China’s military progress challenges Western dominance, says IISS – Deutsche Welle

Posted on by

China accounted for a third of Asia's military spending in 2016 and was looking to sell more arms abroad, the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) said in a report on Tuesday.

China's overall defense budget last year was $145 billion (137 billion euros), 1.8 times higher than South Korea and Japan combined.China's spending was topped only by the United States which spent $604.5billion (572 billion euros) on defense in 2016.

On air power, China "appears to be reaching near-parity with the West," IISS said, adding that Chinese-made drones had been seen in Nigeria and Saudi Arabia.

Its sales in Africa had moved beyond Soviet-era designs to exports of systems designed in China itself, thethink tank's report found.

China's air force had introduced a "highly capable" short-range missile in a class only a handful of leading aerospace nations had been able to develop, it added.

Additionally, China's longrange air-to-air missile seen on exercise last year posed a risk for aircraft tankers and AWACS surveillance aircraft that previously loitered safe out of range.

GivenChina's advances Western dominance "can no longer be taken for granted," said IISS director John Chipman.

NATO members falling short

Across all nations, there was a "growing proliferation of lethality," the IISS concluded, warning the West that increasing sophistication was "complicating" its military options.

In a reference to NATO, the institute said European nations were "only gradually" increasing their defense spending, an issue highlighted by the new US President Donald Trump.

Only two European NATO nations - Greece and Estonia - met the aim of spending 2percent of their gross domestic product (GDP) on defense in 2016, concluded the IISS.

The report also noted that Britainspent 1.98 percent of its GDP on defense, falling short of the 2 percent NATO target. A spokesman with the British Ministry of Defense denied the shortfall, saying that "NATO's own figures clearly show the UK spends over 2 percent of its GDP on defense."

Both British officials and the IISS emphasized that the UK's defense budget is still the largest in Europe.

Resurgent Russia

With $60 billion in spending, Russia remained the "principle security concern," said the think tank. It stressedthat Russian equipment outranged the missile and rocket artillery systems of NATO's most capable power, the USA.

"The Kalibr cruise missile, for instance, is being fitted to an array of Russian naval vessels - including an arctic patrol vessel," it said.

NATO would need to "refocus" on spending targets that lead to real capability improvements among systems that were increasingly complex, the IISS recommended.

Ahead of NATO talks in Brussels on Wednesday and the Munich Security Conference next weekend, NATO head Jens Stoltenberg admitted that the "picture is still mixed" with some allies "really struggling."

He was responding to a question about budget constraints in Italy, which is trying to reduce its budget deficit following the euro zone crisis.

ipj/rs(Reuters, AFP, dpa, AP)

Read the original post:

China's military progress challenges Western dominance, says IISS - Deutsche Welle

Lecture series explores ethics in sports industry – Observer Online

Posted on by

The global sports industry is estimated to carry a $1.5 trillion value. With that big of a presence in the business, it makes sense that Mendoza College of Business chose its Ethics Week theme for this year to be Sports and the Common Good.

Sports and the Common Good just seemed like a natural [pick for a theme], especially at a university like Notre Dame [with] a college of business like Mendoza, Brian Levey, one of the organizers for the event, said in an email. Educating the mind, body and spirit is at the heart of the Holy Cross mission.

Levey said Notre Dames emphasis on this complete education is evidenced not only in varsity sports, but also in activities such as Bengal Bouts, which starts this week, and Bookstore Basketball.

Now in its 20thyear, Mendoza College of Business Ethics Week was first started by accounting professor Ken Milani. Inspired by the work of John Houck, a Notre Dame management professor who died in 1996, Ethics Week has included themes such as sustainability, financial institutions, governing for the greater good (politics and public service) and ethics through a global lens.

Over the history of the event, the organizers have tried various approaches and activities with Ethics Week, including a brown bag lunch speaker series and an ethics case competition.

Recently, changes in the timing and formatting of the events, as well as an increased online presence through a Facebook page and Twitter account, have helped attendance spike to about 500 participants in 2014 and 2015.

Speakers from past Ethics Weeks have ranged from Fr. Jenkins to the chief ethics officer of the United Nations. This years agenda feature an equally diverse group, with backgrounds spanning sports psychology to wealth management.

Levey hopes incorporating sportswith this years Ethics Week will help students consider ethics on a different level.

By examining sports from a deeper perspective, we can explore business ethics issues in a relatable manner. Winning, losing, fair play, cheating, equality, discrimination, altruism, egoism sports has it all, he said. Just check the headlines; youll see a sports ethics issue, and, in turn, a business ethics issue almost every day.

Thursday offers a movie night that features the baseball movie The Natural, starring Robert Redford. The first 75 movie attendees who also stay for the panel after the movie will be treated to free pizza.

Its critically acclaimed its a sports movie, its a love story, its a tale of redemption and it presents the audience with an ethical dilemma, Levey said.

View original post here:

Lecture series explores ethics in sports industry - Observer Online

Female cultism in Nigerian universities and other dangerous cults – NAIJ.COM

Posted on by

What is cultism confraternity? Have you ever heard about female cultism in Nigeria? What about female cultism in Nigerian universities? You might get shocked after reading the article.

Female cultism in Nigerian universities, does it exist?

Each of us from childhood has heard the word "cult" or "cultism", but even many adults interpret the origin of cultism and the meaning of this word not quite right. In the view of the society the concept of "cultism" is associated with Satanism, Voodoo magic, occult practices. According to the history of cultism in Nigeria, people identify the meaning of cult as a glorification of any individual, for instance - the cult of the Pharaoh in ancient Egypt, the cult of Stalin in the Soviet Union and the cult of Hitler in the Third Reich in the twentieth century.

Female cultism in Nigerian universities, does it exist?

If you consider a cult in religion, then it will be a true statement that the cult is the service of the deity or deities, including religious rituals, traditions and worldview. Another meaning of the word cult in religion is religious worship of any material object, such an object is called a cult. Cult objects found in most religions of the world, including in the three major religions are the icons and relics in Christianity, Buddha in Buddhism, mosques of Mecca and Medina in Islam.

READ ALSO: 9 incidents of political violence in Nigeria in December

Types of Cultism

As in a broad sense, it is considered to be a kind of a worship. However, all cults can be divided into several groups depending on the object of admiration. Therefore, sociologists, historians and psychologists divide the cults that take place in the spiritual and social life of modern society, groups are the following:

Religious cultism

Religious veneration of deities, saints, fathers, prophets, apostles, and also of items which according to belief were given to men by God. Religious cults include not only the spiritual aspect of belief, but also all the rituals, traditions and ceremonies that have to be performed by the believers. By and large, any religion can be called a cult and every religion includes a certain number of more narrowly focused cults for example, cults of gods, cults of sacred animals, ancestor worship.

Personality cultism

Personality cults - these cults are the basis of the autocratic form of government, as their essence lies in the exaltation of the personality of the leader. In almost all states with authoritarian and totalitarian forms of government there is personality cult of the leader. This cult originated in ancient times, when the first kings appeared.

Youth and prosperity cultism

Cults associated with material goods or position in society in their relation to the meaning of the word cult should be interpreted in the widest sense, as cult of money, cult of beauty, cult of youth and so on, it means that a large part of society considers wealth as a priority over the spiritual development and "eternal values".

Female cultism

This type of cultism involves representatives of one gender (female) who gather together in order to achieve their sacrificed aims or for other special purposes. They may gather in the forests or in other remote places, make circles, singing songs and reading out some invocations and spells.

Female cultism in Nigerian universities, does it exist?

Speaking about cultism in Nigeria and, in particular, female cultism in Nigerian universities, it can be said that a great number of people claim to be witnesses of the gatherings of such female groupings and their involvement to its activities.

According to the stories of some Nigerian universities students, such phenomenon is widely spread in campuses of Lagos universities. Let me tell you how all this takes place.

Female cultism: shocking welcoming procedure

If you want to become one of the members of such group, you will need to go through a certain procedure for new-comers, which implies virginity loss (with the presence of other members of the clan), cutting of thumbs, cooking a kind of a soup with the blood from these parts of the body and then drinking such a beverage. After you have become a member of this group, you cant leave it unless you are dead or you come under protection of more stronger clan.

Female cultism in Nigerian universities, does it exist?

READ ALSO: Top 10 dangerous religious cults in the world

Speaking on the terms of membership in this clan, it is worth taking into consideration your main tasks in future you will have to work as a prostitute, offering your body and soul for big sums of money and presents from so-called Aristos. If you are lucky they may even give you a car as a present or something even more valuable.

Female cultism in Nigerian universities, does it exist?

One of the most unpleasant factors is that while the welcoming steps you may easily get HIV, as the majority of girls has already become its carriers. Some girls offer natural sex without condoms for the purpose of infecting other people with such unpleasant diseases.

Other cults in Nigerian universities

1. Ahoi-Seadog ( Ibadan college)

This confraternity is supposed to be pirate one, their main symbols are the skull and crossbones. According to them there shouldnt be a kind of an inequality which implies different clothes of affluent students and those who are much poorer who strive to look more smart so as to be accepted by other students.

2. Buccaneers Association of Nigeria (BAN) or AloraSealords

This is a part of the aforementioned grouping. This group consisted of those who couldnt manage to cope with all the restrictions and conditions of membership in Ahoi-Seadog.

3. Black Axe Confraternity or Aye-Axemen

Such confraternity is aimed at fighting against oppression against Black men. One of their beliefs and exclamations is - The Black man will be freed with an axe.

Got impressed?

Think it is important? Share with your friends!

