Monthly Archives: August 2021

Crime is rampaging in Denver. Homicides are skyrocketing.

Vagrants infest our streets. Our sidewalks are littered with human excrement and used needles.

Forced out of business by city lockdowns, storefronts are boarded up and covered with graffiti.

Inflation is stealing from working families. Colorado is in the bottom third of states in employment.

Our once-shining city is in decay.

So of course, now is the time for the citys leader, Mayor Michael Hancock, to turn his attention to the most pressing Denver issue of allreparations for slavery.

As The Gazette reported, Mayor Hancock is leading a national effort to establish pilot projects that will provide reparations to African American citizens in several cities around the country.

Hancock is now co-chair of Mayors Organized for Reparations and Equity (MORE, clever acronym, eh? Well named, given that when asked how much all this should cost, the answer is simply, MORE).

MORE is a group of 12 mayors from fiscally responsible cities like Los Angeles, Providence, RI, and Austin who believe that their city governments, at taxpayer expense and without consensus on the ethical and financial ramifications of reparations, must act as laboratories for bold ideas that can be transformative for racial and economic justice on a larger scale, and demonstrate for the country how to pursue and improve initiatives that take a reparatory approach to confronting and dismantling structural and institutional racism.

For those not schooled in the overly wordy language of oppressor/oppressed victim-speak, the above gobbledygook means since the federal government wont give reparations, we socialist-leaning cities will.

As progressives continue their stranglehold over urban areas, governmental mission creep turns into a tsunami. It used to be only smug cities like Boulder would do sanctimonious things like passing a moratorium on nuclear weapons. (Seriously, if you have a nuke, I strongly recommend you stay out of Boulder.) But at least that type of virtue-signaling didnt have a large price-tag.

Reparations for slavery has a massive price tag, squeezing out other budget items. So next time your car is victimized by an oppressive pothole know youre making up for centuries of systematic oppression. We all even now?

Sadly, African Americans also drive those same roads, so they get to pay for a front-end alignment as well. So, not quite sure how that math works.

Reparations for sins of generations past is a big decision which should come from a very deliberative process and is one of the few decisions that should be centralized at a national level.

The United States, not the City and County of Denver, paid reparations to Japanese Americans who were interned by executive order of big government icon Franklin D. Roosevelt. After all Denver didnt intern them. And important point here, those who were personally interned were the ones compensated, not their descendants descendants.

Should it matter to anyone, slavery was always illegal in Colorado. And as the statue of the union soldier at the State Capitol, the one toppled by anti-police and #BLM rioters, might indicate, Coloradans fought and died to end slavery.

That leads to a question. If descendants of slaves deserve payments for the wrongs done to their ancestors, why should the descendants of those who paid the ultimate price by being killed in the civil war to free slaves be forced to pay for it?

Apparently, the debit side of the balance sheet passes along the generations, but the paid-in-full credit side stops with death.

Of course, your public-schooled child, now proficient in Critical Race Theory, will tell you its the systemic, institutional racism created after the Civil War which deserves reparations. After all Denver is such a systemically racist city a black man cant be elected mayor.

If Mayor Hancock wants to help black families advance in his city, racial favoritism and wealth redistribution arent answers. Opportunity is.

Mayor, what is keeping black families down in Denver? Crime, a result of the progressive dream of emptying the jails. Enforce the laws again.

Education is the key to economic mobility. Champion school choice.

Minorities are priced out of homes in Denver, so let builders build and end growth boundaries.

Minorities are confined to government transit. Give poor people cars or transit vouchers for Uber.

Stop enslaving minorities to government.

Jon Caldara is president of the Independence Institute, a free market think tank in Denver.

Our unofficial motto at Complete Colorado is Always free, never fake, but annoyingly enough, our reporters, columnists and staff all want to be paid in actual US dollars rather than our preferred currency of pats on the back and a muttered kind word. Fact is that theres an entire staff working every day to bring you the most timely and relevant political news (updated twice daily) from around the state on Completes main page aggregator, as well as top-notch original reporting and commentary on Page Two.

CLICK HERE TO LADLE A LITTLE GRAVY ON THE CREW AT COMPLETE COLORADO. Youll be giving to the Independence Institute, the not-for-profit publisher of Complete Colorado, which makes your donation tax deductible. But rest assured that your giving will go specifically to the Complete Colorado news operation. Thanks for being a Complete Colorado reader, keep coming back.

comments

Continued here:

Caldara: Denver doesn't belong in the reparations business - Complete Colorado

PxFuel.com

This article closes out a series of articles that NPQ has published over the past few weeks in partnership with Hispanics in Philanthropy to raise attention to some of the many economic justice issues that Latinx communities face. (Prior installments in the series are here, here, here, here, and here). While the series concludes, the conversation continues. Additional contributions to NPQ on the topic are welcome.

For this story, I interviewed Viridiana Hernandez, who is executive director of Poder in Action in Arizona, and Brenda Elodia Ochoa Ortiz, executive director of Fray Matas de Crdova A.C. Human Rights Center (Fray Matas). Hernandez grew up as a child during a time that Sheriff Joe Arpaios raids terrorized immigrants in the state. After the show me your papers bill, SB1070, became law in 2010, Hernandez became, at the age of 24, executive director of Poder in Action, where she has supported leadership development of hundreds of young people. This work ultimately led to the electoral defeat of Arpaio. She views the goal of her work as creating spaces of community and love. For her part, Ochoa considers herself a human rights defender, and feminist; in her work, she aims to repair the damage from structural violence faced by migrants. I conducted both interviews in Spanish and translated them into English.Inar Yar Melndez Vzquez

VH: Poder in Action is a grassroots organization focused on building community power to disrupt and dismantle systems of oppression and determine a liberated future for people of color in Arizona. Right now, the fight against state violence means a focus on the crimmigration systemthe way the immigration and criminal justice intersect. We are fighting to abolish systems of harm and punishment and instead invest in the health and safety infrastructure in our communities.

We have two programs, Youth Poder and Barrios al Poder. These programs were created by members directly impacted by the crimmigration system. Youth Poder organizes youth ages 1318 and 1935 to take action against injustice, white supremacy, and machismo. Barrios al Poder organizes Spanish-speaking immigrant families to take action against the crimmigration system.

