Aerospace ETFs are Still Trump Trades – ETF Trends

Posted on by

Aerospace stocks and exchange traded funds have spent ample time in the spotlight since the November U.S. presidential election. That trend is expected to continue as President Donald Trump addresses Congress for the first time Tuesday.

Although the aerospace and defense industry is perceived as being beholden to Uncle Sams whims, the allure of late-cycle sectors, including industrials, in a rising rate environment remains in place. Industrials perform well when interest rates rise because rising rates can go hand-in-hand with economic growth.

However, the iShares U.S. Aerospace & Defense ETF (NYSEArca: ITA), PowerShares Aerospace & Defense Portfolio (NYSEArca: PPA) and the SPDR S&P Aerospace & Defense ETF (NYSEArca: XAR) were pinched somewhat late last year after Trump criticized the Pentagons profligate spending habits.

Coming one day before delivering his high-stakes State of the Union address on Tuesday to a joint session of Congress, Trump will demand a budget with tens of billions of dollars in reductions to the Environmental Protection Agency and State Department, administration officials reported, reports ETF Daily News.

ITA is a cap-weighted ETF, meaning it has larger weights to big-name defense stocks, including Dow components Boeing (NYSE: BA) and United Technologies (NYSE: UTX). XAR is an equal-weight ETF. PPA holds 50 stocks involved in the development, manufacturing, operations and support of US defense, homeland security and aerospace operations, according to PowerShares.

In addition to political rhetoric, potential catalysts for aerospace ETFs include include, renewed airline pricing power evidenced by higher ticket prices, and more fees paid per traveler, increased airline profitability, new aircraft program launches and continued demand for aircraft models and technology.

Resistance from federal agencies could ease some of the deepest cuts in the initial plan before a final budget request is even sent to Congress. And Capitol Hill will have the last word. To meet Mr. Trumps defense request, lawmakers in both parties would have to agree to raise or end statutory spending caps on defense and domestic programs that were imposed by the 2011 Budget Control Act, according to ETF Daily News.

For more information on the defense industry, visit our aerospace & defense category.

Link:

Aerospace ETFs are Still Trump Trades - ETF Trends

BYU engineering students use virtual reality to develop aerospace … – Deseret News

Posted on by

Jaren Wilkey, BYU

Lockheed Martin has awarded a grant to the BYU Department of Mechanical Engineering to develop aspects of a virtual reality training system that will advance Lockheeds digital engineering training. The program allows trainees to immerse themselves in a virtual reality environment where they can install, repair or replace components on a system themselves instead of watching someone do it on a video.

PROVO Lockheed Martin has awarded a grant to the BYU Department of Mechanical Engineering to develop aspects of a virtual reality training system that will advance Lockheeds digital engineering training.

BYU student Jeffery Smith, who interned for the company last year, has been developing a system where engineers can use virtual reality to undergo essential training.

The system leverages immersive 3-D technology from the Unity game engine to create training environments accessible to engineers from any location in the world as long as they have a virtual reality headset.

A lot of money has been invested in this product, and we want to leverage that investment for engineering purposes, BYU mechanical engineering professor John Salmon said in a statement. We are making training faster, making it cheaper and making it possible to train from remote locations.

The program allows trainees to immerse themselves in a virtual reality environment where they can install, repair or replace components on a system themselves instead of watching someone do it on a video. Since physical laws can be broken in the virtual word, a trainees avatar can also be overlaid onto the trainers avatar to develop muscle memory, improve precision of motion and repeat the same procedure from any angle.

If youre going to teach someone how to swing a baseball bat, you can show them and even put your arms around them, but you cant put your and their hands and arms exactly where they need to be at the same time, Salmon said. In virtual reality, you can. You can literally walk a mile in someone elses shoes.

Smith, a senior majoring in mechanical engineering, calls it an all-inclusive sensory experience. He believes the finished project will enable engineers to transfer their skills into the real world faster and more accurately than current training methods.

For their part, Lockheed Martin engineers say virtual reality engineering saves them millions of dollars by avoiding extra design and build time.

See the original post:

BYU engineering students use virtual reality to develop aerospace ... - Deseret News

Microbiology Class Wins SWI, CDC Contest – NC State News

Posted on by

When the the Small World Initiative and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention encouraged students to do something about the antibiotics crisis at the CDCs ninth annual Get Smart About Antibiotics Week, NC State professor Alice Lees Microbiology 360 class answered the call.

It was one of 14 groups from colleges across the country to enter the challenge last November, in association with global activities from the World Health Organization, the European Union, the Pan-American Health Organizations and similar groups in Canada and Australia.

Lees Inquiry in Microbiology: Crowdsourcing Antibiotics course took first place in the challenge. TheCDC commented that the classs entry had excellent depth and reach of impact. They believed the students did a great job recording their impact, which is one of the most important things they do in public health.

The winning class members include:

The class will receive a special tour of the CDC and the CDC museum in Atlanta. They will also receive a mentoring session with Lauri Hicks, a medical epidemiologist and director ofthe CDCs office of antibiotic stewardship. Her expertise is in bacterial respiratory diseases, outbreak investigations and antibiotic resistance and use.

Awinner profilewas posted and their outreach efforts can be seen in thisyoutubevideo.

Read the original post:
Microbiology Class Wins SWI, CDC Contest - NC State News

Behavioral Science Startup Secures $3.4 Million in Series A … – IT Business Net

Posted on by

February 28, 2017 --

San Francisco, CA (PRWEB) February 28, 2017

Motimatic, a mission-driven startup that pairs behavioral science with leading-edge advertising techniques to deliver motivational content to college students, today announced that it has secured $3.4 million in Series A funding, led by two of the nation's leading education-focused venture capital firms, University Ventures and New Markets Venture Partners.

With college graduation rates at less than 55 percent, colleges and universities are under increasing pressure to improve student persistence and completion. Motimatic's technology appliestheories of behavior change currently used in commercial advertising and social impact campaignsto increaseengagement and improve student outcomes.

Inspired by decades of experience in education and online advertising, as well as recent research on motivation and persuasion, Motimatic delivers behavioral science-based messages to students through the social media and digital communications networks they already use, including Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest, and Twitter, as well as through SMS and email. The messages, designed to encourage students to persist and engage in their coursework, appear in place of the online advertising that students would normally encounter on social media sites.

In the past few months, Motimatic has experienced significant growth, adding seven new university customers and more than 10,000 students. The first major study of Motimatic's impact, completed last fall with a group of 3,318 online students, found that the number of students who persisted in their studies after one year was 9% greater in the Motimatic group than in a comparison group that did not receive Motimatic messages.

?Colleges and universities are grappling with the challenge of keeping pace with students' shifting digital engagement and consumption habits," said Alan Tripp, co-founder and CEO of Motimatic. ?Motimatic's system streamlines this process, enabling higher ed institutions to reach students through the familiar channels they are already using."

Motimatic's turnkey system optimizes the distribution of motivational messages to specific students, drawing upon a library of more than 1,000 messages. The system personalizes the experience of each student based on academic and demographic characteristics to provide the type of targeted encouragement that has the greatest likelihood of impacting persistence and completion.

The funding round was led by University Ventures and New Markets Venture Partners, with additional participation from GSV, the Jefferson Education Accelerator, and Mike McCaffery, former CEO of the Stanford Management Corporation, which oversees the endowment at Stanford University.

?Motimatic's approach is unique in that it is both rooted in groundbreaking behavioral science and tailored to the digital culture of today's students," said Troy Williams, Managing Director of University Ventures. ?Unlike many other services that are trying to solve the student retention and persistence problem, Motimatic requires no new staff or staff time on the part of universities. It's truly turnkey and delivers results. We are excited to join them in their efforts to provide students with much-needed out-of-class support."