Continue reading here:

Female cultism in Nigerian universities and other dangerous cults - NAIJ.COM

Faking It: The Rise of Political Nihilism – Study Breaks Magazine – Study Breaks

Posted on by

In an atmosphere where political activism is an expectation, social pressure is working counter-productively, instilling apathy instead of passion.

By Kayla Kibbe, Connecticut College

In the days (and weeks) following the election, How are you holding up? became the standard form of greeting on my campus, and it quickly became clear that Fine, was not an acceptable answer.

Like many colleges, mine had declared a campus-wide state of mourning, complete with walkouts, candlelit vigils and round-the-clock opportunities to stand in solidarity. In the days following Decision 2016, How are you? became more rhetorical than ever. Freshman to senior, dorm to dorm, humanities to sciences, a state of utter despair was the new expected norm.

Universal post-election bereavement was a safe enough assumption to make on a small, private liberal arts campus in New England. And while Im usually pretty deft at blending in with the schools tacit political expectations, I consistently missed my cue throughout the unofficially official mourning period.

Image via Time

Every time I unthinkingly admitted to being fine, I was met with the astonished glare usually reserved for an uncouth uncle who just made a joke at funeral. Trying to save face after again making this error during a conversation with my advisor, I offered for an excuse, Im just not very politically minded.

I know youre not, she replied. Ive read your writing.

This was not a compliment.

The main sin I had committed was not in having betrayed signs of Republicanism. That, I imagine, remained unthinkable. The guilt lay entirely in my political apathy. In the turbulent post-election climate on campus, not caring was not an option. If you werent in mourning, you were part of the problem, regardless of whether or not you thought there was a problem.

In 2017, declining to voice a political opinion in polite conversation is no longer a sign of good manners. In fact, being politically vocal has become a staple of every day interaction. If you dont have an opinion, youre being rude. And it better be the right opinion. In todays unwritten rules of social decorum, talking politics is like apologizing as a kid. You dont have to mean it, you just have to say it so your mom will leave you alone.

This new spirit of obligatory political fervor, however, may be doing more harm than good on the political playground. Mandating political zeal from the otherwise indifferent does little to actually advance the causes on either side of the spectrum. Rather, this push for universal political enthusiasm only subverts its own efforts by giving rise to political nihilism, which critics blame for the current state of Western politics.

Forcing people to take a side just to save face in everyday conversation doesnt actually make them devoted activists. Rather, it merely results in half-hearted political opportunism, devoid of any real convictions. Faking political fervor is like faking an orgasm. Done right, its a quick and easy way to get out of an undesirable social situation, but it still doesnt make the sex good.

This new emphasis on obligatory political activism isnt just an unwritten rule on college campuses or in break room conversation. For better or worse, politics are increasingly blending into pop culture, and from Leonardo DiCaprio to Madonna, political activism has taken center stage in Hollywood. Meanwhile, like college students who were accidentally fine post-election, celebrities who arent making a big enough splash politically are taking a hit for their reticence.

Image via CMA

Take, for example, Taylor Swift. Between securing another two breakups under her belt and the infamous Kim-Exposed-Taylor debacle, Taylor Swift had just about as bad a 2016 as anyone elsefor the years highest paid woman in music, that is. 2017 has also seen Swift off to a rocky start, as her failure to make an appearance at the Womens March was met with considerable social-media backlash.

No stranger to the political demands of Hollywood, Swift attempted to do her part by offering a now infamous tweet:

So much pride, love, and respect for those who marched. Im proud to be a woman today, and every day.

As replies were quick to point out, however, it was a classic case of too little too late. Swift was slammed for being a political opportunist, accused of picking and choosing when to use feminism to her benefit. Though not even guilty of pure political reticence, Swifts attempts to fulfill the political demands of Hollywood simply werent enough to stave off the witch-hunt.

Essentially, Taylor Swift got caught faking it, and was burned at the social-media stake for falling into the opportunistic political nihilism that the new rules of modern society have pushed on everyone. Thats the thing about faking orgasms: If you get caught, things only get more complicated. At the end of the day, Taylor Swifts performance just wasnt convincing enough.

The Taylor Swift Womens March debacle highlights exactly the kind of self-destructive dangers lurking within the new politically-charged rules of society. Making vocal political activism all but mandatory inevitably pushes individuals into a state of political nihilism that is opportunistic by default. When you have to feign political fervor just to get by, your political efforts obviously have ulterior motivations.

A recent Cosmopolitan article addresses this issue of increasingly empty celebrity activism. Pinning Taylor Swift as the figurehead of the tiresome trend, the article follows in the footsteps of other critics who accused Swift of political opportunism.

While the article raises an important critique of the increasing intersection of pop culture and politics, its main complaint is not that celebrities are being forced to engage in political dialogue, but rather that their engagement is not convincing enough. Essentially, the article condemns the effects of obligatory political engagement while still promoting the cause.

While the article notes that At this point, remaining silent seems just as likely to cause your fans to abandon you as saying something political does anyway, it simultaneously fails to recognize this very trend as the source of the problem it attempts to critique. Rather, the article presents this logic as all the more reason for celebrities to get politically active, as long as they make it convincing.

Meanwhile, the article ignores the very injustice it has just highlighted: Celebrities must be politically vocal at the risk of losing their fans.

Amidst the increased demands of todays politically charged society, fame comes at a greater price than ever.

What all of these critics, from college professors to Taylor Swift fans, fail to see, is that forced political activism inevitably gives way to opportunistic political nihilism. Whether its a college student or a pop star, if youre forcing someone to voice a particular political opinion, it is inevitably going to be an empty, self-serving one.

Unfortunately, the increasing trend of obligatory political engagement has left the politically indifferent with no choice but to play along and use politics to their advantage. Liberal when in need of an A on a paper, conservative when home for Thanksgiving dinner, and only free to return to your regularly-scheduled indifference in private, the politically neutral have become political opportunists.

political apathypolitical nihilismpolitics

Continued here:

Faking It: The Rise of Political Nihilism - Study Breaks Magazine - Study Breaks

Teen Nihilism Erupts in LA Premiere of Fierce, Funny PUNK ROCK by Simon Stephens – Broadway World

Posted on by

What happens when kids have the world at their feet, and its weight on their shoulders? Odyssey Theatre Ensemble presents the Los Angeles premiere of Punk Rock, a ferociously funny, complex and unnerving play by Tony Award-winning playwright Simon Stephens (The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time) that peels back the layers of teen angst for a deeper look at what might make one of them snap. Lisa James directs for a March 25 opening at the Odyssey Theatre.

As seven teens at an English prep school tangle with the pressures of love, sex, bullying and college entrance exams, the confusion, disconnect and latent savagery simmering beneath the surface is revealed. They are intelligent, articulate and accomplished - the cream of the crop turning sour.

"The play's pulsing, driving rhythm, like the music of the title, is what makes it so exciting" says James. "The characters are incredibly complex. Each one is hateful and cruel, but also loving and kind. Their hormones are raging, so they're out of control. It's a cacophony of emotion."

Punk Rock's electrifying cast of young newcomers features Jacob B. Gibson, Zachary Grant, Nick Marini, Raven Scott, Kenney Selvey, Story Slaughter and Miranda Wynne.

The creative team includes set designer John Iacovelli; lighting designer Brian Gale; Sound Designer Christopher Moscatiello; costume designer Halei Parker; fight choreographer MATTHEW GLAVE; and dialect coach Anne Burk. Sally Essex-Lopresti and Ron Sossi produce for Odyssey Theatre Ensemble.

Based on Stephens' experiences as a teacher and inspired by the 1999 Columbine shooting, Punk Rock premiered at London's Royal Exchange in 2009, then transferred to the Lyric Hammersmith. The play opened off-Broadway in 2014 at the Lucille Lortel Theatre in an MCC Theater production that Ben Brantley of The New York Times called "tender, ferocious and frightening."

Simon Stephens is an associate artist of the Lyric Hammersmith and The Royal Court Theatre. His many other plays include Carmen Disruption; Heisenberg; Birdland; Blindsided; Three Kingdoms; Wastwater; Seawall; Pornography; Country Music; Christmas; Herons; A Thousand Stars Explode in the Sky (co-written with Robert Holman and David Eldridge); an adaptation of Jon Fosse's I Am the Wind; and Motortown. His version of A Doll's House for the Young Vic transferred to the West End and then New York. His new translation of The Threepenny Opera ran last fall at the National Theatre. His other plays for the NT include Port, Harper Regan and On the Shore of the Wide World, which received the Olivier Award for Best New Play. His stage adaptation of Mark Haddon's novel The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time received both the Olivier Award and the Tony Award for Best Play.

Director Lisa James is a multi-award winner for her work on Heartstopper (LA Weekly Award), Palladium is Moving (Los Angeles Drama Critics Circle Award), Lynn Siefert's Little Egypt, Wendy MacLeod's The Water Children (LADCC and Garland Awards), Justin Tanner's Bitter Women (LADCC Award) and The Visible Horse (LADCC and Garland Awards). World premieres include Beth Henley's Tight Pants, Billy Aaronson's The News, Justin Tanner's Oklahomo! and Little Egypt-The Musical (music/lyrics by Gregg Lee Henry) at both the Matrix Theater in L.A. and Acorn Theatre in NYC. She most recently directed the West Coast premiere of Smoke by Kim Davies at Rogue Machine and End Days at the Odyssey Theatre, and is currently developing the new musical That Was Then.

