Select Page ::

Man Wears Personal Plastic Tent on Flight to Avoid Deadly Virus

Posted on February 9, 2020 by Danzig

US business man and certified genius Rick Pescovitz was seen wearing a personal, transparent tent in a window seat on a flight to avoid the coronavirus.

Personal Quarantine

A US businessman named Rick Pescovitz wore a personal, transparent tent in the window seat of a commercial airliner.

Pescovitz — the brother of BoingBoing‘s David Pescowicz, who blogged about the ordeal — says he was reportedly to avoid contracting the deadly coronavirus that’s been claiming the lives of hundreds of people around the world.

Under the Weather

But it was mostly a publicity stunt. Pescovitz is the CEO of StadiumPod, a company that makes tiny tents called “Under the Weather Pods” for sports spectators — and proud soccer moms and dads — who want to stay dry while it rains. Pescovitz even went on Shark Tank to pitch the idea.

Sounds like Pescovitz has decided to reframe his tents as personal quarantine zones. According to BoingBoing — remember, this is the dude’s brother writing — “the flight attendant happily took his photo” and the man sitting next to Pescovitz “didn’t even bat an eye.”

Stay Safe

It’s unclear how effective the tent actually would be at fending off a virus — and if Pescovitz said yes to a cup of coffee.

If you don’t want to shell out for your own personal tent, experts advise to treat the coronavirus much like the common flu: wash hands regularly and be wary of touching possibly contaminated surfaces.

READ MORE: Personal tents for airplane passengers to avoid coronavirus [BoingBoing]

More on the virus: Scientists Warn: You Can Catch Coronavirus More Than Once

The post Man Wears Personal Plastic Tent on Flight to Avoid Deadly Virus appeared first on Futurism.

We’re Hiring: Futurism.com Wants a Staff Writer

Posted on February 9, 2020 by Danzig

So! Futurism Media is looking to hire a Staff Writer for Futurism.com to work out of our Brooklyn office. Ready? Here’s the deal:

A Staff Writer at Futurism.com will:

Report directly to the Managing Editor of Futurism.com, as they pitch and write anywhere from five to seven short, razor-sharp news hits a day, giving our readers the succinct summaries, context, and takeaways on offer at The Byte.
Staff writers will also contribute reported medium-length stories and features, in addition to special projects, source development, and beat reporting.

The Byte, which will be the primary charge of our new hire, is a relevant, useful, sharp, smart, funny, and crucial daily must-read for the leaders of tomorrow, today. Here’s what we’re looking for when hiring writers for it, in order of priority:

Writing chops. While it’d help if you have a background or understanding of writing about technology and science, as well as ideas concerning the future of the world, it’s not crucial. The important thing, first and foremost, is that you have a passion for writing and can string together fun, sharp, concise, informative, exciting copy — and that you can do it quickly, without preciousness. Literary journal aspirants or chronic dissertation writers need not apply. Same goes to anyone married to any kind of static, universal style guide. If your writing reads well, we want it, and we don’t care if it comes to us from a high school sports desk or the steerage deck at an ad agency.
Competitiveness and work ethic. We’re a small media operation and we keep things trim. We ask of our writers the ability to work hard, work smart, and the desire to be entrepreneurial about their work. We need someone we can trust to get the job done, to learn from mistakes quickly in order to get us where we’re going.
Editing chops. If you’re already a halfway decent writer, you’re probably also gonna instinctually understand how to make other people’s writing better (or at the very least, help them deliver clean, concise copy). This is less about any practical editing experience than it is an ability to deal with other people’s work — to take things from good to great, and to communicate with writers in a constructive, respectful, and ultimately meaningful way that helps them get that much closer to achieving the highest level of quality they can reach.
News instincts and strong ideas. Again, you don’t have to be a science or technology expert, but you need to have some interest in topics like AI, quantum computing, medtech, universal basic income, blockchain, transportation, urbanization, green energy initiatives, and wonderfully rich characters like Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos (as well as a sense of who’s missing from conversations about science and technology). If this stuff makes your eyes gloss over, sorry, this isn’t for you — but if you’re fascinated by the rough edges as those things make their way into everyday life, you could be a terrific fit. And needless to say, if you already have an intense passion for these subjects, and strong ideas about them, we’re definitely looking for you.

Candidates of all backgrounds are encouraged to apply. And if you think you’ve got what it takes, here’s what we’d like from you, submitted right here:

An email cover letter and a resume. We know, it’s standard and basic. But we want a quick, clean snapshot of who you are and what you’ve got to say.
A few writing samples, linked in your cover letter. They can be literally anything — we just want you to show us you, at the best of your abilities.

We’re an exciting, growing company focused on the future, and from where we stand, it’s pretty bright. Come join us on the ride.

Futurism/Singularity University is an equal opportunity employer and values diversity at our company. We do not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, color, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, age, marital status, veteran status, or disability status.

The post We’re Hiring: Futurism.com Wants a Staff Writer appeared first on Futurism.

Read the rest here:
We’re Hiring: Futurism.com Wants a Staff Writer

How Europe is trying to reverse its post-debt crisis brain drain – Quartz

Posted on February 9, 2020 by Danzig

From our ObsessionGlobal Economic Disruptions

Globalization, automation, and inequalityoh my!

About a decade agolong before the word Brexit entered the popular vernacularit seemed like the European project was on the brink of collapse.

Between 2009 and 2013, Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain (a group derisively known as the PIIGS) were in danger of defaulting on their sovereign debt, and of bringing other Eurozone countries down with them. The EU and the IMF bailed out Greece, Ireland, and Portugal, ushering in an era of economic austerity that wrought wide-ranging social and political consequences. One result was that many workers, especially the young, left in search of better economic opportunity elsewhere.

Now, many of the Southern European nations hurt bythis so-calledbrain drain are implementing policies to incentivize their citizens to come home. From tax relief to wage subsidies, these countries have one message for those who left: You can come back now. But will they?

In 2010, 5.8% of Europeans with a college degree left their home country. Economic need largely motivated them. Workers were fleeing high unemployment, low wages, and poor living standards.

At the same time, in Central and European states, the debt crisis accelerated a trend that began in the mid- to late-2000s, when countries like Bulgaria and Latvia joined the European Union and, later, the Schengen area, which allows for the free movement of labor. People in these countries could suddenly settle and work anywhere in the EU, and they did, going to places where there were more higher-paying jobs, especially for young people.

This depleted the young worker population in the region. According to a report by the European Commission (p. 9), if current emigration trends remained the same, the population of Romania would decrease by 30%, from 19.9 million in 2015 to 13.8 million in 2060. But if Romania wasnt an EU member state, and its people didnt have the freedom to move around the EU, the loss would be only 14%.

These countries can ill-afford to lose their best and brightest. Across Europe, populations are aging and fertility is down, leading to what some have called a demographic time-bomb (paywall).

Southern Europes fertility rate is one of the lowest in the world, at 1.37 child per woman, well below the population replacement level. Immigrants from poorer EU countries could help offset this loss. But there is no such option for Eastern and Central European states, where fertility is higher but emigration more dramatic. Because workers who emigrate tend to be younger, these countries are left with a reduced population and an aging workforce, which leads to lower productive potential and accelerated population aging, according to the European Commission report.

According to the United Nations, of the top 10 countries with the fastest shrinking populations, six are EU member statesBulgaria, Latvia, Croatia, Lithuania, Romania, and Greeceand one, Serbia, is on the EU accession list.

Policies that seek to reverse the emigration of highly-skilled labor can take many forms.

Last year, Greece launched Rebrain Greece, a program that offers 500 workers between 28 and 40 years old a job and a pre-tax monthly wage of 3,000 ($3,318) if they return to Greece and bring with them the knowhow gained abroad, innovations and fresh ideas. The Greek government has committed to covering 70% of these salaries, with companies contributing the other 30%.

Meanwhile, since July 2019, Portugals Programa Regressar (return program) has offered returnees who sign a full-time work contract in Portugala cash incentive worth 2,614 ($2,891), a 50% income tax reduction for five years, and a cover for relocation costs worth up to 3,886 ($4,299).

The Italian parliament expanded its rientro dei cervelli (pdf) (return of the brains) program in May of last year. Italian nationals who relocate to Italy with a work contract and agree to stay there for at least two years can now get a 70% break on their income tax for up to 10 years. And in August of last year, the Polish government declared that it would eliminate income tax for roughly two million Polish workers under the age of 26a move aimed at attracting its citizens back but also encouraging young Poles to stay and work in their home country.

Its not clear that programs like these actually work. Only 71 people took advantage of Portugals offer to move back home when the return program launched, and so in October the government eased some requirements, making it easier for people to qualify for the program. Italy also eased conditions on its rientro dei cervelli program.

Cyril Muller and Asli Demirg-Kunt, experts on Eurasia at the World Bank, wrote in a recent blog post that countries focus too much on additive programs and not enough on the underlying socio-economic conditions that led people to leave in the first place. All the tax incentives in the world cant make up for stagnating economies and democratic backsliding, says Pawel Zerka, a policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR), who left Poland in 2017 to work in France and has no immediate plans to return.

This is about much more than just economic incentive, he says. Everyone wants to lead a lifewhich is agreeable, secure, and decent. He argued in a recent article that governments should focus instead on improving public services like healthcare and education, reducing air pollution and corruption, and ensuring law and order.

If people feel that they lack a better future where they are, many of them will continue to vote with their feet, Zerka explained in his article. And even the fanciest system of fiscal incentives for people to come back home makes little sense if it is not accompanied with structural reforms.

Here is the original post:

How Europe is trying to reverse its post-debt crisis brain drain - Quartz

The Irresistible Resiliency of Iraq’s Protesters – Lawfare

Posted on February 9, 2020 by Danzig

Editors Note: This article originally appeared on Order from Chaos.

Iraqs protest movement has been remarkably resilient. For months now, tens of thousands of Iraqis across Baghdad and the south have mobilized against the government, demanding better services, accountability, and wholesale reform of the Iraqi state. Since the protests erupted, more than 600 have been killed and thousands more have been injured, according to human rights organizations. The fallout over Iranian commander Qassem Soleimanis assassination was expected to signal the death-knell of the movement, but even that has failed to decisively end what is arguably Iraqs biggest grassroots socio-political mobilization in history.

Iraqis cannot be blamed for wanting more from their government. Their country is on the brink of a socio-economic implosion as a result of a youth bulge, economic degradation, and dilapidated infrastructure. The countrys population of more than 30 million is expected to reach 50 million in a decade. More than 60 percent of Iraqis are under 24, and 700,000 require jobs every year. Iraqs ruling class has failed to respond to the demands of the population and simply no longer has the credibility, much less the capacity, to assuage its population despite the hundreds of billions of dollars that has been expended over the past decade.

Iraqs ruling class crudely assumed the threat of terrorism, the war on ISIS, and sectarian strife could deflect focus from their governance failures and the endemic (politically sanctioned) corruption in perpetuity. The political class has also capitalized on and exploited a powerful narrative that has been forged among its supportersand indeed some policy circles in Washington and other Western capitalsthat has measured the grievances and calamities of the country against the extremes of civil war or Baath-era rule. This sensationalist narrative propagated the notion of a revived Iraqi state and government and it took hold particularly under the previous Iraqi government of Haidar al-Abadi, yet it ignored underlying, deep-rooted issues that have galvanized an entire generation of Iraqis longing for a better future.

But the odds are against Iraqs protesters. The environment is not conducive to a wholesale deconstruction (followed by a reconstruction) of the state or its political system, and there are very few, if any, major actors internally in Iraq and externally that want a revolutionary change that effectively upends the post-2003 political order in its entirety. Iraqs protesters may have to also come to terms with the reality that the international community is actually much more aligned with the Iraqi ruling class (even the militias brutally suppressing them) than they think: There is far too much at stake and far too many dangerous uncertainties in a post-war climate in Iraq and the region for any major external actors to seriously contemplate backing or actively supporting an attempt to overhaul Iraqs political system.

A large part of the challenge for the protesters is that the Iraqi political system is designed in a way that makes it impervious to a major restructuring. There is a whole host of formal and informal, state and para-state actors that dominate, shape, and manage the structures of governance and power. The country suffers from the inexorable accumulation of weapons and armed groups, the absence of viable institutions, and multiple alternative authorities that supplant the Iraqi state. Many areas are beyond the influence and control of the government, areas where power is distributed diffusely among parties, militias, tribes, and clerics.

As a consequence of these dynamics, and unlike protests in Algeria or Sudan, Iraqs ruling elites are likely to stay in power even if the protests reach critical mass. In other words, save for its destruction by way of an external invasion, a country-wide civil war (which itself requires a decisive victor), or another dictatorship that is brought about through a coup, for example (and even then, Iraqis may be worse off than they currently are), the current system will prevail.

What makes the situation particularly perilous for the protesters is the impunity with which militia groups and state-sanctioned security forces are able to crack down on civilians. Iraq is dominated by unaccountable militia groups that wield substantial power and influence, in large part because these groups have exploited the fragility of the Iraqi state, have amassed considerable weapons and other resources, benefited from external patronage from Iran, and capitalized on all this to acquire political superiority.

The 100,000-strong Popular Mobilization Force (PMF), for example, was formed in response to the collapse of the Iraqi army, when ISIS seized Mosul in 2014. It is led and dominated by Iran-aligned groups that have been at the forefront of the violent crackdown against protesters. The power of the PMF is such that it has subsumed Iraqs conventional army; where it may have once been conceivable that the army would protect protesters from the atrocities of Shiite militias, that is evidently no longer the case.

The popular wisdom before the current crisis was that the PMF was not a homogenous force and included nationalist or state-aligned groups that will prevent Irans proxies from monopolizing power within the organization, groups who will operate as a buffer that insulates the Iraqi population from their violence and atrocities. There were misplaced hopes in the multi-layered characteristics of the PMF. The reality is that Irans proxies have been unmatched in their sheer resolve and ruthlessness to instrumentalize and appropriate powerful institutions like the PMF, and this has been grossly underestimated in the analysis of these groups.