?As post-traditional students become the 'new normal' in higher education, these students face increasing financial, family and workforce demands, putting them at much higher risk of disengaging or dropping out. In order to respond, colleges and universities must look for innovative, evidence-based approaches to encourage and support students where they are," said Jason Palmer, General Partner at New Markets Venture Partners, who previously led the postsecondary innovation portfolio at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. ?Motimatic and its university partners have developed a pioneering system to engage this new generation of students and improve their likelihood of graduating."

About Motimatic Motimatic is an automatic motivation system for educational institutions seeking to improve student retention and completion. Our technology blends the latest advances in advertising technology and behavioral science to deliver motivating messages to students in place of commercial messages that they'd typically encounter on social media networks like Facebook, Instagram and Twitter, as well as SMS and email. Nearly half of students who begin college never finish. Working with a wide range of educational institutions, Motimatic has the potential to increase student retention by more than 9% over the course of a year. Setting Motimatic up requires no new systems, and students do not have to "like", "follow" or download anything to receive messages. Motimatic is backed by leading venture capital firms, including University Ventures and New Markets Venture Partners.

Read the full story at http://www.prweb.com/releases/2017/03/prweb14105652.htm.

Source:PRWEB.COM Newswire. All Rights Reserved

Link:
Behavioral Science Startup Secures $3.4 Million in Series A ... - IT Business Net

Mount Tam With Anti-Aging Drug Is Secretly Preparing For Trump's New FDA – ValueWalk

Posted on by
Mount Tam With Anti-Aging Drug Is Secretly Preparing For Trump's New FDA
ValueWalk
In spite of this, medicine is still based on the old disease model. Doctors wait for a disease to appear and then treat it. Regulators approve drugs to help treat full-blown diseases. This needs to change. But the move from a disease cure to a disease ...

Read the original here:
Mount Tam With Anti-Aging Drug Is Secretly Preparing For Trump's New FDA - ValueWalk

Feeling good and looking great – Nevada Appeal

Posted on by

You've often heard the phrase," if you don't have your health, you don't have anything."

So many wonderful businesses have opened in the past few years allowing us to keep our health in check, our bodies toned, our minds clear, and our skin as good as it can be as we continue to age.

It's not easy getting older and we all get there no matter what we do to try to stave it off. Following are a few of the great businesses we recommend to keep you on the path to feeling great and looking good:

ForeverYoungMDSpa is owned by Dr. Gail Krivan, M.D. who has made it her passion to help all look as good as possible, no matter the age. Whether it's a simple injectable to smooth out wrinkles or a full resurfacing of the skin, Dr. Krivan has a whole bag of wonderful "tricks" that will keep you looking your very youthful best. 461-0535.

Dr. Frank Shallenberger is a well-known anti-aging guru who heads the Nevada Center of Alternative & Anti-Aging Medicine. He has helped many through the difficult menopausal stage and other ailments using orthomolecular medicine versus allopathic medicine cures. He is an M.D. who has written books on his revolutionary new approach to health, aging and disease prevention. 884-3990

Paradise Salon-Spa-Wellness can take care of just about every need from aquatic exercises in their beautiful therapy pool to taking care of every part of your body from head to foot. The staff subscribes to the old adage, "when you look marvelous, you feel marvelous!" 883-4434

Kaia FIT & Tumbleweeds Gymnastics is a women's only fitness center with the mission to create strong bodies and powerful minds and provide nutrition advise to last a lifetime. 841-4962

Pulse Fitness in Minden offers a bit of everything. Zumba, Yoga, RIPPED, Chisel'd, TRX, Karate, Spin and more as well as all the things you would expect from a fitness center. They offer a 3-day VIP pass so you can try them out. Conveniently located near the Carson Valley Swim Center 782-2705.

The Change Place is Carson City's newest wellness center offering personal training, yoga, massage and motivational therapists. It's a unique total wellness center where you can enjoy music and art. Drop-in encouraged. 283-0699.

Sierra Nevada Holistic Services is all about integrated wellness through massage, meditation, energy work, aroma therapy, and cold laser therapy to relieve pain. 720-2563

Keep your skin in great shape!

Felicity Skin Full Esthetician services 843-9316

May Kay Cosmetics Carol Swanson 267-0418

Mary's About Face & Body Full skin care including body wraps 841-5969

Massages make you feel great inside and out:

Massage Envy 267-9400

Sierra Nevada Holistic Services, LLC 720-2563

The Change Place 283-0699

Touch of Bliss 291-9577

Link:
Feeling good and looking great - Nevada Appeal

Miami Beach's Newest Wellness Institution biostation – Miami's Community Newspapers

Posted on by

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

The biostation is a comprehensive, individualized, scientific approach to total wellness and age management for men and women looking to rejuvenate their bodies, revitalize their minds and reclaim their confidence. From cosmetic enhancements that help you glow on the outside, to the latest advances in natural healthcare that transform your body from the inside, the biostation will customize a targeted treatment plan designed to get you the results you want.

Having opened its second location on Miami Beach at 777 Arthur Godfrey Road Suite 330, the newest biostation will follow in its Delray Beach flagship footsteps, maintaining the essence of the practice and offering a full range of total wellness and anti-aging services to all of South Florida. The medical center is elegant and spa-like, providing a unique experience to each and every patient. Dedicated Patient Advocates and in-depth personal consultations with their in house Medical Directors, Dr. Bloom and Dr. Shapiro, ensure an exceptional patient-centric experience.

Miami Beach Medical Director, Dr. Jason A. Shapiro, and the biostation Co-Founder, Dr. Martin G. Bloom, have combined their extensive expertise in Medical Aesthetics and Functional Medicine to provide cutting edge total wellness and aesthetic enhancement services designed to help patients beautify and age defy from the inside out.

Dr. Shapiro is a renowned physician Board Certified in Internal Medicine, whose extensive aesthetics training has allowed him to provide his patients with safe, effective, and above all, natural-looking non-surgical and surgical procedures using the most advanced equipment and techniques. Dr. Bloom, a cardiologist of 35 years, decided to embark on his journey in Functional Medicine 5 years ago with the goal of reaching patients earlier in the aging process and providing them with the personal attention and care they deserve. In 2015, Dr. Shapiro partnered with the biostation and Dr. Bloom to expand his highly successful aesthetics practice to include total wellness, anti-aging and medical weight loss services.

The biostation total wellness and anti-aging services:

Comprehensive blood panel, food & allergy testing Hormone Replacement Therapy Nutrient Therapy IV Therapy Medical Weight Loss Platelet Rich Plasma Sexual Health Hair Restoration Lips by Shapiro Botox Dermal Fillers Facial Aesthetics Liposuction & Laser Lipo Kybella Laser Tatoo Removal Surgical Aesthetics

Connect To Your Customers & Grow Your Business

More:
Miami Beach's Newest Wellness Institution biostation - Miami's Community Newspapers

Facing tragedy with courage – The News International

Posted on by

It is a rare event in modern history that a country has been at war for over a decade without being able to identify who the enemy is. Pakistans 15-year involvement in the global war on terror has turned the country into a primary theatre of this conflict, with immense costs in terms of loss of lives and adverse impact on the economy. Yet, it still remains a daunting task for us, both as a society and a state, to clearly articulate who is responsible for this carnage, let alone propose solutions to this perpetual nightmare.