Performances of Punk Rock take place March 25 through May 14 on Fridays and Saturdays at 8 p.m. and Sundays at 2 p.m.Additional weeknight performances are scheduled on Wednesday, April 12; Thursday, April 27 and Wednesday, May 3, all at 8 p.m. Tickets are $34 on Saturdays and Sundays; $30 on Fridays; and $25 on Wednesdays and Thursdays, with discounted tickets available for students and members of SAG/AFTRA/AEA. There will be three "Tix for $10" performances on Friday, March 31; Friday, April 28; and Wednesday, May 3. Post-performance discussions are scheduled on Wednesday, April 12 and Friday, April 28. The third Friday of every month is wine night at the Odyssey: enjoy complimentary wine and snacks and mingle with the cast after the show.

The Odyssey Theatre is located at 2055 S. Sepulveda Blvd., West Los Angeles, 90025. For reservations and information, call (310) 477-2055 or go to OdysseyTheatre.com.

Recommended for mature audiences: graphic language and violence.

View original post here:

Teen Nihilism Erupts in LA Premiere of Fierce, Funny PUNK ROCK by Simon Stephens - Broadway World

Weekend Arts: Find the Beethoven Music Festival, ‘Avenue Q’ and more in Tulsa this week – Tulsa World (blog)

Posted on by

NAOYA IKEGAMI1

The Miro Quartet will headline Chamber Music Tulsas Beethoven Winter Festival, performing the complete cycle of Beethovens string quartets over a course of six concerts. Courtesy

JAMES GIBBARD

Ronald Radford, former Tulsan and flamenco guitar master, teaches students about performing the flamenco during a workshop at Jenks East Elementary School on Tuesday. JAMES GIBBARD/Tulsa World

STEPHEN PINGRY

Ronald Radford, a former Tulsan and master of flamenco guitar, presents his program The Power of Practice for students at Tulsas Traice Academy on Wednesday. STEPHEN PINGRY/Tulsa World

STEPHEN PINGRY

Ronald Radford, a former Tulsan and master of flamenco guitar, presents his program The Power of Practice for students at Tulsas Traice Academy on Wednesday. STEPHEN PINGRY/Tulsa World

JAMES GIBBARD/Tulsa World

Josh McGowen (left), Liz Hunt, Jen Thomas, Steven Lambie, and Tasha McCabe in a scene from Avenue Q. JAMES GIBBARD/Tulsa World

Posted: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 12:00 am

Weekend Arts: Find the Beethoven Music Festival, 'Avenue Q' and more in Tulsa this week By James D. Watts Jr. Tulsa World TulsaWorld.com |

CHAMBER MUSIC TULSA

Your current subscription does not provide access to this content. Please click the button below to manage your account.

Thank you for reading and relying on TulsaWorld.com for your news and information. You have now viewed your allowance of free articles.

Joshua Gindele, cellist for the Miro Quartet, said in a recent Tulsa World interview: Quartets are somewhat renown for their disagreements. But we took a different approach. We made it our first priority to take care of the personal relationships first. We figured, if we can get along well with each other, the music making would follow.

And so it has for more than two decades as Gindele and his colleagues violinists Daniel Ching and William Fedkenheuer and violist John Largess have earned international acclaim for their work in classical and contemporary music.

The Miro Quartet has long been a favorite ensemble of Chamber Music Tulsa, which is why the Miro was chosen to headline the organizations Beethoven Winter Festival, performing the complete cycle of Beethovens string quartets in order, over the course of six concerts.

The first two concerts will be devoted to the six quartets that make up Beethovens Opus 18, his first forays into what would become an increasingly personal and expressive form.

Performances: 7 p.m. Friday-Saturday at the Tulsa PAC, 110 E. Second St.

UNIVERSITY OF TULSA, ARTS FOUNDATION

Former Tulsan Ronald Radford is the only individual to be awarded a Fulbright Scholarship in flamenco guitar and is a student of such legendary guitarists as Carlos Montoya and Andres Segovia.

Acknowledged as the American master of flamenco guitar, Radford regularly returns to Tulsa to share his music and story with students of all ages.

He will present a special concert titled The Romantic Guitar of Spain, sponsored by the University of Tulsa and the Arts Foundation.

Performance: 7:30 p.m. Wednesday at the Lorton Performance Center, 550 S. Gary Ave.

Tickets: Admission is free.

And at the end of the day

Having to live on Avenue Q might not be all that great, but the musical that takes place along this fictitious street in New York City has been a smash hit with audiences ever since it debuted in 2003.

This satiric look at 20-somethings trying to make their way in the world most of whom are portrayed by puppets ended up winning the Tony Award for Best Musical, beating out Wicked for the honors.

Tulsa Project Theatres production continues through Sunday.

Performances: 7:30 p.m. Thursday-Friday, 2 and 7:30 p.m. Friday, 2 p.m. Sunday at the Tulsa PAC. 110 E. Second St.

NOTE: Avenue Q is for mature audiences.

Theatre Pops will present Andrew Lippas The Wild Party as the latest of its immersive dinner theater experience shows.

The production stars Tabitha Littlefield as Queenie and Rick Harrelson as Burrs, a pair of vaudeville stars who decide to throw a party that reflects the hedonism of the Roaring 20s but which soon degenerates into tragedy.

The Wild Party, directed by Meghan Hurley, will be staged in and around the audience, putting them right in the middle of the story. Music director Christy Stalcup leads a seven-piece band in swinging songs inspired by the era.

Start the party early with a special four-course dinner before the show, crafted especially for the occasion by Ludgers Catering and Events. Deco-inspired cocktails will be served by IDL Ballroom with a decadent backdrop befitting the era.

Performances: 7 p.m. Friday-Sunday and Feb. 24-26 at the IDL Ballroom, 230 E. First St.

Tickets: General admission, $25. Dinner and show, $60. 918-902-6339, theatrepops.org

A little-known bit of African-American history is the inspiration for the play Court-Martial at Fort Devens, which Theatre North will present as an entry in the Tulsa Awards for Theatre Excellence.

When a group of young African-American women are denied by a racist commander the training they were promised when they joined the Womens Army Corps, they go on strike. When two women refuse to return to their duties, they are set for court-martial.

Performances: 3 p.m. Sunday and 8 p.m. Feb. 24-25 at the Tulsa PAC, 110 E. Second St.

James D. Watts Jr.

918-581-8478

james.watts@tulsaworld.com

Twitter: watzworld

Your current subscription does not provide access to this content. Please click the button below to manage your account.

Thank you for reading and relying on TulsaWorld.com for your news and information. You have now viewed your allowance of free articles.

Posted in Arts, Artsandentertainment, Jamesdwattsjr, Arts, Artspage, Weekend on Wednesday, February 15, 2017 12:00 am. | Tags: Mir Quartet, Pittsburgh Youth Symphony Orchestra, Classical Lounge, 918-596-7111, Tulsa, New York City, General, Womens Army Corps, Rick Harrelson, Music Director, University Of Tulsa, John Largess, Tulsa World, Andrew Lippa, Lorton Performance Center, The Tony Award, Spain, Meghan Hurley, Daniel Ching, Christy Stalcup, Carlos Montoya, William Fedkenheuer, Miro Quartet, Cellist, Ronald Radford, Wicked, Weekend Arts Joshua Gindele, Fort Devens, Racist Commander, Tabitha Littlefield, Idl Ballroom, Deco, Violinist, Arts Foundation, Andres Segovia, 918-902-6339, Quartet, Music, Classical Music, Concert, Theatre, Former Tulsan Ronald Radford, Chamber Music, Joshua Gindele, Era, Performance

See original here:

Weekend Arts: Find the Beethoven Music Festival, 'Avenue Q' and more in Tulsa this week - Tulsa World (blog)

Barnaby Joyce condemns WA Liberals’ preference deal with One Nation – The Northern Daily Leader

Posted on by

13 Feb 2017, 1:04 p.m.

Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce has condemned the Western Australian Liberal Party's unprecedented decision to preference One Nation ahead of the Nationals at the upcoming state election, a deal that has been defended by Mr Joyce's federal Liberal partners.

Prime Minister and Liberal leader Malcolm Turnbull with Nationals leader and Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce and deputy Liberal leader Julie Bishop. Photo: Andrew Meares

Trade Minister Steven Ciobo has defended One Nation's record defending the government, while Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce has warned the deal could cost the Liberal Party government in WA. Photo: Andrew Meares

Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce has condemned the Western Australian Liberal Party's unprecedented decision to preference One Nation ahead of the Nationals at the upcoming state election, a deal that is splitting opinion in the federal Coalition ranks.

Striking a different note to Liberal colleagues, former prime minister Tony Abbott agreed with the argument that One Nation leader Pauline Hanson was a "better person" today than when she was previously in Parliament but said the Nationals should be preferenced above all other parties.

While Mr Joyce described the deal as "disappointing", cabinet colleague and Trade Minister Steve Ciobosaidthe Liberal Party should put itself in the best position to govern and talked up Ms Hanson's right-wing populist party as displaying a "certain amount of economic rationalism" and support for government policy.

Mr Joyce said the conclusion "that the next best people to govern Western Australia after the Liberal Party are One Nation" needed to be reconsideredand the most successful governments in Australia were ones based on partnerships between the Liberals and Nationals.

"When you step away from that, there's one thing you can absolutely be assured of is that we are going to be in opposition," he told reporterson Monday morning.

"[WA Premier] Colin Barnett has been around thepoliticalgame a long while and he should seriously consider whether he thinks that this is a good idea or whether he's flirting with a concept that would put his own side and Liberal colleagues in opposition."

The deal will see Liberals preference One Nation above the Nationals in the upper house country regions in return for the party's support in all lower house seats at the March 11 election.

The alliance between the more independent WA branch of the Nationals and the Liberals is reportedly at breaking point over the deal, which could cost the smaller rural party a handful of seats.

