Coltrain: Satanism and paganism are not the same thing – The Daily Iowan

Religious freedom is a a fundamental characteristic of America; this includes respecting other religions and not spreading false representations of them.

ByTravis Coltrain

travis-coltrain@uiowa.edu

Religious freedom is one of the founding ideals of this country. In the United States, an individual has the freedom to identify with any religion, whether that be as a member of the First Church of Cannabis or a member of the Church of Satan. America was formed with religious freedom very much in mind, and that battle continues to this day.

A lot has changed since the witch hunts of the Early Modern Period, when an estimated 35,000 to 100,000 people were executed under the pretense of being witches. Now, more than 400 years later, we have pop-culture icons using once-taboo religions as a way to gain popularity.

Recently, from Buddhism to Satanism, select religious have become trendy. This is where an issue that comes with religious freedom comes into play, the power to participate in a religion because it is viewed as cool or trendy. This can lead to unrealistic portrayals of a religion because those who simply jumped on the bandwagon are doing it for popularity reasons, not necessarily because they have a true understanding of the religion.

A prime example of this is Matt Skiba, the lead singer of the rock band Blink-182. Recently, Skiba told NME Magazine in an interview, I had a bad feeling about that event [Fyre Festival]. I consider myself a pagan and a witch. With every inch of my energy, I wanted Fyre not to happen I used my witchy ways, and it seemed to work. Ill take responsibility, and everyone can blame me.

However, this is untrue for two reasons. The organizers of Fyre Festival, Billy McFarland, who cofounded the event with rapper Ja Rule, have since been charged with fraud, in which they admitted the festival was a disaster because they spent all the money on promotions and advertisements, meaning it was doomed to fail before Skiba and his magic had anything to do with it.

The second reason is the more important one: Skiba is known as practicing LaVeyan Satanism and has been open about that since 2005. While to many people Wicca and Satanism seem to be pretty much the same thing, that couldnt be further from the truth.

The one key difference between the two religions is belief.

LaVeyan Satanists are actually atheist and do not believe in God or Satan, they simply view the idea of Satan as a symbol for individualism. However, Wiccans do believe in a god and goddess, and some variations of Wicca actually worship numerous gods.

Ironically enough, on the Church of Satans website under the Frequently Asked Questions section, it clearly states when asked if they are allied with Wicca, Satanism is an atheist philosophy, hence it is not congruent with any other philosophy or religion which endorses the belief in supernatural entities.

This showcases Skiba and his witchy powers had nothing to do with the outcome of Fyre Festival, and he was just using Wicca as a steppingstone to put himself in the spotlight. Furthermore, his statement conflated paganism with Satanism, which can lead to more confusion and stigma about two belief systems that are already usually misunderstood.

America gives us the opportunity to learn and experience a vast number of religions, and while it is great to explore and learn about as many religions as possible, we also have to respect their ideals and not simply view them as a trendy statement.

A religion isnt a trend, it is an ideology that needs to be treated with respect, even if it promotes ideas that you do not agree with.

Read the original:

Coltrain: Satanism and paganism are not the same thing - The Daily Iowan

How the Satanic Temple Became a Queer Haven – VICE

In the early 90s, Ash Blackwood (who goes publicly by his psuedonym, Ash Astaroth) was an openly gay teen looking for community in his tiny Ohio suburband he found it when he stumbled upon Satanism.

With his piercings and blue hair, he found empowerment by embracing his own brand of weirdnesssomething that brought him routine high school bullying, but seemed to be embraced by the Church of Satan. Without a physical church to visit, he said he'd spend a few hours each day at his local library, logging onto online Satanic forums and chatting with like-minded souls. For several years, those virtual chats sufficed.

Ultimately, however, he became disenchanted by the Church's insincere and aggressive tone, not to mention the bros who infected the scene with outdated machismo.

He nearly ditched Satanism altogether. In 2014, as he prepared for a life explaining away his Lucifer tattoos with a spiel about liking the literary archetype, he discovered the Satanic Temple, an unrelated though similarly-named group. It was actually an anti-Satanic Temple rant that drew him to the organization, posted to YouTube by Brian Werner, a former death metal vocalist in the band Vital Remains. "It's become a very liberal, compassionate, borderline hippie-like outlook on politics and societal issues," said Werner.

"If this guy is leaving the Satanic Temple for those reasons," Astaroth recalls thinking. "That's exactly where I need to be."

A year later, Astaroth established New York City's first Satanic Temple chapter, pulling an online community into a real-life group roughly 80 members strong, the first IRL chapter in the city. The goal: to make it "not just accepting of LGBTQ people, but an enthusiastically accepting atmosphere for LGBTQ people," he said. In other words, the kind of group he'd longed for as a teen in Ohio. To wit, the first question on the New York chapter's membership application asks for one's preferred pronoun, which establishes a communal sense of respect while also acting as a safety net. "If someone takes the opportunity to answer it in a flippant way, they're just not going to be a good fit for our chapter," Astaroth said.

He has since moved to Salem, Massachusetts, where he's now the director of the Temple's headquarters and remains an assistant chapter head of the NYC group he founded. The Temple's openness to intersectional identities is just part of what's endeared him so strongly to the group. "Queer is an extra layer on top of being gay just like Satan is an extra layer on top of being an atheist," Astaroth said. "You can be both."

This would have been news to me six months ago. At 26 years old, newly lesbian, and navigating the tail end of a five year relationship with the man I loved, I didn't know what to call myself aside from "confused." Figuring I might as well lean into that untethered panic, I attended a public forum hosted by the Satanic Temple's LA chapter. Held at a biker bar in the suburbs, I showed up wearing mom jeans and fit in seamlessly, and I've since become a member in good standing.

Since then, I've been consumed with all things Satanic Temple. As someone who identifies as both gay and queerqueer in the modern sense of rejecting binary thinkingI feel at home in its embrace of complexity. As it turns out, I'm not alone.

With 60 chapters around the world (many of them online, according to LA chapter head Ali Kellog) and more than 70,000 followers on Facebook, the Temple has gained recent attention thanks to several campaigns meant to challenge the religious right's grip on American policymaking. Take, for example, its fight for reproductive rights, campaign to install a statue of its gender-fluid deity near a Ten Commandments monument outside the Oklahoma State Capitol building and offer to perform same-sex weddings when Michigan state officials wouldn't. VICE has previously covered the Temple's first "Pink Mass," in which spokesman Lucien Greaves trolled the founder of the Westboro Baptist Church, by having same-sex couples kiss over his dead mother's grave.

But beyond these kinds of stunts, the Temple is an important movement that provides a safe, radically-inclusive space for people who identify in all sorts of ways. Without defining itself as an LGBTQ organization outright, the Satanic Temple has become a haven for queer folks. At the first meeting I attended, nearly everyone I talked to was confidently queer, gay, pansexual, transgender, bi, polyamorous, or something in between.

There's still ample confusion about what it means to be a Satanist. Given society's long history of pegging Satan as the root of all evil, that's fairthough it's worth making some distinctions. Anton LaVey, a then 36-year-old American musician, founded the Church of Satan in 1966 with the mission of creating an organization "openly dedicated to the acceptance of Man's true naturethat of a carnal beast, living in a cosmos that is indifferent to our existence." The Satanic Temple, on the other hand, was created by Lucien Greaves (aka Doug Mesner) and Malcolm Jarry in 2014 to promote humanistic principles of benevolence and empathy.

Greaves is surprised I find the Temple's queerness, well, surprising. "It's not a big deal," he said. "We don't have strict separations or definitions of our gay membership, our trans membership, or anybody else." Though he doesn't have an exact headcount of LGBTQ members, Greaves said he wouldn't be surprised if more than half identify as such (an estimate that conforms with my experience at the LA chapter). The organization as a whole is a platform for LGBTQ members to celebrate their identities.

Throughout the long history of Satanic culture, "there's always been a tenor of tweaking the status quo, tweaking the mainstream," said David E Embree, who teaches religious studies at Missouri State University. That opposition to the status quo, Embree said, is exactly why the Temple has such great appeal to many who have been burned by mainstream religions. What's more interesting, in his mind, is the way Temple Satanists formed a community in the relative safety and privacy of online chat rooms. "The internet is the best friend Satanism ever had," he saidwhich makes sense, when you consider how dangerous it can be to identify as anything other than cisgendered, straight, and Christian in much of the country.

That origin storyhow the Satanic Temple was mostly born onlinemakes for an almost too-perfect metaphor. The internet operates as both a Pandora's box of vile commentary and a tool for distributing a means of communication and organization to marginalized communities around the world. It obscures as much as it clarifies and blunts loneliness as often as it exacerbates it. Those are modern-day dualities that both queers and Satanists are all too familiar with. "Humans are complex," as Astaroth put it. "I don't understand why you would resist being as many things as you want to be. That idea shouldn't be intimidating, but refreshing."

This article was written by Kate Ryan. Follow her on Twitter.

Read the original here:

How the Satanic Temple Became a Queer Haven - VICE

Lana Del Rey: Lust for Life review topical tunes and retro bombs – The Guardian

Glossy nihilism, delivered with a wink: Lana Del Rey. Photograph: Dave J Hogan/Getty Images

Most pop stars innovate every album cycle, a fraught hustle that is of a piece with this eras frantic audio production values. Thats all beneath Lana Del Rey.