The recent tragic-comedy of the blasts in Lahore, where we remain unsure even on whether it was a terrorist attack or a work-safety incident (the latter itself an outrageously regular occurrence in the country) shows that we might just be regressing in terms of providing political and intellectual clarity.

What has infuriated many progressive commentators is how in the aftermath of deadly attacks that are ripping apart our social fabric, popular opinion tends to become entrenched in existing certainties and prejudices rather than demanding a break from the status quo. Popular explanations for the attacks have ranged from hinting at government collusion to distract the public from Panamagate, to the hysterical accusations against Afghan involvement, not to mention the widely-held belief that our eastern neighbour was involved due to petty jealousy over our ability to host as grand an event as the PSL final in Lahore! In these narratives, it is the world against Pakistan.

Yet, while much has been written on the obvious vacuity of such assertions, our task should be to interrogate the structural reasons that continuously reproduce such opinions at a mass level. Primarily, such a task requires us to break from a theological belief in the power of tragedy to make the situation more transparent, not to mention induce a desire for a rupture from the status quo. In fact, tragedies, including terrorism, natural disasters and economic-political turmoil, far from posing a threat to the powers that be, have become an essential tool in the armoury of modern states for further enhancing their grip over socio-economic life. This point was made a decade ago by Naomi Klein in her celebrated book, The Shock Doctrine.

Klein argued that a docile citizenry, frightened and disoriented in the aftermath of tragic events, is deemed ideal by state authorities for carrying out far-reaching reforms that benefit ruling elites, without much popular opposition. Her examples included the devastating economic reforms in Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union that allowed the formation of an economic oligarchy, and the hysterical response to the 9/11 attacks in the US that paved the way for public support for a more aggressive American intervention in the Middle East, much to the delight of the military-industrial complex.

We can clearly see how this method of control is currently being practised in Pakistan. The fear induced by terrorist attacks spontaneously leads to an outcry for revenge, without much discussion on who should be the subject of this revenge. It is precisely at this point that powerful apparatuses, including the government and the media, enter the fray, to harness the feelings of fear and disorientation. It begins with the customary sensationalism in the live coverage of the event, where the pressure to drive up ratings means that the reporting is intended less at conveying information about the tragedy, and more at emphasising the magnitude of the tragedy, lest anyone consider changing the channel. Such manipulation of our sensory experience was on display after the latest Lahore blasts, when news channels were reporting two or three terror attacks in Lahore, perpetuating panic across the city.

This panic is often followed by official and media analysis of the events, recycling the list of the usual suspects (India, the West, Afghanistan, etc), without any coherent narrative in which all of them can be placed together. The haphazardly cobbled together list of external enemies does little to inform the frightened multitude, and more to disorient their imaginary, instilling a feeling that the nation is under siege, without fully elaborating by whom and more importantly for what reason.

The next stage is a desperate attempt to overcome the feeling of collective emasculation by a search for a protective patriarch. It is here that the coercive apparatus comes into force, dazzling the public with immediate action, followed by creatively chosen names for impending military operations. Statistics of terrorists killed and arrested start making the rounds, with the anonymity of those purportedly targeted wilfully ignored by a public in search of some solace. Moreover, exceptional measures, such as the institution of military courts, are enthusiastically accepted by a population ready to cede its democratic rights for a vague feeling of retribution.

We must emphasise that a tragedy is never a neutral phenomenon, and all discourse of not politicising a tragic event often permits only the state to extract political mileage out of it. This is the key to unlocking why traumatic events do not in themselves produce a progressive discourse. In moments of absolute fear and helplessness, people tend to gravitate towards recognisable ideological frameworks, as well as coercive apparatuses, in a frantic search for stability. The biggest casualty of this drama is public debate, with dissent immediately equated either with cowardice, or in a more sinister vein, with a foreign conspiracy.

It is for this reason that the recurrent tragedies we face must be openly debated in the public domain if we are to break the cycle of fear, anger and docility. For example, in order to win this war, it will be pertinent to interrogate the previous military offensives to see what parts of the strategy worked and where lie the persistent failures. Moreover, while hundreds of anonymous terrorists have presumably been killed, it is important to ask what is stopping us from extending this bravado to more clearly identifiable, and globally notorious, groups openly preaching hate throughout Punjab, not to mention inside the federal capital itself.

On the ideological terrain, the violence permeating our daily lives ought to be mobilised for another scandalous proposition regional peace. With a number of officials admitting (including recently, General (r) Musharraf) Pakistans involvement in destabilising our neighbours, is it not time to recognise that we can neither relocate the country to a geography of our liking, nor can we over-run our neighbours? This entails having a bold discussion on how to create a path to normalising relations with our neighbours, as enmity has historically provided legitimacy to outfits that have had little success in over-powering India, but have inflicted irreparable damage to Pakistani society.

Finally, in an increasingly militarised society, historically marginalised communities often bear the brunt of the violence aimed primarily at soothing the fears of the dominant groups. Consider the rather pathetic attempts of racial profiling of Pakhtuns reportedly currently being practised by the Punjab police. It is ironic that state officials who curtail dissent in the name of national unity would so blatantly sow divisions in society through primitive techniques of controlling populations based on identitarian predicates. This example more than any other reveals how knee-jerk reactions to tragedies, no matter how universal their language, only end up intensifying existing cleavages in society, rather than offering a credible way out of the impasse.

Thus, under the carefully crafted impulse of fear, the public becomes more divided, notwithstanding official claims of unity, unconsciously lending support to the entrenchment of deep ideological, political and military structures against an anonymous enemy. Caught in the vortex of immediacy, we demand easy answers and swift revenge. However, more than a panic-induced search for solutions, we need to ask whether we are posing the right questions. Such a task requires courage, not only because it may disrupt our own deeply held views, but because it may also remove us from the (false) satisfaction provided by the hysterical jingoism consumed by a docile public after every terror attack.

Posing the correct question, then, requires sacrificing our individual and collective certainties about the world we inhabit. If the alternative is authoritarianism, social disintegration and perpetual terror, this shift from fear to courage is a sacrifice worth making.

The writer is a doctoral candidate at the University of Cambridge and a lecturer at the Government College University, Lahore.

Email: [emailprotected]

Go here to see the original:

Facing tragedy with courage - The News International

We’re ‘in touch’ every day with things that can make us sick – Williamsport Sun-Gazette

Posted on by

PHOTO PROVIDED Heather Stafford, left, director of infection prevention and control at UPMC Susquehanna, instructs a nurse on proper hand washing techniques to prevent the spread of germs.

Trying to avoid the many germs that lead to colds, influenza and other health problems may seem like navigating a minefield, especially during the winter months.

But protection against germ warfare to stay healthy is not so much a battle as much as it is a common-sense approach.

Germs are spread mostly through hands and what a person touches, said Heather Stafford, director of infection prevention and control at UPMC Susquehanna.

And each day, most people come into contact with objects both in public places and the household on which the germs are waiting, she noted.

Door handles, elevator buttons, hand railings, phones, computers and, of course, the TV remote control, are some of the most commonly touched objects where people can encounter germs that get passed from person to person.

Cellphones carry all sorts of bacteria, Stafford said. You are touching it all the time.

Sneezing and coughing can result in the expulsion of droplets containing germs, and viruses and bacteria survive on many objects people come in contact with every day, she said.

Some viruses can live 14 days on an inanimate object, she said.

Its best to avoid placing hands, which may have come in contact with germs, on the face and mouth.

Proper handwashing has been universally accepted, Stafford noted, as one of the best means of protecting oneself against germs as well as preventing the spread of them.

But it must be done properly to be effective.

Ideally, hands should be washed with soap and in warm water for a least 15 seconds. Unfortunately, many people simply lack the patience to adequately clean their hands.