"Pauline Hanson is a different and, I would say, better person today than she was 20 years ago. Certainly she's got a more, I think, nuanced approach to politics today," Mr Abbott told Sydney radio station 2GB.

"It's not up to me to decide where preference should go but, if it was, I'd certainly be putting One Nation ahead of Labor and I'd be putting the National Party ahead of everyone. Because the National Party are our Coalition partnersin Canberra and in most states and they are our alliance partners in Western Australia."

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull declined to criticise the deal, stating that preference deals in the state election were a matter for the relevant division who "have got make their judgment based on their assessment of their electoral priorities".

Mr Ciobo joined the Prime Minister and other federal Liberal colleagues in defending the WA division's right to make its own decisions.

"What we've got to do is make decisions that put us in the best possible position to govern," he told ABC radio of the motivations of his own branch in Queensland.

After Industry Minister Arthur Sinodinos called the modern One Nation more "sophisticated" now, Mr Ciobo also praised the resurgent party.

"If you look at, for example, how Pauline Hanson's gone about putting her support in the Senate, you'll see that she's often voting in favour of government legislation.There's a certain amount of economic rationalism, a certain amount of approach that's reflective of what it is we are trying to do to govern Australia in a fiscally responsible way.One Nation has certainly signed up to that much more than Labor."

When in government, former Liberal prime minister John Howard declared that One Nation would always be put last on how-to-vote cards.

Follow us on Facebook

The story Barnaby Joyce condemns WA Liberals' preference deal with One Nation first appeared on The Sydney Morning Herald.

More:

Barnaby Joyce condemns WA Liberals' preference deal with One Nation - The Northern Daily Leader

Japanese manga artist Jiro passes away – The Kathmandu Post

Posted on by

Feb 15, 2017- One of Japans best-known manga artists, Jiro Taniguchi, has died aged 69, his publisher has announced.

Taniguchi, who was known for his elegant line drawings and intricately-constructed landscapes, died on Saturday.

His art earned him an international following and some of his work was made into a television series. His death was announced by Casterman, his publisher in France, where his work was particularly popular.

Casterman must sadly announce the death of Jiro Taniguchi on 11 February, the company said on its website, expressing deep condolences to his family. Taniguchi was widely praised for the gentle manner in which he approached subjects that were often unique for Japans manga consumers.

His works such as The Walking Man, The Summit of the Gods and The Magic Mountain, stood apart in a genre sometimes seen as rooted in extreme violence and pornography.

In The Walking Man, the protagonist of the story simply wanders around fascinated with aspects of everyday life. Taniguchi was extraordinarily kind and gentle, Casterman said in a statement.

The humanism that imbued all his work is familiar to his readers, but the man himself was much less well-known, naturally reserved in character and more inclined to let his work speak on his behalf, the publisher added. In an interview with the AFP news agency in 2012, Taniguchi explained why his art was painstakingly hand-drawn. I do not use a computer because I do not know how, I dont have that skill, he said.

He was also surprised at his popularity in the West.

I dont know why I am also known outside Japan. Perhaps it is because my work is similar to Western comics, which Ive followed for 30 years and they have influenced my subconscious, he said. Taniguchis detailed landscapes filled with cartoon characters drew comparisons in the West with European comic heroes such as Tintin.

Born in 1947 in the city of Tottori, Taniguchi had his first cartoon published in 1970. Many years later his graphic art took off in France and in 2015 his work was featured at the annual Angouleme international comics festival.

Published: 15-02-2017 10:52

See original here:

Japanese manga artist Jiro passes away - The Kathmandu Post

Despite Censorship Row, a Show Connecting Immigrant Rights and Police Brutality Goes On – Hyperallergic

Posted on by

View of Scott Daniel Williamss Storefront Sign for the Ungovernable City (2016) partially installed at the Loisaida Center (image courtesy the artist)

Ifyou visitthe Loisaida Centerin the next month, the firstthing youll notice is the sound of running water and voices some in English, some in Spanish telling stories about the Rio Grande river. Then youll see the rest of El Paso-based artist Zeke Peas collaboration with local musicianEureka The Butcher,River Border, a large graphite drawing on cloth that maps the stretch of the MexicoUS border where a military wallruns along the banks of the Rio Grande in the El Paso del Norte region. The combined effect of the Peas drawing and Eurekas recordingsis powerfully evocative, transporting the visitor to the rivers edge.

The next sound you mightve heard would have come from Albuquerque-based artistScott Daniel Williamss interactive sculpture, Storefront Sign for the Ungovernable City which, behind a sign that reads Police Not Welcome, can be toggledby pulling a chainto simultaneously play a recording of Ornette Colemans The Artist in America and audio ofthe killing ofJames Boyd byAlbuquerque Police Department officers in 2014. That workwas originally installed near Loisaidas main entrance by the curators ofFuture Now // Futura Ahora, Atomic Culture(the duo of Matthew and Malinda Galindo), but was removed on February 3, the day before the exhibitions opening. The decision, taken unilaterally by one of Loisaidas directors, was spurred by a fear that the centers CEO, Raul Russi a former Buffalo police officer who was injured in the line of duty would object to the work.This act of censorship repeatedly threatened to undo Atomic Culturesvital exhibition.

Its a very difficult situation for us as artists because this is a community center, and its a Latin Americancommunity center specifically, thats done a lot of really, really incredible work and we want to stand as allies with the center, Williams told Hyperallergic. It was a difficult decision to even take any sort of stand, but at the same time I think we [the artists in the show]feel like thats where we have to start. If were going to talk about expression and social justice we have to start at home, in these places where we should all be most accountable.

Russi who only became aware of the situation after Williams had issued a public statement and protested the exhibition opening, and negotiations between the artist, curators, and Loisaida directors had reached an impasse finally saw Storefront Sign for the Ungovernable City and the rest ofFuture Now // Futura Ahoraduring a visit to the center on Saturday. Today, he releaseda public statement about and apologyfor the works removal, paving the way for the reinstallation of Williamss work in a different space at Loisaida tomorrow.

Unfortunately, our team jumped to the wrong conclusion that I would object to the exhibition of one of the pieces without consulting with me in advance, Russis statement reads. I had the opportunity over the weekend to have a dialogue with the Atomic Culture organizers, to clarify all of this and to offer my apologies on behalf of Loisaida, Inc. As CEO, I let Atomic Culture know that the piece can be part of their ongoing exhibit.

Indeed, Williamss work seems especially relevant for an exhibition about social justice at a community center that represents a historically over-policed community and is located directly next to a major NYPDstation. Add to this the fact that all the featured artists in Future Now // Futura Ahoraare based in the southwestern United States, an area poised to become an intensified zoneof activity for the USs militarized border patrols under President Trump, and the show takes on an added sense of urgency.

In addition to Williamss piece, several other works in the exhibition condemn the excessive use of force and systemic abuses of agents paid to uphold the law. For instance, the mural On Both Sides of the Border Women Are Still Being Murdered (2016) a collaboration between Albuquerque-based artist Nani Chacon and author Tanaya Winder highlights the vulnerability of women in both Mexico and the US. And Peas aforementioned map of the Rio Grande and border wall includes a drawing of a threatening US Border Control vehicle alongside the words: You have the right to remain silent.In one of the exhibitions main rooms, a row of small, vintage-looking cell phones emits poetry and displays compass faces that seem to point the viewer north. The work, Transborder Immigrant Tool, is a safety systemdeveloped by San Diego-based artistsRicardo Dominguez and Brett Stalbaumto help disoriented travelers in any desert setting to find their way. The program offers tips for desert survival in the form of poetry recited in several different languages, and logs the coordinatesof known water caches, offering a vital tool for people crossing, for instance, the MexicoUS border in southern California, where the artists developed and tested it between 2009 and 2012.

Atomic Culturehas brought together a powerful group of artists from the southwestern US, many of whom are making work at theconfluence of art and activism, and most of whom are too rarely exhibitedin New York. Fortunately, Loisaida has rectifiedthe earliercensorship of one work and, in doing so, avoided jeopardizing the telling of all the other featured artistsimportant stories. Indeed, the reinstallation of Williamss piece will provide a crucial link between the issues of migrant safety and anti-immigrant infrastructure along the MexicoUS border that many of these artists are addressing. Police brutality often targets the most vulnerable residents in the country, and some US cities situated near the Mexican border are particularly prone to this type of institutionalized violence. The fact that many of the artists here are from Albuquerque is particularly poignant, since the citys police department is under investigation for use of force by the Department of Justice.Future Now // Futura Ahora is a testament to the works artists make not only to cope with such conditions, but to combat them.

Future Now // Futura Ahora continues at the Loisaida Center (710 East 9th Street, Lower East Side, Manhattan) through March 18.

Continue reading here:

Despite Censorship Row, a Show Connecting Immigrant Rights and Police Brutality Goes On - Hyperallergic

Nick Cannon accuses NBC of censorship, leaves ‘America’s Got Talent’ after 8 years – Washington Times

Posted on by

Nick Cannon announced his abrupt resignation from NBCs America's Got Talent Monday, accusing the network of trampling on his free speech rights and trying to censor him following a racial joke he made on his recent Showtime stand-up special.

The comedian announced his unexpected exit on Facebook, saying he was deeply saddened about being threatened with termination after his controversial joke on Stand Up, Dont Shoot reportedly irked NBC executives.

I find myself in a dark place having to make a decision that I wish I didnt have to, but as a man, an artist, and a voice for my community I will not be silenced, controlled or treated like a piece of property, Mr. Cannon wrote. There is no amount of money worth my dignity or my integrity.

