Sudan is to ban female genital mutilation (FGM), cancel prohibitions against religious conversion from Islam and permit non-Muslims to consume alcohol in a decisive break with almost four decades of hardline policies under the former Islamist government, its justice minister has said.

The transitional government which took over after the Sudanese autocrat Omar al-Bashir was toppled last year has faced stiff opposition from conservatives who thrived under the former regime but the prime minister, Abdalla Hamdok, appears to have accelerated the pace of reforms following calls from pro-democracy groups for faster change.

Last week the finance, foreign, energy and health ministers were replaced as part of a reshuffle and Sudans police chief and his deputy, both seen by pro-democracy groups as close to Bashirs regime, were also fired.

Hamdok, who leads the administration of technocrats under an awkward, 39-month power-sharing agreement between the military and civilian groups, said the reshuffle was intended to advance the performance and execution of the transitional periods missions and respond to accelerated economic and social changes.

The new laws announced this weekend mean that Sudans non-Muslim minority will no longer be criminalised for drinking alcohol in private, the justice minister, Nasredeen Abdulbari, told state television. For Muslims, the ban will remain. Offenders are typically flogged under Islamic law.

Alcoholic drinks have been banned in Sudan since the former president Jaafar Nimeii introduced Islamic law in 1983, throwing bottles of whisky into the Nile in the capital Khartoum.

Sudan will also ban the practice of takfir, by which a Muslim can be declared apostate by another and so subject to a potential death sentence. The takfir of others became a threat to the security and safety of society, Abdulbari said.

Campaigners have long sought to impose a ban on FGM. A UN-backed survey in 2014 estimated 87% of Sudanese women and girls between the ages of 15 and 49 have been subjected to FGM. Most undergo an extreme form known as infibulation, which involves the removal and repositioning of the labia to narrow the vaginal opening.

Anyone found guilty of performing FGM will be sentenced to up to three years in prison, according to a copy of the new law.

FGM degrades the dignity of women, the justice ministry said in its statement.

During Bashirs rule some Sudanese clerics said forms of FGM were religiously allowed, arguing that the only debate was over whether it was required or not.

While many were elated by the the laws long-awaited passing, rights groups warned that the practice remained deeply entrenched in the regions conservative society and that enforcement posed a steep challenge.

In neighbouring Egypt, for example, where genital cutting was banned in 2008 and elevated to a felony in 2016, a government survey still found that nearly nine out of every 10 Egyptian women had undergone it.

Other veteran activists questioned the timing of the ratification, saying the coronavirus pandemic puts them at a disadvantage since they cannot mobilise awareness campaigns or police training in a country under lockdown.

Currently there are fuel shortages and long daily power cuts as well as rising infections of Covid-19, said Nahid Toubia, a leading Sudanese womens health rights activist specialising in ending FGM. Communication and peoples mobility are severely hampered. These are not the conditions where advocacy for legislating against FGM is a priority or even possible.

There have been more than 10,000 cases of Covid-19 confirmed in Sudan and 649 deaths.

Still the move, both symbolic and consequential, has stirred hopes for stronger protection of personal liberties as Sudan moves towards democratic elections scheduled for 2022.

In another change, women will also no longer need a permit from male members of their families to travel with their children.

Though some have criticised the pace of reform, the new government has made a series of moves that have surprised and pleased many international observers.

One was to put Bashir on trial for corruption, and even signal that the former dictator might eventually be transferred to the international criminal court to face charges of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity for atrocities committed by pro-government forces in Darfur.

In the Darfur conflict, rebels from the territorys ethnic central and sub-Saharan African community launched an insurgency in 2003, complaining of oppression by the Arab-dominated government in Khartoum.

The government responded with aerial bombings and unleashed militias known as the Janjaweed, which are accused of mass killings and rapes. Up to 300,000 people were killed and 2.7 million were driven from their homes.

Last month one of the most notorious Janjaweed commanders involved in the wars in Darfur was arrested in Central African Republic and handed over to the ICC.

Ali Kushayb, who had been on the run for 13 years, surrendered to authorities in a remote corner of northern CAR near the countrys border with Sudan.

In May, Sudan appointed an ambassador to the US, the first such envoy in more than 20 years.

The introduction of Islamic law by Nimieri was major catalyst for a 22-year-long war between Sudans Muslim north and the mainly Christian south that led in 2011 to South Sudans secession.

Nimieri shifted away from earlier nationalist, socialist and pan-Arab ideologies towards Islamism in the early 1980s but remained a significant US ally in the region.