BO: The Fray Matas human rights center is a local organization founded 24 years ago that responds to the recognition of the need for handholding, care, and support of one of the highly vulnerable migrant and refugee populations on the southern border of Mexico. We recognize that global policies have a strong impact on the life and dignity of people, subjecting them to serious human rights violations and constant political and social criminalization. Our mission is to provide people with the psychosocial and legal support they need. From the individual to the collective, we aim to strengthen their political capacity for social and political influence.

VH: My days are spent providing support for our organizers or community members. We work with many families impacted by police violence. This means they have a need for individual support, as well as support for common demands or campaigns.

Immigrant families in the US constantly face crises. In 2020, the impact of COVID in our communities led us to create a fund to support undocumented people who have been excluded from government assistance programs. Our communities are constantly seen as disposable, and this role means also responding to those moments at the same time we fight for the long-term changes necessary for our communities.

BO: It is a great question. My tasks range from taking care of my team, making decisions to be able to provide external care, as well as respond to the political needs of the moment. It is difficult to describe a normal day. For me, that ranges from internal organization meetings, internal conflict resolution, inter-institutional meetings, liaison and representation, reporting, drafting proposals, and responding to informational emails with other organizations and donors.

VH: The people in our community are resilient, hard-working, and strong. We organize in West Phoenix, home to many Latinx immigrant families and youth. These are working-class families, living paycheck to paycheck to push their families through. The communities we build with have been impacted by institutional racism, leading to higher contact with the carceral system and health disparities. Despite these obstacles, our communities have survived and learned to thrive.

Immigrant communities in Phoenix are the backbone of our economy. Nonetheless, immigrants in Phoenix and Arizona are often not valued or respected. Neighborhoods with higher populations of immigrants are less resourced, over-policed, unattended, and are made to believe these racial disparities are our own fault rather than the product of structural racism. For decades, the Arizona legislature has created and passed laws that target immigrants, from denying healthcare, to denying in-state tuition and access to grants, to making it legal to racially profile through SB1070. Our communitys ability to prosper is constrained, and yet immigrants in Arizona find ways to be seen and live joyous lives.

BO: We are in an impoverished region. There are not enough government resources for education and public health. We see few resources arrive because they become diluted by political corruption that occurs through the manipulation of information. The data is inflated to indicate progress, but that is not the reality, as we have seen with the issue of maternal mortality. There is also a large Indigenous population that the authorities often disregard. In a community ignored by the government, it is common that people feel suspicious about the help that migrants receive when the community already receives so little.

VH: I do this work because, like many in my community, I was an undocumented young Brown woman being denied an education and whose life had become a political pawn. My different identities and life experience have led me to this work. At first, I organized to defend myself and my family, but it has now become the only way to fight for liberation for our communities. I believe deeply that we deserve more than just survival; we deserve to live happy, healthy, and joyous lives.

BO: I am a woman born in the region from a family with a history of social struggle. I believe that my mother and father left a strong mark on me. These are principles with which I carry myself, including empathy to recognize shortcomings, inequalities, and opportunities. I have been able to participate with groups of young volunteers in the community for many years, which made me recognize my strengths, including my experience in my professional development as a doctor. I face the harshness of the system and the impacts of life, which allowed me to recognize the need to focus my energies on places where I could confront the inequalities and violence that states themselves originate.

VH: I became the executive director at Poder in Action at the age of 24. Being a young Brown woman has been one of the biggest challenges. My expertise was constantly questioned. Living the systems that I was fighting was not enough expertise for some. I did not have the degrees that some deemed necessary. The only way to overcome it was to continue doing the work I needed to do. I had to surround myself with a tribe of people that supported and uplifted me. It has meant practicing reflection, grounding myself on why this work is important, and being accountable to the families I organize with.

BO: Being a young woman from the community means I face challenges within these social structures. Even within our civil society organizations, these gender-based issues are present and internalized. We are often underestimated in our technical and professional capacities. Personally, machismo is one of the great challenges that I have faced within my work. I have overcome this by recognizing the structures, pointing them out when they are present, becoming more assertive with my words, and paying close attention to how they constantly show up.

VH: We work with youth and families impacted by the crimmigration system. At the beginning of Poder, we worked on issues of education, immigration, and policing. But today it is more focused on police violence and the polimigra.

For many years we focused solely on immigrant rights and resisting attacks on immigrants. But after the 2016 election, it was clear that our strategies had to shift. Stopping deportations was becoming harder. Part of our shift to a focus on policing was rooted in stopping deportations. Local police departments were the biggest contributors funneling our people into the deportation machine. The shift to this work has also led us to see the huge impact of police violence in immigrant communities. We have worked with undocumented mothers whove lost their children to police violence and on top of that have been questioned for their ID and immigration status.

BO: It has changed only in giving greater emphasis to the entire complex of the defense of human rights, with special interest in violence against women, girls, boys, and adolescents. These are the people who are most vulnerable and in greatest need of recognition of their rights in the face of a capitalist, patriarchal, and adult-centered system. As the most vulnerable populations are protected in their rights with full recognition and guarantee of the same, the other populations will therefore be respected their rights, thus ensuring that rights are not a privilege.

Fray Matas has always focused strategically on women and children. The move to create a space only for women is something that has come from the migrant women themselves. It is important to create these spaces that go beyond physical space to provide a safe space where women are listened to, understood, and motivated. Fray Matias provides the physical space, but it is from the meetings of the women that the motivation and work arises.

VH: This work is hard because state violence functions as it was intended to, continuously harming Black, Indigenous, and Brown people. Under the Obama administration, we had the most deportations in history. Young people were learning how to fight deportations through public advocacy campaigns. In 2012, I went to a training led by undocumented youth on how to launch and sustain these campaigns. A month later, a family I worked with contacted me. They were in a crisis: a dad, husband, friend to many, Edi Armas, had been detained and was facing deportation.

This became the first #Not1More deportation campaign I worked on. After several months of protests, meetings with congressional representatives, and press conferences led by his children, Edis deportation was halted, and eventually, Edi was released from the detention center. To me, this was a clear example of community members coming together as friends, family, and strangers to help a family remain together. These months of campaigning were an example of our humanity and deep love for our people.