The ageless 32-year-old arrived at a languid sound, a detached authorial voice and a set of obsessions on her 2012 debut Born to Die, and her fourth album remains true to them all. One fine track sums up her entire oeuvre: the title of Summer Bummer reflects the consistently high mercury of Del Reys mises-en-scne; and there is usually a worm at the centre of her perfect peach. The rhyme reflects the way all this glossy nihilism is often delivered with a wink.

At least three departures separate Lust for Life from its predecessors. One is the over-abundance of guests, a concession to modernity. The usual attendant menfolk rappers A$AP Rocky and Playboi Carti lend notional grit to Del Reys ultra-glide. You might want to punch the air, however, when Stevie Nicks turns up on Beautiful People, Beautiful Problems Nickss even, level delivery is so obviously a precursor to Del Reys own. The title is almost self-parody; the rest, however, goes deeper than Del Rey songs usually do, combining a fetish for muscular blue-collar men with eco-fear.

Its not the only instance. A number of songs here step outside Del Reys favourite theme wrongness, gilded and tackle the non-solipsistic. The second departure is that this is an album about America today. God Bless America and All the Beautiful Women in It wears its title like a pussy hat; gunshots punctuate the chorus.

The ghostly When the World Was at War We Kept Dancing invokes the 1940s while wondering: Is it the end of an era? Is it the end of America? Del Rey surveys the crowd at Coachella and worries about their children, their childrens children. I said a prayer for the third time, she sighs. And we know what Del Reys prayers are like nowadays in February she encouraged Twitter followers to join a nationwide congregation of witches to put a spell on the US president.

If this is an album about America, it is also an album about Americana, and other venerable source materials: the Coachella song is subtitled Woodstock in My Mind. Despite the rappers, the hip-hop content in Del Reys sound mostly gives way to canonical genres the third departure.

Millennials might find a subscription to Uncut or Mojo useful here, as Del Rey drops retro bombs all over the place. Dont worry baby, she croons on Love (Beach Boys). My boyfriends back, she notes on Lust for Life (the Angels), her strangely unsatisfying hook-up with the Weeknd, which borrows from Iggy Pop. It all gets a little ridiculous when Sean Ono Lennon consents to a Beatles pastiche called Tomorrow Never Came crammed with wide-ranging interpolations. Lay lady lay, Del Rey sings, I would be your tiny dancer. Its a mark of Lana Del Reys persuasive skill that a good song emerges from under all that baggage. Girl meets boy. Boy fails to turn up when he said he would. Love goes wrong. Repeat till fade.

Visit link:

Lana Del Rey: Lust for Life review topical tunes and retro bombs - The Guardian

Letter: Encourage open debate of secularism – The Columbus Dispatch

There are some who think there is no God, but the evidence for God is overwhelming (Movement on the move, Faith & Values article, Friday). Nevertheless, they hold onto that belief because it gives liberty to hedonism.

Hedonism is rejected by many atheists, but for no good reason. Bertrand Russel once wrote, We feel that the man who brings widespread happiness at the expense of misery to himself is a better man than the man who brings unhappiness to others and happiness to himself. I do not know of any rational ground for this view.

Russell was a secularist; what values did he hold and, for that matter, for what reason did he hold them? His daughter, Katharine, took these words from his autobiography, thus an accurate conveying of a despairing sentiment, suggesting the values of a secularist have no foundations and are fluid.

In the battle of ideas, especially on college campuses, secularism and theism should be made available to each student to choose on his and her own. Let the debates begin, and let not the campuses shut them down because one might be conservative and the other progressive/liberal.

The Rev. Ron Thomas

Sunrush Church of Christ

Chillicothe

See the original post here:

Letter: Encourage open debate of secularism - The Columbus Dispatch

Secret Garden Party bows out with its most debauched bash yet – NME – NME.com (blog)

The famous Cambridgeshire hedonist's playground closes its gates after 2017's final bash - here's all the naked, paint-flinging, mansion-burning fun of the last ever SGP.

Who wants to wear my pubic hair hat?

In the age of unkillable super-gonnorhea, this question really shouldnt get the enthusiastic response that it does. But the rush to don the pubic headwear of a random woman on the Palais De Boob stage is perhaps the biggest of its kind in recorded history. For this is Secret Garden Party, a place where normal convention does not hold, where every yoga session involves at least one naked man, where your inhibitions are best left in the care of the massive sad fox by the entrance and theres no concern whatsoever for cultural appropriation. Forget all the Native American head-dresses, there would be real uproar if word of this place ever got back to the ancient Amazonian tribe of the Glittertits.

Go Big & Go Home is the weekends motto. 2017 marks the last ever Secret Garden Party I got very emotional, twice, says Head Gardener Freddie Fellowes, discussing his Q&A about shutting the gates for good so in wild-ass hedonism terms, time is of the essence. Everywhere you turn lies another invitation to get naked. Outside the Spiritual Playground tent an array of Buddhist monkey gods and false idols are celebrating the birthday of a nude bloke called Phil The Little Acorn (for evident reasons) by playing a game of Pass The Parcel where virtually every prize is a silver thong. The Palais De Boob stage is dedicated to freeing the nipple and every game of Keeping Up With The Car-Crashdashians in the Colosillyum seems to end with the loser fortfeiting most of their clothing. Its like the worlds biggest game of Spin The Bottle decided to put some bands on.

The acts certainly get in the spirit. On Sunday afternoon Beans On Toast has written a song especially for the festival, commemorating the sight of a grown man attempting to leap a gap on a five-year-olds bike during the Wonky Races and the time he took a pill live onstage at Where The Wild Things Are. And Peaches appears to have won the race to the pubic hat she opens her Friday night set wearing a vagina headpiece and flanked by dancing vaginas, and ends it half naked, simulating such rampant lesbianism youd think she was pitching her own Netflix drama.

All of which makes Secret Garden Party an affront to God, so naturally He tries to wash it from the face of the earth on Saturday and Sunday. SGP just organises a mass moon at the clouds. The Zeuses and nuns of the Spiritual Playground just move their game of Blind Deity inside. The men with gold TVs for heads dont let a spot of rain stop them having a dance off in the onsite boxing ring. Two Amy Winehouses still stop for a natter by The Drop, a dance ditch featuring the worlds shittest Transformer.

Indeed, despite the rain, Secret Garden Party pulls out all the stops for its final curtain. The spectacular Sunday afternoon paint fight comes with paint fireworks, and the Dance Off even has a champagne fight on Friday. A skywriting plane shooting fireworks circles over the Lake Stage during Jagwar Mas Saturday set and the legendary burning of the effigy in the middle of the lake sees an entire faux mansion house go up in smoke, revealing a gigantic heart of fire in its ruins.

Its tempting to call this weekend the death of the boutique. A monochrome film shown on the big screen of the Lake Stage on Saturday night made up of footage shot here over the past fifteen years certainly makes people on bungees hitting each other with giant balloons look as mournful as it can. As SGP bows out and Bestival shrinks onshore, there are few bijou festival wonderlands left, places you can go to take on a three-day identity, become a superstar of costumed idiocy and, most crucially, feel like you really own. A toff-fest in Freddies glorified back garden, yes, but Secret Garden Party was also a community of free-spirited souls in a way that Leefest, frankly, isnt. Perhaps the bleakness of Brexit, Trump and May overwhelms even the need to find respite in a place where you can dance to reggaeton in a spangly tassled leotard to your hearts content. Perhaps hedonism only really thrives hand-in-hand with hope and the Oh Jeremy Corbyn chants are more ardent here than anywhere.

Or maybe, as Fellowes claims, think of it more as Dylan goes electric than our Altamont.You cant be avant-garde from within an institution and lest we forget, the frontier always moves. So watch this space for the phoenix rising from the ashes. It seems new borders are being planted, gardeners

Read the rest here:

Secret Garden Party bows out with its most debauched bash yet - NME - NME.com (blog)

The many flavors of Israeli hotels – ISRAEL21c

When traveling, you can sometimes let go of normalcy and embrace something dreamlike. Israel abounds with wonderful places to sleep and to dream, catering to all tastes and imaginations.

There are the lush fairy houses of the Castles that Move in the Wind up in the Golan;Beresheet, a stone hotel that sits, as silent and monolithic as the city of Ur, on the edge of the Ramon crater in the Negev; and the sublime respite Mitzpe Hayamim,a spa/hotel/organic farm near Rosh Pina, and many more.

We have not stayed in every hotel in Israel not by a long shot but we have touched down in nearly every corner of the country and have seen a wide gamut of lodging places, from mud huts on working farms in the desert to the most elegantly appointed hotel rooms overlooking vistas of green hills, borderlines, and history.

What we have seen throughout our travels is that Israelis have a knack for combining elegance with a lack of pretention, a Mediterranean understanding of hedonism with a kibbutznik practicality.

Each of the hotels, inns, and guesthouses weve mentioned combines those factors.

Your feet are always on the ground in Israel; it is hard not to feel agreeably at home here in the most basic and the most high-toned places. That kind of comfort is the ultimate luxury.