Bashir reinforced Islamic law after he took power in 1989, seeking to bolster his support among Sudans powerful conservative factions.

Sudanese Christians live mainly in Khartoum and in the Nuba mountains near the South Sudan border. Some Sudanese also follow traditional African beliefs.

Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report

The headline on this article was amended on 13 July 2020 to remove any suggestion that FGM is an Islamist policy; while the practice continued with support from some clerics in Sudan, it is considered a cultural tradition.

Excerpt from:

Sudan bans FGM and breaks with hardline Islamist policies - The Guardian

We are in the middle of one of the most inspiring protest upsurges in the United States in decades. Mass demonstrations against racist police violence have swept the country since the police murder of George Floyd, demanding an end to state murders of unarmed black people and racial inequality more generally.

Protesters have persisted in the face of vicious police rioting and repressive curfews. The number of protests has waned in recent weeks, as all protest upsurges eventually do. But they are still going strong throughout much of the country and have produced a massive ideological shift, making defunding the police a mainstream policy proposal. Elected officials in some cities, with varying degrees of sincerity, are arguing for or have already pledged to cut police budgets.

The protests have inspired many white Americans to reflect on the persistence of racism in the United States and their role in changing it. One common framework for reflection involves asking how white people can be good allies to people of color.

This framework seems to suggest that, while white people have a moral obligation to assist people of color in anti-racist struggles, we who are white have no interests of our own at stake in these struggles. So white people must be moved to anti-racist action through feelings of obligation, guilt, or sympathy. At its worst, the white allyship framework promotes introspection and quasi-spiritual self-improvement as political action.

Black people in the United States have faced and continue to face horrible forms of oppression that white people dont. Yet thinking of white peoples role in anti-racist struggle solely in terms of allyship is myopic. White people have sometimes taken part in significant black freedom struggles in the past not just out of altruism or a sense of moral duty. They saw the moral imperative to fight racial oppression as bound up with broader projects of collective liberation projects in which they, too, had a stake. They were moved, in other words, by solidarity.

Take the story of the Haitian Revolution, as an example, recounted by C. L. R. James in his classic The Black Jacobins and dramatically illustrating the power of solidarity. The revolution in the French colony of Haiti (then called Saint-Domingue) began with an uprising of the enslaved in August 1791. This revolt took place against the context of the ongoing revolution in France.

The enslaved black people of Saint-Domingue won their freedom through years of protracted, bloody struggle against the white plantation owners, as well as French, British, and Spanish troops who attempted at different points to crush the rebellion.

Given the forces they were up against, the Haitian slaves victory over so many European imperial colonizers and invaders is one of the most incredible achievements of recent history. The slaves themselves were the principal protagonists in overthrowing slavery. As James writes, the revolutionary troops led by Touissant LOuverture, and not the perorations in the Legislative [Frances governing body] would be decisive in the struggle for freedom.

But the victory of the Haitian revolutionaries was also aided by the revolutionary action of the French masses. In 1792, the internally divided French government, which had not yet entered its more radical, Montagnard phase, sent armed forces to Saint-Domingue to help quell the enslaved peoples rebellion. By early 1793, these forces had nearly crushed the uprising.

But in the meantime, the French masses had deposed and executed the King, provoking Britain and Spain to declare war on the revolutionary regime. These events helped turn the tide. They forced a diversion of French troops away from their assault on LOuvertures army to defend the coasts against British and Spanish invaders, and they allowed LOuverture to make an alliance with the Spanish against the French.

In the course of these events, the cause of the Haitian rebels and that of the French revolutionaries came to be fused in the minds of the more radical militants. As a Jacobin-aligned governor of the colony said: The slaves of the New World are fighting for the same cause as the [revolutionary] French armies.

Local French authorities in Saint-Domingue were forced to declare the abolition of slavery, in an attempt to win the formerly enslaved to their side in the struggle against the counterrevolutionary powers. The abolition of slavery was finally made official and extended to all colonies by the French government on February 4, 1794.

Robespierre and the left-wing Jacobins (the Montagnards) had won control of the National Convention, and their voting for abolition reflected not only longstanding personal convictions, but the revolutionary mood of the French people. James writes:

It was not Paris alone but all revolutionary France. Servants, peasants, workers. the labourers by the day in the fields all over France were filled with a virulent hatred against the aristocracy of the skin. There were many so moved by the sufferings of the slaves that they had long ceased to drink coffee, thinking of it as drenched with the blood and sweat of men turned into brutes At that time slavery had been overturned only in [Saint-Domingue] of all the French colonies, and the generous spontaneity of the Convention was only a reflection of the overflowing desire which filled all France to end tyranny and oppression everywhere.