My moral principles will easily walk away from the millions of dollars they hang over my head, he added. Its never been about the money for me, what is difficult to walk away from is the fans, the people who love me on the show. This hurts tremendously.

Mr. Cannons resignation came after rumors swirled that NBC executives were considering terminating his contract following a racial joke he made about America's Got Talent on his comedy special that aired on Showtime Friday night.

Sometimes I wish I could say the stuff that I really want to say, Mr. Cannon said on stage, according to a clip posted by TMZ. Cause yall see my face on America's Got Talent? Like, This next crazy motherfer coming to the stage gonna be juggling blindfolded with knives and shit, so nas be careful! But I cant say that. I cant talk like that. Cause that would mess up the white money.

Sources familiar with the situation told TMZ that NBC executives thought Mr. Cannon was disparaging the network. Sources said NBC considered terminating Mr. Cannons contract but ultimately decided to keep him after determining the joke was a passing comment, TMZ reported.

Still, Mr. Cannon said his decision to resign was based on a moral duty to stand up for what he believes is right.

I have fought many battles in my career and have never been afraid to go up against the system. I have mulled over my process for days and felt it was best to once again speak my mind about an unjust infrastructure that treat talent like they own them, he wrote Monday. So I wish AGT and NBC the best in its upcoming season but I can not see myself returning. As of lately I have even questioned if I want to even be apart of an industry who ultimately treats artists in this manner.

Production on season 12 of America's Got Talent is scheduled to begin next month. A replacement for Mr. Cannon, who served as the host since 2009, has not been named.

See the original post here:

Nick Cannon accuses NBC of censorship, leaves 'America's Got Talent' after 8 years - Washington Times

Unwilling to Reason: Why Censorship is the Wrong Answer – Daily Nexus

Posted on by

As of late, a wave of censorship has swept over this campus. Those who would silence the free speech of UCSB students are not authorities but private individuals. The College Republicans have set up signs around campus in an effort to advertise for their Ben Shapiro event on the topic of Black Lives Matter. They have followed all of the correct procedure. They have been met with vandalism. Their wood signs have been repeatedly painted over and their fliers ripped from sight.

Those who have repeatedly defaced the College Republicans signs are unwilling to reason. This would be obvious to any outsider looking in to the enclosed environment of this UC campus. In a place where one-sided classes on political issues are taught as fact, it is a wonder that there are any students at the university who would challenge the doctrines imposed on them at all.

Art by Sierra Deak / Daily Nexus

When knowledge is transmitted in such a way as it is in the university system, there is little hope for dialogue. I hear those on the left clamoring for a national dialogue, yet they offer nothing but the destruction of property, both private and public. Observe the force employed by the individuals at UC Berkeley in response to the Milo Yiannopoulos event scheduled there. And now, in a small act of what is perhaps imitation of their more violent comrades at Berkeley, leftists of UC Santa Barbara have destroyed the signs advertising the Ben Shapiro event. Nothing else could be expected from those who consider speech violence.

To equivocate speech and violence is to obliterate the distinction between reason and force. Free speech is a principle of this liberal society for one reason: so that thinking individuals may partake in a discussion of their ideas with other individuals. It is the political prerequisite to freedom of the mind that is, the freedom to reason. As humans are thinking, rational animals, such an ability as reasoning is essential for our existence within a society.

Reason is exactly the means that humans use to avoid predation on each other. In the personal sphere, reasoning is absolutely essential. Consider sex, the most personal and intimate of all human relations. Any good persons intuition regarding sex would prescribe a consensual basis for it. Consent requires a state of consciousness and agency. Such a state is the state of reason. Reason demands conscious awareness and the ability to exercise ones volitional faculties, and so it is the heart of consent. When consent is not given by all parties involved, when force is substituted for reason, the interaction becomes rape or sexual assault. Voluntary, willful consent is required in the realm of sex. It is considered most vital in this context but abandoned in others.

If the free expression of our ideas is not protected by a just government, then where is justice in our law?

The person who forces another person to be his or her friend has nothing to offer. Friends help each other. Friends do good to their friends. This is common sense. If force is used, real value and worth is absent. Just as this applies to friendship, so it applies to politics. Particularly, freedom of speech. It is a truth that no one wants something that must be forced on them. Furthermore, no one wants what is theirs to be taken away by force. Ideas are the most intimate kind of possession. They make up our minds and ourselves. If the free expression of our ideas is not protected by a just government, then where is justice in our law? Are we to apply principles of freedom to one area of our life and not the other? I would say the freedom to speak and not necessarily to be heard is more valuable than a friendship. What friendship could survive without being grounded on a firm slab of truth? What truth can be arrived at except by the free expression and exploration of ideas?

When we apply the principle of reason to economic and political relationships, we get a free market. When we apply it to academics, we should get a free market of ideas. If there is any place in the nation to glorify free speech, it should be the university. Knowledge is the business of the university. Knowledge requires truth. Truth is not easy to obtain. To obtain truth, there is only one principle that can be brought to bear. This is reason and its corollary, freedom of speech.

I am an individualist, so I do not believe everyone on the left condones the savage actions of those students who defaced the College Republicans signs. I do not believe even the majority of those on the left are gripped by a fundamentally irrational Marxist ideology that denies the premises of reason and freedom. In the coming weeks, there will be events which promote unpopular ideas. If for no other reason than to affirm that it is okay to hold an unpopular idea, these events are a blessing. With regards to the administration of this university, the vandals who ruined the College Republicans signs should be found and punished. Their punishment should not be minimal. They should serve as an example so the university can assure its students that freedom of speech will be protected.

Connor Pardini believes in the right to hold an opinion, popular or not.

Follow this link:

Unwilling to Reason: Why Censorship is the Wrong Answer - Daily Nexus

Right-Wing Troll Milo Yiannopoulos Inspires Free Speech Bill …

Posted on by

A bill to protect free speech on college campuses, introduced Thursday in Tennessees state House, was informally named in honor of Breitbart News editor Milo Yiannopoulos, who has sparked waves of student protests over his offensive remarks.

The Milo Billwould require the states public universities to adopt policies giving students the broadest possible latitude to engage in expressive activity.

Campus free speech is being challenged by restrictive speech codes; speaker bans and disinvites; ... safe spaces and trigger warnings; and administrators who feel pressured to placate demonstrators, state Rep. Martin Daniel (R), the bills sponsor,warned at a press conference.

Under the proposed legislation, officially titled the Tennessee Student Freedom Expression Act, the new college policies may not shield individuals from ideas and opinions considered unwelcome, disagreeable, or even deeply offensive. They must promote mutual respect and civility, but not use those concerns as a justification for closing off the discussion of ideas no matter how offensive or disagreeable.

In an apparent nod to the controversy over Yiannopoulos, the bill requires that public universitiesbe open to any speaker whom students, student groups, or members of the faculty have invited.

State Sen. Joey Hensley (R) suggested that the legislation was particularly necessary to protect students with conservative views.

Too many times weve seen classrooms where the professor doesnt want to hear both sides of an issue, Hensley said. Weve heard stories from many students who are honestly on the conservative side, who have those issues stifled in the classroom.

But state Sen. Jeff Yarbro (D) dismissed the bill as silly in a statement emailed to HuffPost.

The First Amendment isnt under attack on Tennessee campuses, Yarbro said.The sponsors should try focusing on real issues, instead of bringing silly legislation to suck up to Breitbart.

Yiannopoulos has made a career out of trolling liberals, including writing an article titled Birth Control Makes Women Unattractive and Crazy, describing transgender individuals asmentally ill and calling Black Lives Mattera hate group. He has gained publicity for acts like directing a flood of racist and harassing comments at Saturday Night Live actress Leslie Jones on Twitter, which got him banned from the social media site. Yiannopoulos styles himself as a free speech advocate.

His Dangerous Faggot tour appearances on college campuses have been met with protest, violence and cancellations. A scheduled speech at the University of California, Berkeley, last week was called off by school officialsafter some protesters turned violent and police put the campus on lockdown.

A statement from the Berkeley College Republicans, who had invited Yiannopoulos, said the groups right to free speech was silenced by criminals and thugs.President Donald Trump also weighed in, threatening to pull federal fundingfrom the school.

We dont want this happening in Tennessee, what happened in California, Hensley said Thursday.

The Tennessee bill requires that the proposed speech policy be communicated to students at least once each semester.If students think a public university has violated the policy, the legislation gives them the right to file complaints or petition for relief in local courts.

A spokeswoman for the University of Tennessee system pushed back on the idea that speech is being stifled on its campuses. The University has a long and established record of vigorously defending and upholding all students right to free speech, spokeswoman Gina Stafford said in an email.

Daniel proposed similar legislation last year, according to CBS affiliate WVLT, but pulled it after a critic noted that its speech protections couldtheoretically allow ISIS to recruit on campus.

Visit link:

Right-Wing Troll Milo Yiannopoulos Inspires Free Speech Bill ...

Free Speech Washington – Home

Posted on by

Free Speech Washington is a citizens group dedicated to preserving the right to boycott and divest from countries and corporations involved in human rights violations and abuses. Boycotting and divesting are forms of free speech afforded the highest level of constitutional protection by the United States Supreme Court.

2017 has so far seen four attacks in the Washington State Legislature on free speech, the right to boycott and in particular on the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. These measures include an anti-boycott bill announced in December by Senator Michael Baumgartner, House Joint Memorial 4004 and House Joint Memorial 4009 condemning the BDS Movement, and a Governors Against BDS statement delivered to Governor Inslee. The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement is a grassroots campaign to pressure Israel to abide by international law: end military occupation, ensure equal rights for Palestinians inside Israel, and accept the internationally-recognized Right of Return for Palestinian refugees. The BDS call is modeled after the South African boycott and thus calls for broad boycotts against Israeli institutions. Nothing in it calls for discrimination against individuals solely because of their national origin, religion, or ethnicity. Whatever your views on Israel, Palestine, or BDS, anti-boycott measures should be of concern, because they threaten our right to take collective action against injustice.