BO: In October 2018, the first caravan from Honduras departed with more than 2,000 people. Alongside colleagues from other organizations, we headed about 15 miles away from Tapachula to the border of Guatemala. It was there where we formed a monitoring group that continues to denounce the political repression and violence against migrants and refugees. That day was the first of many where we reached the banks of a river on the border that was said to be where people would cross. On that day we encountered more than 2,000 people in front of us who made it to the edge of the river, but they did not cross and only stayed on the shore. On the other side of the river, for over 10 minutes, they chanted slogans and hymns from their countries. The image and voices are recorded in my mind and my heart. Every day, I witness the strength people have to simply live.

VH: This work is not a choice. It is a necessity as people of color. To create a more just, free, and healthy life, we must undo the systems we function in that thrive on white supremacy and patriarchy. There is a role for everyone, and if one is not actively fighting to dismantle these systems, we are perpetuating them. So as a reminder, let us reflect and have clarity on our role in this work and how each is disrupting and dismantling these systems.

BO: What we do is a long-term struggle, based in collective and individual activity. One key part of this work is the recovery of our social fabric by educating our community, so that we can all be defenders of human rights through our everyday actions. By so doing, we strengthen our ability to counter the systemic violence we face.

Viri Hernandez is the executive director of Poder in Action, an Arizona-based nonprofit that seeks to build power to disrupt and dismantle systems of oppression by and for the people of color in the state.

Brenda Elodia Ochoa is the director of Centro de Derechos Humanos Fray Matas de Crdova A.C. (Fray Matas), a human rights organization that works to protect the rights of migrants and refugees in Tapachula, Chiapas, Mexico.

Inar Yar Melndez Vzquez is senior manager of communications for Hispanics in Philanthropy.

Read the original post:

Ambos Lados: A Conversation from Both Sides of the US-Mexico Border - Non Profit News - Nonprofit Quarterly

I recently relocated to Atlanta for work, and Ive spent the last few months trying to put my life together again. When you move, a great deal of time goes into just merely finding your new people and merchants.

Where do I buy my groceries? Who is going to color my hair? What new dentist do I try?

And top of the list for me: where am I going to practice yoga?

Yoga is more than a workout for me. I use it to prevent my sciatica from flaring upa debilitating and particularly painful condition that can leave me bedridden for days. And I also use it as a treatment for my anxiety disorder. For me, yoga is essential medicine, mentally and physically, and I refuse to miss more than a day or two for my healths sake.

After trying a few studios in my new neighborhood, I finally landed on CorePower Yoga, a national, high-end chain with rigorous classes. The only issue? They were still making people wear a mask from the front door to the mat...where we then proceeded to lock ourselves in a 90-degree room for 60 minutes and sweat out every drop of water in our bodies.

I let the manager know Id be happy to join as a member if they got rid of this bit of security theater, and to my pleasant surprise, they did! ..For about two weeks. But then it came roaring back with a vengeance. I arrived last week to find out the studio had not only reinstated its mask policy, it was now requiring them throughout the class. Yes, really.

I dont know if youve ever done a hot yoga sculpt class, but they are physically demanding. I often leave feeling a bit lightheaded as it is and gasping for cool air. The thought of wearing a mask through such an ordeal sounds like literal torture. And for an exercise that relies fundamentally on ones breath and breathing techniques, its frankly ludicrous to even suggest.

The studios actions come on the heels of a new order by Atlanta Mayor, Keisha Lance Bottoms mandating masks for all people indoorsvaccinated or notincluding in private spaces. The last part of that act is certainly a violation of property rights, but it has yet to be struck down.

And Atlanta isnt an outlier. Cities from Missouri to Massachusetts have implemented similar rules and some places, like New York City, are even rolling out vaccine passports.

I, like so many other Americans, have been going along to get along for 15 months now. I willingly put on my cloth mask when asked to, knowing I had natural immunity and that a cloth mask was little more than security theater. I kept supporting small businesses that held different views than me knowing theyd been pummeled by pandemic policies and wanting to help them out. I was respectful. I didnt push my views on people, even as I advocated online and in print for very different approaches to public health.

Politically, its been a balancing act of protecting civil liberties, property rights, and bodily autonomy, while honoring the value of human life. Personally, it has been a landmine of respecting the rights of others and their choice to approach situations differently, so long as they do not try to force their choices on others. It has not been easy.

For this balancing act, I (and others who think similarly) have been labeled grandma-killers (even as pro-lockdown Democrats like Andrew Cuomo actually killed hundreds of grandmas), anti-science (even as we consistently presented data that proved lockdowns and cloth masks were ineffective), and Trump supporters (even as the Trump administration itself was responsible for many bad pandemic policies we fought against).

At the end of it all, Ive determined that I dont care what the COVID Karens have to say about me. People who favor lockdowns, vaccine passports, masking kids for eight hours a daythese people have discounted themselves and wreaked mass havoc on millions of lives by following politics instead of the actual science. They do not respect individual rights, bodily autonomy, or civil liberties, and they no longer get to pretend they have the moral high ground.

What I care about is what history has to say about me during this time, and being able to look back and know I did all I could to defend individual rightsincluding my own. Its time to rise up and resist.

Is it the businesses fault that politicians are again forcing these policies on us? No. But it is their responsibility to fight back and stand up for their property rights just as it is the duty of all citizens to resist when our government tramples on our rights.

Does resisting mean some hard choices? Yes. Freedom often requires sacrifice. And I dont say that flippantly.

Fortunately I work for a company that actually respects my autonomy, and one that allows remote work. Due to that I wont be confronted with an 8-hour work day in a mask. But if I were, I would quit. There has never been a better time to job hunt and demand better working conditions. Companies are desperate for workers, and they ought to find people are unwilling to work for them if they cave to politicians and enforce such policies.

And when it comes to the myriad of other businesses most of us frequent throughout a given week, its time to start asking which we can do without, and which we can find alternatives to. The answer is, thanks to the beauty of capitalism and all the competition it provides, most of them.

In Human Action, Ludwig von Mises wrote, The market is a democracy in which every penny gives a right to vote. We too quickly forget how powerful our money is, how much it matters who we give it to. Its time we take stock of that and quit giving money to people who dont support our values and who wont stand up for us. This is how you vote with your dollar.

And this mentality and practice is also how we fight back against this nonsense on multiple fronts.