Alcohol-based disinfectants are a good option for cleaning hands, especially after one has been in public places. Many dispensers can be found outside grocery stores and other heavy-traffic sites.

For your house, its really key to keep wipes handy. Wipe your kitchen counters and your remote. Spray with a disinfect, she said.

Alcohol-based wipes or hydrogen peroxide applied to a cloth are effective for eliminating germs on surfaces, Stafford added.

She noted UPMC Susquehanna is seeing more flu in the immediate area than last year, and quite a few cases in the past few weeks.

LEWISBURG Lewisburg Reiki Practice and Whole Life Society are working together in service to our community by ...

As care evolves for those experiencing chronic conditions, many patients ask: Whats the difference between ...

HARRISBURG The state Department of Health is working with Penn State to investigate confirmed cases of mumps ...

UPMC Susquehanna sets healthy events UPMC Susquehanna announces healthy events scheduled to provide health ...

WASHINGTON Bacteria live on everyones skin, and new research shows some friendly germs produce natural ...

NEW YORK This seasons flu vaccine seems to be working pretty well, weakening the punch of a nasty bug ...

Link:

We're 'in touch' every day with things that can make us sick - Williamsport Sun-Gazette

Opinion: Focusing on religious oppression in China misses the big … – CNN

Posted on by

But I've also seen how religion is tightly proscribed.

Only five religious groups are allowed to exist in China: Buddhism, Daoism, Islam, Protestantism and Catholicism. The government controls the appointment of major religious figures, and decides where places of worship can be built. It tries to influence theology and limits contacts overseas. And it bans groups it doesn't like, especially the spiritual practice Falun Gong, or groups it calls cults, like the charismatic Christian splinter sect Almighty God.

But overall, the message is glum. Almost all groups are said to face serious restrictions, with three groups --Uyghurs who practice Islam, Protestant Christians, and followers of the banned spiritual practice Falun Gong --facing "high" or "very high" levels of government interference.

While most of the facts in the study are correct, the context feels more negative than the religious world I've experienced. Of course it is in the nature of such reports to be critical --this is what watchdogs like Freedom House are for-- but it feeds into an overall assumption in western countries that the Chinese government is a major persecutor of religion.

On the face of it, this is horrific -- so many churches shorn of the very symbol of their faith. What better example of a heavy-handed atheistic state persecuting belief?

And yet I think this is not typical of Protestantism in China. I've made several trips to the area where the crosses were removed and feel I know the region well.

I'd say that the most important point is that virtually none of these churches have been closed. All continue to have worshipers and services just like before. In addition, the campaign never spread beyond the one province. Some pessimists see it as a precursor for a campaign that might spread nationally, but so far that hasn't happened and there is no indication it will.

What seems to have happened is a fairly special case. That region is at most 10% Protestant -- above the national average of about 5%, but still a minority. But local Christians decided to put huge red crosses on the roofs of buildings and churches, so they dominated the skyline of every city, town, and village across the province. That gave the impression that Christianity was the dominant local religion and irked many non-Christians.

Self-critical Christians told me that their big red crosses were meant well. They were enthused by their faith and wanted to proclaim it. But they also sheepishly said it might also have been a sign of vanity; rather than putting their money into mission work or social engagement, they wanted to boast about their wealth and faith. I felt they were a bit hard on themselves -- in a normal, healthy society an open expression of one's faith should be normal -- but it is true that it was also a potential provocation for a state that does not give religion much public space.

This mirrors what I've seen as well. Protestantism is booming and Chinese cities are full of unregistered (also called "underground" or "house") churches. These are known to the government but still allowed to function. They attract some of the best-educated and successful people in China. And they are socially engaged, with outreach programs to the homeless, orphanages, and even families of political prisoners. To me, this is an amazing story and far outweighs the cross-removal campaign, which basically ended and seems to have had no lasting consequences.

Now, it's true that all this could change. Last autumn, the government issued new regulations on religion. The most important point of the rules was to reemphasize a ban on religious groups' ties to foreign groups -- for example, sending people abroad to seminaries, or inviting foreigners to teach or train in China. This is clearly part of a broader trend in China that we see in other areas. Non-governmental organizations are also under pressure, and the surest way to get unwanted government attention is to have links abroad.

Given the predilections of the Xi administration, these new religious regulations could be harshly enforced. We could see unregistered churches forced to join government churches. And we could see outreach programs closed down.

If this happens, then I would say that Protestantism would be suffering from a "high" degree of persecution. And if it happens we'll need hard-hitting reports condemning it in no uncertain terms. But until this crackdown really occurs, we might be missing the forest for the trees.

Ian Johnson is a Pulitzer Prize-winning correspondent based on Beijing. His new book, "The Souls of China: The Return of Religion After Mao," will be published in April. The views expressed above are solely his own.

Visit link:

Opinion: Focusing on religious oppression in China misses the big ... - CNN

What should we see in the ashes of the Standing Rock protest camp? – Liberation

Posted on by

The anti-DAPL (Dakota Access Pipeline) protest camp burned last Wednesday, teepees set ceremoniously ablaze by protesters before the police swarmed in to arrest anyone who dared remain on the camp.

As Donald Trump and his cronies strip away the rights of trans people, Muslims, immigrants, and now Native Americans with his executive order to accelerate the building of DAPL, it may almost seem the world is burning down, engulfed in the wealthys insatiable hunger to steal more and more from the oppressed.

The struggle continues, however. This is only another example of, as described by Linda Black Elk, head of the Medic and Healer Council at Standing Rock, a continued legacy of oppression by the United States government. DAPL cuts through Sioux historical camps and ceremonial sites throughout its route, as well as being a threat to drinking water and their edible and medicinal plants that grow adjacent to the pipeline. The voices of the nearly 10,000 people who occupied the resistance camp at its peak have been silenced by force.

This is not unlike the history of Native Americans being coerced at gunpoint to give up their land to colonizers or the denial of Native Americans right to control their reservations resources by the U.S. government, causing disastrous mismanagement of Native American assets and burdensome bureaucracy, forcing those living on reservations into poverty.

But as oppression continues, resistance builds. This is not even close to being the end of the struggle against the capitalist machine that pollutes our water and robs us of what is rightly ours. The Indigenous Environmental Network is organizing an action from March 7th to March 10th in Washington, D.C. in solidarity with Indigenous Peoples across the world and [to] demand that Indigenous Rights be respected. The turnout is expected to be in the many thousands.

As Black Elk pointed out, we also have people who are going down to Texas to fight the Trans-Pecos pipeline. We have people who are going to Louisiana to fight the Bayou Bridge pipeline and Florida to fight the Sabal Trail pipeline. [] We continue to stand. We continue to educate. We will be everywhere to let people know that theres a better way to live, theres a better way to live with the Earth.

We will continue to fight for that better way to live, for a society where the working class and all the people of the world who have been exploited and oppressed can be liberated. If we are to see poetry in the rising smoke of the Standing Rock protest site, let it be this: this fire will never go out; our rage, our despair, our burning desire for justice will be our toolswith which we win freedom for the people.

Read this article:

What should we see in the ashes of the Standing Rock protest camp? - Liberation

Philippine president to bring police back into war on drugs – Reuters

Posted on by

MANILA Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte said on Tuesday he would recall some police to fight his controversial war on drugs, nearly a month after suspending the entire force from all operations in the bloody narcotics crackdown.

In an about-face on his decision to remove the 160,000-member Philippine National Police (PNP) from his signature campaign, Duterte said the country was beset by security and law enforcement challenges and he needed more manpower to sustain the crackdown on drugs.