The odds moved further against the protesters because they have arguably lost their single most important buffer against the militia groups that have been responsible for killing and injuring civilians. Muqtada al-Sadr and his Sadrist movement have been critical to protecting them from these groups, but a deal struck last week between al-Sadr, the Iraqi government and Irans proxies has resulted in the cleric withdrawing his support. The amorphous nature of the protest movement means its ranks will continue to swell, even without the support of a major socio-political force like the Sadrists; but the notion that the movement can still survive and sustain itself without the protective cloak of at least one of the major political actors in the country is both extremely dangerous and implausible.

That said, the protesters may have some of their fortunes revived. Iraq is infamous for its fragile political deals and coalitions, and so if there is one thing the protesters can bank on, it is the opportunities that might be thrown their way as a result of the fractious nature of the political landscape. The protesters need to urgently mobilize support from at least one major Iraqi political actor in the wake of Sadrs withdrawal of support. That might also include key institutions like the U.S.-trained Iraqi army, which has fought Irans proxies in the past. Although it is still unlikely that the army will intervene, it is not improbableparticularly if there is some active support from external actors like the U.S.

But the zero-sum approach from the movementcalling for the entire overhaul of the political systemmakes them their own worst enemy. The absence of a concerted effort to mobilize significant support within the Iraqi political arena makes them extremely vulnerable and exposed to malign forces. Moreover, the protests are not disconnected from other domestic and regional dynamics, including tensions between the U.S. and Iran. The rocket attack on the U.S. embassy by militia groups last week was immediately followed by a vicious crackdown against protesters. A broader conflict between the U.S. and Iran, or some other conflagration, could gift Irans proxies with the perfect smokescreen for launching an expanded violent campaign that looks to decisively end the protests. The fate of the protesters may also be decided away from the glare of the media: the backroom deals, the assassinations, kidnappings, and the occasional attacks launched in total darkness.

The coming weeks will be critical for determining whether Iraqs protest movement can sustain itself and, more importantly, yield at least some objectives focused on improving governance and reforming the state. The government may increasingly turn to violence, but case studies from around the world and the scholarly literature on protest movements show that while coercion might decrease protest temporarily, it far from neutralizes them; in the longer run, coercion increases the dissidence that enables protest movements to revive themselves. On every occasion the Iraqi government relies on coercion, the protesters are likely to adapt their strategies accordingly and reinforce their resiliency as a result.

See the original post:

The Irresistible Resiliency of Iraq's Protesters - Lawfare

2019: The academic world: Exploring diverse topics – The Ukrainian Weekly

Posted on February 9, 2020 by Danzig

Notable in Ukrainian academic circles were topics such as the Holodomor, Ukrainian-Jewish relations and history, and the role of women in politics, society and culture.

Author Anne Applebaum was interviewed on January 16 by Marta Baziuk, executive director of the Holodomor Research and Education Consortium (Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies, University of Alberta), about her latest book, Red Famine: Stalins War on Ukraine. Ms. Applebaum reflected on the overwhelmingly positive response the book received in the U.S. and U.K press, as well as across European states, with translations in French, Italian and Portuguese editions released in the fall of 2019.

The discussion noted that challenges remain in the Holodomor being accepted as a genocide internationally (which Ms. Applebaum separated from her book to not take a stance on the matter, but personally identifies the Holodomor as a genocide). For many scholars, Ms. Applebaum said, there does not exist a piece of paper that says Stalin wanted to kill a lot of Ukrainians, but the evidence shows the Stalin knew what was going on, and laws and policies were adjusted to deepen the famine conditions in Ukraine. The long-term challenge is for books like Red Famine and others to be incorporated in courses on Soviet history.

Jewish-Ukrainian relations were explored in a landmark discussion on January 29 at the Jewish Community Center JW3 in London. The panelists included Prof. Yaroslav Hrytsak, Josef Zissels and Mark Freiman, with moderator Peter Pomerantsev. The event was organized by the Ukrainian Institute London and was sponsored by the Ukrainian Jewish Encounter. A major turning point was how a new Jewish Ukrainian identity emerged after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the establishment of the Ukrainian state in 1991, but this was not realized until 2004 and the Orange Revolution and more importantly, the Revolution of Dignity in 2013-2014. Anti-Semitism in Ukraine has been on the decline, said Prof. Hrytsak, as evidenced by the lack of political support for right-wing nationalist parties. Issues of historical memory surrounding figures such as Stepan Bandera were also discussed. Bandera, as a leader of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, fought both the Nazis and the Soviets and sat in a Nazi concentration camp, stressed Prof. Hrytsak. Dr. Zissels underscored that figures such as Bandera and Roman Shukhevych (commander of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army) are glorified as heroes who fought for an independent Ukraine, and are not celebrated for killing Jews. Ukrainians, Dr. Zissels added, risked their lives to hide Jews from the Nazis.

Ukrainian Institute London

At the discussion on Jews and the New Ukraine at the Jewish Community Center in London on January 29 (from left) are: Mark Freiman, Ukrainian Jewish Encounter; Peter Pomerantsev, London School of Economics, Institute of Global Affairs; Prof. Yaroslav Hrytsak, Ukrainian Catholic University; and Josef Zissels, chairman, Vaad Association of Jewish Organizations and Communities of Ukraine.

Feminist scholar Oksana Kiss presentation, Ukrainian Women in the Gulag: When Survival Meant Victory, was held on January 31 in Toronto. She applied the theories and methods of feminist anthropology to explore traditional Ukrainian society, with a focus on the pre-industrial Ukrainian village life and its belief system, social norms and traditions, definition of a womans rights and duties, and female roles in family and society. Her conclusions showed that Ukrainian culture was essentially patriarchal, with power, authority and resources in the hands of men. Her research also examined the role of women during the Holodomor and in the gulag experiences. The event was sponsored by the Ukrainian Canadian Research and Documentation Center and co-sponsored by the Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies (CIUS) at the University of Alberta and St. Vladimir Institute of Toronto. Dr. Kis is a historian and anthropologist working as a senior research associate at the Institute of Ethnology, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, in Lviv. She is president of the Ukrainian Association for Research in Womens History and is editor-in-chief of the academic website Ukraina Moderna. Dr. Kis noted the expansion of publications available in Ukraine today, as compared to 20-plus years ago, and the expansion of feminism scholarship in Ukraine, and pointed out that much of this would not be possible without foreign donations and international support. Continued reforms in the education and academic systems were needed to modernize the field of study and scholarly opportunities.

Fifteen rare Ukrainian dictionaries, totaling 22 volumes, were presented to the Library of Congress on March 21 during the program Celebration of Leadership in a Rule of Law Country that was sponsored by the U.S.-Ukraine Foundation. Presenting the dictionaries were Liudmyla Mazuka, wife of Ambassador to the U.S. Valery Chaly, and Embassy staffers. Receiving the donation were Grant Harris, chief of the European Division, Regina Frackowiak and Jurij Dobczansky. The dictionaries were reprints of originals from the 1920s.

Five of the volumes were sponsored by the Kyiv-City Rotary Club; the other 10 were published by the Ukrainian Language Institute and the Institute of Encyclopedic Research, both of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. The Library of Congress has some 900 dictionaries and only had one of the original publications, acquired in 1930 the year of its publication. The first 10 volumes of the Dictionary Heritage series cover topics such as chemistry, education, business, medicine, manufacturing, geology, mining, music, proverbs, geodesy and physics.

Dr. Taras Hunczaks latest book, Ukraine in the Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries: The Unending Complexities of Survival, a collection of scholarly essays, was presented on March 24 at the Ukrainian American Cultural Center of New Jersey in Whippany. Dr. Hunczak is professor emeritus of history at Rutgers University. His latest book deals with Ukraines pursuit of sovereignty and statehood during the periods of World War I, the Ukrainian Revolution of 1917-1021, the interwar period and World War II. The presentation was organized by the Ukrainian Academy of Arts and Sciences in the U.S. (UVAN) and sponsored by the Morris County N.J., branch of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America and Selfreliance Federal Credit Union in commemoration of the 100th anniversary of Ukraines proclamation of independence in 1918. Other scholars participating in the presentation were Dr. Albert Kipa, president of UVAN, Dr. Leonid Rudnytzky, president of the World Council of Shevchenko Scientific Societies, Dr. Mark Thomas, professor of political science at LaSalle University, and Dr. Walter Zarycky, executive director of the Center for U.S.-Ukrainian Relations. The book was noted for the 12 thorny subjects, including the Holodomor, examined and explained by Dr. Hunczak.

It was reported in March that the film of the 1983 international symposium on the 1933 Famine in Ukraine (held on March 25-26, 1983, in Montreal), was restored and preserved by Yurij and Zorianna Luhovy. Mr. Luhovy and Peter Blysczak had filmed the symposium in 1983, and the medium U-MATIC videotape was discontinued. As the film was in danger of disintegrating and disappearing, it was transferred to DVD and color-corrected. The symposium was significant in that scholars examined not only the agricultural and farming casualties that were the main target, but also the destruction of the Ukrainian national elites, the Churches, language, culture all the qualities that made Ukrainians a nation and a culture, said Dr. Roman Serbyn.

The symposium was sponsored by the University of Montreal, McGill University, Concordia University and Universite du Quebec a Montreal, as well as the Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies at the University of Alberta. The restoration donors included the Ukrainian National Federation, Montreal Branch; La Caisse Populaire Desjardins Ukrainienne de Montreal; the Holodomor Research and Education Consortium of the Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies, University of Alberta; Shevchenko Foundation Ukrainian War Veterans Fund; Ucranica Research Institute; Buduchnist Credit Union Foundation and others.

Ukrainian-Jewish relations were discussed on March 28 at the Ukrainian Institute of America in New York, with a focus on the new book by Dr. Paul Robert Magocsi and Dr. Yohanan Petrovsky-Shtern, Jews and Ukrainians: A Millennium of Co-Existence. The event was sponsored by the UIA and the Ukrainian Jewish Encounter. The discussion touched on a number of important issues related to how Ukrainians and Jews from Ukrainian lands view each other, and how that relationship has developed over the centuries. A major focus was how Ukrainian territory had been in the control of invading empires over the centuries it was noted that Ukraines defined borders were more of a 20th century concept and how Jewish identity played into that territorial shift and Ukrainian national identity. Moderator Adrian Karatnycky noted that Jewish Hassidism considers Ukraine as its cradle of development, with many prominent leaders coming from Ukraine, and he spoke of the millions killed in Ukraine during the Holocaust (Jews and non-Jews alike). Discussion also focused on investigations by scholars into the state archives about suspected Nazi collaborators during the second world war, but the scholars cautioned that historical context and balance were important.

Ambassador to the U.S. Valery Chaly spoke at Harvard University on April 15 about the important geopolitical role of Ukraine. He highlighted the importance of Ukraines bilateral relationship with the U.S., and explained how that relationship plays out in the latest developments in the ongoing war with Russia in Ukraines eastern Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts. Ukraine gets 92 percent of its military support for the U.S., he said, adding that some 200 troops from the U.S. Armys 101st Airborne Division were arriving in Ukraine for training exercises. The U.S. Navy, he said, had sent ships into the Black Sea to reduce destabilization in the area by Russia. The ambassador also explained the situation in Crimea and Russias militarization of the peninsula since it was annexed by Russia in 2014.

Andrew Nynka

Ukraines ambassador to the United States, Valery Chaly (right), presents a watch as a gift to Prof. Serhii Plokhii, director of the Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute, on April 15 at Harvard University. The ambassador spoke on Ukraines geopolitical role in Europe.

The National University of Kyiv Mohyla Academy (NaUKMA) held its 25th jubilee convocation in Kyiv on June 28, Constitution Day in Ukraine. This was the largest graduating class from the university since 1991, with 646 undergraduates, 366 post-graduates, 55 MBAs and four Ph.D.s. The keynote speaker, Roman Nabozhnyak, a 2013 graduate, who is a musician, entrepreneur, ATO veteran and co-founder of the caf Veterano Brownie, drew loud applause. He stated: Do not be afraid to go all in at everything your love, your family and your favorite passion. And do it without the expectation to receive anything in return. Because nobody owes you anything. Look for great challenges in life, and never forget to ask yourself this question, What can I do? The Mykola Kravets Award for practical contribution to the development of Ukraine was presented to Oleh Dykyj, who received a Master of Law degree. Mr. Dykyj noted the struggle for freedom was tied to the wish to build a strong society through the Alumni Association of NaUKMA, which would continue to benefit Ukraine.

Cover of Dr. Oleh Wolowynas Atlas of Ukrainians in the United States, which was released in the fall of 2019.

In September, readers learned about Dr. Oleh Wolowynas latest book, Atlas of Ukrainians in the United States: Demographic and Socio-economic Characteristics. A book review by Wsevolod W. Isajiw hailed the book as perhaps one of the first comprehensive atlases of an ethnic group in the U.S.A. with 380 maps, 15 figures and three tables. The atlas provides a thorough picture of the historical and current demographic socioeconomic status of the Ukrainian community from the first wave of immigration in 1899 up until very recently in 2010. The maps were made possible by the Center for Demographic and Socio-Economic Research of Ukrainian in the United States at the Shevchenko Scientific Society, directed by Dr. Wolowyna. The atlas covers historical migration, recent immigration from Ukraine, internal migration, population distribution by state and in over 55 metropolitan areas, with percentages of Fourth Wave and of those speaking Ukrainian at home. The wealth of information in this book is of service to all Ukrainian community organizations, as the old centers of the community shift to new areas of the U.S. and reflects the current reality.