Lin Arison & Diana C. Stoll are the creatorsofThe Desert and the Cities Sing: Discovering Todays Israel, a treasure box that highlights Israels creative achievement and innovation.

Read the original post:

The many flavors of Israeli hotels - ISRAEL21c

Say it Right: The -ists and -isms of personal belief – Mail Tribune

By Sandi Ekberg for the Mail Tribune

Two of the most critical questions we ever ask ourselves are, Who am I? and What do I believe?

As we meet people in our lives and encounter a variety of beliefs or philosophies, we make these decisions.

Our language has two vital suffixes that deal with answers to these questions: -ist is an ending that refers to one who, while the suffix ism, points to the belief. We will look at a few of these words speaking of people. Nearly all can just change their ending to ism and give us the belief.

While a realist accepts a situation as it is and is prepared to deal with it accordingly, an idealist sees visions or dreams of perfection.

Then there is the fatalist, who accepts all things and events as inevitable, part of predetermination. As we form our values, we may learn from an altruist, one who is unselfish, concerned for or devoted to the welfare of others. The egoist, on the other hand, believes individual self-interest is the valid end of all action. He sees himself as important, but not necessarily superior, as does the excessively conceited egotist. And then there is the moralist, fond of making moral judgments about others behavior.

Each of these philosophies is more complicated than we can cover here, but if one explanation stirs an interest, let it serve as a launching pad for more.

A rationalist is one who bases opinions on reason/knowledge rather than emotional or religious feelings. The pragmatist is guided more by practical considerations and judges theories in terms of success or practical application.

A nationalist advocates political independence for a country, while a federalist is a proponent of a government system in which several states unite under a central authority. A capitalist uses money to invest in trade and industry for profit for private owners; however, a socialist advocates political and economic organizations be owned or regulated by the community as a whole. A communists political theory is derived from Karl Marx, favoring a society in which property is publicly owned, and each worker is paid according to his abilities and needs.

And do you ever wish, just for a moment, that your only goal was pleasure? Hedonism, even if only transitory, is the pursuit of enjoyment, personal gratification.

Sandi Ekberg taught high school English in Medford for 30 years, with a special interest in vocabulary, grammar and usage. If you have grammar questions you would like answered, email her at ifixgrammar@charter.net

Read the rest here:

Say it Right: The -ists and -isms of personal belief - Mail Tribune

On Melodrama, Lorde reveres being young and dumb – McGill Tribune

Its easy to trivialize pop music, or dismiss it as something intrinsically lesser than real music." It can seem banal, and focus on catchiness in lieu of explicit meaning. But those criticisms often miss the point of the genre. At its best, a pop song isnt about a message, per se, but rather a feeling, wrapped up in a chorus that seems so true to a moment or person or place that you cant not sing along with it.

Every Top 40 aspirant tries to manufacture that irresistible magic. Regular placeholders like Drake and the Chainsmokers seem to have it down to a science. While a good way to score airtime, such a formulaic approach is also what separates generic radio hits from the likes of pop princess Lordes debut album, Pure Heroinea hypnotizing, shapeshifting gem that made house parties everywhere suddenly uncomfortably introspective.

For her part, the New Zealand artist has expressed not merely a love, but a reverence for the pop genre. And throughout Melodrama, her latest offering, that adoration is alive and well. The result is an exquisite, affecting account of all the heartbreak and hedonism of life at 20-something.

Much like 2013s Pure Heroine, Melodramanails that pendulum swing between revelry and restlessness that should be familiar to anyone on the fringe of adulthood, while avoiding the predictability that often weighs down songs about young people partying. Thats largely thanks to Lordes exceptional songwriting, which defies conventional pop structure at every turn. Unexpected yet irresistible flourishespunching horns on Sober, Green Lights triumphant piano bridge, a penultimate guitar riff warped to sound like wrenching metal on Hard Feelings/Lovelesspunctuate beats like Pop Rocks candies that are sometimes watered down, sometimes chased with tequila.

On highlight track The Louvre, a soaring hook crops up as giddily and unexpectedly as the crush you didnt know was going to be at the bar tonight, before the spoken chorusBroadcast the boom, boom, boom and make em all dance to itpulls it all back, muting the party because youve stepped into the bathroom to try and stop blushing.

Thematically, the album is a soundtrack to some bender of a weekend, and all the barely-suppressed emotional baggage that comes with it. Drunken, reckless decisions abound on Homemade Dynamite, but hangover and heartache are never far off. Liability is a delicate ode to the party girl tired of being cast aside, and sways sad and reflective in the middle of the albums otherwise humming dancefloor. The contrast is somewhat poignant, but lays on the pure melancholy just a little too thick. Its successor, Hard Feelings/Loveless, yanks the heartstrings more effectively. The two-parter narrows the focus from broad heartache to that implosive, painstakingly concealed brand of hurt unique to the era of hook-ups and smartphonesthe kind that requires confessions like: It was real for me.

The singer-songwriters diagnosis of the young adult saga as one big, messy melodramabuilding relationships on boozy nights out, agonizing over the punctuation of a text, how we kiss and kill each otheris spot-on. Like any good soap opera, being young can be tragic, ridiculous, and, quite often, both at the same time. Cloaking jarringly insightful social commentary in winking, snarky lines like, Ill give you my best side, tell you all my best lies / Awesome, right?, Lorde strikes the balance between comedy and tragedy effortlessly.

And its not all anguishthis drama wouldve been cancelled seasons ago if there werent at least a few victories now and again. The closing track, Perfect Places, is an anthem apt for stumbling out of a house party like a living god, while the sparkling Supercut captures the afterglow of a fling never meant to last.

Above all, Lordes magnetism lies in her authenticity. Shes not just singing about being young and reckless; at 20 years old herself, shes right there with you, searching for peace of mind at crowded parties and noisy bars. She reflects on the absurdity of it all with sensitivity, candor, and wry humorbut never condescension. Its her melodrama, too.

Follow this link:

On Melodrama, Lorde reveres being young and dumb - McGill Tribune

NON-FICTION: THE FAILED RATIONALIST – DAWN.com

The growing religious-ideological discord and presence of an assortment of religiously inspired extremist movements and groups in Pakistan have complex socio-political implications. Where these processes of negative social change will lead Pakistan is a worrying prognosis.

The religious discourse in the country, though diverse in sectarian terms, is largely monolithic intellectually. Even ideological diversity is rare; historically two trends have remained dominant, ie a traditional religious-political discourse, and Islamisation.

Although the two trends have some common violent and non-violent expressions, Islamist movements have also nurtured certain rational tendencies. These rational tendencies acted as a catalyst for overall religious trends in the country. On the one hand, rationalists shaped their own movements and established their institutions and on the other, under their influence or in reaction the traditionalists and Islamists tried to amend their strategies. However, the rationalists have failed to completely transform the religious discourse in the country. Their desire to become distinguished among the religious discourse would be a reason for this failure. This is strange, that in South Asian intellectual discourse leading Muslim scholars, rather than contributing, established their own movements while being part of the mainstream tradition.

An examination of why post-Islamist movements are unable to transform into populist social movements

Scholar, researcher and professor Dr Husnul Amin argues in his doctoral thesis about why the rationalists could not develop a populist approach. He counts many reasons, including the countrys peculiar societal structures, rationalists comfortable relationship with the power elites and most importantly the rationalists larger focus on the middle classes and special interest in academic issues. These findings give an impression that the rationalists failed on a strategic level, but one can argue about their whole intellectual paradigm, which may be borrowed from the West and influenced by contemporary socio-political environments rather than be linked with philosophical tradition or evolution of Islamic thought.

In pursuit of alternative modernity, the rationalists are developing compatibility with Islamic text and democratisation. Amin has tried to understand the dynamics of this process in his book Post-Islamism: Pakistan in the Era of Neoliberal Globalisation. This is indeed an important contribution to understanding the construct of Muslim intellectual movements in contemporary societies. He takes Javed Ahmed Ghamidis blueprint as a case study to comprehend the phenomenon, but uses the term post-Islamism for Muslim rationalism.

Post-Islamism is not a new term. French scholar Olivier Roy, as well as Iranian Asef Bayat, have mainly constructed the framework of post-Islamism, which is taken as a transformative form of Islamist movements of post-world wars that emerged in the Middle East, North Africa, and South Asia. Bayat contributed more in shaping the conceptual framework of Amins thesis, as he has acknowledged, but Amin applied this framework in a different context and with some variation. Amin believes post-Islamism is not the dead end of Islamism. It may not be dubbed anti-Islamic or secular, but secularisation of state/society. Post-Islamism proffers a framework where political reform is linked to religious reform. The Islamist parties have shifted their focus to minorities, youth and gender concerns and adopted a rights-based approach this is a practical manifestation of post-Islamism.

As far as Islamism is concerned, Amin considers it a revivalist movement and lists three factors that contributed to the conceptualisation of Islamism: 1. Political interpretation of religious text and thus blurring of categories of collective obligation and personal obligation. 2. Socio-political struggle to enforce Sharia, pursuance of an Islamisation programme through the institutional arrangement of the state and re-affirmation of Islam as a blueprint of socio-economic order. 3. Islamists openness to adopt and deploy all modern means of propaganda machinery, technology, print, electronic and social media.