Should we push back on our politicians for enacting these bad policies? Certainly. But we should also encourage businesses to push back as well. They have much more political power and capital than the average consumer and are better positioned to mount a legal challenge. They also, in most of these circumstances, have far greater legal standing. It is their property rights that are being violated by such mandates, and their bottom dollar most impacted by these policies. The business community needs to band together and fight back in the courts.

They should also resist by simply refusing to comply. Civil disobedience is a deeply American tradition, after all. Both individuals and businesses possess the agency to stand up against oppression and refuse to allow our rights to be further withered away.

Henry David Thoreau wrote, If I deny the authority of the stateit will soon take and waste my property and so harass me and my children without end. This is hard. This makes it impossible for a man to live honestly, and at the same time comfortably."

But the thing is, the government has already done these things. It has already taken peoples property under an unconstitutional eviction moratorium. It has already taken away the education of millions of children. It is already harassing us and trying to force people into putting a substance in their body. Comfort is no longer an option.

If the injustice, Thoreau wrote, is part of the necessary friction of the machine of government, let it go, let it go: perchance it will wear smoothcertainly the machine will wear out but if it is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then I say, break the law. Let your life be a counter-friction to stop the machine. What I have to do is to see, at any rate, that I do not lend myself to the wrong which I condemn.

At a certain point, going along to get along becomes lending yourself to the wrong you condemn. As Thoreau also wrote, "Those who, while they disapprove of the character and measures of a government, yield to it their allegiance and support are undoubtedly its most conscientious supporters, and so frequently the most serious obstacles to reform."

We cant keep going along to get along. If we do, we are as responsible for the erosion of our rights as those cheering for it. Its time for peaceful, civil disobedience.

And in the meantime, the incredible thing about capitalism is that the market will find a way to provide. During COVID weve seen all kinds of innovative alternatives spring upin my case online yoga classes and on-demand personal trainers willing to come to the consumer. I want to vote for that innovation with my dollar, and support those who do not cave to authoritarianism.

We should reward those who thwart the government in this manner and withdraw our money from those who roll over. I obtained a refund from my yoga studio for this month and will be putting my money where my mouth is, I think others should do the same.

See the original post:

How I Responded When My Yoga Studio Reinstituted a Mask Mandate | Hannah Cox - Foundation for Economic Education

Yesterday Governor Kristi Noem tooted her own horn for coercing the Board of Regents into approving a draft policy restricting the teaching of Critical Race Theory at state colleges and universities. For their part, the Regents trotted out their newest members, all Republican toadies appointed in April, to croak for whatever anti-anti-racist propaganda Noem is pushing:

The boards statement frames its position around four central tenets: (1) offering opportunity for all students; (2) proudly supporting the United States of America; (3) safeguarding the rich tradition of American universities; and (4) offering curriculum based upon widely held and accepted knowledge and thought.

The statement recognizes the importance of teaching public university students in South Dakota about Americas history, the system of individual liberty in a democratic republic, and the free enterprise system. Part of that instruction is to acknowledge and discuss Americas flaws and mistakes, so that we can learn from them and improve, it says. Critical Race Theory is not the basis for instruction in our state universities and its not going to be. But this is a label that means different things to different people, said Regent Tony Venhuizen. Thats why our board today is taking a step back and stating the American values that will continue to guide the university system.

We are committed to programs that enhance a wide ranging knowledge of American government and its traditions, said Regent Jeff Partridge. As part of that, we are prepared to offer new opportunities for students to increase their civic engagement and develop skills in communication, critical thinking, civility, and dispute resolution.

Regents recognize that South Dakotas public universities are part of the rich tradition of American universities, a tradition built upon free speech, scientific discovery, and academic freedom. As our students expand their understanding in a field of study, we encourage thatstudents be exposed to a variety of viewpoints, ideas, and theories, so that they can be debated and critiqued, the statement says [South Dakota Board of Regents, press release, 2021.08.05].

Wait a minute: even the toadies seem to be croaking out of tune with Queen Frog. Noem and her merry fascists are saying they are going to ban critical race theory. But Venhuizen,the smartest of this warty bunch, suggests theres nothing to ban, that our universities are not basing and will not base their instruction on critical race theory. Noems former chief of staffspeaks as if the universities status quo has been following American values just fine all along. Former legislator Partridge doesnt mention critical race theory; his statement about the universities commitment to enhancing a wide-ranging knowledge of American government and its traditions seems to call for exactly the opposite of what Noem says shes about; as a matter of fact, critical race theory seeks exactly what Partridge describes: critical thinking about the traditions of racismthat have built systemic discrimination into our laws and institutions, with the goal of improving communication and helping resolve disputes and make American government better.

And the new draft policy itself never mentions critical race theory. It wallows in some dismissive All Lives Matter racismresponding to concerns of systemic racism with bland declarations of colorblind support for every individual deliberately misses the point, devalues valid critiques of genuine discrimination, and thus perpetuates the problemit engages in greater contortions to avoid saying exactly what Noem wants us to think it says about the hobbyhorse she wants to ride into the 2024 election. Lets read each of the four points of the Regents statement:

1. South Dakotas state universities offer opportunity for all students, to benefit from education and to prepare to live and work in South Dakota, or anywhere in the world. We do not discriminate on the basis of race, sex, ethnicity, religion, disability, veteran status, economic status, or sexual preference. We treat each person as an individual, not as a member of a group, and offer services and supports for each persons individual situation. We reject, and will not promote, the idea that any individual person is responsible for actions taken by other people. We also reject, and will not promote, any suggestion that one group of people is inherently superior or inferior to another group, or is inherently oppressive or immoral [South Dakota Board of Regents, Opportunity for All statement, approved 2021.08.05].

Critical race theory does not make claims about individuals, other than to grant that individuals choose their own membership in social categories and belief systems regardless of identities that outsiders may attempt to impose on them. Critical race theory cant promote any notion of one racial groups inherent superiority, inferiority, immorality, or penchant for oppression, because critical race theory holds that race is not inherent, not biological, not essential, but a social construct. Critical race theory actually responds to those who adopted such fallacious racial essentialism and who therethrough baked racism into our legal system. So on this first point, the Regents statement is right in line with critical race theory.

