 million women are in the U.S. workforce.

He thinks Margaret Thatcher is still alive. He talks about his prior job in the OBiden-Bama administration. He brags that hes known eight presidents, three of them intimately.

On Monday, in Pittsburgh, Biden developed a new verbal tic. He started adding rs to words, on a very random basis.

Here Biden is on the violence in the urban areas. You recall that this is the same rioting and looting and mayhem that the alt-media media and the Democrats have been endlessly assuring us for months were peaceful protests.

But now its all Trumps fault. All those peaceful protests are now an orgy of what we all saw with our own eyes.

Every day George Orwells 1984 becomes more prescient. Here is Biden on how Trump is handling the, uh, peaceful protests:

He doesnt want to shed light, he wants to generate heat and hes stroking violence in our cities.

Stroking violence. Thats what Joe said, he accused the President of stroking violence. He was reading off a Teleprompter and he added an r, to make the word stroking.

Why is Trump stroking violence, Joe?

Since Donald Trump and Mike Prence cant run on their record.

Mike Prence? Of course, during the primary campaign he once called the president Donald Hump, I guess you could say Biden is running against the Hump-Prence ticket.

In his speech, in front of maybe five people, including cameramen, Joe also mentioned building the nations roads, bridges, solar rays.

And Biden bemoaned the declining faith in the birth of the right American future.

He also asked the empty auditorium if anyone thought he had a soft spot for radicals.

If I were one of Dementia Joes handlers, I would make sure he never again uttered the word soft. Thats a key part of a couple of more of those Trumpian phrases, you know, like soft as a grape, or softer than a sneaker full of

Biden is just lucky that the alt-left media averts its eyes from his obvious decline. They even allow him to lie with impunity, as he did Monday when he denied saying that he wanted to ban fracking.

He has said that, repeatedly. But nothing to see here, folks, move along. Thats the verdict from CNN, MSNBC and all the rest of them.

Same thing with his endorsement of defunding the police. Biden denies now that he ever said it, and to be fair, he didnt use the d word. Instead, Biden just said he wanted to reallocate law enforcement budgets.

Ill leave you with one final thought, from Bidens final words at the virtual Democrat convention two weeks ago.

Theres never been anything weve been able to accomplish when weve done it together.

I think Uncle Joe misread unable as able. But if hes talking about his campaign, I can only hope hes right. For once.

Visit link:

Slow Joe Biden is a few fries short of a Happy Meal: Howie Carr - Boston Herald

[OPINION] Law and order president? The chaos and violence Trump wants you to be fearful and hateful of is happening now under his watch – Asian…

Posted on by

President Donald J. Trump participates at a roundtable on donating plasma Thursday, July 30, 2020, at the American Red Cross-National Headquarters in Washington, D.C. (Official White House Photo by Tia Dufour)

DOOMSDAY in America is what President Donald Trump has been scaring people about in his campaign. He warns that if his opponent, Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, wins in November, then people will not be safe with all the chaos, violence, and killing happening in the country. He claims only he can fix this and bring law and order back in America.

No self-respecting and thinking Republican, Democrat, or Independent will choose to be blind to the truth because the fact is: all that he is warning voters about is already happening under his watch, in Trumps America.

Trump purposely fans the flame of hate, mistrust, and division in America. He emboldens racists, white supremacists and right-wing extremists. This is his own doing. His words, actions and policies have been inciting the chaos, violence and carnage we are now experiencing.

Falling behind in the polls because of his failed leadership, especially in handling the coronavirus pandemic, he uses the tactic that got him elected in 2016: stoking racial and cultural divide. He is desperate to be re-elected to buy time and escape all the lawsuits waiting to be filed against him for all the crimes and transgressions he has committed against the Constitution and the American people.

The violence, looting, and destruction we now see are perpetrated NOT by the peaceful Black Lives Matter Movement protesters rallying against racism and racial injustice in America, but by opportunists, anarchists, right-wing extremists and white supremacists, some of them coming from other states and cities. This is tactically done so Trump can blame protesters and the Democrats, and cast himself as the savior and the hero for the crises he and his administration have created.

Trump has been using people as pawns and props for his fabricated narrative to appeal to his base and to convince those who are still undecided to vote for him, using lies, fear-mongering and doomsday scenarios.