In that context, he distinguishes post-Islamism as a social movement with a retreat from the idea of creating an Islamic state and an outcome of neo-liberal globalisation inspirations on modern Muslim minds. The Ghamidi movement is a perfect manifestation of this phenomenon as it has succeeded in creating an interpretive community in Pakistan that engages with liberalism and democracy.

It is interesting that Ghamidi thought was promoted by military dictator Gen Pervez Musharraf as his top-down project of enlightened moderation. It could be conceived as an enforced moderation project, that was part of a political tool and foreign policy agenda of the military government. Amin rightly argues, Ghamidi and his close associates received disproportionate media coverage on newly liberated private television channels. He became a member of the Council of Islamic Ideology in 2006 and remained in this position for two consecutive years. Despite an overwhelming emphasis on the status of democracy in their [Ghamidi movements] religious discourse, Ghamidi has hardly directly questioned the legitimacy of the system in place in which he gained the opportunity to flourish.

It is also interesting that Ghamidi does not subscribe to major Islamic schools of thought in the Indian subcontinent and places himself in a self-constructed category, Dabistan-i-Shibli. Amin believes that this imaginary school of thought has served the Ghamidi movement in multiple ways. It enables them to place themselves in the middle of two popularly known opposite poles, namely Deobands conservatism and Sir Syed Ahmed Khans rationalism. As a post-Islamist, Ghamidi has challenged the notion of the Islamic state projected by the Islamists including Maulana Maududi, who believes in the supremacy of Sharia over all aspects of social, political and religious life.

Amin also examines existing religious political movements in the country in the third chapter Islamism Without Fear. He argues that though the Jamaat-i-Islami is a well-structured and organised party in Pakistan and played a leading role in shaping the Islamism discourse in the country, compared to the Jamiat-Ulema-i-Islam Fazl (JUI-F), which is a loosely connected party, the latter remains more accommodative to religious minorities and in its political approaches. It can be assumed that despite its conventional credentials, the JUI-F has more flexibility to accommodate post-Islamism concepts of a social life.

Despite making some visible intellectual contribution, post-Islamist movements have failed to transform their ideas into a popular social movement. Amin is not hopeless and he agrees with Bayat that post-Islamism is an evolving concept and a conscious attempt to conceptualise and strategise the rationale and modalities of transcending Islamism in social, political and intellectual domains. Most importantly it provides an inward-looking approach, which may have a slow impact.

Amin is a fine scholar with exposure to the best international academic forums and his attempt will provoke healthy academic debate in Pakistan.

The reviewer is a security analyst and director of the Pak Institute for Peace Studies, Islamabad

Post-Islamism: Pakistan in the Era of Neoliberal Globalisation By Husnul Amin International Islamic University, Islamabad ISBN: 978-9697576050 198pp.

Published in Dawn, Books & Authors, July 23rd, 2017

More here:

NON-FICTION: THE FAILED RATIONALIST - DAWN.com

Herb Van Fleet: The sad state of education in America – Joplin Globe

Here we are with 2017 more than half over and weve got a lot on our plate to deal withour political system, our environmental problems, our federal and state debt, our infrastructure, our civil unrest, our dealings with domestic and international terrorism, our health care problems, and many more.

But one issue that is rarely brought up these days is education; specifically, where is education in terms of priorities, what are the issues and how will its shortcomings be remedied?

The people of the United States need to know that individuals in our society who do not possess the levels of skill, literacy and training essential to this new era will be effectively disenfranchised, not simply from the material rewards that accompany competent performance, but also from the chance to participate fully in our national life. A high level of shared education is essential to a free, democratic society and to the fostering of a common culture, especially in a country that prides itself on pluralism and individual freedom. That quote was taken from a report called A Nation At Risk and presented to president Ronald Reagan in April 1983.

The report goes on to enumerate the deficiencies of our school systems and to offer suggestions for improvement. But the negative findings in that very report are just as valid today as they were 34 years ago. Arguably, even worse.

Youve probably seen some of the statistics. The United States ranked 14th out of 40 nations in overall education. We are 24th in literacy and 17th in educational performance. In its 2015 report by the Program for International Student Assessment, the U.S. was ranked 38th out of 71 countries in math and 24th in science and reading. Among the 35 member nations of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the United States ranked 30th in math and 19th in science.

This lack of education has produced some disappointing results. For example, the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs commissioned a civic education poll among public school students. A surprising 77 percent didnt know that George Washington was the first president, couldnt name Thomas Jefferson as the author of the Declaration of Independence and only 2.8 percent of the students actually passed the citizenship test. Along similar lines, the Goldwater Institute of Phoenix did the same survey and only 3.5 percent of students passed the civics test. According to the National Research Council report, only 28 percent of high school science teachers consistently follow the National Research Council guidelines on teaching evolution, and 13 percent of those teachers explicitly advocate creationism or intelligent design. And 18 percent of Americans still believe that the sun revolves around the earth, according to a Gallup poll.

Another statistic that is alarming today is the result of a July 10 poll taken by the Pew Research Center in Washington, where 58 percent of Republican and Republican-leaning Americans said colleges and universities had a negative impact on the way things were going in the country. Two years ago, only 37 percent of that group said that. In recent months, that seems to ring true.

This decline of education in America has been going on for years. And problems engendered by this diminution have been and continue to show up in most of our institutions, our culture and our national conscience. As a result, we are losing respect from the rest of the civilized world along with our competitive edge. In short, we are facing a national tragedy.

As Susan Jacoby writes in a 2008 article in The Washington Post, The Dumbing of America, Dumbness, to paraphrase the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, has been steadily defined downward for several decades, by a combination of heretofore irresistible forces. These include the triumph of video culture over print culture; a disjunction between Americans rising level of formal education and their shaky grasp of basic geography, science and history; and the fusion of anti-rationalism with anti-intellectualism. There is a growing and disturbing trend of anti-intellectual elitism in American culture. Its the dismissal of science, the arts, and humanities and their replacement by entertainment, self-righteousness, ignorance, and deliberate gullibility.

So here we are at the beginning of the 21st century with too many of us dismissive of science and rational discourse. Literacy and critical thinking are becoming anathema to our future leaders.

For some time now, Ive been studying the Iroquois Confederacys political philosophy as set fourth in its constitution. A small excerpt from that document seems pertinent here.

In all of your deliberations in the Council, in your efforts at law making, in all your official acts, self-interest shall be cast into oblivion. ... Look and listen for the welfare of the whole people and have always in view not only the present but also the coming generations, even those whose faces are yet beneath the surface of the ground the unborn of the future Nation.

Time to wake up America.

HERB VAN FLEET, a former Joplin resident, lives in Tulsa.

Read more:

Herb Van Fleet: The sad state of education in America - Joplin Globe

Russian Protesters Rally Against Internet Censorship – RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty

MOSCOW -- Hundreds of demonstrators took to the streets of Moscow on July 23 to protest Internet censorship and demand the resignation of the head of Russia's state media regulator.

The protest came amid a broad crackdown on online speech in recent years that rights activists say is targeting legitimate dissent under the pretext of battling extremism.

Organizers of the rally, which received official permission from Moscow authorities, called for the rehabilitation of Internet users convicted for reposting material on social networks.

Protesters also called for the sacking of Aleksandr Zharov, the head of Roskomnadzor, the state agency that plays a central role in regulating online speech.

Demonstrators chanted slogans that included "No to censorship, no to dictatorship!" and "Down with the police state!" They also adapted a slogan against Russian President Vladimir Putin frequently chanted at opposition rallies: "Russia without Putin and censorship!"

The protest came two days after Russia's lower house of parliament passed a bill that would prohibit the use of Internet proxy services, including virtual private networks, or VPNs.

The bill, approved in its third and final reading on July 21, would also ban the anonymous use of mobile messaging services.

It will face a single vote in the upper house before going to Putin, who rarely rejects bills adopted by the Kremlin-controlled legislature.

Sarkis Darbinyan, head of the Center for the Defense of Digital Rights, a Moscow-based advocacy group, said he believes the solid turnout for the rally was driven by "typical Internet users" who are "tired of the volume of crazy laws."

He specifically cited the bill that would ban the use of proxy services and the anonymous use of mobile messaging services.

"This really does create problems for the connectivity of the Russian segment of the Internet and for access to services," Darbinyan told RFE/RL. "I think this is why many citizens truly want to come out and openly state their opposition to such ham-fisted regulation of the Internet."

Police estimated the turnout for the demonstration at around 800 people. Opposition activists frequently accuse authorities of playing down the size of public protests.

OVD Info, a website that monitors detentions of political activists, reported that three people had been detained at the rally -- one for distributing leaflets promoting Russian opposition leader Aleksei Navalny.

Two of the detainees were released later in the day, OVD Info reported, including the minor reportedly hauled in for the Navalny leaflets.

The Washington-based rights group Freedom House says Internet freedoms continued to slide in Russia last year, and other international watchdogs have criticized the country's treatment of online speech as well.