Following the death of Prof. Dmytro Shtohryn on September 25, his daughter, Dr. Liudoslava Shtohryn, reminded our readers about the Dmytro Shtohryn Endowment in Ukrainian Studies in the Department of Slavic Languages and Literature at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. [Editors note: The endowment was actually established in 2017.] The endowment for the department is targeted for conferences, symposia, individual lectures and other learning opportunities on the topic of Ukrainian studies. Prof. Shtohyrn, professor of library administration and the first head of the Slavic and East European Library, was credited with establishing Ukrainian studies as a discipline at the university.

On October 1, the Holodomor Research and Education Consortium (HREC), a project of the Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies, University of Alberta, announced the 2019 winner of the HREC Educator Prize for Holodomor Lesson Plan Development. The winning lesson plan, titled Holodomor Three Issues to Examine (High School Edition), has students apply their critical thinking to comparing the patterns of three factors related to a better understanding of the Holodomor, utilizing current geographically mapped research data.

Manor College in Jenkintown, Pa., hosted a dialogue on the topic Emerging Women in Politics in, of, and for Ukraine on October 11. The featured speakers included Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.), a member of the Congressional Ukrainian Caucus, and Myroslava Gongadze, chief of the Ukrainian Service at Voice of America, with Manor College president, Dr. Jonathan Peri, as moderator. Ms. Gongadze explained her rise as a voice in Ukraine after the murder of her husband, Heorhiy Gongadze, in 2000 that propelled her to the spotlight. She said she made a decision to use her knowledge to raise awareness about corruption and fraud. Her role with Voice of America has sought balance and fairness, for both men and women. Rep. Dean spoke of the need for diversity related to men and women at the discussion table. Although womens rights are enshrined in the Constitution of Ukraine, as it is in the U.S., she said there remains an ongoing struggle to make it reflected in practice. Ms. Gongadze also advocated for women to take up roles in U.S. politics, the need for Ukrainians to speak up for themselves in the media coverage of Ukraine and Ukrainians, and the necessity for Ukraine to be covered from Ukraine, not Moscow or Washington.

The spring courses offered by the Ukrainian Studies Program at Columbia University were announced in January, and included two history courses led by visiting scholar Dr. Johannes Remy, Introduction to the History of Ukraine and Ukraine in the Russian and Habsburg Empires. Other offerings were Dr. Mark Andryczyks literary course on Brand New Creating Identity in Contemporary Ukrainian Culture, Ambassador Valery Kuchynskyis Todays Ukraine: Power, Politics and Diplomacy, and Ukrainian language instruction by Dr. Yuri Shevchuk, elementary, intermediate and advanced. The program also hosted film screenings through the Ukrainian Film Club at Columbia University, and presentations by Ukrainian scholars.

Columbias fall course offerings in the Ukrainian Studies Program included art history taught by Dr. Olena Martyniuk and visiting Fulbright scholars Drs. Oksana Remaniaka and Dr. Maria Shuvalova, as well as Dr. Motyls Ukraine in New York course, Ambassador Kuchynskyis Ukrainian Foreign Policy: Russia, Europe and the U.S., Ukrainian language instruction by Dr. Yuri Shevchuk and his film study, Soviet, Post-Soviet, Colonial and Postcolonial Cinema. Events scheduled for the fall included: a literary roundtable, Envisioning Ukrainian Literature 2019, Part II with Irene Zabytko, Dr. Motyl, Dzvinia Orlowsky, Olena Jennings and Mark Andryczyk; a talk by Dr. Kis, Remaining a Ukrainian Woman: Normative Femininity as Armor in the Gulag; and a two-day conference, Five Years of War in the Donbas: Cultural Responses and Reverberations with The Ukrainian Museum and the Ukrainian Film Club at Columbia University.

Continued here:

2019: The academic world: Exploring diverse topics - The Ukrainian Weekly

FW de Klerk’s defining speech in full, reactions as Mzansi reflects on the past – TimesLIVE

Posted on February 9, 2020 by Danzig

Here's the former president's speech in full:

Mr Speaker, Members of Parliament.

THE GENERAL ELECTIONS on September the 6th, 1989, placed our country irrevocably on the road of drastic change. Underlying this is the growing realisation by an increasing number of South Africans that only a negotiated understanding among the representative leaders of the entire population is able to ensure lasting peace.

The alternative is growing violence, tension and conflict. That is unacceptable and in nobody's interest. The well-being of all in this country is linked inextricably to the ability of the leaders to come to terms with one another on a new dispensation. No-one can escape this simple truth.

On its part, the government will accord the process of negotiation the highest priority. The aim is a totally new and just constitutional dispensation in which every inhabitant will enjoy equal rights, treatment and opportunity in every sphere of endeavour - constitutional, social and economic.

I hope this new Parliament will play a constructive part in both the prelude to negotiations and the negotiating process itself. I wish to ask all of you who identify yourselves with the broad aim of a new South Africa, and that is the overwhelming majority.

Let us put petty politics aside when we discuss the future during this Session.

Help us build a broad consensus about the fundamentals of a new, realistic and democratic dispensation. Let us work together on a plan that will rid our country of suspicion and steer it away from domination and radicalism of any kind.

During the term of this new parliament, we shall have to deal, complimentary to one another, with the normal processes of legislation and day-to-day government, as well as with the process of negotiation and renewal. Within this framework I wish to deal first with several matters more closely concerned with the normal process of government before I turn specifically to negotiation and related issues.

1 Foreign relations

The Government is aware of the important part the world at large has to play in the realisation of our country's national interests.

Without contact and co-operation with the rest of the world we cannot promote the well-being and security of our citizens. The dynamic developments in international politics have created new opportunities for South Africa as well. Important advances have been made, among other things, in our contacts abroad, especially where these were precluded previously by ideological considerations.

I hope this trend will be encouraged by the important change of climate that is taking place in South Africa

For South Africa, indeed for the whole world, the past year has been one of change and major upheaval. In Eastern Europe and even the Soviet Union itself, political and economic upheaval surged forward in an unstoppable tide. At the same time, Beijing temporarily smothered with brutal violence the yearning of the people of the Chinese mainland for greater freedom.

The year of 1989 will go down in history as the year in which Stalinist Communism expired.

These developments will entail unpredictable consequences for Europe, but they will also be of decisive importance to Africa. The indications are that the countries of eastern and central Europe will receive greater attention, while it will decline in the case of Africa.

The collapse, particularly of the economic system in eastern Europe, also serves as a warning to those who insist on persisting with it in Africa. Those who seek to force this failure of a system on South Africa, should engage in a total revision of their point of view. It should be clear to all that is not the answer here either. The new situation in eastern Europe also shows foreign intervention is no recipe for domestic change. It never succeeds, regardless of its ideological motivation. The upheaval in eastern Europe took place without the involvement of the Big Powers or of the United Nations.

The countries of southern Africa are faced with a particular challenge: Southern Africa now has an historical opportunity to set aside its conflicts and ideological differences and draw up a joint programme of reconstruction. It should be sufficiently attractive to ensure the southern African region obtains adequate investment and loan capital from the industrial countries of the world. Unless the countries of southern Africa achieve stability and a common approach to economic development rapidly, they will be faced by further decline and ruin.

The government is prepared to enter into discussions with other southern African countries with the aim of formulating a realistic development plan. The government believes the obstacles in the way of a conference of southern African states have now been removed sufficiently.

Hostile postures have to be replaced by co-operative ones; confrontation by contact; disengagement by engagement; slogans by deliberate debate.

The season of violence is over. The time for reconstruction and reconciliation has arrived.

Recently there have, indeed, been unusually positive results in South Africa's contacts and relations with other African states. During my visits to their countries I was received cordially, both in private and in public, by presidents Moburu, Chissano, Houphouet-Boigny and Kaunda. These leaders expressed their sincere concern about the serious economic problems in our part of the world. They agreed South Africa could and should play a positive part in regional co-operation and development.

Our positive contribution to the independence process in South West Africa has been recognised internationally. South Africa's good faith and reliability as a negotiator made a significant contribution to the success of the events. This, too, was not unnoticed. Similarly, our efforts to help bring an end to the domestic conflict situations in Mozambique and Angola have received positive acknowledgement.

At present the government is involved in negotiations concerning our future relations with an independent Namibia and there are no reasons why good relations should not exist between the two countries. Namibia needs South Africa and we are prepared to play a constructive part.

Nearer home I paid fruitful visits to Venda, Transkei and Ciskei and intend visiting Bophuthatswana soon. In recent times there has been an interesting debate about the future relationship of the TBVC countries with South Africa and specifically about whether they should be re-incorporated into our country.

Without rejecting this idea out of hand, it should be borne in mind that it is but one of many possibilities. These countries are constitutionally independent. Any return to South Africa will have to be dealt with, not only by means of legislation in their parliaments, but also through legislation in this Parliament. Naturally this will have to be preceded by talks and agreements.

2 Human rights

Some time ago the government referred the question of the protection of fundamental human rights to the South African Law Commission. This resulted in the law commission's interim working document on individual and minority rights. It elicited substantial public interest.

I am satisfied that every individual and organisation in the country has had ample opportunity to make representations to the law commission, express criticism freely and make suggestions. At present, the law commission is considering the representations received. A final report is expected in the course of this year.

In view of the exceptional importance of the subject of human rights to our country and all its people, I wish to ask the law commission to accord this task high priority.

The whole question of protecting individual and minority rights, which includes collective rights and the rights of national groups, is still under consideration by the law commission. Therefore, it would be inappropriate of the government to express a view on the details now. However, certain matters of principle have emerged fairly dearly and I wish to devote some remarks to them.

The government accepts the principle of the recognition and protection of the fundamental individual rights which form the constitutional basis of most Western democracies. We acknowledge, too, that the most practical way of protecting those rights is vested in a declaration of rights justiciable by an independent judiciary. However, it is clear that a system for the protection of the rights of individuals, minorities and national entities has to form a well-rounded and balanced whole. South Africa has its own national composition and our constitutional dispensation has to take this into account. The formal recognition of individual rights does not mean that the problems of a heterogeneous population will simply disappear. Any new constitution which disregards this reality will be inappropriate and even harmful. Naturally, the protection of collective, minority and national rights may not bring about an imbalance in respect of individual rights. It is neither the government's policy nor its intention that any group - in whichever way it may be defined - shall be favoured above or in relation to any of the others.

The government is requesting the law commission to undertake a further task and report on it. This task is directed at the balanced protection in a future constitution of the human rights of all our citizens, as well as of collective units, associations, minorities and nations. This investigation will also serve the purpose of supporting negotiations towards a new constitution.

The terms of reference also include:

3 The death penalty

The death penalty has been the subject of intensive discussion in recent months. However, the government has been giving its attention to this extremely sensitive issue for some time. On April the 27th, 1989, the honourable minister of justice indicated that there was merit in suggestions for reform in this area. Since 1988 in fact, my predecessor and I have been taking decisions on reprieves which have led, in proportion, to a drastic decline in executions.

We have now reached the position in which we are able to make concrete proposals for reform. After the chief justice was consulted, and he in turn had consulted the Bench, and after the government had noted the opinions of academics and other interested parties, the government decided on the following broad principles from a variety of available options:

Should these proposals be adopted, they should have a significant influence on the imposition of death sentences on the one hand, and on the other, should ensure that every case in which a person has been sentenced to death, will come to the attention of the appellate division.

The proposals require that everybody currently awaiting execution, be accorded the benefit of the proposed new approach. Therefore, all executions have been suspended and no executions will take place until parliament has taken a final decision on the new proposals. In the event of the proposals being adopted, the case of every person involved will be dealt with in accordance with the new guidelines. In the meantime, no executions have taken place since November 14th, 1989.

New and uncompleted cases will still be adjudicated in terms of the existing law. Only when the death sentence is imposed, will the new proposals be applied, as in the case of those currently awaiting execution.

The legislation concerned also entails other related principles which will be announced and elucidated in due course by the Minister of Justice. It will now be formulated in consultation with experts and be submitted to Parliament as soon as possible. I wish to urge everybody to join us in dealing with this highly sensitive issue in a responsible manner.

4 Socio-economic aspects

A changed dispensation implies far more than political and constitutional issues. It cannot be pursued successfully in isolation from problems in other spheres of life which demand practical solutions. Poverty, unemployment, housing shortages, inadequate education and training, illiteracy, health needs and numerous other problems still stand in the way of progress and prosperity and an improved quality of life.

The conservation of the physical and human environment is of cardinal importance to the quality of our existence. For this the government is developing a strategy with the aid of an investigation by the President's Council.

All of these challenges are being dealt with urgently and comprehensively. The capability for this has to be created in an economically accountable manner. Consequently existing strategies and aims are undergoing a comprehensive revision.

From this will emanate important policy announcements in the socio-economic sphere by the responsible ministers during the course of the session. One matter about which it is possible to make a concrete announcement, is the Separate Amenities Act, 1953. Pursuant to my speech before the president's council late last year, I announce that this Act will be repealed during this session of parliament.

The state cannot possibly deal alone with all of the social advancement our circumstances demand. The community at large, and especially the private sector, also have a major responsibility towards the welfare of our country and its people.

5 The economy

A new South Africa is possible only if it is bolstered by a sound and growing economy, with particular emphasis on the creation of employment. With a view to this, the government has taken thorough cognisance of the advice contained in numerous reports by a variety of advisory bodies. The central message is that South Africa, too, will have to make certain structural changes to its economy, just as its major trading partners had to do a decade or so ago.

The period of exceptionally high economic growth experienced by the western world in the 1960s was brought to an end by the oil crisis in 1973. Drastic structural adaptations became inevitable for these countries, especially after the second oil crisis in 1979, when serious imbalances occurred in their economies. After considerable sacrifices, those countries which persevered with their structural adjustment programmes, recovered economically so that lengthy periods of high economic growth and low inflation were possible.

During that particular period, South Africa was protected temporarily by the rising gold price from the necessity of making similar adjustments immediately. In fact, the high gold price even brought prosperity with it for a while. The recovery of the world economy and the decline in the price of gold and other primary products, brought with them unhealthy trends. These included high inflation, a serious weakening in the productivity of capital, stagnation in the economy's ability to generate income and employment opportunities. All of this made a drastic structural adjustment of our economy inevitable.