The violence and crimes happening in America are not mainly perpetrated by peaceful protesters, Black Lives Matter activists, Antifa, immigrants and Democrats as alleged by Trump the so-called bad guys in his playbook that he loves to blame and demonize.Here is the truth about the issue from Anti-Defamation League (ADL). ADL is a leading anti-hate organization that was founded in 1913 in response to an escalating climate of anti-Semitism and bigotry, and its timeless mission is to protect the Jewish people and to secure justice and fair treatment for all.

The facts from the ADLs annual Murder and Extremism report that Trump does not really want you to know:

Of the 42 extremist-related murders in the U.S. last year, 38 were committed by individuals subscribing to various far-right ideologies, including white supremacy.ADL ranked 2019 as the sixth-deadliest year on record for extremist-related violence since 1970.

A total of 17 separate incidents were counted last year. The deadliest, by far, was the August white supremacist shooting spree at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas, which left 22 people dead and at least 24 more wounded. Including the El Paso attack, white supremacists were behind 81 percent of the domestic extremist-related murders in 2019.

Right-wing extremists were responsible for 90 percent of such murders in 2019 and for 330 deaths over the course of the last decade, accounting for 76 percent of all domestic extremist-related murders in that time.

Over the last decade, right-wing extremists have been responsible for more than 75 percent of extremist-related murders in this country, said ADL CEO Jonathan A. Greenblatt. This should no longer come as a shock to anyone. Lawmakers, law enforcement and the public need to recognize the grave and dangerous threat posed by violent white supremacy. We cannot begin to defeat this deadly form of hatred if we fail to even recognize it.

The past five years (2015-2019) include four of the deadliest years on record for extremist murders. Last year, the number of extremist-related fatalities in the U.S. declined slightly from the previous year, dropping from 53 fatalities in 2018 to 43 in 2019. But last years total was still higher than 2017, when 41 deaths were recorded.

For the eighth year in a row, firearms were the weapon of choice for domestic extremists.

Guns were involved in 86 percent of last years fatalities. In the past 10 years, 315 of the 435 people (72 percent) killed in the U.S. by extremists were shot to death. The increase in extremist-related shooting sprees in recent years is of particular concern.

These are the people Trump referred to as very fine people after one woman, 32-year-old Heather Heyer, was killed by a white supremacist while she protested at a rally of alt-right groups, who were defending the white supremacists and neo-Nazis in August 2017 in Charlottesville, Virginia.

These very fine people in Trumps playbook were neo-Nazis who staged a torchlight parade, unabashedly chanting anti-Semitic slogans, and roughed up students locked in arms around a statue of Thomas Jefferson. When the violence escalated and became fatal, Trump immediately blamed the alt-left, the Antifa, and defended the neo-Nazis.

In May of this year, Black American George Floyd was arrested and killed by a white Minneapolis police officer who knelt on his neck for eight minutes as he was handcuffed and faced down pleading for his life, saying I cant breathe.

In the wake of this brutal murder, Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement protesters rallied in Minneapolis (and in other parts of the country and the world) to fight against racial injustice. Chaos, looting and violence perpetrated by anarchists, opportunists followed. Trump and his administration were quick to blame antifa without bases in fact.

Antifa is not a single group with a clear organizational structure or leader. It is a decentralized network of activists who dont coordinate. Antifa is a monicker for these people whose common goal is opposing anything that they think is racist or fascist.Experts who have studied antifa say there is no evidence that the fringe, amorphous group is driving nationwide protests, and Trump hasnt cited anything specific as he accused them of doing so, theWashington Postreported.

But according to thePost, even as the protests have been overwhelmingly peaceful in recent days, Trump and Barr have made a concerted effort to implicate antifa involvement in them.

The Trump administrations own intelligence reports reveal that most of the violence appears to have been driven by opportunists. A separate DHS document dated June 17 stated, anarchist and anti-government extremists pose the most significant threat of targeted low-level, protest-related assaults against law enforcement. The document did not mention antifa by name and the documents definition of anarchist extremist

appears to exclude the group, thePostfurther reported. Did Trump tell you about this?The president also did not differentiate the Black Lives Matter (BLM)s peaceful protesters from anarchists who infiltrated the rallies, and did not acknowledge what BLM was fighting against racial injustice and police brutality. Trumps malicious attempt to tie antifa with peaceful protesters is an assault to peoples constitutional right of peaceful assembly to a voice out their legitimate grievance in a democracy.

So who is behind this misinformation about antifa? Twitter has shut down multiple accounts that it says were operated by a white supremacist group posing as liberal groups encouraging violence. This account violated our platform manipulation and spam policy, specifically the creation of fake accounts. We took action after the account sent a Tweet inciting violence and broke the Twitter Rules the company said, as reported by CBS News.