Russian officials have repeatedly rejected such criticism. Vyacheslav Volodin, the current speaker of the lower house of parliament, said last year that the Internet in Russia is "more free than in the United States."

In one recent high-profile case, a Russian blogger was convicted of inciting hatred and insulting religious believers' feelings with videos he posted on YouTube -- including one showing him playing Pokemon Go in a church.

The blogger, Ruslan Sokolovsky, was handed a 3-1/2 year suspended sentence that was reduced by more than a year earlier this month.

Sokolovsky was also added to an official list of "terrorists and extremists" maintained by Russia's Federal Financial Monitoring Service.

The rest is here:

Russian Protesters Rally Against Internet Censorship - RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty

Censor keeps Israelis in the dark as world learns of Jordan embassy saga – The Jerusalem Post

Jordanian police outside Israeli embassy in Amman . (photo credit:SOCIAL MEDIA)

The world knew about it, reported on it but in Israel there was nothing. For about 11 hours between Sunday night Monday morning, Israelis were forbidden from reporting on the events taking place in Jordan.

The fact that social media was full of the news about the anapparent attacknear the Israeli embassy in Amman and stories had been published by Reuters, Fox News, the Independent and elsewhere, meant nothing. In Israel, journalists could not send out a tweet or post a word on Facebook. Everything about the attack was banned for publication by the Military Censor's Office.

Shortly before the incident was placed under censorship, some information got through. Zionist Union MK Ksenia Svetlova managed to launch a tweet saying only that there was a dangerous security incident at the embassy in Jordan.

Initially, reports were unclear, but it was learned that at least one Israeli security officer at the embassy had been injured after he was stabbed by a Jordanian who was subsequently shot. Svetlova called on the Jordanian government to take all the necessary steps to ensure the security of the personnel at the embassy.

According to a Foreign Ministry statement, the Israeli had been stabbed in the stomach in Amman by a man with a screwdriver moving furniture in one of the residences in the embassy compound Sunday night. The guard shot the assailant identified as Mohammed Zakaria al-Jawawdeh, 17 in self defense. Al-Jawawdeh was killed, and another man at the scene the owner of the compound was injured and later succumbed to his wounds.

These details became available as the night progressed and foreign outlets, including news agencies, reported on the developments. But in Israel, complete radio silence.

Of course anybody with internet access and basic English or Arabic reading skills (or the ability to use online translation services) could learn all about it easily. News reports appeared throughout the entire international media - on Reuters, Fox News, the Independent and elsewhere. Everyone was reporting about the incident. The only ones who didn't know were Israelis.

Slightly before midnight, the Jordanian General Security Administration released an official statement saying that the incident was being investigated. But Israeli media couldn't even report that.

Reporters couldn't even alert readers in Israel to the fact that the Foreign Ministry decided to evacuate all it staff from the Israeli embassy in Amman out of concern that the incident may cause riots outside the embassy, or that the move was stymied by Jordan.

It was that reason that the full censorship of the incident remained in place until Monday morning, hours after the incident. International and local Jordanian media, who began reporting the event shortly after it occurred continued to release details which Israeli media and foreign journalists with Israeli press cards were barred from reporting on.

Censorship was finally lifted early Monday morning. At this point Israel still has not fully evacuated embassy staff and the Jordanians have still refused to let the guard be transferred back to Israel. Jerusalem claims the guard enjoys diplomatic immunity and is exempt from investigation by Jordanian authorities.

The decision to leave Israelis in the dark was criticized by Israeli journalists and politicians. Unlike previous incidents in this case Israelis were also prohibited from citing foreign media sources for the story.

Even former chief IDFcensor Rachel Dolev characterized the information blackout as excessive. In an interview to Army Radio she said the "aggressive actions by the censor were unjustified," and only lead to a rumor mill breaking out on social media. She added that this was not the first time in recent weeks that the censor decided to act this way and as a result harmed the democratic value of having a free press.

At a time when information flows freely on the internet, many questioned the need for the censorship, which journalists and pundits argued Monday morning, was out of touch.

More details to follow.... maybe.

Share on facebook

See the original post:

Censor keeps Israelis in the dark as world learns of Jordan embassy saga - The Jerusalem Post

6 Incidents Unmasking Social Media Giants as Enemies of Free Speech – Townhall

|

Posted: Jul 24, 2017 12:01 AM

Hate speech is not free speech, the Left increasingly insists particularly on college and university campuses. In my new book The Complete Infidels Guide to Free Speech (and Its Enemies), I show why the very concept of hate speech is a scam. Here are the top seven:

1. Twitter decides who has the right to hate speech

Consider, for example, what Twitter does not consider to be hate speech. A Muslim named Obaid Karki, @stsheetrock on Twitter, runs a website headed Obaid Karki St.Sheetrocks Painfulpolitics Offensive Comedy Hepcat and another called Suicide Bombers Magazine. He posted this on one of them in late May 2016, just before the European Union and the social media sites announced their new agreement: Robert Spencer mustnt [be] featured but lynched

Karkis posted this call for me to be lynched on Twitter. But Twitter refused to delete his account or even remove the threatening tweets.

2. Social Media blocks the truth by deeming it hate speech

Videogame developer Mark Kern was suspended from Twitter for writing, I dont see why mosques with radical leanings should be excluded from surveillance when the rest of us get our emails collected by the NSA. The administrator of a proDonald Trump Facebook group was banned for arguing that Trump was not anti-Muslim but anti-ISIS.

In early February 2017, they came for me.

On February 7, 2017, referrals to my website, Jihad Watch, from Facebook numbered 23,783, and from Twitter, 1,718. These numbers were generally representative: referrals from Facebook for several years up to that point had averaged between 15,000 and 20,000 a day, and 1,500 to 2,000 a day from Twitter. But on February 10, 2017, those numbers dropped suddenly and precipitously, with only 2,923 referrals from Facebook and 295 from Twitter. Thats around where they have held since then: on March 20, 2017, there were 1,954 referrals from Facebook and 241 from Twitter.

Did thousands of people who used to click through to Jihad Watch articles from Facebook and Twitter suddenly lose interest on February 10, 2017? Of course not. What happened on that day was that Facebook and Twitter began to censor Jihad Watch as hate speech, in accordance with the assurances they had given to the European Union.

Blocking the Truth

Facebook, immediately after concluding an agreement with the European Union, began moving aggressively against foes of jihad terror and mass Muslim migration in the West. Nina Rosenwald, the president and founder of the conservative think tank Gatestone Institute, on June 2, 2016 recorded Facebooks haste to implement the new speech regulations: On Tuesday, the European Union (EU) announced a new online speech code to be enforced by four major tech companies, including Facebook and YouTube. On Wednesday, Facebook deleted the account of Ingrid Carlqvist, Gatestones Swedish expert.

Carlqvists crime, according to Rosenwald, was to take note of real crimes by Muslim migrants: Ingrid had posted our latest video to her Facebook feedcalled Swedens Migrant Rape Epidemic. In that video, said Rosenwald, Ingrid calmly lays out the facts and statistics, all of which are meticulously researched. Rosenwald added that the video was adapted from a research paper that Gatestone published last year. The video has gone viralracking up more than 80,000 views in its first two days. But the EU is quite candid: it is applying a political lens to their censorship....

Facebook banning anti-jihad opinions

Facebook banned the page of a gay magazine, Gaystream, after it published an article by David Berger, its editor-in-chief, criticizing German gay activists and leftists for ignoring the Islamic root causes of the Orlando jihad massacre. Berger wrote, Whoever had thought the culmination of masochism and Islam-appeasement by left-green professional homosexuals was already achieved, will now be mistaken: it becomes even more masochistic and perverse.

5. Deleting jihad awareness

In July 2016, YouTube also invoked hate speech criteria, which supposedly it had developed as a tool to use against jihad recruiting videos, to delete a video critical of non-violent Muslim Brotherhood efforts to advance Sharia in the West.

6. The immunity of the censorship of certain social media groups explain a lot

On July 13, 2016, the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC) filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, on behalf of Pamela Gellers American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), of which I am vice president, challenging Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA), which grants Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube immunity from lawsuits, and thus makes it impossible to challenge their consistent bias against foes of jihad terror and tolerance of jihad terror activity.

Section 230 of the CDA explicitly immunizes Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube from challenges to anything they do to restrict access to or availability of material that that they deem obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected.

David Yerushalmi, AFLC co-founder and senior counsel, added, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube have notoriously censored speech that they deem critical of Islam, thereby effectively enforcing blasphemy laws here in the United States with the assistance of the federal government. It has been the top agenda item of Islamic supremacists to impose such standards on the West.... Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are falling in line, and we seek to stop this assault on our First Amendment freedoms.

Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watchand author of the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades)and The Truth About Muhammad. His latest book is The Complete Infidels Guide to Free Speech (and Its Enemies). Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.

Read more from the original source:

6 Incidents Unmasking Social Media Giants as Enemies of Free Speech - Townhall

At UCLA, free speech is suppressed and double standards reign – Washington Examiner

On June 27, University of California at Los Angeles Professor Keith Fink was told that his 10-year teaching career in the Department of Communication Studies was over. No substantive reason was given; Interim Dean of Social Sciences Laura Gmez simply stated "your teaching does not meet the standard of excellence." The decision attracted national attention in large part because Fink teaches courses on the First Amendment, including a course on Free Speech on Campus a hot-button topic that has become politically-charged in recent years (inversely and ironically so, because the Free Speech Movement was born within the liberal mecca of UC Berkeley in the 1960s).