The government's basic point of departure is to reduce the role of the public sector in the economy and to give the private sector maximum opportunity for optimal performance. In this process, preference has to be given to allowing the market forces and a sound competitive structure to bring about the necessary adjustments.

Naturally, those who make and implement economic policy have a major responsibility at the same time to promote an environment optimally conducive to investment, job creation and economic growth by means of appropriate and properly co-ordinated fiscal and monetary policy. The government remains committed to this balanced and practical approach.

By means of restricting capital expenditure in parastatal institutions, privatisation, deregulation and curtailing government expenditure, substantial progress has been made already towards reducing the role of the authorities in the economy. We shall persist with this in a well-considered way.

This does not mean the state will forsake its indispensable development role, especially in our particular circumstances. On the contrary, it is the precise intention of the government to concentrate an equitable portion of its capacity on these aims by means of the meticulous determination of priorities.

Following the progress that has been made in other areas of the economy in recent years, it is now opportune to give particular attention to the supply side of the economy.

Fundamental factors which will contribute to the success of this restructuring are:

These and other adjustments, which will require sacrifices, have to be seen as prerequisites for a new period of sustained growth in productive employment in the nineties.

The government is very much aware of the necessity of proper coordination and consistent implementation of its economic policy. For this reason, the establishment of the necessary structures and expertise to ensure this co-ordination is being given preference. This applies both to the various functions within the government and to the interaction between the authorities and the private sector.

This is obviously not the occasion for me to deal in greater detail with our total economic strategy or with the recent course of the economy.

I shall confine myself to a few specific remarks on one aspect of fiscal policy that has been a source of criticism of the government for some time, namely state expenditure.

The government's financial year ends only in two months' time and several other important economic indicators for the 1989 calendar year are still subject to refinements at this stage. Nonetheless, several important trends are becoming increasingly dear. I am grateful to be able to say we have apparently succeeded to a substantial degree in achieving most of our economic aims in the past year.

In respect of government expenditure, the budget for the current financial year will be the most accurate in many years. The financial figures will show;

Without pre-empting this year's main budget, I wish to emphasise that it is also our intention to co-ordinate fiscal and monetary policy in the coming financial year in a way that will enable us to achieve the ensuing goals - namely:

It is a matter of considerable seriousness to the government, especially in this particular period of our history, to promote a dynamic economy which will make it possible for increasing numbers of people to be employed and share in rising standards of living.

6 Negotiation

In conclusion, I wish to focus the spotlight on the process of negotiation and related issues. At this stage I am refraining deliberately from discussing the merits of numerous political questions which undoubtedly will be debated during the next few weeks. The focus, now, has to fall on negotiation.

Practically every leader agrees that negotiation is the key to reconciliation, peace and a new and just dispensation. However, numerous excuses for refusing to take part are advanced. Some of the reasons being advanced are valid. Others are merely part of a political chess game. And while the game of chess proceeds, valuable time is being lost.

Against this background I committed the government during my inauguration to giving active attention to the most important obstacles in the way of negotiation. Today I am able to announce far-reaching decisions in this connection.

I believe these decisions will shape a new phase in which there will be a movement away from measures which have been seized upon as a justification for confrontation and violence. The emphasis has to move, and will move now, to a debate and discussion of political and economic points of view as part of the process of negotiation.

I wish to urge every political and community leader, in and outside parliament, to approach the new opportunities which are being created, constructively. There is no time left for advancing all manner of new conditions that will delay the negotiating process.

The steps that have been decided are the following:

These decisions by the cabinet are in accordance with the government's declared intention to normalise the political process in South Africa without jeopardising the maintenance of good order. They were preceded by thorough and unanimous advice by a group of officials which included members of the security community.

Implementation will be immediate and, where necessary, notices will appear in the Government Gazette from tomorrow. The most important facets of the advice the government received in this connection are the following:

About one matter there should be no doubt. The lifting of the prohibition on the said organisations does not signify in the least the approval or condonation of terrorism or crimes of violence committed under the banner or which may be perpetrated in the future. Equally, it should not be interpreted as a deviation from the government's principles, among other things, against their economic policy and aspects of their constitutional policy. This will be dealt with in debate and negotiation.

At the same time I wish to emphasise that the maintenance of law and order dares not be jeopardised. The government will not forsake its duty in this connection. Violence from whichever source, will be fought with all available might. Peaceful protest may not become the springboard for lawlessness, violence and intimidation. No democratic country can tolerate that.

Strong emphasis will be placed as well on even more effective law enforcement. Proper provision of manpower and means for the police and all who are involved with the enforcement of the law, will be ensured. In fact, the budget for the coming financial year will already begin to give effect to this.

I wish to thank the members of our security forces and related services for the dedicated service they have rendered the Republic of South Africa. Their dedication makes reform in a stable climate possible.

On the state of emergency I have been advised that an emergency situation, which justifies these special measures which have been retained, still exists. There is still conflict which is manifesting itself mainly in Natal, but as a consequence of the countrywide political power struggle. In addition, there are indications that radicals are still trying to disrupt the possibilities of negotiation by means of mass violence.

It is my intention to terminate the state of emergency completely as soon as circumstances justify it and I request the co-operation of everybody towards this end. Those responsible for unrest and conflict have to bear the blame for the continuing state of emergency. In the mean time, the state of emergency is inhibiting only those who use chaos and disorder as political instruments. Otherwise the rules of the game under the state of emergency are the same for everybody.

Against this background the government is convinced that the decisions I have announced are justified from the security point of view. However, these decisions are justified from a political point of view as well.

Our country and all its people have been embroiled in conflict, tension and violent struggle for decades. It is time for us to break out of the cycle of violence and break through to peace and reconciliation. The silent majority is yearning for this. The youth deserve it.

With the steps the government has taken it has proven its good faith and the table is laid for sensible leaders to begin talking about a new dispensation, to reach an understanding by way of dialogue and discussion.

The agenda is open and the overall aims to which we are aspiring should be acceptable to all reasonable South Africans.

Among other things, those aims include a new, democratic constitution; universal franchise; no domination; equality before an independent judiciary; the protection of minorities as well as of individual rights; freedom of religion; a sound economy based on proven economic principles and private enterprise; dynamic programmes directed at better education, health services, housing and social conditions for all.

In this connection Mr Nelson Mandela could play an important part. The government has noted he has declared himself to be willing to make a constructive contribution to the peaceful political process in South Africa.

I wish to put it plainly that the government has taken a firm decision to release Mr Mandela unconditionally. I am serious about bringing this matter to finality without delay. The government will take a decision soon on the date of his release. Unfortunately, a further short passage of time is unavoidable.

Normally there is a certain passage of time between the decision to release and the actual release because of logistical and administrative requirements. In the case of Mr Mandela there are factors in the way of his immediate release, of which his personal circumstances and safety are not the least. He has not been an ordinary prisoner for quite some rime. Because of that, his case requires particular circumspection.

Today's announcements, in particular, go to the heart of what black leaders - also Mr Mandela - have been advancing over the years as their reason for having resorted to violence. The allegation has been that the government did not wish to talk to them and that they were deprived of their right to normal political activity by the prohibition of their organisations.

Without conceding that violence has ever been justified, I wish to say today to those who argued in this manner:

These facts place everybody in South Africa before a fait accompli. On the basis of numerous previous statements there is no longer any reasonable excuse for the continuation of violence. The time for talking has arrived and whoever still makes excuses does not really wish to talk.

Therefore, I repeat my invitation with greater conviction than ever:

Walk through the open door, take your place at the negotiating table together with the government and other leaders who have important power bases inside and outside of parliament.

Henceforth, everybody's political points of view will be tested against their realism, their workability and their fairness. The time for negotiation has arrived.

To those political leaders who have always resisted violence I say thank you for your principled stands. This includes all the leaders of parliamentary parties, leaders of important organisations and movements, such as Chief Minister Buthelezi, all of the other chief ministers and urban community leaders.

Through their participation and discussion they have made an important contribution to this moment in which the process of free political participation is able to be restored. Their places in the negotiating process are assured.

Conclusion

In my inaugural address I said the following:

All reasonable people in this country - by far the majority -anxiously await a message of hope. It is our responsibility as leaders in all spheres to provide that message realistically, with courage and conviction. If we fail in that, the ensuing chaos, the demise of stability and progress, will for ever be held against us.

History has thrust upon the leadership of this country the tremendous responsibility to turn our country away from its present direction of conflict and confrontation. Only we, the leaders of our peoples, can do it.

FW de Klerk's defining speech in full, reactions as Mzansi reflects on the past - TimesLIVE

BNF on the verge of collapse? – The Voice Online

Posted on February 9, 2020 by Danzig

Crushed by a technicality, analysts call for evaluation and new leader.

On Wednesday, a five-man bench at the Court of Appeal (CoA) crushed Umbrella for Democratic Changes (UDC) hope of taking over government from the ruling Botswana Democratic Party (BDP).

The court dismissed, with costs, the Umbrellas request to challenge the outcome of 14 constituencies at last years general elections. The CoA ruled that, according to the Constitution of Botswana, it does not have the jurisdiction to hear such petitions.

The UDC were forced to turn to the CoA after High Court threw out their original petition on the basis the coalition failed to comply with Electoral Petitions procedures.

In light of Wednesdays ruling, The Voice staffer, DANIEL CHIDA spoke to three Political Analysts to get their views on where the UDC go from here.

PROFESSOR AGREEMENT JOTIA

What makes a distinction between a democracy and any form of government is the respect and honour of the rule of law.

In this case, argumentatively so, the UDC approached the Courts as per the provisions of our democratic process as enshrined within our Constitution and they were given a platform to vent the displeasure.

The Courts listened and ruled. However, whether the ruling is what they expected is a subject for another intellectual engagement.

Moving forward, I take it that the UDC has a mammoth task to go on a journey of self-introspection in terms of making a very critical analysis of what else could have gone wrong during the elections besides the claims of election rigging.

Fundamental to UDCs critical examination should be on the leadership frontier: what did the leadership do right and where did they blunder? What else could have been done differently and by who?

Going forward, how does the UDC mend the political walls of Jericho? Whom should the UDC associate with going forward and which relationship should they bring to an end?

How do you turn the UDC into a political brand going into 2024?

What do the figures of those masses who voted for UDC mean to the leadership and Botswanas political platform in general?

These are difficult, uncomfortable and tough questions which demand nothing but logic-driven and fair critical analysis.

All in all, our democracy has never been so challenged before and I guess this is why democracy as a principle of governance is beautiful.

We disagree, challenge and accommodate diversity of opinion.

Botswana is our country let us move forward to socio-economic and political prosperity despite the fact that some are in grief. With God, our tomorrow will be better!

LEONARD SESA

The UDC s move of taking this matter to court is a sign of democracy on its own but what happened should be a wake up call for IEC in the future. It shows that they must improve and do better.

The UDC members were within their constitutional rights and the outcome shouldnt be a blow to them but to introspect their movement.

UDC lost on a technicality and this could be based on how they interpreted law.

There are still 2024 elections and bye elections coming along the way.

Another point to be noted from the case is how the President, Mokgweetsi Masisi did not interfere.

When abroad, he made a statement that he was waiting for the outcome just like anybody else and he was prepared to accept the results.

KEBAPETSE LOTSHWAO

This was a political matter that didnt need the court to decide.

Batswana rejected UDC and the party should have evaluated the elections to see why Batswana chose the BDP over them.

However, the ruling has brought an end to the matter and it will be laid to rest.

They must take stock of themselves since there is 2024 coming.

When doing introspection, they must also look at their leadership, especially Boko who lead the movement twice but failed to bring the needed results.

Maybe it is time for the BNF to hand over to someone like Prince Dibeela who listens to people.

The rest is here:

BNF on the verge of collapse? - The Voice Online

The Presidential Medal of Freedom: Its Just So Beautiful – RushLimbaugh.com

Posted on February 9, 2020 by Danzig

RUSH: For those of you watching on the Dittocam, this will also be at RushLimbaugh.com. I want to show you a picture up close of the Presidential Medal of Freedom. That is it right there. And I couldnt stop looking down at it the whole time that Im wearing it. The clasps in the back, its just beautiful.

Weve also got one more photo to show you that will also be at RushLimbaugh.com.

A black and white picture taken from below the second floor with the Medal of Freedom in color.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: This is Will in Rhinebeck, New York. Great to have you, sir, the EIB Network. Hello.

CALLER: Rush, thank you so much. Its great to hear from you. Mega dittos, mega prayers. Ive been listening to you for about 15 years. I just want to thank you because during the Obama years, you were the beacon of hope for all of us.

RUSH: Thank you, sir. For me, too.

CALLER: My daughters and I are huge fans of the Rush Revere books. Were actually reading through the First Patriots right now. It was such an honor to see you receive the Medal of Freedom. It just couldnt have gone to a better person.

RUSH: Well, it was a once-in-a-lifetime thing. Its so special and the president was not gonna let me miss it. He was not going to let me talk him or myself out of appearing at the House Chamber that night. Remember, folks, I knew I was gonna get the medal. The president had told me that it was gonna happen in a couple of weeks in the Oval Office and for those of you just tuning in, let me remind you of something else.

There are details here that I cant tell you that I so desperately want to because they describe and illustrate even further the kind of person Donald Trump is. But to do that I would have to go into details about my condition and my treatment, and Im just not gonna do that. Im not the only one thats ever gone through this. A lot of you have, a lot of you are, and I vowed when this whole thing started, Im not gonna bleed on anybody with this.

But someday, somehow, Im gonna be able to tell the entire story, because there are elements of it that youll just laugh yourself silly. Theyre all about Donald Trump refusing to hear no, no matter how polite, no matter how sincere, no matter how heartfelt, no way, not possible. As I say, its an aspect of his personality that these people, his political opponents havent the slightest idea. They have no way of understanding it.