Contact us: freespeechwa@gmail.com

Follow this link:

Free Speech Washington - Home

Climate Lawsuit Threatens Free Speech – The New American

Posted on by

As a practical proposition if I enjoy normal life expectancy, this case will consume the bulk of my remaining time on earth. In the event that I dont, the thuggish Mann will come after my family, as has happened to my late friend Andrew Breitbarts children.

This is how well-known political commentator Mark Steyn recently summed up his opinion about the libel suit filed against him by Penn State climate scientist Michael Mann, which is expected to be set for trial soon.

I did not seek this battle. But I will not shirk the fight, and I will prevail, Steyn predicted in a recent blog.

Remarks made by Rand Simberg, a policy analyst with the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) in 2012 were the genesis of the Mann suit. Simberg referred to Mann as the Jerry Sandusky of climate science. Sandusky was a coach with the Penn State universitys football team who had been convicted of child molestation. The university has been roundly condemned for neglect in allowing Sanduskys antics to continue for so long.

This hyperbolic statement of comparing the Sandusky case to Manns was an effort to lambast Penn State for clearing Mann of accusations of scientific misconduct. Apparently, since Penn States administration had failed to rid itself of Sandusky, Simberg was saying that the exoneration of Mann by that same university was suspect.

Political commentator Steyn said as much, declaring in National Review magazine that any investigation by a deeply corrupt administration was a joke.

This was no doubt a strong comment by Steyn, but it was an opinion, and an opinion, regardless of how harsh it is, about a public figure is held to be protected speech press, under the First Amendment, according to the 1964 Supreme Court decision New York v. Sullivan.

Mann is most famous for his development of the so-called hockey stick image to illustrate his assertion that global temperatures have spiked over the last century, a spike Mann and others attribute mostly to human activity in the industrial age.

After Mann responded by suing CEI, Simberg, National Review, and Steyn for defamation, the defendants all asked that the lawsuit be dismissed on the grounds that their remarks were constitutionally protected free speech. The original trial judge allowed Manns suit to continue. Judge Natalia Combs Greene even argued that Manns defamation suit was likely to succeed. She said, To call his work a sham or to question his intellect and reasoning is tantamount to an accusation of fraud.

Surprisingly, the D.C. Court of Appeals declined to dismiss. Judge Vanessa Ruiz spoke for the three-judge panel when she wrote, Tarnishing the personal integrity and reputation of a scientist important to one side may be a tactic to gain advantage in a no-holds-barred debate over global warming. That the challenged statements were made as part of such debates provides important context and requires careful parsing in light of constitutional standards.

Despite these words, which would seem to have favored the defendants, Judge Ruiz then concluded, But if the statements assert or imply false facts that defame the individual, they do not find shelter under the First Amendment simply because they are embedded in a larger policy debate.

The D.C. appellate court said, in remanding the case back to the district court for trial, Dr. Mann has supplied sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to find, by a preponderance of the evidence, that statements in the articles written by Mr. Simberg and Mr. Steyn were false, defamatory, and published by appellants to third parties, and, by clear and convincing evidence, that appellants did so with actual malice.

Steyn, in an article for National Reviews online blog, The Corner, cited Simbergs analogy of the Mann and Sandusky cases. Im referring to another cover-up and whitewash that occurred [at Penn State] two years ago, before we learned how rotten and corrupt the culture at the university was. But now that we know how bad it was, perhaps its time that we revisit the Michael Mann affair, particularly given how much weve also learned about his and others hockey-stick deceptions since.

Then, Steyn added the biting words that precipitated Manns retaliatory lawsuit: Mann could be said to be the Jerry Sandusky of climate science, except that instead of molesting children, he has molested and tortured data in service of politicized science that could have dire consequences for the nation and planet.

Steyn did note, Not sure Id have extended that metaphor all the way into the locker-room showers with quite the zeal Mr. Simberg does, but he has a point, adding that Manns hockey-stick graphic was used to advance the fraudulent climate-change thesis, and that Mann was the ringmaster of the tree-ring circus. (Editorial note: This is typical of Steyns wit, using tree-ring, instead of three-ring. Of course, animal-rights activists, the close cousins of the radical environmentalists, have now succeeded in shutting down the largest of the circuses).

While National Review has recently been dismissed as a defendant in this particular case, leaving Steyn and Simberg as the defendants, Dr. Judith Curry had previously filed a very interesting amicus curiae, or friend-of-the-court brief on the side of National Review and the individual defendants. An amicus curiae brief is often filed in high-profile cases by parties who, while not actual litigants in the case, have a strong interest in the cases outcome.

Dr. Curry recently announced she was leaving academia due to the poisonous nature of the scientific discussion around human-caused global warming. She had challenged some of the assertions of the advocates of the climate change theory, and Mann had responded by calling her three books and nearly two hundred scholarly articles a meager contribution to science and stating she played a particularly pernicious role in the climate change denial campaign [by] laundering standard denier talking points but appearing to grant them greater authority courtesy of the academic positions she has held.

In short, Mann dismissed Currys work as boilerplate climate change denial drivel.

A comparison of anyone to a convicted child molester, as was done by Simberg, even though a reasonable person could see that it was simply a hyperbolic statement, is certainly a harsh statement. But the use of the expression of climate change denier to scientists like Curry is even stronger. As despicable as the analogy to the sexual molestation of little boys is, the denier label used so freely by the climate change crowed, including Mann, conjures up a comparison to the denial of the Holocaust the systematic murder of millions in Hitlers gas chambers.

For his part, Mann has repeatedly attacked those who disagree with him on this issue as peddling pure scientific fraud, and fraudulent denial of climate change, and even taking corporate payoff for knowingly lying about the threat climate change posed to humanity.

The Curry brief noted, As it relates to this case, Dr. Curry has been critical of Appelle Michael Manns methodological approach to climate science and the conclusions he has reached. Dr. Curry has experienced personal and professional attacks from Dr. Mann for her criticism of his work. Dr. Mann has a pattern of attacking those who disagree with him and this case is another in a long line of tactics to silence debate over the science of global warming.

Dr. Curry said that she has tried to understand Michael Manns perspective in suing so many people, while at the same time so freely throwing insults at others and even defaming other scientists. My understanding is this. Michael Mann does not seem to understand the difference between criticizing a scientific argument versus smearing a scientist.

The amicus brief of Dr. Curry highlighted its concern about allowing such a lawsuit to continue. If Dr. Mann and others like him who use libel laws to silence critics are allowed to prevail, those who use normal scientific debate will find themselves disadvantaged in the marketplace of ideas.

This is why libel suits involving public figures such as Mann are required to overcome significant hurdles in order to succeed. The plaintiff in a libel suit must prove not only that the statements found offensive are false, the plaintiff must additionally prove to a jury by clear and convincing evidence (a higher standard than the preponderance of the evidence of most civil actions, and closer to the beyond reasonable doubt requirement of criminal cases) that the defendant knew the statement was false. And the statement must have been made with actual malice, or a desire to cause damage. (For example, writing that a football player won the Heisman Trophy would not be libelous, even if the writer knew that was not true, because such a statement is not damaging and no intent to cause harm exists).

Finally, a plaintiff must show that some actual damage was caused to his reputation.

Jonathan Adler, a professor at Case Western Reserve University law school, explained the dangers of making it too easy for public figures to win such lawsuits. It threatens to make it too easy for public figures to file lawsuits against their critics, and, as a consequence, threatens to chill robust political debate.

Adler also expressed concern over the reasoning of the appellate court, when it held that, because Penn State had investigated and then exonerated Mann of doctoring scientific evidence to support his thesis of global warming, Simberg and Steyn cannot then criticize that investigation. It cannot be that once some official body has conducted an investigation of an individuals conduct, that further criticism of that individual, including criticism that expressly questions the thoroughness or accuracy of the investigatory body, is off limits.

This would preclude criticism of a judicial processes that exonerated individuals found not guilty, Adler notes.

Nor is it consistent with existing First Amendment doctrine to suggest that hyperbolic accusations of bad faith or dishonesty against public figures involved in policy debates is actionable, Adler added. In other words, the opinions expressed by Steyn and Simberg were just that opinions.

Even the threat of a libel suit is often enough to inhibit the free expression of honest political opinions, because of the potential enormous costs of litigation. Winning in a successful defense, but nevertheless out thousands of dollars, does not make one feel much like a winner. As one federal court once put it in the context of controversies in the field of science (and applicable in other fields, as well), More papers, more discussions, better data, and more satisfactory models not larger awards of damages mark the path toward superior understanding of the world around us.

Link:

Climate Lawsuit Threatens Free Speech - The New American

Guest column: free speech is essential to American liberty – The Daily Cougar

Posted on by

Wednesday, February 15, 2017

In a commitment to free expression, universities nationwide should be fostering speech in all forms, at all times. | Ajani Stewart/The Cougar

In the wake of protests in Berkeley, California, and the ensuing support for silencing speakers deemed upsetting by the left, we all should step back and reflect upon the idea that has made our society truly and classically liberal.

Free speech is more than a mere law; it is a defining principle of our society. It is not merely one among many competing values. Properly understood, it is a foundational value that supports all else that is good in our culture.