"So, I need more men. I have to call back the police again to do the job most of the time on drugs, not everyone," he told reporters.

Duterte has been scathing in his criticism of a police force he declared "corrupt to the core" after it was discovered that rogue drugs squad officers had kidnapped and killed a South Korean businessman at the PNP headquarters.

His decision to bring some police back into the campaign comes after a month of uncertainty about whether he would maintain the momentum of a merciless campaign that has defined his eight-month-old presidency, and has earned him international notoriety.

More than 7,700 people have been killed since his first day in office, some 2,555 in operations in which police said drug suspects resisted arrest.

Activists believe that extrajudicial killings have taken place during sting operations, and that many of the other killings were carried out secretly by police, or assassins working for them.

Authorities vigorously reject the allegations.

Since the Jan. 30 police suspension, the drug trade has come back out of the shadows, more than half a dozen drug users and dealers in some of Manila's toughest areas told Reuters.

'SOONER, THE BETTER'

PNP chief Ronald dela Rosa on Monday warned that gains in the drug war would be lost with police on the sidelines and "the sooner we return, the better".

The Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA), which has only 1,800 members, would lead the anti-drugs campaign, with the support of the military and PNP. Duterte said police would no longer conduct their own operations under his revised strategy.

The armed forces and PDEA signed an agreement on Tuesday to share intelligence and jointly go after "high value targets" in the narcotics business.

The military would provide firepower behind the PDEA in hostile situations, but troops would not be involved in street-level operations.

"It's meant to be PDEA-supervised, whether done by the military or the police. There should always be a PDEA ... who will be supervising everything," Duterte said.

Duterte has resolutely defended the campaign and lambasted anyone who speaks against it, including world leaders like then U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and former U.S. President Barack Obama. He has promised to humiliate anyone who is willing to debate him on the issue.

He said he had ordered dela Rosa to recruit young men for task forces who were "imbued with the fervor of patriotism" and not tainted by corruption.

He did not specify what task forces.

"I have to do it because I don't have enough men," Duterte added.

PNP spokesman Dionardo Carlos said he was not aware of a decision to re-deploy police for the drugs war.

"We have to await proper instructions and guidelines," he said. "We need to know where are we on the drug situation and where we left off."

Separately, the Senate announced on Tuesday it would hold an inquiry into allegations by a retired policeman that Duterte had operated a team of hit men during his 22 years as mayor of southern city of Davao. Duterte's aides have rejected that.

Former Davao police commanders and the Commission on Human Rights would also be questioned about their previous investigations into a so-called Davao death squad, according to Senator Panfilo Lacson, who will head the inquiry.

(Additional reporting by Enrico Dela Cruz; Editing by Robert Birsel)

MOSUL/BAGHDAD, Iraq U.S.-backed Iraqi forces on Tuesday battled their way to within firing range of Mosul's main government buildings, a major target in the offensive to dislodge Islamic State militants from their remaining stronghold in the western side of the city.

MOSCOW Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Tuesday a draft U.N. Security Council resolution put forward by Western powers to sanction Syria's government over the alleged use of chemical weapons was inappropriate.

GENEVA/KUALA LUMPUR South Korea called for "collective measures" to punish North Korea for using chemical weapons to kill the estranged half-brother of its leader Kim Jong Un, as Malaysia said on Tuesday it would charge two women with murder over the airport attack.

See the original post:

Philippine president to bring police back into war on drugs - Reuters

Duterte brings back police into war on drugs – Banat

Posted on by

MANILA, Philippines Citing lack of manpower in the anti-narcotics operations, President Rodrigo Duterte has decided to tap policemen again in the war against illegal drugs as he stressed that only the qualified ones would be allowed to join the campaign.

Duterte said he has ordered Philippine National Police (PNP) chief Ronald dela Rosa to recruit young men who are imbued with the fervor of patriotism to be members of task forces that would run after drug syndicates.

Every station should have one (task force) pero piling pili, yung walang kaso at walang history ng corruption (they will be selected thoroughly, they should have no cases and no history of corruption), the president told reporters yesterday in Malacaang.

I have to do it because kulang ako ng tao (I lack manpower), he added.

Duterte noted that security forces are also addressing the threats posed by the New Peoples Army and terrorist groups in Mindanao.

So kailangan ko ng tao (I need manpower). I have to call back the police again to do the job most of the time in the fight against drugs, the president said.

Asked if the anti-drug campaign Oplan Tokhang would be revived, Duterte replied: I will leave it to the police to decide. If thats the best way to do it, fine.

Duterte said the anti-drug operations involving policemen and military would be supervised by the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA).

There should always be a PDEA (representative), he said.

Duterte has ordered the Philippine National Police (PNP) to suspend the Oplan Tokhang following the kidnapping and murder of South Korean businessman Jee Ick-joo in the hands of some policemen

Witnesses said Jee was kidnapped by members of the PNP Anti-Illegal Drugs Group in Angeles, Pampanga on Oct. 18, 2016. The businessman was said to have been strangled to death inside Camp Crame. Jees body was cremated in a funeral parlor, his ashes flushed down a toilet, witnesses claimed.

After killing the businessman, the kidnappers demanded P5 million ransom from his wife.

Duterte has abolished the anti-drug units of PNP and has vowed to cleanse the police force of scalawags. The president admitted though that it might take time before the rogue policemen are replaced by decent ones.

Read more from the original source:

Duterte brings back police into war on drugs - Banat

Yasay: Flak on war on drugs, De Lima arrest just ‘partisan politics’ – ABS-CBN News

Posted on by

MANILA Foreign Affairs Secretary on Tuesday dismissed as just part of partisan politics all the criticisms against the Duterte government with regard to the war on drugs and the arrest of government critic Senator Leila de Lima.

Yasay said criticisms from Vice President Leni Robredo and her allies in the Senate and House of Representatives over the governments war on drugs and De Limas arrest should no longer come as a surprise since they belong to an opposing party.

You see, the vice-president is a partisan political opposition of the president, and if something happens to the president or the president is removed from office, she stands to benefit from it, Yasay said in an interview with CNN Internationals Christiane Amanpour.

There is a very strong partisan political undertone that goes behind this criticisms and I dont think it is fair for everyone to just simply say that because you are the vice president or you are a member of Congress, a senator trying to question this -- that they are saying the truth.

President Rodrigo Duterte has come under intense criticism because of his war on drugs, which has so far cost the lives of over 7,000 people.

Yasay said the government only takes responsibility for the killings of about 2,500 drug suspects slain under legitimate circumstances.

The government admits and confirms there are over 2,000 deaths resulting from legitimate operations wherein rules of engagement have been strictly followed, he said.

Nevertheless if there has been accusations or insinuations that the police did not uphold the due process required, we are immediately investigating these things.

Critics have said that De Limas arrest was brought about by her criticism against Dutertes campaign, as well the presidents long-standing grudge towards her for investigating him as a mayor over alleged death squad killings years ago.

Yasay, however, downplayed criticisms that De Limas arrest is a form of political repression.

There is something that one should understand about the arrest of Senator De Lima. Senator De Lima is a very powerful person. She is a senator and you see that our justice system works. Nobody is spared. If you violate the law, you will be arrested, he said.

See the original post:

Yasay: Flak on war on drugs, De Lima arrest just 'partisan politics' - ABS-CBN News

Duterte orders return of police to war on drugs – ABS-CBN News

Posted on by

Three unidentified assailants gunned down Peter Cruz in Barangay Manggahan, Pasig City late Tuesday evening. Fernando Sepe, Jr., ABS-CBN News

MANILA President Rodrigo Duterte on Tuesday announced that he will again use policemen in his controversial war on drugs amid reports that drug dealers are back on the streets, but he said not all policemen will participate in the renewed campaign.