2. South Dakotas state universities are public, taxpayer-funded institutions. It is inherent in the missions of our universities to proudly support the United States of America. Our students will learn about Americas history, our system of individual liberty in a democratic republic, and our system of free enterprise. Part of that instruction is to acknowledge and discuss Americas flaws and mistakes, so that we can learn from them and improve. We celebrate, though, Americas role in recent world history, as the nation most responsible for expanding liberty, prosperity, and equality across the globe [SDBOR, 2021.08.05].

The Regents aver that our professors will lead students to acknowledge and discuss Americas flaws and mistakes, so that we can learn from them and improve. Thats exactly whatNoem herself did last monthwhen she talked about the need to learn from our nations racist mistakes in its Indian boarding school policies. Thats exactly what critical race theory calls on us to do.

3. South Dakotas state universities are a part of the rich tradition of American universities, which are built upon free speech, scientific discovery, and academic freedom, and for that reason have been emulated by the rest of the world. We commit our state universities to a focus on the future: preparing the leaders and scholars of the next generation to solve the problems of tomorrow. Although we can learn from and understand the past, we do this so we can learn to be better in the future, and we will never compel any person to accept any particular set of beliefs [SDBOR, 2021.08.05].

Now the Regents are really parrying Noems attack. They assert that free speech and academic freedom have made our universities global leaders. They reiterate the critical race theorists commitment to understanding and learning from the past so we can learn to be better in the future. And in speaking of never compelling anyone to accept any beliefs (yeah, sure, but if you dont accept the beliefs like the Law of Large Numbers and the Central Limit Theorem, youll have a hard time passing Stats), they are actually rejecting any attempt the Governor and Legislature may make to impose their own ideological indoctrination. This third point thus opens the door for instructors to make critical race theory central to discussions of history, law, and social justice and protects them from authoritarian attempts to infringe on their academic freedom.

South Dakotas state universities will offer a curriculum that is based upon widely-held and accepted knowledge and thought. Our universities will respect academic freedom, and will expect faculty to exercise that freedom in a way that respects this expectation. As our students expand their understanding in a field of study, we encourage that students be exposed to a variety of viewpoints, ideas, and theories, so that they can be debated and critiqued. This could include discredited or controversial ideas, because understanding the weaknesses of failed ideas is as important as understanding the strengths of successful ones. Students must be prepared to identify the good and bad in new or controversial areas of thought [SDBOR, 2021.08.05].

Again invoking academic freedom, the Regents affirm the obvious, that university curriculum is based on widely held and accepted knowledge and ideas. If our young students beliefs are any indication, critical race theory is evidently widely held and (thankfully) informing their views about racism in America. But even if we skip that vague criterion of widely held and accepted as critical race theorys automatic ticket to the curriculum, the Regents say the controversy over critical race theory qualifies it for discussion. Never mind that the controversy arises only because apartheidist Republicans have misappropriated a term they dont understand to distract from their failures and oppressive designs. Students must understand controversial areas of thought; students thus must have opportunities to read and discuss critical race theory.

Governor Kristi Noem seems to think she got the Regents to ban critical race theory. The Regents planted words playing to her deliberate misconception of critical race theory at the top of their press release, and they had her most recent appointees say things that could be quickly read to support the Governors talking point. Yet they issued a formal statement that doesnt mention critical race theory but is almost entirely consistent with the principles of critical race theory.

Seeing such apparent dissonance between what the Governor claims the Regents have done and what the Regents are actually saying, I cant help but wonder if the Regents are trying to superficially placate the Governors fascist impulses while assuring South Dakotans who actually read that our universities will defend academic freedom and honest, non-partisan education, including, where appropriate, the valid and useful framework of critical race theory.

Continued here:

Noem Claims Regents Are Restricting Critical Race Theory; Regents' Statement Doesn't Say That - Dakota Free Press

Kashmir Times. Dated: 8/6/2021 1:30:55 AM

By Bharat DograThe Taliban are now widely regarded as one of the most violent and socially regressive forces in the world. This is largely correct, but an unintentional and unfortunate extension of this understanding is to regard the Pashtun people as a very violent people.