The revolutionary French masses came to fight for the abolition of slavery not out of a sense of pity or disinterested moral obligation, but because they had come to see their own destiny as tied up with the enslaved. As James says, the poor and working classes of France felt towards them [enslaved Saint-Dominguans] as brothers, and the old slave-owners, whom they knew to be supporters of the counter-revolution, they hated as if Frenchman themselves had suffered under the whip.

The white slave owners of Saint-Domingue had always opposed the French Revolution, which represented an assault on their property rights and political power. In 1793, they actually took the side of the invading British who had promised to restore slavery against the revolutionary French government. These counterrevolutionary efforts incited the French masses against the the aristocracy of the skin, which the common people associated with the hated French nobility they had just deposed.

Thus the slave owners opposition to the revolution made it easy for the French masses to see the connection between their own liberty and that of enslaved Saint-Dominguans. And as James notes, the planters counterrevolutionary conspiracy also gave the Montagnards strategic reasons to abolish slavery.

[The] [abolition] decree, by ratifying the liberty which the blacks had won, James writes, was giving them a concrete interest in the struggle against British and Spanish reaction. Frances revolutionary leaders (rightly) predicted that the formal abolition of slavery would recruit the former slaves to their side.

It was up to the enslaved people of Saint-Domingue to make the legal abolition of slavery a reality on the ground, through several more years of war with European armies who wanted to return them to bondage. Facing the possibility of death or torture at the hands of a vicious enemy, the formerly enslaved freed themselves through courageous armed struggle. But they also werent alone.

At the high point of the French Revolution, the French masses joined the Haitians to push forward the fight for abolition. And they did so because they saw their freedom and that of the black people of Saint-Domingue linked together by the struggle to defeat their common enemies.

Multiracial solidarity is a big part of the story of slaverys destruction in our own country, too. As in Haiti, it took a violent war to end slavery, during which the actions of black people themselves were central to the process that led to their emancipation.

As W. E. B. Du Bois famously argued, the Union victory was hastened by a general strike of hundreds of thousands of enslaved people in the South, who deserted their plantations to assist and join the Union war effort.

But understanding why the Civil War occurred in the first place requires us to look to the mass antislavery movement that brought Abraham Lincoln and the Republican Party to power. It was the Republican capture of the federal government that provoked Southern secession, and as historian Matt Karp writes, the party achieved this [by] linking the moral battle against slavery to the material concerns of millions of Northern voters.

The ideological connection that the antislavery movement and Republican Party forged between the material interests of ordinary white Northerners and the freedom of enslaved black people helped make it possible for many Northern whites to find common cause with the enslaved and, again, to perceive a common enemy.

Republicans mass appeal rested in large part on developmental and egalitarian economic policies that ran counter to the interests of the slave-owning class, including tariffs and federal infrastructure spending. Their central economic proposal, Karp says, was a homestead act by which the government would give away millions of acres of land for free.

This policy, opposed by the pro-slavery Democratic Party, was justified by its advocates with the argument that citizens should be able to live on and work their own land for themselves, as free laborers, rather than be subject to the domination of landowners or industrial capitalists.

As Karp notes, it also depended, wrongly, on an assumption that the North American West rightly belonged to Euro-American settlers, not its indigenous inhabitants. The denial of prior inhabitants rights to the land was a justification for a different racist monstrosity the displacement and mass murder of indigenous peoples, which could never be justified.

Southern opposition to the Act, led by the regions enormously wealthy oligarchs, allowed Republicans to portray the slave owners as proponents of land monopoly and plutocracy, and hence as opponents of liberty for both white and black people. In doing so Republicans provided a material basis for Northern white solidarity with enslaved black people against the slave aristocracy.

Many Northerners also saw the pro-slavery laws passed by Congress as direct attacks on their own freedom, revealing the dominance of the slaveholding class over the political system. The House of Representatives passed a gag rule in 1836 barring from consideration any petition or resolution regarding slavery. Many viewed the law as an attack on their political liberties; it encouraged antislavery activism and actually resulted in a significant increase in petitions to Congress.

In 1850, Congress passed the Fugitive Slave Act, which forced private citizens to aid in the capture and return of enslaved fugitives. Defiance of the act was punishable by fine or imprisonment. The law was met with outrage and civil disobedience in the North: even many who had been less sympathetic to the abolitionist cause saw the act as the product of a slave power conspiracy to subject Northern whites as well as enslaved blacks to the power of the slave owners. Like the gag rule, the Fugitive Slave Act heightened antagonism to slavery.