Today, for reasons worthy of a Ph.D. thesis, Free Speech purism has shifted from a "liberal" cause to a "conservative" cause. The First Amendment (especially with respect to its first clause: speech) should be apolitical. Accordingly, I (and Fink, too) view it simply as a non-partisan constitutional law issue one where the past 10 years of campus speech codes, mandatory "diversity training," "hate speech," so-called "safe spaces," and "trigger warnings" all fly in the face of dozens of Supreme Court opinions, none of which lend any credence to the legality of the aforementioned "ideals."

The facts of Fink's case alone are intriguing, especially insofar as they highlight UCLA's lack of commitment to academic freedom, due process, and fundamental fairness. His case also illustrates the growing intolerance on campuses toward ideas that do not conform with their traditional progressive agendas, especially among faculty.

While American research universities have historically dominated international rankings, largely due to their willingness to support a wide range of intellectual beliefs, academic freedom is under siege. Administrators, who rarely are zealous defenders of academic freedom and instead are typically trained in problem mitigation, are undermining the very purpose of the modern research university: to promote the free exchange of ideas. This, in turn, leads to them targeting students, faculty, and ideas that are at odds with their own.

Indeed, Fink, a rare conservative on a campus largely comprised of left-leaning faculty and ideologues, is not the first victim of viewpoint and/or political discrimination at UCLA: there are striking parallels between Fink's story and those of Political Economist Tim Groseclose and Epidemiologist James Enstrom. The nexus between these three cases is UCLA's cultural intolerance towards "conservative" views, or more precisely, views that contradict those of the faculty majority.

Particularly galling, however, are the stark differences between Fink's treatment and that of Gabriel Piterberg, the disgraced Professor of History and sexual predator.

By all outward measures, Fink is an excellent teacher.

His qualifications to teach the subjects of free speech on campus, free speech in the workplace, entertainment law, and contemporary social issues are unparalleled. He's a renowned attorney who specializes in these fields, and won the National Collegiate Debate Championship for UCLA for three consecutive years a record unmatched to this day. His students (liberal and conservative alike) universally love his teaching and describe his classes as among the most influential and developmentally-important classes they've taken at UCLA, some going as far to say that his classes "teach tolerance without imposing tolerance." Students characterize his lectures as dynamic and engaging; he's garnered widespread admiration for the attention he gives to students' individual academic and professional pursuits.

His instructor ratings and course ratings are significantly higher than those of his peers a point that his department chair, Kerri L. Johnson, even concedes which has propelled his classes to the top of students' lists of favorites. Fink can easily fill classrooms with hundreds of eager students; there are always students that are turned away due to lack of space (or more recently, arbitrary and dishonestly-justified caps on his courses' enrollment).

In short, he's an excellent teacher with a virtually impeccable teaching record.

Piterberg's case is a totally different story.

Piterberg has been sanctioned by the UC Regents as a result of allegations of sexual misconduct with two graduate students. His settlement includes a minor reduction in pay along with a conveniently-timed quarter away from UCLA where he could instead pursue a prestigious fellowship, thereby boosting his (and UCLA's) academic credentials. As Cassia Roth notes, "Piterberg's 'quarter off' may have cost him financially, but it actually boosted his real academic capital, his research status. And it also enhanced UCLA's own academic standing."

Even before his sexual assault fiasco, he was not particularly popular in the classroom. Students characterize his lectures as monotone and unorganized; he's not known for his concern for students, and students generally note that success in his courses requires mere regurgitation of facts and that he is "not so great a lecturer."

That's no way to teach a subject as important as history. Many students are skeptical of taking his courses, with some even protesting his mere presence on campus. His classes this past year have failed to attract even 50 students. "[I]ts not a good learning environment," says one student who recently took his course.

Although the disgraced Piterberg may be tenured, sexual assault is absolutely "for cause" grounds sufficient enough to justify early dismissal yet he remains on campus. Fink, a lecturer up for promotion to Continuing Lecturer (effectively granting job security), who boasts an objectively excellent teaching record and well-documented influence on thousands of students easily exceeds the criteria set forth for his advancement yet he was shown the door.

These cases have diametrically different outcomes, but why?

This dissonance sheds light into some of the less-glorious aspects of UCLA's inner workings. It exposes a system where department chairs like Kerri L. Johnson can make up rules to suit their interests; it highlights UCLA's flagrant disregard for their very own rules; and perhaps most shockingly, it shows a top-down culture whereby deans and vice chancellors (such as Laura Gmez and Jerry Kang) don't simply administrate, but rather dictate their campus' intellectual climate in complete derogation of academic freedom (a principle they pay lip service to but rarely match it with their actions).

It's no surprise that Jerry Kang (Vice Chancellor of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion) dislikes Fink's presence on campus. Fink regularly takes Kang to task about issues related to student speech, conduct, and academic freedom typically using Kang's in terrorem email missives as springboards to highlight how the abstractions of First Amendment jurisprudence commonly pan out in public universities.

After all, what better way to teach free speech on campus than to use examples from students' own university?

But when Kang and his peers took issue with this, they should have addressed their concerns directly, expediently, and professionally rather than waiting until Fink's eighteenth quarter where they could sheepishly assemble a star chamber review process rigged against Fink from the outset.

For now, Johnson, Gmez, Kang, and the other administrator-bureaucrats who orchestrated Fink's Kafkaesque review may be rejoicing in the fact that they successfully eliminated Fink's outspoken, popular, and intellectually-competing voice from their campus.

But their rejoice will be short-lived: UCLA is already suffering as a result. Fink will not put this battle to rest, not because it involves him, but because it threatens all lecturers' academic freedom and belies the very tenets upon the modern research university are predicated.

Andrew Litt is a law clerk at Keith A. Fink & Associates. He was a teaching assistant for Fink at UCLA.

If you would like to write an op-ed for the Washington Examiner, please read our guidelines on submissions here.

Read the rest here:

At UCLA, free speech is suppressed and double standards reign - Washington Examiner

Editorial: UC makes right call on free speech – San Francisco … – San Francisco Chronicle

Photo: Paul Chinn, The Chronicle

Visitors walk through Sather Gate at UC Berkeley.

Visitors walk through Sather Gate at UC Berkeley.

Give UC Berkeley credit for learning from the past years intensive course in free speech and right-wing provocation. After a series of standoffs with conservative speakers left the university looking less than eager to accommodate all comers, its approach to the latest controversial invitation strikes the right tone by making unfettered expression the clear priority.

University officials initially expressed reservations about the time, date and type of venue requested for the Berkeley College Republicans next would-be guest, conservative commentator Ben Shapiro, prompting the group to revive its accusations of a consistent bias against right-wing speakers. But the university announced Thursday that it would take additional steps, including possibly paying or waiving venue fees, to make the speech happen on the September evening requested by the student organization.

UC Berkeleys new chancellor, Carol Christ, said in a statement that the university welcomes a broad range of perspectives, including Shapiros: We believe deeply in the value and importance of free speech and fully support student groups right to invite speakers of their choice to campus. She added that the school had hosted literally dozens of speakers from both conservative and libertarian movements without incident. The key is for the hosting organization to work collaboratively with the campus.

Indeed, the recent crop of speakers and their supporters have at times seemed more eager to be refused than to be accommodated and to therefore have the opportunity to accuse UC Berkeley of being a liberal echo chamber that has drifted a long way from the days when the Free Speech Movement began there. The Berkeley Republicans habit of demanding a particular date, time and venue without consulting the administration makes the universitys job more difficult. So do left-wing protesters threatening and carrying out violence, necessitating heightened security measures.

For those and other reasons, scheduled campus speeches by professional provocateurs Milo Yiannopoulos and Ann Coulter were ultimately called off this year. UC Berkeley appears to be striving to avoid a similar outcome in the case of Shapiro, whose books and commentary have targeted Palestinians, Hollywood and universities.

If all the student group and its guests are looking for is a cancellation and a headline, maintaining an open campus will only serve to call their bluff.

UC Berkeleys efforts to welcome the next controversial speaker recognizes that the public university has a special obligation to facilitate the free exchange of ideas even when the ideas are questionable and the interest in exchanging them is in doubt.

Read the rest here:

Editorial: UC makes right call on free speech - San Francisco ... - San Francisco Chronicle

Quote of the Day: Jim Dailey on Love and Atheism – Patheos (blog)

I thought this might provoke a little conversation. it was Jim Daileys offering in response to Geoff Benson on the postWill atheists admit that there is good reason to leave atheism and adopt Christianity?.

Geoff started with:

I dont think theres any accommodation between science and faith, though if you define reason in a broader sense than you do science then its possible to argue theres some level of reasoning can be applied within an already acquired faith.

You cant reason into any religion, but you can certainly reason away from it.