Today the world is talking about the Taliban as an extremely violent group known for very fierce fighting and extreme forms of violence. Many strategists are saying that the Taliban takeover of much of Afghanistan territory is a very serious threat for the spread of very violent forms of ideologies. Cruel revenge against all those who are perceived by it to have acted against its interests is widely feared in the areas which are taken over by this militant organization. In addition, violence against minorities and women is feared, in particular those women who are not perceived by it to be abiding by its approval of only a very restricted social role of women as well as prescribed dress codes.The Taliban emerged initially from the residential schools opened in Pakistan mainly for refugees from Afghanistan where highly restrictive fanatic thought was the base of education and many of the pupils had no exposure to any other worldview in their formative years. This was backed by military training and glorification of fighting and dying for a fanatic form of religion.They were then unleashed as a heavily armed militant force for narrow political objectives in Afghanistan without realizing the very serious adverse longer-term impacts of such an action. The Talibans comprised mainly Pashtun people who live on both sides of the Durand line in Afghanistan and Pakistan. In due course a similar group with equally violent actions on the Pakistan side also emerged, although it is much smaller as it never had official support.The Taliban are now widely regarded as one of the most violent and socially regressive forces in the world. This is largely correct, but an unintentional and unfortunate extension of this understanding is to regard the Pashtun people as a very violent people. This is wrong, and in particular it is important to recall at this juncture the time when the Pashtuns were organized for one of the most inspiring non-violent struggles which drew well-deserved extensive praise from none other than Mahatma Gandhi.The reference here of course is to the great movement under the inspiring leadership of Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan (also called Badshah Khan the King of Khans and Frontier Gandhi), a non-violent freedom movement that prospered in parts of the Pashtun dominated region during 1920-1947, peaking around 1930-1935 with the involvement of nearly a hundred thousand soldiers of peace. As is well known, these were years of freedom movement in undivided India against colonial British rule led by Mahatma Gandhi, who pioneered the biggest anti-colonial peaceful movement. In the main Pashtun area of undivided India centering around the city of Peshawar, this struggle was led by Badshah Khan, a friend and admirer of Mahatma Gandhi. Ultimately Mahatma Gandhi was to say that it is Badshah Khan and the freedom fighters trained by him who have become a big source of hope for him in carrying forward his peaceful struggles.During these days Badshah Khan had successfully raised an army of peaceful soldiers called Khudai Khidmatgars (or servants of God). Every khudai Khidmatgar had to take this oath I am a Khudai Khidmatgar; and as God needs no service, but serving his creation is serving him, I promise to serve humanity in the name of God.I promise to refrain from violence and from taking revenge. I promise to forgive those who oppress me or treat me with cruelty. I promise to refrain from taking part in feuds and quarrels and from creating enmity. I promise to treat every Pathan as my brother and friend. I promise to refrain from anti-social customs and practices. I promise to live a simple life, to practice virtue and to refrain from evil.I promise to practice good manners and good behaviour and not to lead a life of idleness. I promise to devote at least two hours a day to social work.Describing the importance of this oath for the people of this region, Badshah Khans biographer Eknath Easwaran writes, For a pathan (or pashtun), an oath is not a small matter. He does not enter into a vow easily because once given, a Pathans word cannot be broken. Even his enemy can count on him to keep his word at the risk of his own life. Nonviolence was the heart of the oath and of the organisation. It was directed not only against the violence of British rule but against the pervasive violence of Pathan life.During 1930-31 came the real test of endurance of their commitment to non-violence as the colonial police and army rapidly escalated their brutal repression to check the spread of the freedom movement.According to a report prepared by the Congress Inquiry Committee, a protest demonstration in Qissa Khawani Bazar was dispersing peacefully when all of a sudden two or three armoured cars came at great speed from behind without giving warning of their approach and drove into the crowd. Several people were run over, of whom some were injured and a few killed on the spot. The people were not armed [not even with] stones or bricks. The crowd behaved with great restraint, collecting the wounded and dead.More people collected. The troops were ordered to fire. Several people were killed and wounded, the report continues, and the crowd was pushed back some distance. At about half past eleven, endeavours were made by one or two outsiders to persuade the crowd to disperse and the authorities to remove the troops and the armoured cars. The crowds were willing to disperse if they were allowed to remove the dead and the injured and if the armoured cars and the troops were removed. The authorities, on the other hand, expressed their determination not to remove the armoured cars and troops. The result was that the people did not disperse and were prepared to receive the bullets and lay down their lives. The second firing then began and, off and on, lasted for more than three hours.In his study of nonviolent movements, Gene Sharp of Harvard includes a description of the firing in Qissa Khawani Bazaar: When those in front fell down wounded by the shots, those behind came forward with their breasts bared and exposed themselves to the fire, so much so that some people got as many as 21 bullet wounds in their bodies, and all the people stood their ground without getting into a panic. A young Sikh boy came and stood in front of a soldier and asked him to fire at him which the soldier unhesitatingly did, killing him. The crowd kept standing at the spot facing the soldiers and were fired at from time to time, untill there were heaps of wounded and dying lying about.A newspaper of Lahore, which represented the official view, itself wrote to the effect that the people came forward one after another to face the firing and when they fell wounded they were dragged back and others came forward to be shot at. This state of things continued from 11 till 5 in the evening.Such incidents were repeated. The brave Pathans continued to pass the test of endurance and their commitment to peace and non-violence. The result was that within a few months their support increased dramatically. The Khudai Khidmatgars had started with a strength of about one thousand only, but by the end of the September there were nearly eighty thousand volunteers.Another equally inspiring and dramatic development was that the Hindu soldiers of Garhwal Rifles refused to fire on peaceful Pashtun Muslim freedom-fighters, even when they knew that theyll get the most severe punishment. In fact, these brave soldiers led by Chandra Singh Garhwali told their officers that they can blow them from their guns if they want but they will not fire on such peaceful freedom fighters.The peaceful resistance spread widely despite the fact that Badshah Khan and other leaders were arrested. His two sons and elder brother were also arrested.Another inspiring aspect of the movement very relevant to the present days of the Taliban is that Pathan women were encouraged to participate actively in the freedom movement and many of them came forward to play an important role. Badshah Khan opposed the purdah system (veil) and emphasised the equality of women.The great inspirational impact this movement had even on very violent people and even criminals can be understood partly from the example of Murtaza, who had earlier been jailed for murder. His life changed dramatically after he came under the influence of this peaceful freedom movement. Although he could not sustain this non-violence throughout his life, at least for some years he observed it honestly and sincerely. When Badshah Khans son Ghani interviewed him about this period of his life, he replied, I was a little saint for those four years. I tried to live up to my dreams instead of my desires. It was great, it was a miracle. I refused fortunes for a hope and spared lovely girls because they trusted me and looked up to me. You cannot help loving those that love you, and you cannot hurt those that trust you. I tried to live up to what the people thought I was.Several important lessons can be learnt from recalling this glorious phase of non-violent struggle. Firstly, the entire Pashtun community should not be a given a bad name because of the spread of Taliban in the area. Both in Afghanistan and Pakistan, for several decades they voted for and elected secular political parties. When a people become most violent or most peaceful depends largely on circumstances. Many Pashtuns are known to have resisted the spread of Taliban and fanatic forces even at the cost of their life.Secondly, the inspiring phase of history involving the efforts of Badshah Khan and his Khudai Khidmatgars tells us how the undoubted courage of people who live violent lives full of honour and revenge killings can be harnessed for great contributions to very noble work and to peaceful struggles for justice.It is when such efforts are constantly suppressed (Badshah Khan and his followers faced jails and repression even at the hands of Pakistans government after the end of the British rule) that the chances for peoples feelings of oppression and injustice to be pushed towards the path of fanaticism and extremism increase. This is particularly true if the government itself encourages this as certainly happened in Pakistan for a long time.When the Taliban was being created and prepared for a very violent role, there were hardly any efforts at world level for checking this at the right time. Instead, big powers appear to have been supportive. Even at a later stage when the dangers of unleashing a very fanatic armed force capable of capturing state power were becoming clearer, there were not much efforts to check this.Another important question iswhat was the official response to the forces of peace? It is well-known that the colonial rulers were cruel in suppressing it. But after independence and partition, under the new Pakistani government also Badshah Khan had to spend most of his time in jail and/or under serious restrictions. So many cases were foisted on him and he faced so many difficulties and oppression that he just could not get the opportunities he needed to spread his message of peace among more people. The international community also neglected this important force of peace and its leader. On the other hand, those who worked in a framework of violence and fanaticism continued to get a lot of support and funds, and this increased greatly after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.The chances of building a peaceful resistance never got a chance. As this region became more and more an area of big-power rivalry, the entire effort by big powers was to get the support of one violent group or the other to sort out immediate issues, and in the process opium cultivation, its processing into heroin and smuggling were all boosted, with more and more people getting addicted and also dependent on this for economic support. Hence the region was pushed more and more towards becoming a region of guns and opium, a far cry from the world of peace, cooperation and philanthropy which Badshah had tried to create for his people.Can his vision be revived again today for this deeply troubled region? This is the question that needs to be asked by all peace-loving people.Bharat Dogra is a journalist and author who has written on peace, justice and ecology for nearly five decades. He is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save the Earth Now. His recent books include Protecting Earth for Children, Planet in Peril and Earth without Borders. Contact bharatdogra1956@gmail.com web-site-bharatdogra.in