Republican appeals to white Northerners economic and political freedom went hand-in-hand with increasingly strong moral denunciations of slavery and its perpetrators. Partly through the partys electoral campaigns and propaganda efforts, both a sense of shared interests with enslaved people and a moral hatred of slave owners came to be established in the minds of millions of Northern voters.

Ohio Governor Salmon P. Chases comments during the 1856 election were typical of Republican rhetoric, which made the continued existence of slavery a threat to the freedom of all Americans:

[T]he popular heart is stirred as never before, for the issue is boldly made between Freedom and Slavery a Republic and a Despotism! The chain-gang and Republicanism cannot coexist, and you must now elect whether you will vindicate the one at whatever cost, or whether you will yield to the other.

Sentiments like these led to the election of an antislavery government. That election in turn put the country on the road to a social revolution, in which black and white Americans fought side-by-side to defeat the Confederacy and abolish slavery.

The movements which brought about abolition in Haiti and the United States provide particularly dramatic examples of the power of solidarity. But we dont need to look so far back in time to make the point. The US Civil Rights Movement of the 20th century was led by many activists, including socialists and labor organizers, who connected the struggle for black liberation with wider fights for economic justice.

Black workers led the struggle for civil rights in the 1940s, through participation in militant unions belonging to the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO), and especially the most left-wing unions, led by members of the Communist Party. Radical unions like the United Public Workers of America fought against discrimination and for full rights for their black workers.

Local 22 of the Food, Tobacco, Agricultural and Allied Workers of America fought against racist police and voter disenfranchisement in Jim Crowera North Carolina. Local 10 of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union of San Francisco also fought racial discrimination against its black workers in the 1940s.

Many of these Communist-led unions were destroyed by McCarthyism and the Red Scare in the 1950s, significantly setting back struggles for racial justice. Even so, many leading activists of the Civil Rights Movement later on continued working to forge multiracial coalitions, by connecting anti-racism with broader redistributive demands. Paul Heideman writes:

At the grassroots, organizers like Ella Baker or Bayard Rustin came out of the Old Left, and knew full well that legal equality without redistribution would be a hollow victory. The 1963 March on Washington was built with crucial assistance from the United Autoworkers, and the marchs full title was The March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. The policy objectives of this tendency in the movement were summed up in the Freedom Budget, a proposal that attempted to translate the Civil Rights Movement into a campaign for full employment and public works.

Martin Luther King Jr, best remembered for his passionate moral speeches against racism, was a supporter of the Freedom Budget. Toward the end of his life, King declared the need for democratic socialism and began organizing a Poor Peoples Campaign to demand economic justice. (He was assassinated before the campaign began, when he traveled to Memphis to support a strike of black sanitation workers.)

In the late 60s and early 70s, radical activists like those involved in Detroits League of Revolutionary Black Workers also sought to reconnect anti-racist struggle to workplace militancy. The League fought racism in the auto plants and within their own union, while building multiracial solidarity with other workers around their shared interests.

Civil rights activists of various stripes refused to separate anti-racist struggle from class struggle. Many of the movements successes in fact depended on linking struggles against racism with economic demands, within the workplace or outside of it. And movement leaders like King realized that the movement for racial equality would not make further progress without tackling economic equality. That vision of anti-racism linked the interests of black Americans with poor and working-class whites.

White people have a moral obligation to help dismantle white supremacy. But it would be wrong to see anti-racism only as a moral imperative. Now, as in the past, poor and working-class white people have a shared interest in fighting racism and destroying its material infrastructure.

Policies and institutions responsible for the severe oppression of black people and other people of color hurt the entire working class. Our massive, heavily militarized police forces kill black people at higher levels than whites, but kill the poor of all races at higher rates than the rich; mass incarceration locks up black people at much higher rates than whites, but it also locks up an enormous number of white people and represses labor organizing; xenophobic immigration restrictions also make it harder for workers to organize. That means working people of all races have a material stake in defunding the police, dismantling mass incarceration, and ending repression of immigrants.

The emancipatory potential of anti-racist demands for the working class as a whole is nothing new, of course. As Jamelle Bouie documents, the black freedom struggle in America has long been bound up with struggles against the dominance of capital and for economic redistribution.

Those who participated in great freedom struggles of the past did not lose sight of their common plight and common enemies. Neither should we. White people can act in solidarity with people of color to fight racial oppression and to work toward collective liberation.