We hold this truth to be self-evident: that free expression, the foundation of a liberty-loving society, is granted to us by our creator and cannot be justly restricted by the institutions of man.

Those who believe government grants us our rights fail to comprehend this essential feature of the American tradition. If government grants us free expression, then it has the ability to constrict it by requiring that it be exercised in the proper place with proper consent.

I do not hold to that idea and neither should you.

The moment we give individuals the authority to decide where and when you can express your views, we relinquish the power to freely dissent. Being at liberty to do so is not merely a concoction to benefit the few; it protects us all no matter our race, religion or ideology. It provides universal benefit, and we must never lose sight of that basic truth.

In his immortal treatise On Liberty, John Stuart Mill described the virtues of free expression.

He said: He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. And further, The particular evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is that it is robbing the human racethose who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth; if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error.

Even if a suppressed opinion may be erroneous, it often contains a kernel of truth. Since no view is ever perfectly formed, by the battle of wits we elucidate the unknown.This argument is not about law, but rather a personal responsibility to engage with those whom we disagree.

Any restriction on the expression of an opinion reduces the total knowledge of humanity and immorally robs from history the conclusions of our frank and honest debates.

The problem with confronting free speech with forceful demands that it be stopped is not that it runs counter to law the Constitution constrains only the government from such action, not individuals. The problem is that those actions trample the principle of liberty that a pluralistic society must cherish.

Rather than shout down speakers, we should hear them out (or not youre not required to listen) and then counter speech we find disagreeable with our own. If you truly believe your views are correct and important then you should use every opportunity to persuade others rather than banish dissent.

Shutting down discussion is merely a self-gratifying exercise rather than one of academic courage.The corollary to this notion is that any restriction on the locations where free expression can be conducted similarly constricts the voices of those who wish to be heard.

The only difference is that, where speech is restricted to designated places, the coercive force is exerted by administrators and police rather than by a mob. Free Speech Zones are, therefore, an aberration which have no place in a university setting.

Rather than talk about what areas of campus should be Free Speech Zones, an understanding of the rationale and importance of free speech should cause us to flip the argument around. Instead of designating a few areas as places where we allow the exercise of liberty, we should consider all of campus to be a place of free expression barring only the few requirements necessary for the functioning of the University.

For example, it would not be possible for a professor to teach if people were to protest inside her classroom.

By looking at the entire campus as a Free Speech Zone as the starting point, and only then limiting the few necessities, we make a statement of our values: We will no longer aspire to the bare minimum of the law but rather to the maximum of our principles.

In a commitment to free expression, universities nationwide should be fostering speech in all forms, at all times, and everywhere that does not diminish the ability of the school to perform its functions.

I urge our beloved University to similarly codify its own commitment to fostering dialogue, free expression and open inquiry by all students, faculty, staff and guests. The University of Chicago described the importance of and its commitment to this value in its Statement on Principles of Free Expression.

It is high time we make a similar pledge.

In Whitney v. California, Justice Louis Brandeissaid: If there be a time to expose through discussion the falsehoods and fallacies, to avert the evil by the process of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.

History senior Matthew Wiltshire is thepresident of College Republicans at the University of Houston. History senior Michael Anderson is the chapter president and Texas state chair of Young Americans for Liberty. Both can be reached at [emailprotected]

Tags: free speech, University of Houston

The Super Bowl is coming to Houston: what do you think?

Total Voters: 200

More here:

Guest column: free speech is essential to American liberty - The Daily Cougar

Free speech and soy milk – The Washington Post – Washington Post

Posted on by

February 14 at 6:47 PM

The Feb. 11 Economy & Business article Dairy industry stakes claim on milk reported that the dairy industry has enlisted members of Congress in its quest to stop soy- and almond-milk makers from using the word milk on their packaging.

The article made clear that no one is confused by the labels on cartons of soy and almond milk and also that this effort represents a brazen dairy industry attempt to harm its competition by creating government-enforced market interference. Missing was the fact that what the dairy industry is asking for would also violate the First Amendment free-speech rights of soy- and almond-milk makers. According to clear Supreme Court precedent, for the government to dictate that almond-milk producers cannot call their product almond milk, it would need to have some legitimate government purpose, and supporting one industry over another does not qualify. Free speech and free markets are both bipartisan values, and so the dairy industry will fail in its latest attempt to fight unfairly with its plant-based competitors.

Bruce Friedrich, Washington

The writer isexecutive director ofthe Good Food Institute.

See the article here:

Free speech and soy milk - The Washington Post - Washington Post

Gainesville Resident Fights To Protect Free Speech – WUFT

Posted on by

Jim Funk still remembers when a Gainesville police officer grabbed his arms and escorted him away.

It was an event that shocked and scared Funk but also sparked a discussion about free speech and assembly in Gainesville. His run-in proved to Funk that the cityhas work to do toensure free speech to all its citizens.

That kind of disturbed me that something like that would happen, Funk said.

Funks run-in happened in November 2015 at Artwalk, a monthly event held in downtown Gainesville, while he was gathering petitions for medical marijuana. Funksaid he was approached by police officers and the events coordinatorand was told he couldnt gather signaturesbecause he wasnt affiliated with a reserved booth.

Funk said he could gather signatures because the event was on a public street. After debating the issue for a while, police said Funk caused a scene an accusation Funk denies and he was carried out. Though Funkbelieves it was an isolated incident, he still feels he was treated with injustice and that his speech was limited.

They basically can assault someone in public whos an old man not doing anything, and they can get away with it, Funk said.

The discussion about free speech has mainly been ledby Gainesville resident James Thompson, an acquaintance of Funk. Shortly after Funks incident, Thompson emailed Gainesville City Commissioners and Mayor Lauren Poe. He has since been in touch with members of Parks, Recreation & Cultural Affairs, city commissioners and city lawyers.

Poe said he firmly stands behind free speech in Gainesville, and wants to ensure it remains protected.

We dont want anything that would create a chilling effect on people practicing their free speech, Poe said.

Thompson received a list of court cases supporting Gainesvilles law from a city lawyer, David Schwartz. In response, Thompson went through each case and pointed out why it didnt apply.

At the time of his initial complaint, the Citys Administrative Procedure 34 said more than two canvassers contacting a single member of the public could be restricted, along with profanity and actions designed to gather crowds. Since then, the city manager updated the procedure to 34-A, which struck down those restrictions. However, a procedure only affects how city staff operatesinternally, and is not city law.

The current ordinance, which hasnt been updated, still has language limiting more than two canvassers from contacting a single member of the public at any time, Thompson said. It is found in Chapter 19, article 2, under peddlers and canvassers.This means people gathering petitions or passing out information might be unable to do so in a group.

That law is pretty egregious, and really a bad liability situation in my opinion, Thompson said. You basically dont need to make laws to limit free speech. We have a constitution, we have a set of practices, we have a set of rules. You cant create free speech zones, thats unconstitutional.

Thompson said limiting free speech makes sense when its a public safety concern, but that doesnt apply to Gainesville.

We all think of Gainesville as this perfect liberal open-minded town, but the fact is, you know, when people hold events even in public streets they have grand expectations about what they can do to limit others, and thats not the case, Thompson said.

Initially, Thompson planned to let the issue sit until the city took care of other dated laws on the books. The city hired Municipal Code Corporation in December to review existing laws. After the laws are reviewed, a recommendation will be made to the commission. The process should wrap up in two to three months, said Gainesville Clerk of the Commission Kurt Lannon.

Poe said he thinks it is too early to see if the code will be changed.The commission will wait until they receive a recommendation from the group.

This is why we wanted to hire an outside person, so we wouldnt crowd the view with our own personal biases and assumptions, Poe said.

With the election of President Donald Trump and subsequent national protests, Thompson said free speech in Gainesville needs to be protected now more than ever. He thinks making changes to the laws around assembly cannot wait.

I thought its very important for Gainesville to have this stuff cleared up before anything bad happens, to basically state that Gainesville is going to stand by the First Amendment and stand by its citizens, Thompson said.

Though Thompson considers himself liberal, he said it doesnt matter what the protests are for.

Thats exactly the time when we are supposed to protect free speech, is when it makes us uncomfortable and when it is unwelcome[d], Thompson said. In fact, it doesnt matter what these people are petitioning or assembling for, they should be allowed to do what theyre allowed to do with their rights.

See more here:

Gainesville Resident Fights To Protect Free Speech - WUFT

Free Speech Restrictions Leave Federal Workers Anxious About Challenging Trump – Truth-Out

Posted on by

The First Amendment does not always protect civil servants from reprisal. (Image: Jared Rodriguez / Truthout)

Recent internal memos on how and when federal employees can speak their minds has left those frustrated by President Trump in murky waters, according to advocates.

For climate scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or rogue members of the National Park Service, this uncertainty around their ability to speak without fear of reprisal is causing confusion and despair as the Trump administration assumes control and attempts to assert its version of the facts, according to Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), a watchdog group that represents civil servants at agencies like the EPA.

"There will be a number of instances where people are speaking their minds and the rules aren't all that clear," said PEER Director Jeff Ruch, who counsels government employees about their rights. "And you have a chief executive who is somewhat thin-skinned, and that may trickle down through his appointees," who could punish employees for actions perceived as dissent.

Ruch said there seems to be a "level of mutual mistrust" between civil servants who staff federal agencies as nonpartisan workers and President Trump, who promised on the campaign trail to gut agencies like the EPA, and announced a hiring freeze for many agencies shortly after taking office.

"The hiring freeze was not an economic measure but an effort to drain the swamp, as if [federal employees] are a malignant force and, if you can bleed them off, then government will be better," Ruch said. "And a lot of this could be offensive to some of these career civil servants."