He just will not be denied, and for all these times when you think people on his staff are getting away with sabotaging him like the whistleblower, Lieutenant Colonel Vindman? No. No. It may look like it in the moment, but they are going to I dont want to say pay a price. Theyre gonna be outed for what they did. Theyre not going to get away with it, is the point. Hes just indomitable and will not let anybody deny what he wants and I dont mean that as hes oppressive and insensitive and doesnt listen.

Its, in fact, the exact opposite.

Read the original here:

The Presidential Medal of Freedom: Its Just So Beautiful - RushLimbaugh.com

U.S. Launches The First-Ever International Religious Freedom Alliance – Forbes

Posted on February 9, 2020 by Danzig

On February 5, 2020, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo launched the International Religious Freedom Alliance (IRF Alliance), an Alliance of like-minded partners who treasure, and fight for, international religious freedom for every human being. The launch comes a few months after on July 18, 2019, at the second Ministerial to Advance Religious Freedom in Washington DC, Secretary Pompeo announced new initiatives including the creation of the IRF Alliance. The Alliance is intended to bring together senior government representatives to discuss actions their nations can take together to promote respect for freedom of religion or belief and protect members of religious minority groups worldwide.

At the launch, Secretary Pompeo stressed the ever-growing need for such a combined effort listing some of the worst acts of violence based on religion or belief from recent years, including terrorists and violent extremists who target religious minorities, whether they are Yazidis in Iraq, Hindus in Pakistan, Christians in northeast Nigeria, or Muslims in Burma and the Chinese Communist Partys hostility to all faiths. Indeed, such acts of violence based on religion or belief are at increase and need urgent and comprehensive response to stop the atrocities, assist the victims and survivors, prosecute the perpetrators and protect the communities from re-occurrence of such acts of violence in the future.

Shoes of victims are kept as evidence as security personnel inspect the interior of St Sebastian's ... [+] Church in Negombo on April 22, 2019, a day after the church was hit in series of bomb blasts targeting churches and luxury hotels in Sri Lanka, the worst violence to hit the island since its devastating civil war ended a decade ago. (Photo credit: JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images)

26 countries joined the IRF Alliance, including, Albania, Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Colombia, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, The Gambia, Georgia, Greece, Hungary, Israel, Kosovo, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Senegal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Togo, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom. The members of the IRF Alliance have pledged to uphold the Declaration of Principles, a constitution for the IRF Alliance solidifying their commitment to protect the right to freedom of religion or belief.

The Declaration of Principles incorporates several reactive and proactive measures that the members of the IRF Alliance are to adopt to promote and protect the rights to freedom of religion or belief for all. Furthermore, it incorporates a list of potential instruments of actions to aid their work, including regular monitoring, reporting, information-sharing and outreach to impacted individuals and faith communities, support for victims, such as through redress, resettlement, or other actions as appropriate, targeted sanctions against perpetrators, raining of law enforcement officials, building the capacity of national human rights institutions, and cooperating with civil society, investment in projects to protect space for civic engagement by assisting human rights defenders and victims of persecution, as well as to build societal resilience.

During the launch, Secretary Pompeo further announced that Poland will host the next Ministerial to Advance Religious Freedom in Warsaw from July 14-16, 2020. The upcoming Ministerial will be organized in cooperation with the United States and will address several topics requiring urgent response including improving the lives of persecuted and discriminated communities, empowering individuals to affect change, and promoting inclusive dialogue to mobilize action and increase awareness regarding the scale of persecution against religion or belief worldwide.

The U.S. must be commended for the work it has carried out to lead the efforts to promote and protect the rights to freedom of religion or belief for all. The IRF Alliance is intended to provide a springboard towards action to address violations of the right to freedom of religion or belief globally. To be able to do so, the IRF Alliance must grow in numbers and in the common commitment. Other states must join and stand up for human rights of all people persecuted for their religion or belief.

Read the original:

U.S. Launches The First-Ever International Religious Freedom Alliance - Forbes

Democracy and freedom of expression are under threat in Brazil – The Guardian

Posted on February 9, 2020 by Danzig

Brazils democratic institutions are under attack. Since taking office, the Jair Bolsonaro administration, helped by its allies on the far right, has systematically undermined cultural, scientific and educational institutions in the country, as well as the press.

Early on, prominent members of Bolsonaros political party started a campaign to encourage university and high school students to covertly film their teachers and denounce them for ideological indoctrination. This persecution campaign, ominously called School Without Party, created a sense of intimidation and fear in educational institutions in a country barely three decades out of an oppressive military regime. Last month, Bolsonaro suggested that the state should censor textbooks to promote conservative values.

The Bolsonaro administration has made it clear it will not tolerate deviation from its ultra-conservative politics and worldview. Last year the administration fired the marketing director of Banco do Brasil, Delano Valentim, for creating an ad campaign promoting diversity and inclusion, which was then censored by the government. Later that year, as Brazils Amazon forest burned at an alarming rate, Bolsonaros administration retaliated against scientists who dared to present facts. Ricardo Galvo, the former director of Inpe (National Institute for Space Research), was removed from his post for releasing satellite data on deforestation in the Amazon.

The government is also dangerously hostile to the media. On 21 January this year, the federal prosecutors office opened a baseless investigation into the American journalist Glenn Greenwald and his team for participating in an alleged conspiracy to hack the cellphone of Brazilian authorities. The prosecution, a clear attack on freedom of the press, was a response to a series of exposs that Greenwald and the Intercept published concerning possible corruption in Bolsonaros inner circle.

This is not an isolated case. Government officials throughout the country, from regional courts to the military police, have taken it upon themselves to ideologically defend Bolsonaro and curtail free expression. In 2019 alone, there were 208 reported attacks on media and journalists in Brazil.

On 16 January, Bolsonaro and the then special secretary for culture, Roberto Alvim, filmed a joint broadcast that laid out their ideological plans for the country. They praised the conservative turn and the resumption of culture in the country. The next day, Alvim went further: during a video segment to announce a new national arts award, he made apparent allusions to Nazi principles and lifted phrases from the Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels.

Domestic outrage and international condemnation caused Alvim to step down. But Alvim was merely giving voice to Bolsonaros far-right political project, which continues in full force: a continuous affront to freedom of expression, justified in the name of national culture. Public institutions that represent Brazils multicultural heritage the Superior Council of Cinema, Ancine, the Audiovisual Fund, the National Library, the Institute of National Historical and Artistic Heritage (Iphan) and the Palmares Foundation for Black Culture have faced censorship, funding cutbacks and other political pressure.

The Brazilian film-maker Petra Costa, director of the documentary The Edge of Democracy, currently has a chance of becoming the first female Latin American director to win an Oscar. Yet Bolsonaros secretary of communication recently used his official Twitter channel to disseminate a video attacking Costa as an anti-patriot spreading lies about the Bolsonaro government. Similarly, the feature films Bacurau, Invisible Life and Babenco received international acclaim at the Cannes and Venice film festivals, but Bolsonaro has declared that no good films have been produced in Brazil for a long time.

The Bolsonaro government is also working to reverse several important social achievements of the last two decades, including affirmative action. Between 2003 and 2017, the proportion of black students entering Brazilian universities increased 51%; the Bolsonaro regime wants to roll back this progress. Bolsonaro and his ministers routinely disparage ethnic minorities and the LGBTQ+ community all while ignoring the violence and criminality of rightwing paramilitary militias.

This is a government that has no development plan for its people. Instead, the Bolsonaro regime is engaged in a dangerous culture war against contrived internal threats. It denies global warming and the burning of the Amazon, despises leaders who fight for the preservation of the environment, and disrespects the culture and environmental preservation carried out by indigenous communities.

We fear that these attacks on democratic institutions may soon become irreversible. Based on the most extreme and narrow conservative principles, Bolsonaros project is to change the content of school textbooks and Brazilian films, restrict access to funding for scholarships and research, and intimidate intellectuals, journalists and scientists. We ask the international community to:

Pressure Brazil to fully respect the universal declaration of human rights, and thereby respect freedom of expression, thought and religion.

Finally, we call on human rights bodies and the international press to put a spotlight on what is happening in Brazil. This is a grave political moment. We must reject the rise of authoritarianism.

The Classic Novel That Saw Pleasure as a Path to Freedom – The New York Times

Posted on February 9, 2020 by Danzig

But Robert is far from the sole object of Ednas desire. Their liaison eschews monogamy in more ways than the obvious infidelity, taking as lovers the moon, the gulf and its spirits. In the moonlit sea Edna walks for the first time alone, boldly and with overconfidence into the gulf, where swimming alone is as if some power of significant import had been given to control the working of her body and soul. Solitude is essential to Ednas realization that she has never truly had control of her body and soul. (The novels original title was A Solitary Soul.) Among Ednas more defiant moments is when she refuses to budge from her hammock, despite paternalistic reprimand from both Robert and Lonce, who each insist on chaperoning, as if in shifts. Ednas will blazes up even in this tiny, hanging room of her own, as Virginia Woolf would famously phrase it nearly 30 years later. Within the silent sanctuary of the hammock, gulf spirits whisper to Edna. By the next morning she has devised a way to be alone with Robert. Chopins novel of awakenings and unapologetic erotic trespass is in full swing.

Upon her return home to New Orleans, Edna trades the social minutiae expected of upper-crust Victorian white women receiving callers and returning their calls for painting, walking, gambling, dinner parties, brandy, anger, aloneness and sex. She shucks off tradition and patriarchal expectations in favor of art, music, nature and her bosom friends. These open her up, invite her to consider her self, her desires. One friend offers the tattoo-worthy wisdom that the bird that would soar above the level plain of tradition and prejudice must have strong wings. Is Edna such a bird? This is the novels central question, one it refuses to answer definitively. Chopin gives Edna the freedom to feel and yet not know herself. The women in the novel draw forth Ednas intuition they take the sensual and braid it with the intellectual. Eventually, the body and the mind are one for Edna.

The Awakening is a book that reads you. Chopin does not tell her readers what to think. Unlike Flaubert, Chopin declines to explicitly condemn her heroine. Critics were especially unsettled by this. Many interpreted Chopins refusal to judge Edna as the authors oversight, and took it as an open invitation to do so themselves. This gendered knee-jerk critical stance that assumes less intentionality for works made by women is a phenomenon that persists today. Especially transgressive was Ednas candor about her maternal ambivalence, the acuity with which Chopin articulated the fearsome dynamism of the mothers bond with her children: She would sometimes gather them passionately to her heart, she would sometimes forget them. This scandalized and continues to scandalize readers because the freedom of temporarily forgetting your children is to find free space in your mind, for yourself, for painting, stories, ideas or orgasm. To forget your children and remember yourself was a revolutionary act and still is.

Edna Pontellier does what she wants with her body she has good sex at least three times in the book. But the more revolutionary act is the desire that precedes the sex. Edna, awakened by the natural world, invited by art and sisterhood to be wholly alive, begins to notice what she wants, rather than what her male-dominated society wants her to want. Ednas desire is the mechanism of her deprogramming. The heroines sensual experience is also spiritual, and political. Political intuition begins not in a classroom but far before, with bodily sensation, as Sara Ahmed argues in her incendiary manifesto Living a Feminist Life: Feminism can begin with a body, a body in touch with a world. A body in touch with a world feels oppression like a flame, and recoils. For gaslit people women, nonbinary and queer people, people of color people who exist in the gaps Cauley describes between the accepted narrative of American normal and their own experience, pleasure and sensation are not frivolous or narcissistic but an essential reorientation. The epiphany follows the urge. Feeling her own feelings, thinking her own thoughts, Edna recalibrates her compass to point not to the torture of patriarchy but to her own pleasure, a new north.

Like Edna, Kate Chopin did what she wanted with her mind, whatever the cost, and it cost her almost everything. In 1899 The Awakening earned her a piddling $102 in royalties, about $3,000 in todays money. Shortly after its publication the now unequivocally classic novel fell out of print. Chopins next book contract was canceled. Chopin died at age 54 from a brain hemorrhage after a long, hot day spent at the St. Louis Worlds Fair with her son. Her publishing career lasted about 14 years. And yet she established herself among the foremothers of 20th-century literature and feminist thought. She showed us that patriarchys prison can kill you slow or kill you fast, and how to feel your way out of it. She admired Guy de Maupassant as a man who had escaped from tradition and authority, and we will forever argue whether Edna is allowed this escape, whether she shows us not the way but a way to get free. As for Chopin, there is no doubt that she was free on the page, free to let her mind unfurl. None of this is accident or folly, not caprice nor diary. She knew what she was doing. She was swimming farther than she had ever swum before.

Read the original here:

The Classic Novel That Saw Pleasure as a Path to Freedom - The New York Times

Both Freedom teams clinch NWC titles they hope to win outright next week – Morganton News Herald

Posted on February 9, 2020 by Danzig

TAYLORSVILLE The Freedom boys basketball team became impossible to keep up with Friday night , shooting its way to an 83-65 victory at Alexander Central in front of a packed house in Northwestern 3A/4A Conference action.

Three nights after tying a career-high with 36 points, Patriots senior guard Bradley Davis lit up the scoreboard for 28 to go with eight rebounds, shooting 11 of 19 from the field including 6 of 11 from 3-point range. Classmate James Freeman joined Davis in double figures with 21 points to go with a game-high nine assists and made 3 of 5 long-range attempts.

Second-ranked Freedom (20-1, 9-1 NWC) made 15 treys in all as it clinched at least a share of a second straight regular-season title plus the NWCs No. 1 3A state playoff seed on the same night it reached 20 wins for a ninth time in 10 seasons.

We dont want to look at the end of the season yet, Pats first-year coach Clint Zimmerman said. That will take care of itself. We got to keep chipping away and try to get better. Clinching and having a shot is good, but we have to make sure we dont get complacent with that and we come in ready to go on Monday, Tuesday and Friday.