See the rest here:

A Time to Recall A Great Non-Violent Struggle of Pashtuns Against Injustice and Oppression - Kashmir Times

The Herald

Dr Misheck Sibanda

This is a presentation made by Chief Secretary to the President and Cabinet Dr Misheck Sibanda at the launch of President Mnangagwas biography A Life of Sacrifice at State House on Thursday.

The book A Life of Sacrifice is undoubtedly a bold attempt by the authors to capture and chronicle the life and history of a pioneering and trailblazing freedom fighter and politician belonging to the unique nationalist breed of the 1960s.

It was indeed an ambitious enterprise to seek to condense in 130 pages the eventful life of an activist whose journey included: youth activism; military training; armed combat; incarceration; prison sentence; and escaping the hangmans noose; and 40 years of leadership, including in the highest office of the land.

The authors set themselves the task of capturing all these in a life characterised by trials and tribulations which were overcome through the steely, obdurate determination and seemingly quiet disposition of Emmerson Dambudzo Mnangagwa.

From this perspective, the book is a welcome development, because it adds to the knowledge, understanding and appreciation of our history and the pedigree of leading figures that contributed to, and sometimes made that history through personal involvement and unique commitment.

It is a history of struggle, perseverance, valiance, gallantry and sacrifice.

Indeed, it is part of a proud history of brave freedom fighters who valiantly fought against British white settler colonialism, not once but several times, typified by the First Chimurenga in the 1890s and Second Chimurenga in the 1960s and 1970s.

In those wars, gallant sons and daughters of this land paid the supreme sacrifice in defence of the motherland.

They eloquently said No to foreign subjugation and to be turned into drawers of water, and hewers of wood in the land of their forefathers.

Indeed, they followed in the footsteps of the heroic forebears who resisted Portuguese occupation during the Mutapa Empire.

To be counted among that fine crop of the young men who thrust themselves forward was Emmerson Dambudzo Mnangagwa, at a time when white colonial power looked invincible.

After all, colonial authority had the technology of war, instruments of oppression and support from the entire imperialist world.

That notwithstanding, the young freedom fighters had the courage, determination and belief in their innate capacity and ability.

They loved their country and abhorred foreign rule. They were driven by a burning spirit of patriotism, and unshakable conviction that colonialism would be defeated.

After all, the imperial empire was crumbling everywhere then, in Asia and some parts of Africa.

This is the story that A Life of Sacrifice, seeks to weave by unravelling the part played by ED Mnangagwa, our President and Commander-in Chief of the Zimbabwe Defence Forces.

The authors tell this story of this enigmatic and complex revolutionary, in 130 pages of readable and jargon free narrative.

The book brings to the fore the story of the impact of settler colonial oppression and injustice; land deprivation; and limited educational and economic opportunities for the youths.

Reacting to the opposition to destocking his cattle, Emmersons father Mafidhi, and his family were banished from their homeland in the Runde Communal area in Zvishavane, and forcibly relocated to Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia) in the early 1950s.

This led to Emmersons early participation in youth activism of the United National Independence Party (UNIP) of Northern Rhodesia.

Later on, he threw his lot with his fellow Zimbabweans and joined ZAPU at a time when there was a transition to the armed struggle.

He became one of those youngsters who voluntarily went for military training in Egypt. When there was a split within ZAPU, he joined the splinter Party ZANU and saw him heading to China for specialised military training.

Emmersons long and ardours journey of sacrifice had commenced.

This would see him attend the first Congress of ZANU in 1964 in Gwelo (now Gweru), followed by military escapades as part of the first ZANU military attack on a Rhodesian locomotive in Fort Victoria (now Masvingo) by a ZANU specialised military Unit code-named, the Crocodile Gang, led by young E.D. Mnangagwa.

Betrayal and arrest saw him on the death row, saved only by fate as well as adept and dogged efforts by Father Emmanuel Ribeiro and patriotic lawyers from hanging.

After serving his 10-year sentence, he was deported to Zambia. He completed his law studies at the University of Zambia after which he briefly worked with Enock Dumbutshena who became the first black Chief Justice of independent Zimbabwe.

When a call came for him to reunite with his comrades in the struggle, he did not hesitate to go to Mozambique. The rest is the history as narrated in the book.

At independence he was given the delicate and onerous responsibility to integrate the disparate armies, namely: ZANLA, ZIPRA and the Rhodesian Army, into one national army a task he accomplished with distinction.

This was followed by stints as Minister of State for National Security; Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs; Rural Housing and Social Amenities; Speaker of Parliament; Minister of Defence; Vice President and other Government and Party assignments and deployments that prepared him for the eventual position of President of the Second Republic.

Very clearly, ED Mnangagwa approached each assignment with passion, commitment and dedication, and discharged his national obligations driven by loyalty and national service.

The motivation was not characterised by unbridled ambition or love for power, but a national duty to build, protect and defend the independent country he had heroically struggled to bring about.

This disciplined commitment to work and national service became the embodiment of his lifelong service to the nation as a whole. This was also evidenced by his sterling contribution as Speaker of Parliament at a challenging time.

Indeed, his adept and adroit management and steering of its business earned him accolades, enabling Parliament to weather the stormy waters brought about by the presence of a strong and sometimes hostile opposition.

He also introduced fundamental Parliamentary reforms during his tenure as Speaker including making Parliament more open and accessible.

Equally, as Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, he introduced fundamental reforms that included the Open Prison system and Victim Friendly Court Systems.

As Leader Government Business in Parliament, he steered Parliamentary reforms.