To which Jim replied:

Well your post was provocative enough that I tried to find a better description of how I think it works. Ever fallen in love? It is not possible to love someone without making inquiries of them, speaking with them, knowing something about them. But what would happen if you insisted on knowing all about them? That a condition of love was that you could predict their reaction in every single circumstance, under all conditions? Likely you would never end up walking down the aisle with them? So love indeed demands reason, but on some level, as flawed, limited, imperfect humans with a limited life span, we necessarily have to surrender to love to have a chance at happiness.

Speaking of same, my wife is yelling at me about a beautiful day and chores (a whole series of, for me, contradictions that will never reconcile) so I have to go to ensure any chance I have at happiness.

What do you think?

Visit link:

Quote of the Day: Jim Dailey on Love and Atheism - Patheos (blog)

Adam Savage explains why space suits are his happy place – The … – The Verge

Adam Savage loves space suits. When I interviewed him in March, he spoke about how safety equipment appealed to him, whether it was firefighter gear, the protective armor that bomb disposal personnels wear, or space suits of the fictional variety.

For the last several years, Savage would attend San Diego Comic-Con dressed up in a costume that hides his identity, something he calls Adam Incognito. This year, one of the costumes he suited up in was one used in the production of Alien: Covenant.

After he returned from the floor, I spoke with him about why hes so attracted to these galactic wear.

This interview has been condensed for clarity.

Looking back to how you said youre attracted to safety equipment, how did you find wearing the Alien space suit while walking around the floor today? Were you impervious to the crowds?

Well, I'm not impervious to the crowds, because about 75 people came up to me and said you must be Adam. I've definitely spoiled my own thing because Ive done so much cosplay now that any time people see an elaborate, full suit, they ask if its me.

However, the guys at FBFX did a nice job [with this suit]. This fabric looks heavy duty. It looks like ballistic nylon, but it breathes quite well.

To you, what makes up a good space suit costume? What components do you look for?

The stuff that I really like in a space suit is the detail. In a NASA suit, I love the high-level details that tell the story that this was made by people. If you look at NASA hardware really close up you really can sense that these arent production-made items. They're one-offs, each one handmade by a machinist, designed by engineers. And, the best movie space suits are the ones that also communicate that same kind of hand-hewn attention to detail.

What's an example of a detail that you found stands out in a real or fictional suit?

Right now, I'm totally obsessed with the [Alien] Covenant stuff. They have a number of things like little brass tags and tiny markers, and even things like pressure readings that are based off of what the real pressure of that suit would probably be.

So what can cosplayers learn from real suits, and what can real suit makers learn from science fictional suits?

It's funny because real space suits almost never have lights in the helmet. [Theyre] a totally a movie trope because you have to see the actors. There are almost no lights on any NASA suit.

There is a simplicity to NASA hardware and it's required: you need that simplicity. A film like Alien: Covenant is layering in [details] because theyre thinking of a future where these aren't one-off items: they are [mass-produced.]

With its reveal of the latest Z-2 backpack entry suit, NASA is definitely trying to sexy it up to garner a bit more public excitement. They gave it some color, called it the Mars Colonization Suit. I think that's a reasonable thing for an organization like NASA to do, and the positive benefits from The Martian, I think, led if not directly then were at least partially responsible for the increase in NASA's budget a couple of years later. These things capture the public's imagination.

NASAs running out of space suits.

NASA is behind in their space suit production. Its over a million dollars to make a space suit. They now have a set of replacement parts where they can fit together a suit that fits an astronaut by adjusting the arms and the legs and the various geometries.

But yeah, NASA uses a ludicrously complex set of procedures to make this the multilayer, air-proof suits it uses.

What what trends are you seeing in costume manufacturing that has changed how people are making suits?

There's two major leaps. One is from cosplayers: the advancement of foam building technology using camping mats, hot glue, and contact cement to make really elaborate costumes. Its unparalleled: this is a really exciting time, and budgets are going lower because the materials are more easy to come by. It's just about the sweat equity of making sure the forms look great and curves are good.

The other major advancement that I'm really excited about is screen-printing dimension and texture onto lightweight fabrics, so that they look heavy-duty. Captain Americas Winter Soldier costume was an early, excellent harbinger of what's coming. They took four-way stretch dance fabric, which is really light and easy to wear for the actor, and they printed it with texture that made it look like the old ballistic nylon, which is much heavier and harder for the actor to wear, so its much more comfortable.

It turns out that a primary cost on making feature films is just getting the actors out and back into their costumes so they can eat lunch. No actor wants to sit in some giant space suit and try to eat a burrito. It sometimes takes an entire special effects team half an hour or maybe more to get an actor out of a cumbersome costume.

So, working with lighter-weight materials that breathe more definitely increases the the length of time the actors can spend in those suits, and then increases the amount the production can get done.

How about 3D printing and rapid prototyping? I know for some productions, they end up printing up a number of components or props.

3D printing has totally revolutionized both cosplay and costuming for movies. I know that neck rings that FBFX effects made for The Martian and for this suit were 3D printed. [Even] when you machine something and then cast it, trying to get the parts to couple back together is difficult, with the shrinkage inherent in casting and the shrinkage is dependent upon the volume of the material you're trying to cast. That means that some of these are straight 3D printed high strength resins, and that's kind of the only way you can do stuff like this.

[Pointing to the Alien Covenant Helmet on the table] How about this helmet in particular?

I think this helmet is largely 3D printed. Some of the forms for the carbon fiber pressure panels... the neck rings are totally 3D printed, and then there's all this brass etching and all this custom detail. FBFX and companies like it all around the world are using this to radically increase the shapes and the stuff they can produce, lowering the amount of time they need to make it.

Do you see this trickling into the cosplay consumer market?

It's totally trickling in the consumer market, because you can now buy an Ultimaker printer for a couple of grand, and get really impressive resolution for effectively a prosumer model 3D printer.

Last question: right now, whats your favorite space suit?

Currently right now, it's both of the suits from Alien: Covenant: the hard suit that Tennessee wears, which has all 3D printed bearings. It's an absolute masterpiece of engineering. Those were not off-the-shelf components. That suit would have cost tens of thousands of dollars if they were. That was a completely wearable hard suit. That's simply because those guys wanted to push the envelope of what was possible in movie costumes.

Photography by Andrew Liptak / The Verge

Go here to read the rest:

Adam Savage explains why space suits are his happy place - The ... - The Verge

Why Ukrainian forces gave up Crimea without a fight – and NATO is alert – Reuters

KIEV/SEVASTOPOL, Crimea (Reuters) - The career of Sergei Yeliseyev helps to explain why Ukraine's armed forces gave up Crimea almost without a fight - and why NATO now says it is alert to Russian attempts to undermine military loyalty in its eastern European members.

His rise to become number two in the Ukrainian navy long before Russia seized Crimea illustrates the divided loyalties that some personnel in countries that once belonged to the Soviet Union might still face.

Yeliseyev's roots were in Russia but he ended up serving Ukraine, a different ex-Soviet republic, only to defect when put to the test. NATO military planners now believe Moscow regards people with similarly ambiguous personal links as potentially valuable, should a new confrontation break out with the West.

In 2014, Yeliseyev was first deputy commander of the Ukrainian fleet, then largely based in Crimea, when Russian soldiers in unmarked uniforms took control of Kiev's ships and military bases on the peninsula.

Instead of resisting, Yeliseyev quit and subsequently got a new job: deputy chief of Russia's Baltic Fleet.

Yeliseyev, now aged 55, did not respond to Reuters questions sent to him via the Russian defense ministry.

In Kiev, however, there is no doubt where his loyalties lay. "When he took an oath to Ukraine, these were empty words for him. He has always been pro-Russian," said Ihor Voronchenko, now commander of the Ukrainian navy, who once served with Yeliseyev.

In fact, the Russian soldiers were pushing at an open door in late February 2014 - Yeliseyev was just one of many to defect and almost all Ukrainian forces in Crimea failed to resist.

Russia annexed Crimea the following month, prompting a major row with the West which deepened over Moscow's role in a rebellion in eastern Ukraine that lasts to this day.

At the time, Moscow and its allies in Crimea exploited weaknesses within Kiev's military to undermine its ability to put up a fight, according to interviews conducted by Reuters with about a dozen people on both sides of the conflict.

The Russian defense ministry did not respond to questions on their accounts of the events in 2014 submitted by Reuters.

One NATO commander told Reuters that, in a re-run of the tactics it deployed in Crimea, Russian intelligence was trying to recruit ethnic Russians serving in the militaries of countries on its borders.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, the commander said the alliance was particularly sensitive to the risk in countries with high concentrations of ethnic Russians, notably the Baltic states.

NATO had to guard against this, said the commander, though the risk should not be overstated because having Russian roots did not necessarily mean that a person's loyalty is to Moscow.

Officials in the Baltic states, former Soviet republics which unlike Ukraine are NATO members, play down the danger.

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg likewise said he trusted the armies of the Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Still, he told Reuters: "We always have to be vigilant. We always have to develop our intelligence tools and to be able to see any attempts to try to undermine the loyalty of our forces."

Years before the Crimean annexation, a Ukrainian appointment panel appeared to drop its guard when it interviewed Yeliseyev for the deputy naval commander's post.