I have ordered [PNP chief] Bato [dela Rosa] to recruit young men in the PNP who are imbued with fervor of patriotism to be the members only of the task forces. Every station should have one pero yung pili ng pili (but only select ones), iyung walang history of corruption (those who dont have a history of corruption), Duterte said.

I have to do it because kulang ako ng tao.

(I have to do it because I lack men.)

Duterte also said the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA), which took over the campaign when the polices war on drugs was suspended, will continue to supervise anti-illegal drug operations.

The Philippine National Police (PNP) last month suspended its war on drugs after several cops were accused of kidnapping and then killing a Korean businessman right inside the PNP headquarters in Camp Crame in the guise of an anti-drug operation.

Duterte yesterday said, since the suspension of the polices war on drugs, there has been "a gain, a rise of drug activities by 20 percent.

Philippine National Police (PNP) chief Ronald Dela Rosa yesterday said the police force is willing to resume its campaign if Duterte will allow it. He claimed that drug traffickers were rejoicing over the suspension of the police campaign.

The longer na wala kami sa war on drugs, the situation is getting worse, the more na babalik yung problema. Sayang yung gains na nakuha natin from the first 7 months ng ating war on drugs. Nasasayangan ako e. So the sooner the better.

(The problem will worsen the longer we are not part of the war on drugs. I don't want the progress of the war on drugs for the first 7 months to go to waste.)

Read the rest here:

Duterte orders return of police to war on drugs - ABS-CBN News

The Junkie and the Addict: The Moral War on Drugs – Harvard … – Harvard Political Review

Posted on by

In The Odyssey, Homer refers to a substance which banishes all care, sorrow, and anger. Here, he is likely speaking of opium, a substance with the same active ingredient as the modern-day heroin. It seems that from Homers time to modern day America, psychoactive substances have fascinated us throughout all of human history. Accordingly, different societies across the eras have invented standards governing their usageranging from regulation, to spiritual justifications, to prohibition. In particular, the United States has distinguished itself from others in the scale and enforcement of efforts to curb public drug useextending a mere dislike to a full-on war.

People view drug use and abuse within different frameworks, with intensely social, political, medical, and historical implications. In particular, drugs are not only viewed within a schema of facts, but of moralityan ideology that views psychoactive substances as fundamentally wrong. Much of this stems from fears of substances seizing our autonomy: either while under the influence or while addicted.

In the United States, this moralization of drugs has been extended to create associations between certain drugs and certain groups of people. A New York Times article from 1905 cries about individuals selling cocaine promiscuously to negroesan attitude which continues to affect public perceptions of the black community today. According to Charles Whitebread, a former professor at the University of Southern California Law School, the one universal rule of U.S. drug policy is that prohibitions are always enacted by US, to govern the concept of THEM.

This social distinction is just one part of Americas narrative surrounding drug usage.Ultimately, these trends in perceptions are deeply rooted in a centuries-long cultural tradition that can be broadly divided into three distinct periods.

1607-1914: The Early Republic

In an interview with the HPR, Harvard Professor Jane Kamensky, an Early American historian, described Puritan New England as a society that believed deeply in order. Early America saw a conflict between the notions of American individual industry and dissention, and a nation deeply beset in stringent moral values. This conflict arose in Puritan perceptions of drug usage.

By far, Puritan New England was dominated by three drugs: coffee, tea, and rum. Here, Kamensky describes a distinction between coffee talk and tea talk. Coffee talk symbolized the space of ideas, and masculine discourse, while tea talk symbolized the space of effeminate gossip. Neither of these substances were moralized for their drug properties, or as psychoactive substances. Instead, tea in particular was moralized due to its association with the British Other. This made it more desirable, and raised question to its ethical status.

While alcohol was universally common, drunkenness was strictly associated with the lower classes of society. In The Alcoholic Republic, W.J. Rorabaugh describes a culture of heavy tolerance and moderate consumption of alcohol, reaching a peak of 7.1 gallons of alcohol by all individuals above 15 years old in 1830. He describes a society where many parents intended early exposure to alcohol to accustom their offspring to the taste of liquor, to encourage them to accept the idea of drinking small amounts, and thus to protect them from becoming drunkards. At this time, slaves likely consumed far less alcohol than the ruling classesyet culturally, the public associated public drunkenness precisely with this class. This neatly brings together both themes of the morality of drug use in the Americasthe loss of control bringing into question ones autonomous status, as well as the association of use with a non-powerful group in American society.

As the United States rapidly industrialized following the Civil War, drug use skyrocketed and the morality surrounding it followed. Industrialism meant enormous growth in tobacco and coffee, both of which had already been popular drugs in the United States, as well as new innovations in cocaine and morphine. At the same time, a stigma developed around the consumption of alcohol at work as efficiency and productivity became the hallmarks of American labor.

Early records of perceptions towards cocaine use seemed positive. A New York Times article from 1885 extolled the many blessings [that] will yet result from experimenting with cocaine. Coca Cola was first developed in 1886, branded as a method for recreational cocaine usehowever, by this point, tides had already shifted against the drug, with articles speaking about the cocaine habit and the racked and prostrated condition of cocaine users as early as 1887. As industrial cocaine production became associated with this loss of humanity, the nation turned against the drugand Coca Cola only saw a boom in sales when it rebranded itself as Delicious and Refreshing.

This rapid growth of varied drug use and chaos over their moral categorization, coupled with increasing migration, would lay the foundation for later criminalization policies.

1914-1971: The Beginnings of National Prohibition:

Universally, it appears that the prohibition of any drug has followed three steps. Cultural shifts begin with the association of the drug with a particular minority demographic. These proceed to widespread fears surrounding usage and its effects on society. Finally, a perception of a sharp increase in the drug use solidifies its status as illicit. Massive industrialization and immigration in the early 1900s followed this formula, culminating with the Harrison Narcotics Tax of 1914, which first regulated opium and cocaine at a national level. This was the first instance of drug prohibition in national policy but it would certainly not be the last.

This process started sixteen years after the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, when a Scientific American article in 1898 articulated that wherever the Chinese are found there will be the odor of opium. This racial stigmatization shifted public perception of opioids almost entirely from a casual acceptance to hate and eventually, criminalization. The image of the Chinaman seducing American women into prostitution in opium dens dominated majority perceptions towards the drug, factoring into future morphine and heroin policy.

Cocaine followed a similar trend. Although the drug was initially used by academics and medical practitioners between 1890 and 1920, it developed a heavy association with laborers, youth, and black Americans in urban society. Thomas Crothers, a contemporary observer who wrote widely about the effects of inebriety, described a phenomenon where persons of the tramp and low criminal classes who use this drug are increasing in many of the cities. This quickly developed into a national hysteria over the so-called cocaine-fiendan imagined cocaine-crazed violent predator, usually working in labor, and almost always black.

Marijuana prohibition followed a very comparable trajectory. Here, the concern revolved largely around Mexican immigrants in the Southwest. Fears about marijuana first arose during Alcohol Prohibition, when women and churches worried that individuals would simply substitute alcoholism with marijuana addiction. The idea that marijuana as a drug took away a users sense of control developed shortly afterwards and was most famously propagated by the movie Reefer Madness in 1936. The first federal prohibition of recreational cannabis came with the Marihuana Tax Act, in 1937, thus completing the major triad that continues to dominate U.S. drug policy today.