Some civil servants have dared to challenge Trump. Since the National Park Service's Twitter account was temporarily shuttered after it questioned White House statements on the size of the crowd at Donald Trump's presidential inauguration, dozens of "alternative" federal agency accounts (such as AltEPA and AltFDA) have opened and amassed followings that rival their official counterparts.

These accounts identify with the anti-Trump resistance, and are unofficial. Many make it clear that tweets and posts are not coming from government employees in their official capacity, if from government employees at all. Ruch said PEER has been fielding questions from operators of these alternative accounts, which often challenge Trump's public statements and draw attention to the latest climate science.

Agency employees who speak out against Trump are treading on difficult ground, particularly since federal civil servants have limited rights to free speech in the workplace. In 2006, the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment does not protect public employees for statements made while acting in their official capacity, making it risky to speak out against a new administration that has been openly hostile to the media and anyone else who challenges its narrative.

Moreover, the Hatch Act of 1939 prohibits the vast majority of federal employees from participating in certain political activities on the job, including advocating for and against political candidates. Trump has filed 2020 campaign paperwork and is considered a political candidate. This means that federal employees are prohibited from speaking for or against his reelection in their official capacity, according to a memo circulated by the US Office of Special Counsel last week.

Ruch said making a statement as simple as, "This is a disaster, we've got to get rid of this guy," around the water cooler at a federal office could apparently cost a federal employee their job.

Federal employees do have First Amendment rights as private citizens, but that doesn't protect them in the workplace. Not too long after the White House's snafu with the National Park Service's Twitter account, the EPA sent out an agency-wide memo advising employees about the difference between addressing the public as an EPA employee and in their "individual personal capacity."

The memo urges employees not to refer to their agency title, such as "inspector" or "climate scientist," when writing, speaking or making social media posts in their personal capacity, and not to make such statements from EPA computers:

If you feel you must refer to your EPA position or title, then the prudential advice is to do so as one of several biographical details with EPA not having any undue prominence. You should be clear you are expressing an individual personal opinion, not speaking on behalf of the Agency.

Ruch said it's unclear exactly what EPA employees would have to reveal about themselves to make sure their official status as an agency scientist or attorney is not "unduly prominent" compared to, say, their educational background or volunteer positions.

"Federal employees who depart from the official talking points enter murky waters," Ruch said. "Unlike White House staff, who are merely counseled about clear ethics violations, public employees trying to educate the public about the consequences of Trump initiatives may be targeted for discipline or removal."

Ruch said the Trump administration could use this ambiguity to target dissent in its ranks, and purge critics of Trump's policy directives for making statements that would otherwise be considered "borderline and marginal." This looming threat is almost certainly having a chilling effect, especially at agencies that deal with hot-button issues like climate change and immigration.

"Sean Spicer said, 'Get with the program or get out'," Ruch said.

Still, this did not keep EPA workers in Chicago from attending a February 6 rally opposing Scott Pruitt, Trump's nominee to head the agency, and speaking against him from their standpoint as employees.

Ruch said it was unclear if these employees were breaking ethics rules. The recent memos suggest that federal agencies would rather their employees not say anything to the public at all. However, despite all of this uncertainty over what federal employees can and can't say in a nation under Trump, resistance to Trump at federal agencies continues.

"Besides social media, organizations like PEER, federal unions and even professional scientific societies will increasingly become channels for public employee free speech," Ruch said. "Times have changed -- both the public and public employees are demanding more candor and have less tolerance for censorship than ever before."

Read the original post:

Free Speech Restrictions Leave Federal Workers Anxious About Challenging Trump - Truth-Out

Lawyer Defends Alleged Online Threats To Cops As Free Speech Issue – CBS Local

Posted on by

February 14, 2017 12:59 PM

Follow CBSMIAMI.COM:Facebook|Twitter

MIAMI (CBSMiami) The lawyer for a man accused of threatening Miami Beach city workers and cops is calling this simply a case of free speech.

Ricky Weinberger, 54, was in court Monday for violating an injunction.

Weinberger is accused of harassing Miami Beach Police officers with violent and vile threats, through phone calls to the police station, as well as posts on his own social media and a law enforcement site.

While he didnt show up in court Tuesday morning, his attorney argued Weinbergers rights are being violated under the first amendment.

Miami Beach police said they found these guns in an apartment occupied by Ricky Weinberger. (Source: Miami Beach Police)

Theyre claiming he made lots of threats online. But is this free speech, asked defense attorney Noel Flasterstein in court. When is this actually actionable? They said he made threats to city officials, to hotels, or harassment. But I think it has to be when theres no intent or no purpose, if youre calling somebody and bothering them just for the sake of bothering them. He actually had some disputes with the hotel. He actually had some disputes with the city employees. So I think we got, one, freedom of speech concerns. Two, is this injunction, in which this new charge is flowing, even valid? This is coming they want to lock him up, from somebody who allegedly posted stuff online. How did they know it was even his posts?

Inside Weinbergers apartment, police found 4,500 rounds of ammunition and 16 guns, including six assault rifles.

Police picked him up for violating an injunction they filed a year ago when he was arrested for repeatedly making threatening and lewd phone calls to Miami Beach city employees.

The judge found that there was reasonable cause to hold the 54-year-old while he faces three open criminal cases.

Read this article:

Lawyer Defends Alleged Online Threats To Cops As Free Speech Issue - CBS Local

Grey Magick and Soapbox Preachers – Patheos (blog)

Posted on by

photo by Sonja Sadovsky

Yesterday I had dental work. I also had a sinus infection. I was excused from returning to my office. This freed me up to take a trip downtown to file my modified paperwork from last weeks adventures. Its an odd moment to realize that one is excited to be sick enough to go to court. I was so ill that I actually forgot where the courthouse was, and wandered around until I got my bearings.

In front of the courthouse is a statue of Justice, and I admit that this is not my favorite representation. She is blindfolded, but holds no scales. Her empty arms are in different positions, which I infer is the artists rendition of the concept of balance. My impression is quite the opposite. She seems lost, blind, and imbalanced. Other interpretations I have viewed depict a woman who is serene and exudes confidence. This woman is confused and unsure. I prefer the traditional model, but perhaps this new idea is more aligned with the actual reality of the system she represents.

I got to thinking about the idea of Grey Magick, at least as it is applied by most of the practitioners that I know. Esoteric discourse is rooted in the politics of the time period in which it occurs, it becomes an interesting gauge for historical events and cultural shift. Classically, there has always been a stark dividing line between White and Black Magick in Western thought. I heard Lon Milo DuQuette describe it best ..in one you kiss Gods ass, and in the other, you kiss the Devils. Another way to look at this dichotomy is practice that aligns one with external, or astral entities to adjust internal consciousness and create results. On the other end of the arc is practice that pursues similar goals through the use of ones own body, and alignment with terrestrial, or earthbound entities to effect something or someone outside of the self. One is used to bless, and one is used to curse. These categories have become less distinct over time.

Contemporary practitioners, whether they self-identify as magicians, Witches, Pagans, or other, typically use a variety of these techniques. Donald Michael Kraig describes this approach in Modern Magick as Grey Magick, or the science and art of causing change to occur in conformity with will for the purpose of causing either physical or non-physical good to yourself and others, and is done either consciously or unconsciously. (MM, 11.) Grey Magick can quickly turn Black, as sometimes unintended consequences arise from the best ideas. Whenever we use our energies to change the world outside of ourselves, we take this risk. The results can be unpredictable. I thought of these things when I looked at this statue in front of the courthouse, my local equivalent of a Grey Temple. Looking at her I could only think that so much unconscious harm is doled out in pursuit of blessings.

photo by Sonja Sadovsky

To the side of the building but within range of the front door was a man with a Bible and a microphone. He had a step ladder instead of a soapbox, but the message was the same. Seems like an active season for the Jesus People, they are out and about in droves. Sports events, elementary schools, now court. He was not as strident as most, but he mentioned repentance and the promise of salvation if I just surrender to Gods love. It is tiresome to hear this everywhere these past few months, and I think I have become anesthetized to it on some level. I suppose to some this message would be appealing. He seems related to his bronze companion on the front podium. Trust in a higher power, trust the message, let wiser heads decide. Surrender, it is so much easier, and everything will work out in the end. We cannot see the pattern, but just have faith in the system. Let us guide you.

This has never worked for me. In the words of Elle King, Its a mean world that Ive known. Never got no good, doing what Im told. In fact, my rejection of religious dogma and exposure to the realities of the judicial system have led me to embrace a magickal worldview from an early age. I prefer to live from a philosophy of self-determination. I am responsible for my salvation or damnation, and am aware that all actions will have unforeseen effects. I do not need an external source of validation to assure me that everything will be fine. (Though it is gratifying to hear every now and again.) Conversely, I am not often unnerved at bad news or unexpected information. I have no expectation of safety, good news, or ordered existence. My early experience has trained this into me. While this was a source of pity in my youth, I find that it has served me well in recent circumstances.

To be accurate, I can take direction and frequently do. I have Gods, Ancestors, Fae, and other Allies whom I consult for perspective and guidance. The difference is that I can choose to obey, or not. Sometimes the recommendations are tough but necessary. Sometimes the advice conflicts with what I am aiming to accomplish. It is always up to my sole discretion. This is challenging, as there are many moments of self-doubt. However, I think this process is crucial to our survival as a species, if my own personal experience is any indication. We must question everything, and stop expecting to be saved. When we realize these things, conscious evolution occurs. It is not easy, but it is authentic.

Excerpt from:

Grey Magick and Soapbox Preachers - Patheos (blog)