Twitter said the white supremacist group Identity Evropa used one fake account, @Antifa_US, with the intent to call for violence in majority white suburbs, maliciously using the name of the Black Lives Matter movement. Did Trump tell you about this?Yet despite all of this, Trump even wanted to declare antifa as a domestic terrorist group.

Have you ever heard the president denounce white supremacists, right extremists and vigilantes subscribing to far-right ideologies for the violence and deaths they have perpetrated despite all the facts? Did he ever call for the right extremists, and white supremacists to be declared as domestic terrorists? No. He even defends them.

And what about the supposed peaceful protests against the white police officer who shot an unarmed black man seven times at the back, witnessed by his kids in the car in Kenosha, Wisconsin on August 23?

TheNew York Postreported that of the 175 arrested during protests, a total of 105 were not from the city. They came from 44 different cities, including 17-year old Kyle Rittenhouse, the teen accused of shooting dead two men and seriously injuring a third with an assault rifle.

The teenage shooter, along with his mother, had also allegedly crossed state lines and was arrested in his home in Illinois. What were they doing in Kenosha, Wisconsin armed with military-style weapons? The report said police seized more than 20 firearms during the protests, leading to numerous charges for carrying concealed weapons. And did you see the video of the police ignoring this teen as he walked around with his weapon amid the chaos?

And what did Trump do? He defended the teen, who we now know is a Trump supporter. He attended a Trump rally in Iowa, seating in the front row. This kid is not old enough to vote, smoke nor drink but was already in possession of an assault weapon that has killed innocent people.

When Trump was asked if he would condemn the actions of vigilantes like the teen Kyle Rittenhouse, he ignored the question and claimed Rittenhouse probably wouldve been killed if he had acted differently, BuzzFeed reported.

Rittenhouse idolized the police and posted pictures of him on social media posing with guns, in support of Blue Lives Matter. How ironic that he chose to turn an otherwise peaceful protest to tragedy with his knee-jerk vigilante approach to discord.

The president refused to condemn the actions of vigilantes like Rittenhouse even after denouncing the shooting of a right-wing demonstrator in a pro-Trump rally in Portland on Monday, August 31.

This prompted Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden to challenge Trump in a statement: The deadly violence we saw overnight in Portland is unacceptable. I condemn this violence unequivocally. I condemn violence of every kind by anyone, whether on the left or the right. And I challenge Donald Trump to do the same.

Throughout the Republican National Convention, Trump has been branding and selling himself to be the president who will bring back law and order in the United States. He failed to do it as president now, why should we believe he can solve this crisis when re-elected?

Trump accused the Democrats of spreading hate, when in fact, his rhetoric of hate, prejudice and divisiveness against people of color, immigrants, Muslims and his political opponents is the one that has led to the surge of hate crimes in the United States.Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler nailed it when he said:

Its you who have created the hate and the division. Its you who have not found a way to say the names of Black people killed by police officers even as people in law enforcement have. And its you who claimed that White supremacists are good people.

Your campaign of fear is as anti-democratic as anything youve done to create hate and vitriol in our beautiful country.

* * *

Gel Santos Relos has been in news, talk, public service and educational broadcasting since 1989 with ABS-CBN and is now serving the Filipino audience using different platforms, including digital broadcasting, and print, and is working on a new public service program for the community. You may contact her through email at gelrelos@icloud.com, or send her a message via Facebook at Facebook.com/Gel.Santos.Relos.

Gel Santos Relos is the anchor of TFCs Balitang America. Views and opinions expressed by the author in this columnare solely those of the authorand not of Asian Journal and ABS-CBN-TFC. For comments, go to http://www.TheFil-AmPerspective.com and http://www.facebook.com/Gel.Santos.Relos

More:

[OPINION] Law and order president? The chaos and violence Trump wants you to be fearful and hateful of is happening now under his watch - Asian...

Here’s Why You Should Never Use the Term "Alt-Left" – POPSUGAR

Posted on by

On Aug. 15, President Donald Trump stood before a podium in the lobby of his New York City home. Trump was ostensibly there to talk about infrastructure, but the conversation swiftly turned to Charlottesville and the administration's failure to appropriately handle the fallout of the events of the weekend before. A heated Trump brought back his much-derided "many sides" argument from a few days prior . . . and then took it to a whole new level, asking the members of the press gathered before him: "What about the alt-left that came charging at, as you say, at the alt-right?"