1971-present: The Drug War

Modern opinion is split on whether societal norms and values influence drug policy, or whether policy precedes change in public opinion. Truth be told, the answer is probably a mix of both as drug prohibition became increasingly strict at a national level, public perception pigeon-holed addicts into morally lower classes. Correspondingly, as public perception turned tides towards drug criminalization, policy shortly followed. These two mechanisms, especially the former, have become obvious in American history through the modern War on Drugs.

In 1971, President Nixon first declared the now-famous War on Drugs, calling drug abuse public enemy number one. In particular, however, this consisted not in a war on drugs themselvesbut a war on drug users, focusing efforts towards eradication, interdiction, and incarceration.

Socially, the trend ramped up with Nancy Reagans Just Say No campaign. This effort inaugurated the zero-tolerance principle for drug use and abuse, and set a goal to educate a new generation specifically on a grounded, prohibitionist, drug-morality. Many programs commenced by these traditions are still in place, such as the Drug Abuse Resistance Education program in Los Angeles, despite questionable efficacy.

Ironically, in a post-Civil Rights United States, as it became no longer acceptable to explicitly link drug usage with particular demographics, drugs have become a cultural stand-in to avoid explicitly talking about demographics. The heroin addict remains almost synonymous with black youth in urban povertyyet using this moniker places enough distance from racial connotations to maintain political correctness.

The most notable manifestation of this is in the widely unequal criminal sentencing for freebase cocaine (crack) and its powdered form. Chemically, these two drugs are almost identical, with very similar effects. Their primary difference is in price, resulting in a major disparity of use and punishment across different demographics. Until very recently, crack cocaine held penalties as much as 100 times as harsh as powder cocaineand crack stays associated with black neighborhoods. Although this was reduced to only 18 times as harsh, with the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, the racial connotation remains impossible to overlook.

In addition, previously noted fears about drug usage taking away autonomy continue to arise periodically. Spice, a blanket term for a number of synthetic substances that mimic the effects of marijuana, is an example of the continued adaptation of drugs to evade legislation. As a new variant of spice takes over the news cycle, public opinion radically shifts, leaving policymakers scrambling to patch up holes. While usage of the Big Three illegal drugs (cocaine, heroin, and marijuana) remains similar, drugs such as fentanyl and krokodil have become household names.In the same theme as the above analyses, these do not arise because of particular properties of the drugs themselvesbut because of properties of cultural perception.

In this way, two things are clear: the first is that drug policy relies on a variety of moral and sociopolitical patterns that are as old as the United States itself. The second is that regardless of any policy, drugs are here to stay. They become illegal and immoral when they are associated with a distinct voiceless Other that can be easily repressed by the majority, and when they raise question aboutindividuals moral autonomy. These trends and traditions stretch back to the very foundations on which the American republic stands and by understanding that, the possibility for comprehensive drug reform becomes a bit more possible.

Image Credit: U.S. Marshals Service Office of Public Affairs/Flickr

Link:

The Junkie and the Addict: The Moral War on Drugs - Harvard ... - Harvard Political Review

No need to relaunch war on drugs: Duterte aide – ABS-CBN News

Posted on by

A drug user inhales "Shabu", or methamphetamine, at a drug den in Manila, Philippines February 13, 2017. Reuters

MANILA - Secretary to the Cabinet Leoncio Evasco Jr. clarified Monday that the Duterte administration's war on drugs has not been stopped but is a continuing campaign under a different law enforcement agency.

Evasco said the President merely transferred the responsibility from the Philippine National Police to the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency, but the same concept of the drug war remains. "I don't think there was a stoppage on this. It is just shifting from PNP to PDEA."

Over the weekend, there were calls from Senator Alan Peter Cayetano for President Duterte to re-launch the war on drugs, claiming that the drug trade has come back out of the shadows after Duterte halted anti-drug operations under the PNP's "Oplan Tokhang."

"Pag bumalik ang mga pusher, kasunod na n'yan ang patayan ng inosente, kasama na d'yan ang rape, ang nakawan. Kaya ngayong gabi, ako ay nakikiusap sa ating Pangulo at sa PNP: i-relaunch ninyo ang inyong anti-drug drive." Cayetano's said during the vigil-rally in support of the Duterte administration at the Quirino Grandstand in Luneta Saturday.

But Evasco said: "I don't think there is a need to re-launch that because the president just shifted the mandate from PNP to PDEA. It is now the task of PDEA to continue what have been done by PNP."

Evasco, however, said PDEA have yet to provide Malacanang a report on how the war on drugs have progressed after the transfer. He also said the issue has not been discussed in Cabinet meetings lately.

"I hope in the coming meetings this will be discussed," he said.

More than 7,000 people have been killed since Duterte was sworn in almost eight months ago, about 2,500 of whom were killed in official police anti-narcotics operations. Human rights groups believe many of the killings are extra-judicial executions committed as part of the war on drugs, and in cooperation with the police - a claim the Duterte administration has repeatedly denied.

See more here:

No need to relaunch war on drugs: Duterte aide - ABS-CBN News

There’s one last big-ticket item on Trump’s agenda: A war on drugs – Raw Story

Posted on by

Donald Trump arrives on stage with his family to speak to supporters during election night at the New York Hilton Midtown in New York on November 9, 2016 (AFP Photo/Timothy A. Clary)

The weeks since Trump took office with a pledge to make America wealthy/safe/proud/great again have been tumultuous ones. He has tested the nations checks and balances with a series of aggressive executive actions and abrupt policy shifts, on everything from the border wall, the structure of the National Security Council, immigration, attacks on the judiciary, and the selection of Cabinet appointees diametrically opposed to the mission of the agency they are intended to lead.

None of these moves are truly intended to increase the efficiency of national policy. Trump is, if nothing else, a master of branding and his policy moves have been largely symbolic; hes sending a message about his values and his vision for the United States.

But hang on, because there is more to come and, aside from jobs, theres still one big ticket item on his to-do list: drugs.

The threat posed by drugs was a consistent theme during the campaign and often lumped with immigration, globalization, and violent crime as part of a rising lawlessness that threatens the American people. Trump reiterated this theme in his apocalyptic inaugural address, pitting the forgotten men and women of our country against foreign enemies who drain jobs and wealth and replace them with poverty, crime, gangs, and drugsall under the watch of political elites who did nothing to stop the American carnage. Never mind that Trump is also something of a robber baron and never mind his myriad conflicts of interest, this style of rhetoric says: look therethat is the enemy, the other.

Students of Americas many drug wars have been watching these developments with real trepidation, because weve heard this message before. The drug war has always fed on social and political turmoil and functioned as a way to consolidate both political authority and a largely moral and intolerant brand of American identity. In short, its not a question of if Trump will declare war on drugs but when.

And, in fact, the opening shots have already been fired. Trump has promised a return to law and order to a gathering of police chiefs and sworn to be ruthless in taking the fight to the drug cartels. The day after he made these remarks, Trump welcomed Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions as his new Attorney General and used the occasion to sign three new executive orders: instructing the Department of Justice to aggressively prosecute crimes against law enforcement officers, create a new Task Force on Crime Reduction and Public Safety, and increase interagency efforts to combat international drug traffickers.

While Trumps talk of criminal cartels destroying the blood of our youth smacks of racial hygiene and fascism, the drug war has essentially always been understood in terms that link biology, morality, and identity. Like many of Trumps policies, the fight against drugs packs a big symbolic punch. Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, the presidents most closely associated with the war on drugs, both rendered the conflict in similar fashion and for similar reasons. Nixon described drug addiction as a problem which afflicts both the body and the soul of America, and Reagan, while urging Americans to Just Say No, called drug abuse a repudiation of everything America is.