Similarly, when the economy was almost on its knees, he was part of the team that introduced the multi-currency system as a way of arresting inflation, stabilizing prices and the economy.

His Excellency the Presidents nationalist and reformist agenda has found full expression in the New Dispensation with the mantra Zimbabwe is Open for Business and his enunciation of a bold National Development Strategy to ensure that Zimbabwe becomes a Prosperous and Empowered Upper Middle Income Society by 2030.

In a nutshell, this sums up the review of the publication, A Life of Sacrifice A Biography of ED Mnangagwa.

The book makes a good reading for both the young and old who may want to have an appreciation of who their President is, particularly his historical antecedents, his political and educational background, his humanity, humility, his intrinsic core values to unite all the people of Zimbabwe to improve the material and social conditions of the marginalised people, and above all, his vision for the future democratic and prosperous Zimbabwe!

I thank the authors for their benevolent initiative in contributing to the development of our country through this publication.

The launch of the book is indeed very much appropriate, as the nation is gearing up towards commemorating the Heroes and Heroines Day, early next week.

I particularly want to thank the distinguished guests from the private sector for their overwhelming participation in the launch and the auctioning of the book.

See the rest here:

A glimpse into the Presidents eventful life in 130 pages - The Herald

Professor Fraser Sampson Surveillance Camera Commissioner 2 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DF

16 July 2021

http://www.gov.uk/surveillance-camera-commissioner

Justin Hollis

Marketing Director, Hikvision UK & Ireland

Dear Justin,

Letter to Surveillance Partners: The UKs Responsibility to Act on Atrocities in Xinjiang and Beyond.

May I begin by introducing myself. I am the Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner and am broadly responsible for providing guidance on the regulation of public surveillance camera systems in England and Wales. You will be aware of the considerable public interest in the use of developing surveillance technology, not just in the UK, but globally, and a key part of my role is to promote the statutory Surveillance Camera Code which aims to achieve accountable, proportionate and transparent use of surveillance cameras in public space. I was therefore very interested to see a copy of your letter dated 12 July 2021 addressed to valued partners, one of whom shared it with my office.

Headed The House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee published on 8th July its report entitled Never Again: The UKs Responsibility to Act on Atrocities in Xinjiang and Beyond. your letter covers a number of important issues that fall within my remit. As you concluded by inviting recipients to get in touch if they have any questions, I hope you will welcome this prompt and inquisitive response. I was heartened to read that Hikvision has a commitment to openness and transparency and it is in that spirit of openness and transparency that I am writing to you.

I note that the Chair has said of his Committees report that it moves the conversation forward, away from the question of whether crimes are taking place and on to what the UK should do to end them. It is unclear from your letter to surveillance partners whether you accept that basic premise, namely that crimes are being committed against the Uyghurs and other ethnic groups in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region and I would be grateful if you could clarify this at the outset.

For the avoidance of any doubt, I both welcome and support the Committees assertion (at para 54) that the role of advanced technologies in the use of oppression in Xinjiang cannot be ignored here and I would be keen to establish your view as it sets the critical context against which any more technical or nuanced matters of your companys surveillance offer can be meaningfully discussed.

Moving, if I may, to some of your letters more specific points, you cite one of the recommendations in the Committees report as calling for Hikvision to be banned in the UK, something which you say has been the product of a knee-jerk reaction. You go on to say that, in arriving at its recommendation, the Committee has made a staggering leap that is not based on any concrete evidence, leading to an unacceptable message to all those that support evidence-based policy making. I fully endorse your explicit recognition that the messages we send to supporters of evidence-based policy making are crucial in this area. By clarifying our respective positions, we will ensure that those messages are unequivocal. And while policy making is a matter for others, as one of those who supports an evidence-based approach to developing and influencing it, I would also like to understand your position a little better myself.

You describe the Committees finding that your cameras have been deployed throughout Xinjiang and provide the primary camera technology used in the Uyghur internment camps as unsubstantiated and not underpinned by evidence. Again, it was far from clear to me whether Hikvision are denying that their systems have been so deployed. The paragraph in the Committees report from which you quote in fact recommends the proscription of companies known to be associated with the Xinjiang atrocities, of which Hikvision is said to be one. I would be grateful if you could confirm whether your camera technology has in fact been used in the Uyghur internment camps and whether you accept that there is, at least to that extent, such an association.

You also highlight that the report draws on the views of two academics and their concerns about data collected from facial recognition cameras that could be used by the Chinese Government. Are you aware of the extent to which those concerns are shared by your customers and the public in the UK, both in the locations named in the report and at large? I would be very keen to see any evidence you have as the question of how far the public can put their trust in such surveillance technology is currently one of the most pertinent and prevalent in this area. My office regularly receives enquiries from local authorities, the police and the public asking for guidance on this very point, as demonstrated by the sharing of your letter with me.

In that letter you share your own experts views on the absence of any direct interference with human rights by your company. However, you will know that much legitimate public concern in the area of oppression-by-surveillance comes, less from deliberate intent or wilful disregard (the threshold for which is notoriously difficult to satisfy), and more from third parties looking the other way or failing to speak out when that is the only right thing to do - something which, it seems to me, is the elemental premise of the Committees report as regards an appropriate response from the UK. Is it your position that Hikvision had no knowledge of the use(s) of its surveillance camera systems in the internment facilities? This would seem to be incongruous with your welcome assurance that Hikvision hold our products to the industrys highest global cybersecurity standards and I think clarity is particularly important here. In any event, given that the Committee has found and condemned an association between the surveillance equipment and the perpetration of human rights abuses adverted to in its report, I would be very interested to hear how you will reassure people in the UK that you are both taking the Committees concerns seriously and addressing the degree to which operators and the public might place their trust in your end-to-end surveillance systems in the future.

In conclusion, I began by referring to the Surveillance Camera Code which provides a set of principles and standards by which regulation and accountability can be achieved in the operation of surveillance camera systems. That Code is about to be revised and will, once approved by ministers, be published for public consultation; I would encourage your engagement in that important democratic process.

In the meantime, I look forward to receiving your response and thank you again for inviting questions.

Yours sincerely

Fraser Sampson, Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner England & Wales

Email: scc@sccommissioner.gov.uk

Read more:

Letter from Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner to Hikvision, 16 July 2021 (accessible version) - GOV.UK