The Patriots were certainly ready to go Friday, starting off on fire with four out of five first-quarter baskets coming from long range en route to an early 14-10 lead.

Alexander managed to keep the contest tight in the second quarter, going into the half down just 33-28 after Freedom led by as much as 11 at one point.

Freedoms offense exploded in the third. Davis scored 18 of his 28 points in the period, helping the Patriots go off for 30 to finally put some distance between themselves and the hosts. Freeman scored 15 after halftime as Freedom never took its foot off the gas, playing with intensity until the final minute and grabbing the victory by a healthy margin.

Qualique Garner added nine points, Nick Johnson had seven and Ben Tolbert drained two 3s for his six points.

Zimmerman talked afterward of his teams willingness to play every possession as if the game is on the line, no matter the score.

Thats something Coach (Casey) Rogers started with this group a long time ago, he said. Its all about having great habits, and habits transcend what the scoreboard is. Habits go beyond the kind of play, its just doing your job all the time, and were trying to continue that.

The Patriots will look to wrap up the title in outright fashion Tuesday at home against Watauga.

Freedom's Josie Hise (right) battles with an Alexander Central player for position under the goal on Friday.

Freedom 77, Alexander Central 46

The Lady Patriots rode a stifling defensive effort to guarantee at least a share of a fifth straight NWC regular-season title Friday night, matching their second best start in program history (by the 2000-01 team) one game after sewing up a 12th consecutive 20-win campaign.

No. 1 Freedom (21-0, 10-0 NWC) scored 29 points off 31 forced turnovers while committing just nine turnovers and drilling 13 3s. Senior Guard Blaikley Crooks double-double with 20 points and 11 rebounds to complement a stat line that also showed five assists and four steals.

Josie Hise (17 points, six assists, five steals), Christena Rhone (12 points, seven assists, four steals) and Jayda Glass (14 points, four rebounds, three steals) joined Crooks in double figures largely due to their efforts on defense as well.

I think to turn up the pressure and get some unforced errors, that helped us, Freedom coach Amber Reddick said. In the second half, we did a better job rebounding the ball. Thats something we talked about. Alexander has a lot of size and we knew we had to do a better job rebounding. We (also) cleaned up our defense in the second half and kept them off the free throw line.

Freedom won each period, never trailing after the opening minute and leading 17-10 after one and 40-25 at the half.

Reddick said shed appreciate what Friday meant for at least a moment before moving on to the next goal.

I really do have to stop and remind myself to enjoy it, she said. This is a great bunch of girls. They get along, theyre so much fun to coach. But sometimes its easy for me to get tunnel vision, so I do have to stop and tell myself to enjoy this because this is a fun group.

Freedom looks to extend a 38-game win streak on Tuesday vs. Watauga, the last NWC team to hand FHS a loss in January 2018 in Morganton. The Lady Pats have taken six straight from the Pioneers since, four of those by single digits. Freedom has only won by single digits twice this season.

View original post here:

Both Freedom teams clinch NWC titles they hope to win outright next week - Morganton News Herald

You Will Find Your Freedom : Has Netflix Renewed Season 3 of OA? – Union Journalism

Posted on February 9, 2020 by Danzig

Captivity is a mentality! Has Netflix renewed OA for the fourth season???

OA, an American mystery drama, is all set to say our goodbye as Netflix has canceled further seasons of it. This is one of the saddest news for the fans who were eagerly waiting for the suspense left in season 2 to get revealed in the third one. Soon, after the release of 2nd season on 22nd March 2019, which was a massive hit as it broke the records of the previous seasons. On 5th August 2019, Netflix officially canceled the further seasons of the show, leaving the suspense with a big question mark. The news extremely hurts fans.

What is OA all about???

OA is a science-based fuction series. The co-creator of it is Brit Marling. It was premiered on Netflix on 16 December 2016. The director is Batmanglij. Previously, the OA story was divided into 5 phases and therefore ought to be directed in 5 seasons. Still, after the release of the second season, Netflix canceled its further seasons leaving behind the unveiled secrets. When co-creator Brit Marling got the news, she was shocked and said while posting on Instagram Zal and I are deeply sad not to finish this story. The first time I heard the news, I had a good cry.

When is Releasing??

As it is canceled. So, how will it release??

Cast-

The cast of season 2 included Brit Marling, Jason Isaacs, Patrick Gibson, Emory Lohen,Ian Alexander, Phyllis Smith, Brandon Perea, Brendon Meyer, Will Brill, Alice Krige, Chloe Levine and many more.

Plot :

As season 3 cancelation has been done. Therefore, there is no need to discuss the scheme. But let us talk about the plot of the second season

The second season follows the OA as she traverses to another dimension and ends up in San Francisco to continue her search for her former laptop. Hap and her fellow captives, as prarie passes paths with private eye Karim Washington to assist in the investigation of surreal disappearance of a missing girl.

The news of cancellation is a heartbreak for the fans, and they will need time to heal themselves.

The rest is here:

You Will Find Your Freedom : Has Netflix Renewed Season 3 of OA? - Union Journalism

Poetry, Walls and Freedom – The Wire

Posted on February 9, 2020 by Danzig

There has been considerable anxiety, anger, angst and agonising about the role language plays in contemporary times, and in the dark times.

Language is under attack when used in certain ways in the university and academia, on the streets and in polemics. It is also under scrutiny when used in and as poetry. As though poetry which makes nothing happen (W.H. Auden) would overthrow regimes, incite people and shred nerves. But why are we afraid of a mere poem?

When poets sought to channelise public outrage or personal anguish into words, poetry was a genre that appealed to them, for various reasons. It was crisper, shorter.

It was not easy to decode and meanings in its compressed sentences, involved myths and convoluted syntax, and so hidden meanings about protest in the form of metaphors were not visible at first.

One had to work with the text and we all know the people in power, when they do read, rarely have the time for this. But the question for us readers is: how do we see meanings like dissent or freedom or resistance in poetry written for and within contexts as diverse as racism and civil rights in the USA, totalitarianism in the USSR, the freedom struggle, the French Revolution and 18th century British monarchys excesses?

The protagonists, when identifiable in poetry, are different, the victims and perpetrators different and the contexts, radically divergent. Ostensibly. Yet symbols of oppression or protest, freedom and aspirations in poetry seem to work across continents.

Literature is the hunger for Otherness, as diverse critics from Geoffrey Galt Harpham and Martha Nussbaum to, more recently Ranjan Ghosh and Hillis Miller have argued.

Also read: Amid Conflict, Young Kashmiri Writers Are Finding Solace in Literature

When we read, we seek to enter the lifeworlds of Others, other characters and their lives. The Other lifeworld is the exotic, which by definition is distanced and distant from ours and is best consumed detached from its original contexts. The literary as exotic enables us to encounter the Other world, but without the messiness of living in it. Thus hunger for the Other is not limited by geocultural boundaries: in fact, quite the opposite, it is a hunger for cross-cultural solidarity.

Cross-cultural solidarity that enables us to bridge different historical circumstances is possible, if we read ethically, as argued elsewhere. To read the suffering of the Other in literary texts, and in certain ways, is to be hungry not only for accounts of suffering but hungry for an end to that suffering.

Like the Ancient Mariners guest who wakes up sadder and wiser after the consumption, via listening, of the Mariners tale, the hunger for the outsider ought to engage with the Others suffering. Even aesthetic norms of specific cultural forms are ignored in our quest for Otherness, producing then an ethical aesthetics. For a cross-cultural solidarity to occur via aesthetics, the latter must be consumed as ethical aesthetics, unrestrained by its original context but infused by it.

Also read: No Longer the Other: How Holocaust Poetry Reclaims Identities

Thus, Holocaust texts, slavery narratives, and trauma texts from Rwanda may be read with a degree of fidelity to their origins but need not be restricted to them.

Reading literature is an act of deviance then, travelling away from originary aesthetic norms of the text, as Ghosh puts it: Becoming aesthetic owes to sahityas ability for deviancy, detouring competencies in the form of an imposed aesthetic or trained habits of aesthetic response.

Reading as deviation and detour enables us to slide across geocultural formations. Reorganising the reading of Otherness could possibly be transcultural when, for instance, we practise an aesthetic that maps, for example, forms of dehumanisation across contexts to see dehumanisation, as a global condition (what Michael Rothberg would pioneer as multidirectional memory studies. And yes, yes, this reinstates to a considerable measure the old universal nature of the literary.)

Even when we do not know of an-Other context, we are able to imagine that world. Like peace and poetry, we need to be able to imagine this. In the words of Denis Levertov:

But peace, like a poem,is not there ahead of itself,cant be imagined before it is made,cant be known exceptin the words of its making,grammar of justice,syntax of mutual aid.

With the above sense of literature-as-deviance-and-detour in mind, it was intriguing to see Poetry Foundations collection, Poetry of Protest, Resistance and Empowerment. The assortment of poems cut across numerous contexts and cultures, and yet, they made sense even though, in a few cases, one had to look up a historical reference or two.

Partially illustrating how tropes of oppression, protest, suffering and hope can emerge from very different spatio-temporal contexts we can skim through some of the poems here.

There was on the site, Langston Hughes who in I look at the World writes

I look at the worldFrom awakening eyes in a black faceAnd this is what I see:This fenced-off narrow spaceAssigned to me.

I look then at the silly wallsThrough dark eyes in a dark faceAnd this is what I know:That all these walls oppression buildsWill have to go!

If Hughes was speaking of walls of oppression, another text in the collection pointed to the walls that are blackened with the sorrows and blood of the oppressed. Here are William Blakes lines from his astonishing London, from the 18th century:

the hapless Soldiers sighRuns in blood down Palace walls

The radical poet of 18th century England speaks to us alongside Hughes from 20th century racially segregated America, employing the same trope of the wall.

Claude McKay in America would describe his country as feeding him the bread of bitterness, but admits he loves this cultured hell. And then proceeds to tell us how he stands with respect to this nation:

Yet, as a rebel fronts a king in state,I stand within her walls with not a shredOf terror, malice, not a word of jeer.

Within Americas walls, this is how a citizen stands.

James Baldwin in Staggerlee Wonders, deeply critical of the exclusionary policies that run his country, is caustic about how white America worries about China, Vietnam and planting a flag on the moon, but does not honour any treaty anywhere in the world:

They have hacked their children to pieces.They have never honoured a single treatymade with anyone, anywhere.The walls of their citiesare as foul as their children.

So much for walls across time and space. And, not on the website, a poem that resonates throughout India since the early 20th century, also gives us the oppressive wall, the metaphor of restricted freedoms and the prison, in the lines of Gurudev himself:

Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high;Where knowledge is free;Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic walls;Where words come out from the depth of truth;

Where the mind is led forward by thee into ever-widening thought and actionInto that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.

The freedom to transcend walls, to not be limited, is the aspiration of a nation, says Tagore.

Or, look at how Anna Akhmatovas justly famous Requiem ends, at a wall, imposing, unmoving, behind which many loved ones have disappeared forever :

I pray not for myself alone,but for everyone who stood with me,in the cruel cold, in the July heat,under the blind, red wall.

This is the wall at which people wait for their loved ones.

Shifting the trope slightly, but continuing with the image of a lock-down, a carceral and an immobility regime is Maya Angelous legendary Caged Bird:

a bird that stalksdown his narrow cagecan seldom see throughhis bars of ragehis wings are clipped andhis feet are tiedso he opens his throat to sing.

And Angelous bird sings of what else butfreedom :

The caged bird singswith a fearful trillof things unknownbut longed for stilland his tune is heardon the distant hillfor the caged birdsings of freedom.

So many walls, from America through London and Russia to Egypt and India. Capturing oppression, resistance, resilience and employed as a trope, the wall or the cage, is a potent transcultural sign: it tells us of Others whose lives are led (and end) within immobilising walls.

If Tagore and Angelou speak in their poetry of life beyond the walls that enfold, secure and limit them, Constantine Cavafy goes further, and wonders why we never protested when the walls were being put up. Here is Cavafy in Walls:

Without consideration, without pity, without shamethey have built great and high walls around me.And now I sit here and despair.I think of nothing else: this fate gnaws at my mind;for I had many things to do outside.Ah why did I not pay attention when they were building the walls.But I never heard any noise or sound of builders.Imperceptibly they shut me from the outside world.

Like the German pastor Martin Niemllers famous lines Niemllers lines are engraved at the New England Holocaust Memorial Museum in Boston, USA, having deviated from its origins to energize the imagination of visitors elsewhere about the one who never protested when various people were being taken away (first they came for the socialists) so that when his turn came there was no one to protest, Cavafy alerts us to the risk of not resisting and with the metaphor of walls.

Each of the poets here was dealing with a specific cultural context, from civil rights to the anti-colonial struggle. They all found the image of walls, walling in, plastic enough strange, for inflexible walls to employ.

When we read Blake or Cavafy, we see in our minds eye, an abstract human, incarcerated, yearning for justice and freedom. The incarcerated are the exact opposite of us readers, who are free to read, to roam. The freedom to read Literature is the freedom to know about Others who are unfree, albeit in different conditions of immobility. The study of Literature and poetry has never been more urgent than now.

Just one poetic trope across centuries and contexts reminds us that people behind walls are not always secure: often they are immobilised with terror.

The language of poetry, when speaking of immobility regimes, breaks free.

Pramod K. Nayar teaches at the University of Hyderabad.

Continue reading here:

Poetry, Walls and Freedom - The Wire

Bloomberg has thoughts on press freedom; the other candidates should give us theirs, too | TheHill – The Hill

Posted on February 9, 2020 by Danzig

Last November, each of the presidential campaigns received a questionnaire about an issue seldom discussed on the campaign trail, but one crucial to our democracy freedom of the press. To date, only Michael BloombergMichael Rubens BloombergDemocrats at debate criticize the candidate who isn't there: Mike Bloomberg Bundlers see fundraising problems for Biden Five things to watch in New Hampshire primary debate MORE has replied.