Yeliseyev was born near Moscow, graduated from a Soviet naval school in the Russian city of Kaliningrad in 1983 and served with the Russian Pacific fleet.

So the panel asked Yeliseyev what he would do if Russia and Ukraine went to war. He replied that he would file for early retirement, according to Myroslav Mamchak, a former Ukrainian naval captain who served with Yeliseyev. Despite this response, Yeliseyev got the job in 2006.

Mamchak did not disclose to Reuters how he knew what was said in the interview room but subsequent events bear out his account.

Relations between Russia and Ukraine dived as Kiev moved closer to NATO and eight years after his appointment, with the countries on the brink of conflict over Crimea, Yeliseyev stayed true to his word by quitting.

Russia's actions were not the only factor in the Crimean events. Ukraine's military had suffered years of neglect, there was a power vacuum in Kiev after the government was overthrown, and many Crimean residents felt more affinity with Moscow.

Still, Ukrainian service personnel with Russian ties switched sides when the annexation began and some officers pretended to put up resistance only to avoid court-martial. Moscow also intercepted orders from Kiev so they never reached the Crimean garrison.

"There was nothing spontaneous. Everything was organized and each fiddler played his role," said Mykhailo Koval, who at the time was deputy head of the Ukrainian border guard and is now deputy head of the Security Council in Kiev.

Voronchenko, who was another deputy commander of the navy at the time of the annexation, said he had received invitations to defect to Moscow's side soon after the Russian operation began.

These, he told Reuters, came from Sergei Aksyonov, who was then head of Crimea's self-proclaimed pro-Russian government, as well as from the commander of Russia's southern military district and a deputy Russian defense minister.

Asked what they offered in exchange, Voronchenko said: "Posts, an apartment ... Aksyonov offered to make me defense minister of Crimea." Neither Aksyonov nor the Russian defense ministry responded to Reuters questions about the contacts.

Voronchenko, in common with many other senior Ukrainian officers, had been in the Soviet military alongside people now serving in the Russian armed forces. He had spent years in Crimea, where Russia leased bases from Ukraine for its Black Sea fleet after the 1991 break up of the Soviet Union.

"Those generals who came to persuade me ... said that we belong to the same circle, we came from the Soviet army," he said. "But I told them I am different ... I am not yours."

Naval chief Denis Berezovsky did defect, along with several of his commanders, and was later made deputy chief of the Russian Black Sea fleet.

Many in the ranks followed suit. At one Ukrainian signals unit, service personnel were watching Russian television when President Vladimir Putin appeared on the screen.

"To my surprise, they all stood up," said Svyatoslav Veltynsky, an engineer at the unit. "They had been waiting for this." The majority of the unit defected to the Russian side.

Even those willing to resist found themselves in a hopeless position. One member of the Ukrainian border guards told Reuters how his commander had despatched their unit's ships to stop them falling into Russian hands, and ordered his men to train their rifles on anyone trying to enter their base.

However, the base's military communications were not working, having been either jammed or cut by the Russians. Isolated from his own side, and outnumbered and outgunned by Russian troops outside, the commander struck a deal with the head of a Russian special forces unit.

Pro-Russian civilians were allowed to force the base's gate without reprisals. The Ukrainians "supposedly could not do anything; you cannot shoot civilians", the member of the unit said on condition of anonymity because he is still living in Crimea and feared repercussions.

Russian troops then followed the civilians in, taking over the base and offering the unit a chance to switch allegiance to Russia. About half agreed, although the base's chief refused and was allowed to leave Crimea.

"The commander did not resist," said the unit member. "On the other hand, he did what he could under the circumstances."

Two other people involved in the annexation - a former Ukrainian serviceman now on a Russian base in Crimea, and a source close to the Russian military who was there at the time - also described witnessing similar faked confrontations.

"You have to understand that the seizure of Ukrainian military units in Crimea was just a show," said the source close to the Russian military.

NATO's Baltic members differ significantly from Ukraine. Soviet-era commanders, for instance, largely left their armed forces after the countries joined the Western alliance in 2004.

Officials also point out that Russian speakers were among the seven members of Latvia's forces to die during international deployments to Afghanistan and Iraq.

Nevertheless, lessons have been learned from Crimea. "We learned, of course, that there was not only the issue of loyalty, but also false orders were submitted and there was a blockage ofcommunication during the Crimea operation," said Janis Garisons, State Secretary in the Latvian defense ministry.

Latvia has changed the law so that unit commanders are obliged to resist by default. But Garisons said the simplest step was taken long before the annexation, with the introduction in 2008 of vetting by the security services for "everybody who joins the armed forces, from private to general".

Additional reporting by Margaryta Chornokondratenko in KIEV, Andrius Sytas in VILNIUS, Gederts Gelzis in RIGA, David Mardiste in TALLINN, and Robin Emmott in BRUSSELS; editing by David Stamp

Read the original:

Why Ukrainian forces gave up Crimea without a fight - and NATO is alert - Reuters

Russia Is Testing NATO in the Skies – The National Interest Online

Last month, a Russian jet flew within five feet of a U.S. reconnaissance plane near the Baltic Sea. According to U.S. officials, the Russian Su-27 rapidly approached the U.S. RC-135 plane and acted provocatively by performing unsafe maneuvers. Russias Defense Ministry, for its part, blamed the U.S. plane for making a provocative turn towards the Su-27 while being escorted away from Russias borders. Whatever the truth about this incident, it serves as a reminder of Moscows ceaseless belligerence toward NATO.

Earlier this year, NATO reported an increase in European Quick Reaction Alert aircraft Alpha (Air Policing) launches in response to Russian military aircraft from 400 (of a total of 480) in 2014 to 780 (of a total of 807) in 2016. Admittedly, a change in the way that NATO records such events accounts for some of this increase. But there was, nevertheless, a marked increase in Russian military air activity being monitored and responded to across NATOs two Combined Air Operations Centres (CAOCs) in Europeat Uedem in Germany, which covers northern Europe north of the Alps, and at Torrejon in Spain, which covers southern Europe south of the Alps.

It is not just in Europe that Russian jets are buzzing the airspaces of NATO members. In April, two nuclear-capable Tu-95 Bear bombers were intercepted by two CF-18 fighter jets as they approached Canadian airspace. The following month, Russias Defense Ministry confirmed that two Tu-95 Bear bombers, flanked by two multirole Su-35 fighter jets, had been intercepted by U.S. aircraft flying over the Alaska Air Defense Zone. This was not a one-off incident. In 2014, the U.S. intercepted Russian aircraft on fifteen occasions; and since then it has averaged around ten intercepts each year.

During the Cold War, Soviet military activity in the vicinity of NATO members air space was commonplace. The point was to test out the defense systems of NATO members in the case of war. Today, the idea of war between Russia and NATO seems farfetched. So why does Russia rehearse such a scenario?

Russias military activities serve a propaganda purpose. By demonstrating that its military can come so close to the air spaces of NATO members states, with little (if any) consequence, Moscow is able to showcase its apparent strength and the alliances apparent weakness. Such activities are one of few things that allows the Kremlin to look strong at home as well as abroad.

They also serve a military purpose. Through them, Russia has been able to gain valuable information about the chain of command within the defense systems of NATO member states; the reaction times of various countries air forces and the capabilities of their pilots; and, the levels of cooperation between NATO members. Such intelligence-gathering is supplemented by the work of Russias human intelligence assets who recruit and run sources in the defense establishments of NATO countries.

Knowing how NATO members react in an emergency gives Russia crucial insights into how they will behave in war. But Russias activities are not only a test of the Wests military readiness and preparedness; they are also a test of its own abilities to meet the various threats identified by the Kremlin. The modernization of Russias military, which began in 2008, includes not only a substantial investment in arms procurement, but also an improvement of the command-and-control systems, enhanced coordination between ministries and an intense program of exercises.

There are, of course, important differences between Russias activities in North America and those in Europe. In Europe, Russian aircraft have carried ordnance and often fly with their transponders switched off or without flight plans. None of this has been reported in North America. But the type of planes involved informs some of this difference in behavior: a Su-27 fighter jet is, for example, a more effective tool to probe reactions and adopt an aggressive behavior than a slow and defenseless Tu-95 bomber.

There is little that individual NATO members can do to deter Russias aggression in the skies per se. Both Canada and the United States have a bilateral Agreement on Preventing Dangerous Military Activities with Russia, which establishes procedures to prevent the use of force in response to accidental military contacts, incidents and accidents. Other member states could pursue similar agreements with Moscow.

But Russias military activities near NATO skies should not be seen in isolation. They are part of a wider pattern of military assertiveness in the Euro-Atlantic region. So what can NATO do?

NATOs recent reassurance measures are necessary to enhance deterrence of Russian military adventurism in eastern Europe, but they should be supplemented with robust measures to mitigate the risks should an incident occur as a result of Russias aggressions near the alliances skies. These measures could include increased military-to-military communication and greater public and private messaging, as well additional diplomatic and economic incentives.

Andrew Foxall is Director of the Russia Studies Centre at The Henry Jackson Society, a London-based international affairs think-tank.

See the original post:

Russia Is Testing NATO in the Skies - The National Interest Online