Let's set the record straight here and now: there is no alt-left; there has never been an alt-left, and there will never be an alt-left. And there's a good reason why.

The phrase "alternative right" first entered the public consciousness in a real way in 2008 when Taki's Magazine published "The Decline and Rise of the Alternative Right." The outrageously highfalutin speech was given by conservative philosopher (and son of Jewish immigrants) Paul Gottfried to the H.L. Mencken Club, an organization that in and of itself has nationalist-leaning ideologies. Two years later, the questionable association would be concreted when noted white supremacist Richard B. Spencer who had long been hopping around the conservative blogosphere, facing job troubles due to his extremist views used it as the domain name for his very own editorial website: AlternativeRight.com.

Spencer and like-minded hate-speech enthusiast and white supremacist Jared Taylor would use the shorthand "alt-right" to describe their following and the "intellectual" movement that they claim to have given birth to. Fueled by the propaganda issued by the National Policy Institute think tank an organization in which they both sat at the top of the org chart and by their respective websites, the two men would slowly nurture a burgeoning neo-Nazi movement in the darkest depths of the internet. Spencer was not satisfied with his underlying claims of ownership of the phrase and would go on to launch AltRight.com in 2017.

For many, the first time they confronted the hatred and rage of the group was during the 2016 election when the alt-right coalesced behind then-candidate Donald Trump. But it's important to recognize that there is a difference between the right, conservatives, and even an "alternative" conservative movement and the neo-Nazis and white supremacists who Taylor and Spencer represent. Therefore, it's crucial that we are clear in our usage of these phrases when identifying groups of Americans and meticulous about the ideas and actions that we attribute to them. Richard Spencer wants his white nationalist following to be called the alt-right so that they don't have to be called what they are: hate-filled racists who seek to add inequality and despair to each and every conversation on the national scale.

And so we come to the "alt-left." While some have tried to equate the alt-right to a left-leaning counterpart, one underlying fact has made this a false equivalent: the alt-right is a movement fueled by sentiments that have been relegated by modern thought to the deepest, darkest caverns for their impossibly hateful rhetoric. Alt-left, for all intents and purposes, is merely an epithet used by these individuals to indicate that they are not the worst, to pretend that those who oppose their views are just as bad.

But let's dispel of that notion right here and now: there is no alt-left. There is nothing worse than the alt-right. They deserve to stand alone in the unique category of evil that has no counterpart. There is no place for white nationalism, white supremacy, neo-Nazism, or the KKK in 2017. And no amount of deflection about some countermovement on the left, right, or anywhere else can ever change that fact.

View original post here:

Here's Why You Should Never Use the Term "Alt-Left" - POPSUGAR

Bring Me The Horizons Oli Sykes: Yungblud is a new breed of rockstar – NME.com

Posted on by

Bring Me The Horizons Oli Sykes has hailed Yungblud as a new breed of rockstar following their recent collaboration, Obey.

Released yesterday (September 2), the team-up serves as the third single to be lifted from BMTHs upcoming Posthuman project, following on from previous cuts Ludens and Parasite Eve.

Explaining the bands decision to recruit Yungblud (real name Dominic Harrison), Sykes told Loudwire: There was an energy to [Obey] where it felt heavy but then had some slight Britpop influences, which I hear in Yungbluds music.

With our last record [amo], we kind of looked outside the scene for people to collaborate with and bring something new to the table, and with this record we wanted to have people that reflect the scene at the moment and still not choose obvious people that you would expect us to work with.

Sykes continued: I really like what Yungbluds doing. I love his energy and I think hes reflective of a new breed of rock star. Were honoured, to be honest.

Meanwhile, Yungblud has been added to the line-up for next years Reading & Leeds festivals, which will be headlined by Stormzy,Catfish And The Bottlemen, Post Malone,Disclosure, Liam GallagherandQueens Of The Stone Age.

Harrison recently revealed that his second album will be coming out this fall, and has so far shared the tracks Lemonade, Strawberry Lipstick and Weird.

It legitimately explores the ideas of identity, of sexuality, of equality, of depression, of anxiety, of life, of love, of heartbreak, of everything, Yungblud said of the LP. Me and my fan base, were coming of age together. I want to do it side by side.

Excerpt from:

Bring Me The Horizons Oli Sykes: Yungblud is a new breed of rockstar - NME.com