Where are the rest?

This is a trying time for journalism. Its a moment begging for new ideas to build trust, for a new tone to our discourse, for transparency over obscurity. A good place to start is with those who seek to occupy the White House.

Thats why we at the National Press Club Journalism Institute, together with the National Press Club, the Society for Professional Journalists and other industry partners,asked presidential candidatesfrom both parties to describe what a free press means to them, to define their obligations to the free flow of information, and to articulate their commitments to transparency. Bloomberg deserves credit for giving the questions serious consideration.

The Bloomberg campaign said the former three-term New York mayor wants the next president to be afirm and outspoken champion of the news media, has misgivings about the need for a federal media shield law and would restore regular press briefings to the White House.

Bloomberg, of course, is not a disinterested party. He is the founder and majority owner of Bloomberg LP, which includes Bloomberg News. Bloomberg Philanthropies is a donor to the National Press Club and the NPCJI. Widely respected, the news organization has nonetheless drawn flack for apolicy of not investigating Bloombergas a candidate and for applying that policy to the other Democratic presidential candidates.

The Institute submitted the same questionnaire to President Donald TrumpDonald John TrumpFive takeaways: Fear of Trump hangs over Democratic debate Klobuchar raises million since start of debate Buttigieg, Sanders aim to build momentum from New Hampshire debate MOREs campaign as well, though his track record answers some of the questions, and his contempt for journalists and news organizations is a recurrent theme in his Twitter feed.

But over the course of the presidential campaign most other candidates have given only passing reference to issues of press freedoms.

At theDec. 19 Democratic presidential debate, former South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete ButtigiegPeter (Pete) Paul ButtigiegFive takeaways: Fear of Trump hangs over Democratic debate Klobuchar raises million since start of debate Buttigieg after debate: I would be 'most progressive' nominee in party's history MORE took note of the presidents disdain. When the American president refers to unfavorable press coverage as the product of the enemy of the people, democracy around the world gets weaker, he said.

At the same debate, Sen. Amy KlobucharAmy Jean KlobucharFive takeaways: Fear of Trump hangs over Democratic debate Klobuchar raises million since start of debate Buttigieg, Sanders aim to build momentum from New Hampshire debate MORE (D-Minn.) noted that in separate Senate Judiciary Committee hearings she asked Trump attorneys general Jeff SessionsJefferson (Jeff) Beauregard SessionsBloomberg has thoughts on press freedom; the other candidates should give us theirs, too Doug Jones says he will vote to convict Trump Senate Democrats outraise Republicans, but GOP has cash edge MORE and William BarrWilliam Pelham BarrRepublican senators call on Twitter to suspend Iran's Khamenei, Zarif The Hill's Morning Report Trump basks in acquittal; Dems eye recanvass in Iowa Trump 'apoplectic' in phone call with UK's Johnson about Huawei decision: report MORE whether they would imprison journalists for doing their jobs and neither gave her an unequivocal answer. My dad was a newspaperman, Klobuchar said. So this is not just talking points to me.

Meanwhile, Andrew YangAndrew YangYang hits candidates for acting like Trump is 'the cause of all our problems' Overnight Defense: Impeachment witness Vindman escorted from White House | Esper says Pentagon protects service members from retribution | Trump ousts EU envoy Sondland Watch live: Final Democratic debate before New Hampshire MORE hasproposed invigorating journalismand sowing news deserts with a $1 billion fund administered by the Federal Communications Commission to make grants to for-profit, non-profit, and local government entities to help support local news operations.

Good for them for addressing the issue.

It deserves more.

Its time to hear from the rest of the pack. Its time for voters to demand a commitment to press freedom. Its time to ask: Do you believe the president has a role in restoring faith in a free press and the checks it places on our institutions?

Record numbers of journalistsare being imprisoned abroad. Killings, miraculously down, still continue. In many cases, as in the coldblooded murder of Jamal Khashoggi, the responsible parties are state actors who make a mockery of justice.So we have asked the candidates how they would use diplomatic tools to promote a free press across the globe.

Wouldcandidates grant asylum to journalists such asEmilio Gutierrez Soto, who fled Mexico amid death threats from the military?Gutierrez' asylum claimshave twice been rejected by an immigration judge; deportation would mean returning tothe deadliest country for journalists.

At home, the last two administrationshave targeted journalistic sourcesas if they were spies. Forty-nine states have statutes or case law that protect reporters from revealing sources to government officials. Yet, the federal government offers no such protection.

Journalists working in the United States havebeen detained, their equipment confiscated, their homes searched. Federal agencies and the Supreme Court have limited information available to the public through the Freedom of Information Act. And journalists are routinelydenied access to government experts, no matter the subject.

Journalism is the key to an informed public. And in the end, only an informed public can govern itself. We need to know where the candidates stand. Its time.

Jim Kuhnhenn is a veteran Washington correspondent for the Associated Press and Knight Ridder who is now the Press Freedom Fellow for the National Press Club Journalism Institute. He is a former member of the congressional Standing Committee of Correspondents and a former president of the Washington Press Club Foundation. Follow him on Twitter @jkuhnhenn

See the article here:

Bloomberg has thoughts on press freedom; the other candidates should give us theirs, too | TheHill - The Hill

Azaadiphobia: Who is Afraid of Freedom and Why – NewsClick

Posted on February 9, 2020 by Danzig

Recently, the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh Yogi Adityanath said during a pro-CAA rally that anyone raising azaadi slogans will be booked for sedition. This stern warning by a chief minister whose administration has brutally cracked down on anti-CAA protesters is not a surprise. The important question is, who is afraid of the azaadi slogan?

In the last few months, this slogan has come under severe attack from the right-wing media ecosystem. Several fake videos have been broadcast on mainstream media platforms, aiming to delegitimise the detractors of the BJP government, who have raised slogans demanding azaadi.

The azaadi slogan went viral in 2016 in the aftermath of the infamous 9 February incident at JNU in Delhi. When then JNUSU president was released on bail, the university students had raised cries for freedom from poverty, from Brahmanism and from capitalism, feudalism, casteism, unemployment and hunger. Thereafter, the rhythmic chanting of azaadi slogans captured imaginations across the country.

The slogan was further popularised in 2019 when Zoya Akhtar featured it in her blockbuster movie, Gully Boy. Since then, several versions of the azaadi chant have been floating online. They have become so popular that a section of Pakistani students have also chanted it in their own country. In any case, in India the azaadi slogan has become a solid part of the protest repertoire.

For example: When women are not able to go out in the night without fearing molestation and harassment, what they are experiencing is a lack of azaadi.

The azaadi slogans began in Kashmir, but perhaps were first heard in mainland India in 2012-13, during the anti-rape movement after the Nirbhaya incident. Those protesters rejected the idea of protection as a deterrent for sexual crimes and advocated the opposite idea, that of freedom without fear. Several places in Delhi had then reverberated with azaadi slogans. Those protesters, who included men and women, demanded freedom from rape culture, freedom from patriarchy, freedom to move around at night, to love, and freedom to marry or not marry, and so on.

Curiously, even the right-wing groups such as the ABVP, which participated in the 2012-13 protests in Delhi, raised these slogans, probably because the anti-rape movement had also taken on a strong anti-Congress flavour. Azaadi slogans of that time were an attempt to break away from notions of victim-blaming, to which is related the idea of forcing on women the protection of patriarchy. They argued the converse; that the more women stepped outside the confines of their homes, the safer the streets would be for them. The movement therefore redefined the meaning of azaadi from political to social freedom.

One curious aspect of azaadi is that in order to have it you have to fight for it, reclaim it. During the colonial period, Indians fought for azaadi from the British. They wanted Indians to be the masters of their own fate. This is what azaadi actually meansthe capacity to decide your present and future. Naturally, when you try to break the shackles that are holding you back, you come up against them in all their power and fury: the British also unleashed brute force upon Indians countless times during colonial rule.

Freedom is never complete. Azaadi is an ongoing process that you have to assert and fight for at every turn. In India, where communities hold a large measure of control over individuals and their aspirations, where identities are controlled by caste or patriarchal structures and their moralistic orders, the fight for azaadi is even more important. The demand for freedom exists only in those conditions where an individual or group feels that their aspirations are being hindered by unfavourable political conditions or economic and social constraints. Thus the demand for azaadi is an expression of unequal power relations in the socio-economic and political spheres.

Naturally, those in the upper echelons of the power hierarchy, who believe they are the sole custodians of culture, will resist any movement that threatens to take away their power. That is why the chants of azaadi have been met with both outright physical violence and symbolic violence. Women demanding azaadi to take their own decisions are being vilified and slut-shamed. This conservative backlash is well-represented by Haryana Chief Minister Manohar Lal Khattars utterances. He once remarked that if youmeaning womenwant freedom, then why dont you just roam around naked.

Those who believe in azaadi are routinely branded as tukdey-tukdey gang members. We also encounter slogans such as Afzal wali azaadi, Burhan wali azaadi, bandook se denge azaadi, Gauri Lankesh wali azaadi; and so on from right-wing organisations. Their slogans are directed against voices that are critical of the present regime. Yet, for all the reactions it has invoked, azaadi has continued to reverberate across India as a powerful slogan of protest.

Logically, those who are afraid of azaadi slogans are those who fear a political and economic change that would topple them from their position of power. Their fear also emanates from a psychological condition whose origins lie in a crisis of legitimacy. Over the last five years, many celebrities, intellectuals and media personalities have advocated for the present regime. Their future and interests are linked with the present government and so they have thrown their weight behind it. Any political change will create a deep legitimacy crisis for them. The situation is a kind of downward spiral: they have to continuously create a fear psychosis and narrative that favours the regime while delegitimising the protesters and their repertoire.

For example: When you are strolling in the park with your sweetheart and suddenly a bunch of people come and start thrashing you, you are experiencing a lack of azaadi.

Though the azaadi slogans are political, as the saying goes, the personal is also the political. So you find the younger generation seeking azaadi against curfew hours in hostels and opposing the strong societal and familial resistance against own-choice marriages, against moral policing and so on. Each of these are instances of lack of freedom experienced by the youth in one way or another.

The following slogan sums up this sentiment: When you want to pursue education, but are unable to or you are unable to avail quality medical services due to lack of money, you experience a lack of azaadi.

Arguably, the azaadi slogans also add a dimension to the fertile discourse over what constitutes development in India. The Nobel laureate economist Amartya Sen has been arguing that development should also be measured through the lens of freedom, which means that it should entitle people to basic services such as education, healthcare, and employment. Development, in this context, also means building capacity, especially among the marginalised. Therefore, when the youth, women and marginalised groups hit the streets with slogans demanding azaadi, they are not just protesting against a law but breaking their shackles to become more confident and empowered.

For instance: When Dalits are not able to enter temples or fetch water from public sources, they are experiencing a lack of azaadi.

Azaadi cannot be boxed in. Its meaning is redefined by every generation based on their context. The contemporary popularity of azaadi slogans reflects the ambitions of the youth. To criminalise their hopes and aspirations is just the old resisting the birth of the new.

The author is a PhD scholar at JNU in Delhi. The views are personal.

See the article here:

Azaadiphobia: Who is Afraid of Freedom and Why - NewsClick

The latest assault on freedom of the press | TheHill – The Hill

Posted on February 9, 2020 by Danzig

On Jan. 24, Secretary of StateMike Pompeo abruptly ended an interviewwith NPR reporter Mary Louise Kelly after she asked hima series of pointed questions about Ukraineand following his statement that he has defended all State Department personnel if he could point to his remarks defending Marie YovanovitchMarie YovanovitchTrump ousts impeachment witness Gordon Sondland Impeachment witness Alexander Vindman escorted from White House Yovanovitch: Standing up to our government should not be 'dangerous act' MORE, former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine. A few minutes later, a State Department official asked Kelly to accompany her (without a recorder) to Pompeos private living room. Inside the room, according to Kelly, Pompeo berated her, frequently using the f-word. Do you think Americans care about Ukraine?, he asked, and challenged her to identify the country on an unmarked map.

The following day,Pompeo issued a statementclaiming Kelly had violated the basic rules of journalism and decency, saying she lied to him about the subject of the interview and broke a promise to keep their subsequent exchange off the record (Kelly disputes both). Other than implying that Kelly (who has an advanced degree in European Studies from Cambridge University) mistook Bangladesh for Ukraine, he did not dispute Kellys account of his post-interview comments.

A few days later,the State Department barredNPR reporter Michele Kelemen from accompanying Pompeo on a trip to the United Kingdom, Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. The Department did not give a reason for its decision.

Americans across the political spectrum should be denouncing the intimidation of a journalist. They arent.

To be sure,five Democratic senators condemnedPompeos behavior as insulting and contemptuous. Sen. Bob MenendezRobert (Bob) MenendezMedia's selective outrage exposed in McSally-Raju kerfuffle Dem senators say Iran threat to embassies not mentioned in intelligence briefing Overnight Defense: Iran crisis eases as Trump says Tehran 'standing down' | Dems unconvinced on evidence behind Soleimani strike | House sets Thursday vote on Iran war powers MORE declared that, As the United States chief diplomat, the Secretary of State should know that freedom of the press is a fundamental human right, a foundational pillar of democracy, and an indispensable check on authoritarian overreach. And the White House Correspondents Association called the retaliation against NPR outrageous and contrary to American values.

In the hyper-partisan, siloed world in which information is disseminated and issues are framed, however, millions of Americans have not learned thatemail exchangesbetween Kelly and aides to Pompeo demonstrate that the NPR reporter did not agree to limit her questions to Iran and ask no questions about Ukraine. Although her plan was to spend a healthy portion of the interview on Iran, she said I never agree to take anything off the table. She specifically mentioned Ukraine as a topic. Kelly insists as well that no one ever asked her to keep Pompeos post-interview comments off-the-record.