The countrys struggle with drugs has a much longer history than most people realize, with roots that stretch well over 100 years into the past. From early U.S. concern over opium addiction in China and the colonial Philippines, the establishment of the first federal control laws, into the beginnings of global enforcement at mid-century, and throughout the presidencies of Nixon and Reagan, American drug policy has consistently turned on issues of symbolicrather than scientificimportance. Questions about the hazards and benefits of globalization, the role of the U.S. in the world, national security, nature vs. nurture, race and crime, the social contract, andmost importantlyAmerican identity have proven far more determinative than the pharmacology of drugs or the particulars of any given drug epidemic. Many of these tensions continue to define American political culture today.

With the drug problem historically framed in cultural and ideological terms, control and enforcement strategy have focused almost exclusively on punitive policing and supply-side solutions. Rather than rely on comparatively soft public health strategies to reduce demand, American policymakers have demonstrated a clear preference for going after bad guyslike foreign traffickers, street-level dealers, and deviant junkies. Despite its obvious practical shortcomings, this adversarial drug war framework prevails because it skirts internal responsibility for the drug problem; drugs are a scourge perpetrated against the American people by outside powers, rather than a domestic social problem tied to Americas own internal contradictions and predilections. And one of the consequences is that we overlooked the risk posed by the growth of the legal narcotics industry.

The American Society of Addiction Medicine estimates that in 2015the most recent year for which there is good dataaround two million Americans suffered from a substance abuse disorder involving opioids. Of those, nearly 600,000 were active heroin users, and four out of five new heroin users began with a prescription opioid. That same year, the number of deaths specifically attributed to heroin overdose (12,989) eclipsed the number attributed to gun violence (12,979). In short, the problem is growing and its causes have more to do with legal practice and industry than criminal trafficking.

According to data provided by the Center for Disease Control, the rates of opioid prescription and overdose have both quadrupled since the start of the millennium, and the influx of legal opioids has created new heroin markets throughout the country. Ironically, the problem is particularly concentrated among older, white, working class populations in areas like the Rust Belt, Appalachia and the Deep Souththe same areas that turned out in strength for Trump in November. Broadening the scope beyond opioids, the National Institute on Drug Abuse estimates that the collective abuse of alcohol, tobacco, and illicit drugs is a $700 billion a year problem.

The question is: what is Trump going to do about it?

In his most direct remarks on the campaign trail, Trump acknowledged the need for expanded treatment options, but he also promised a return to the punitive and supply-side strategies that have done demonstrably little to solve the drug problem, including the use of mandatory minimum sentencing and a general escalation of street-level enforcement. And, of course, he also promised a wall, telling his supporters, A wall will not only keep out dangerous cartels and criminals, but it will also keep out the drugs and heroin poisoning our youth. The actual efficacy or viability of the wall remains very much in doubt, even within Trumps own party. But thats also beside the point; the wallmuch like the Muslim/travel banis a gesture that signifies a besieged nation in need of a strongman to lead it.

Trumps willful conflation of illegal immigration and the drug problem is no real surprise. Trump, after all, first seized political relevancy by casting doubt on the citizenship of Barak Obama, and his great ally in the birtherism conspiracy was ex-DEA agent Joe Arpaio, who drew national attention by proclaiming himself Americas toughest sheriff and fulminating against illegal immigration as the source of all of Americas problems. (Arpaio is still at the birther thing, by the way.) The notion that Obama is not a U.S. citizen is a proven falsehood, but the rhetoric and cultural beliefs the conspiracy signaled clearly played with that segment of the electorate dismayed by the election of Americas first black president.

A major indicator of Trumps intentions comes from his selection of Sessions as Attorney General. This is a man who was deemed too racist to win a federal judgeship in 1986 and once joked that he thought the KKK was ok but for their pot use, so its unlikely that Sessions will prioritize a healthy respect for civil rights over Trumps calls for aggressive drug enforcement. Indeed, Sessions has reportedly been a determinative influence on Trumps hard-line positions and as White House Press Secretaryrecently indicatedis likely to pursue a confrontational approach with the twenty-nine states that have voted to legalize marijuana, setting up yet another potential constitutional crisis.

Its all but certain that Mexico will be a primary antagonist in any Trump drug war. When Trump declared his candidacy for office, he did so with the charge that Mexico actively exports drugs, crime, and rapists to the United States. Within days of entering the White House, he caused yet another controversy with joking/not-joking remarks about sending the U.S. military to deal with Mexicos bad hombres.

China, another campaign trail punching bag, will also play an important role on the foreign policy side. China has long been the worlds largest supplier of synthetic drugsincluding fentanyl, a powerful narcotic implicated in recent spikes in overdose rates. But China also seems to be cracking down on illicit production and is an area where the DEA has been making notable progress with quiet diplomacy instead of more confrontational tactics.

On the domestic front, the major policy decisions revolve around policing vs. treatment. Trump has already threatened to send the feds into Chicago to quell the citys gun violence, but its doubtful hes going to send the feds into places like Alabama, Tennessee, Ohio, West Virginia, and Hew Hampshirestates that have some of the highest densities of opiates and the highest rates of overdose.

The ostensible whitening of heroin is a real dilemma for the Trump administration. Its always been difficult for the authorities to parse the difference between dealer and user, and Trump is probably not going to wage drug war on his own voters. But expanding treatment options is going to be terribly difficult in the face of GOP plans to dismantle the Affordable Care Act, which extended new coverage for drug and alcohol disorders. It also remains to be seen if Trump is willing to confront Big Pharma in the same manner that he has rattled his Twitter account at General Motors and Boeing.

The biggest uncertainty looming over all of this, however, is figuring out how much is bluster and how much of Trumps tough talk signals actual changes in policy. The DEA has acquired wide-ranging law enforcement authority in its nearly 45-year history, both at home and abroad. Even as a mere rhetorical device shorn of any real policy shifts, the drug war is a source of power and its likely only a matter of time before Trump attempts to claim it. Well know more when the first report of the newly created Task Force on Crime Reduction and Public Safety is published four months from now.

The most likely scenario is that Trump will mostly ignore the specifics of the opioid epidemic and stick with the supply-side enforcement tactics that appeal to his bombastic and adversarial style. To address demand is to admit weakness, and, in Trumps worldview (such as anyone can know it), the forgotten people need jobs, not coddling or rehab. Instead, Trump will use the drug issue to reinforce his basic theme of a blighted America that begs for decisive leadership. He will focus on urban gang violence (which has a limited connection to the opioid crisis), double-down on his confrontation with Mexico, and use legal pot and Chinas role as synthetic supplier as pawns in his gamesmanship to extract economic concessions from the states and foreign rivals.

Thats a best-case scenario. All bets are off if Trump embraces the mantle of drug warrior with the enthusiasm of Reagan. And all the while, the drug crisis and the injustices of the American police and legal system will almost certainly grow worse.

There is, however, one glimmer of hope. Trump will be the first to tell you that hes a great deal maker; now that weve seen the whitening of heroin perhaps he will seize the opportunity that lies before him and strike a grand bargain that moves national policy toward a more effective balance between law enforcement and the humane treatment of American addiction. But I wouldnt hold my breath.

Matthew R. Pembleton holds a Ph.D. in History from American University, where he is an adjunct professorial lecturer. His book on the history of the drug war,Containing Addiction: The Federal Bureau of Narcotics and the Origins of Americas Global Drug War, is forthcoming from UMass Press.

This article was originally published at History News Network

Originally posted here:

There's one last big-ticket item on Trump's agenda: A war on drugs - Raw Story