Perhaps, not surprisingly given its brazen-it-out and never-apologizemodus operandi comments from Trump world are, at best, disappointing.

During an appearance with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin NetanyahuBenjamin (Bibi) NetanyahuMORE in the White House on Jan. 28, PresidentTrump pointed to the great Pompeo, inducing a standing ovation from the assembled guests. That reporter couldnt have done too good a job on you, Trump (who, in November 2015,mocked Serge Kovaleski, a New York Times reporter with a physical disability, and has often called the press the enemy of the people) said, I think you did a good job on her, actually.

In covering the incident,Fox News reportedthat NPR stood behind its reporter, but then changed the subject, reminding readers that in December 2018, her news organization had been forced to issue a lengthy correction after falsely accusing Donald TrumpDonald John TrumpFive takeaways: Fear of Trump hangs over Democratic debate Klobuchar raises million since start of debate Buttigieg, Sanders aim to build momentum from New Hampshire debate MORE Jr. of lying to the Senate about plans to build a Trump Tower in Moscow.

And presidential impeachment lawyer Alan DershowitzAlan Morton DershowitzPelosi: Republicans embraced 'darkest vision' of executive power by acquitting Trump Trump couldn't get Ukraine to smear Joe Biden, so Senate Republicans did it for him Trump's acquittal may have profound impact on presidential power MORE,who patted Pompeo on the backat the White House as Trump praised the Secretarys very impressive behavior, emphasized that he thoroughly disapproved of the way he has reportedly treated a reporter, only to opine (in a non-sequitur, usually applied to excuse the actions of demagogues and dictators) that if Pompeo can help bring about peace in the Middle East, Ill forgive him.

In an op-ed in theNew York Times, Kelly summarized whats at stake. Committed to the free and unfettered flow of information, journalists sit down with senior government officials to ask tough questions, on behalf of our fellow citizens, she wrote, and then share their answers or lack thereof with the world. Freedom of the press is enshrined in the Constitution so that people in positions of power will be held to account. The stakes are too high for their impulses and decisions not to be examined in as thoughtful and rigorous an interview as is possible.

These values, which are fundamental to democracy, it seems clear, are under assault. They deserve the visible and vocal support of every American.

Glenn C. Altschuler is the Thomas and Dorothy Litwin Professor of American Studies at Cornell University. He is the co-author (with Stuart Blumin) ofRude Republic: Americans and Their Politics in the Nineteenth Century.

Originally posted here:

The latest assault on freedom of the press | TheHill - The Hill

The Most Abused Freedom of Information Act Exemption Still Needs to Be Reined In – Project On Government Oversight

Posted on February 9, 2020 by Danzig

Judge James Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia independently reviewed the records without redactions and found the Justice Department had overreached in its efforts to conceal information.

Boasberg wrote in an opinion, nowhere does the White House directly ask for legal advice in the email, nor is there any other statement that can even be fairly construed as a solicitation of legal counsel.

As the Courts review makes clear, the communications here reveal no deliberative process that could expose the agencys policy deliberations to unwarranted scrutiny. Absent more, the privilege cannot apply. A record is not protected merely by virtue of being a relevant predecisional communication, he found.

As previously mentioned, the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, the most recent amendment of the law, included provisions specifically seeking to constrain overuse and abuse of Exemption 5. One requires agencies to apply a foreseeable harm standard when seeking to withhold records under the exemption. The standard would require agencies to sufficiently show that disclosure of the requested records would cause a specific harm.

An amicus brief filed by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press in an ongoing FOIA appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit notes the purpose and intent of the foreseeable harm reform to curtail abuse of Exemption 5. (Amicus briefs are legal documents filed by parties not involved in the case but who have an interest in the subject and want to offer expertise or perspective on the issues under consideration by the court.) Congress enacted the foreseeable harm standard to reverse the growing trend toward excessive government secrecy; Congress was concerned, in particular, with overuse of the deliberative process privilege, the Reporters Committee argued in the brief.

The brief also emphasizes the importance of requiring agencies to identify a specific harm that FOIA exemptions were meant to prevent. An agency cannot prevail by speculating that harm might result from disclosure, or by reciting generic rationales that could be applicable to broad categories of agency records, the Reporters Committee wrote. If an agency fails to satisfy the foreseeable harm standard as to any particular record or portion thereof, the [FOIA Improvement] Act makes clear that it must be released.

Effectively reining in overuse of Exemption 5 might also require new FOIA reforms. One potential reform would be to further shrink the amount of time records can be withheld under that exemption, perhaps to 12 years, the same cap for shielding presidential records involving deliberative process.

Another promising reform would involve mandating a balancing test if an agencys redactions are challenged. CREWs Anne Weismann recently wrote in support of such a change that Congress should reform the [FOIA] statute to mirror how the deliberative process privilege is treated in the discovery context.

When a litigant challenges the governments invocation of the deliberative process privilege in discovery, a reviewing court balances the governments interest in secrecy against the litigants interest in disclosure. Exemption 5, by contrast, has no balancing test when considering an agency claim that material is protected by the deliberative process privilege, she wrote. Accordingly, Congress should amend Exemption 5 to require agencies and reviewing courts to weigh an agencys need to protect the quality of its decisions against the publics interest in disclosure.

As Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) said in support of the FOIA Improvement Act of 2016, a truly democratic system depends on an informed citizenry to hold their leaders accountable. Allowing agencies to use Exemption 5 as a get out of jail free card to avoid disclosing embarrassing or politically problematic records whenever they want runs directly contrary to that goal.POGO will continue working with our partners to pursue further reforms to improve FOIA and increase transparency and accountability in government.

Here is the original post:

The Most Abused Freedom of Information Act Exemption Still Needs to Be Reined In - Project On Government Oversight

Freedom unifies the soul: Trump’s State of the Union speechwriters have thrown in the towel – The Guardian

Posted on February 9, 2020 by Danzig

Theres only one political body that is more incompetent than the Iowa Democratic party. That body was delivering what could be its last State of the Union speech on Tuesday.

For the fourth year, Donald Trump pretended to address Congress like his presidential predecessors, with some kind of legislative agenda worthy of the chief executive of the most powerful country on the planet.

But our reality-TV president has shown a stubborn resistance to playing anything like the normal role of a commander-in-chief. This time last year, he threatened war if Congress continued to investigate his many varied scandals, crimes and impeachable abuses.

If there is going to be peace and legislation, there cannot be war and investigation, he said in a nonsense rhyme that sounded like the vaguely ominous threats of a childish bully armed with nuclear weapons. It just doesnt work that way!

Strangely enough, the investigations continued all the way to impeachment, and the Democrats still voted for his new North American free trade legislation. So his assessment of politics was as perfect as his call with the Ukraine president.

Trump is supposed to be a straight shooter but his State of the Union speeches are as unruly as his tweets. Two years ago he said his administration was working on a bipartisan approach to immigration reform. The next year he said that countless Americans are murdered by criminal illegal aliens.

This time around, he insisted he was building the worlds most prosperous and inclusive society. That was shortly before he recounted a gruesome spree of deadly violence by one immigrant.

As someone famously said, it just doesnt work that way.

In case you were wondering how Trump was going to demagogue his way through the next eight months of an election, you can now rest easy. He has identified the enemy, and it is something called free government healthcare for illegal aliens.

Like some Frankenstein amalgam of spare body parts, Trump is fabricating an entirely new Republican party by sewing together its most nightmarish fears. Its only a matter of time before he declares a war on Islamist atheists.

Sitting behind Trump was his chief tormentor. Nancy Pelosi, the House speaker, was dressed in white, along with several dozen Democrats marking the centenary of womens voting rights in the United States.

Trump showed his respect for the institution of Congress by refusing to shake Pelosis outstretched hand before he launched into his annual exercise in teleprompter reading. For most of Trumps speech, Pelosi adopted the posture of a schoolteacher reviewing the grade paper of one of her worst students.

Socialism destroys nations, said Trump after welcoming Venezuelas opposition leader, Juan Guaido. But always remember, freedom unifies the soul.

Pelosi shook her head as she mouthed the words to herself over again. Freedom unifies the soul. Can a soul be divided and shattered like a horcrux? How does freedom put a soul back together? And most importantly, did this speech get reviewed before it passed the presidents lips?

Trump's ideas about freedom are as strange as his devotion to Vladimir Putin

Trumps ideas about freedom are as strange as his devotion to Vladimir Putin. With a grand flourish, he awarded the nations highest civilian honor, the presidential medal of freedom, to the spectacularly racist hate-monger known as Rush Limbaugh. Trump said he was giving him the medal in recognition of all that you have done for our nation [and] the millions of people a day that you speak to and inspire. The fact that Limbaugh is now stricken with cancer does not erase a career of spewing the opposite of an inclusive society, especially through the Obama years.

At this point we should spare some thoughts and prayers for the people with the worst job in the White Houses west wing. Working as a speechwriter for Donald Trump is as thankless a job as trying to style his hair: theres not a lot to work with.

You start out with the doorstopper volumes of great presidential speeches, and you end up writing a line that sounds like youre driving a bulldozer. We are moving forward at a pace that was unimaginable just a short time ago, said Demolition Donald, and we are never ever going back!

This is the kind of rhetorical flourish a speechwriter crafts when the facts fail them. Trump constructed his big speech around some economic statistics his team had cherrypicked about the active workforce.

Somehow he failed to say that economic growth has slowed to 2.1% for the last two quarters. When economic growth under Obama was around this level, back in 2012, Trump himself thought this was less than great. The economy is in deep trouble, said the man with a tweet for all occasions.

The sick joke of the Trump presidency is that its becoming increasingly hard to tell the difference between funny strange and funny haha. After bragging about getting his NATO allies to help pay their fair share, Trump pointed to his greatest military innovation.

Just weeks ago, for the first time since President Truman established the Air Force more than 70 years earlier, he declared, we created a new branch of the United States Armed Forces, the Space Force.

At this point the cameras turned to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, who looked like he could barely stifle his giggles.

It has long been unclear how much of this presidents entourage is engaged in a daily stifled giggle.

On the eve of his impeachment acquittal, so many of the jurors listening to Trumps state of the union treat him like a man-child whose conduct cannot be judged by normal adult standards. I believe that the president has learned from this case, Senator Susan Collins of Maine told CBS News. The president has been impeached. Thats a pretty big lesson.

Yes, thatll teach him. Now he knows he can ignore congressional budgets, use military aid for his own personal gain, and coerce a foreign government to interfere with an American election.

This is a special place, Trumps America. Its the kind of country where senators can openly surrender their principles and power out of fear for their own reelection. Its the kind of country where half of Congress can cheer race-baiting radio stars and a president who demonizes immigrants.

And its the kind of country where a presidents speechwriters can just give up on the whole speechwriting thing to list a bunch of randomly famous American names to wind up one final Trumpian state of the union.

This is the home of Abraham Lincoln, Frederick Douglass, Amelia Earhart, Harriet Tubman, the Wright Brothers, Neil Armstrong, and so many more, Trump said as his speechwriting staff threw in the towel. This is the country where children learn names like Wyatt Earp, Davy Crockett, and Annie Oakley.

One day they will learn the name of Donald Trump too. Hes the guy who put kids in cages, watched TV all day, and made a Space Force. He got caught lying and cheating but there were no referees, so he never stopped.

See the rest here:

Freedom unifies the soul: Trump's State of the Union speechwriters have thrown in the towel - The Guardian

Trump says he will award Rush Limbaugh with Medal of Freedom – msnNOW

Posted on February 9, 2020 by Danzig

Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images

President Donald Trump awarded the Medal of Freedom to conservative radio personality Rush Limbaugh on Tuesday in an unprecedented move during the State of the Union address.

First lady Melania Trump placed the medal on the visibly surprised Limbaugh, one day after the talk show host revealed he has advanced lung cancer.

"Here tonight is a special man, someone beloved by millions of Americans who just received a Stage 4 advanced cancer diagnosis. This is not good news, but what is good news is that he is the greatest fighter and winner that you will ever meet," the President said during his speech, thanking the radio host for his "decades of tireless devotion to our country."

Trump, in announcing the award, highlighted Limbaugh's charity work.

"I am proud to announce tonight that you will be receiving our country's highest civilian honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom," Trump said, instructing the first lady to bestow the medal on Limbaugh.

Limbaugh had not been publicly announced as a White House guest for the State of the Union until Tuesday evening, just prior to the address' start.

Trump told network anchors during a private lunch earlier Tuesday that he planned to award Limbaugh with the Medal of Freedom.

Limbaugh has been a staunch ally of the President's for years, and dined with him at his Palm Beach golf club over the holidays. Once, during an event in the Rose Garden, Trump praised Limbaugh as someone who "can speak for three hours without a phone call."

Trump wished the conservative radio talk show host a speedy recovery Monday after Limbaugh told his audience he is beginning treatment, which will require him to miss the show some days.

"I wish I didn't have to tell you this, and I thought about not trying to tell anybody, I thought about trying to do this without anybody knowing, because I don't like making things about me," Limbaugh said Monday during a live broadcast. But "there are going to be days that I'm not going to be able to be here, because I will be undergoing treatment, or I'm reacting to treatment."

Limbaugh has been hosting "The Rush Limbaugh Show" for 31 years.

The Medal of Freedom is bestowed to "individuals who have made especially meritorious contributions to the security or national interests of the United States, to world peace, or to cultural or other significant public or private endeavors," according to the White House.

People close to Trump say he personally enjoys granting his friends the nation's highest civilian honor. He bestowed the award upon seven recipients in 2019, and several more the year prior.

Like presidents before him, Trump invites anchors from all the major networks to dine with him at the White House in advance of his State of the Union address. The conversation is considered off the record, but CNN was excluded this year, and therefore did not agree to the mandate. Other anchors did attend the lunch.

Originally posted here:

Trump says he will award Rush Limbaugh with Medal of Freedom - msnNOW

Select Page ::