Go here to read the rest:

Solidarity Should Be the Basis of White Anti-Racism, Not Allyship - Jacobin magazine

I am not sure which is the more terrifying: the idea that the premier of Victoria, Daniel Andrews, had sufficient evidence to justify locking up about 3,000 of my neighbours, or the idea that he didnt and was doing it anyway.

Last Saturday, shortly after 4pm, Andrews announced that the public housing tenants of Flemington and North Melbourne were to be detained in forced quarantine because of potentially high rates of Covid-19. They would be prohibited from leaving their homes for any reason.

A sudden shock will send your fingers numb. I was watching the press conference on television. I grabbed my phone and ran the two blocks to the Flemington estate.

The police were already there. As dusk fell I began to take photographs of massed police cars, the flashing blue lights, the armed officers stopping people trying to leave the towers, and residents of the estate making their way home and asking: Whats happened? What have we done wrong? Has there been a murder?

The public housing towers are part of the rhythm of my suburb. There are the kids clattering up the hill to the high schools, and the constant traffic in the main street to and from the African cafes.

I can see the towers of the Flemington estate from my living room window. The lights in individual flats, blinking off, prompt me to my own bedtime. Sometimes if I rise in the night, I can see that someone over there is also awake.

I am not part of the public housing community. I am one of the middle-class white people literally and metaphorically at the top of the hill. But these are my neighbours.

On the estates, one in five people have no English, or poor English. The main languages are Vietnamese and Somali, as well as Ethiopian languages such as Amharic, Tigrunya and Oroimo. Arabic is common, as is Cantonese. Many of the residents are refugees from war-torn countries, predominantly in Africa. Unemployment is high.

And now, without warning, they were locked up by government.

The police, it emerged, had only about an hour and a halfs notice of the lockdown. The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), the lead agency managing the lockdown, had about the same warning.

The two local governments City of Melbourne and Moonee Valley city council had no warning, and nor did the community leaders on the estate.

Ever since the coronavirus crisis began, these leaders had been asking the health department for a plan. They wrote emails and made phone calls asking for hand sanitiser on every floor, regular deep cleaning of lifts and shared spaces, and public health information posted in multiple languages.

Bottles of sanitiser were placed in the foyers, but when they ran out they were not replaced. Otherwise, there was no visible response.

Now the community depended for its most basic needs on the same department which they routinely experience as deaf to their voices.

And that department was responsible, with next to no warning, for provisioning a vulnerable community the size of a small town, vertically stacked.

Among the residents, shock at the sudden and heavy police presence was universal, but there was also some relief that the emerging Covid-19 crisis, which they had been uneasily aware of, was at last attracting serious government attention. Yet there were no health workers, social workers or health department employees in the first wave of government action.

As one frustrated department employee said to me later, there are no standing armies of health workers and social workers. We have no surge capacity in caring. If you need an emergency response, you have either the army or the police.

In the African Australian community, there were angry people who did not believe the public health justification for the lockdown and saw the operation as a racially motivated act of oppression.

One resident of the Flemington estate, Melissa Whelan, got the text telling her about the lockdown when she was in the checkout queue at the supermarket. Short on cash, she had popped out for milk and bread with a budget of $7. She rapidly rang a friend, borrowed another $50 and stocked up.

Other households were not so quick or lucky. These tend to be big and young families, living week to week. Those who had planned to shop on Sunday soon ran short of food.

By Sunday morning, there were a few DHHS workers on the estate, dispatched at no notice and with no clear directions. The police were still in charge, and there were hundreds of them.

The DHHS and other agencies struggled with the implications of the premiers promise that this vulnerable community would be supported with wraparound services. To start with, they could barely keep it fed.

The basics boxes the government delivered in the first day of lockdown contained date-expired food, Weetbix without milk, jam without bread. They were stacked in the foyers while the DHHS worked out how to get them safely up the towers.

Calls went out from those inside the flats to friends and relations, desperately asking for grocery deliveries and, in some cases, medication.

Local federal and state MPs Greens and Labor devoted their staff to trying to fill the gaps, escalating emergencies on an ad hoc basis. The premiers office made a staff member solely available for their calls.

There were people with asthma who had no Ventolin, diabetics without clean needles, mothers of premature babies now isolated from their infants in the nearby Royal Melbourne hospital.

Meanwhile, the African community was rallying, wanting to look after its own. In the forefront were young volunteers from the North Melbourne-based Australian Muslim Social Services Agency Youth Connect (AMSSA) who began soliciting and trying to deliver bags of goods. Others were trying to deliver just to specific family members and friends.

It was chaotic, and made harder by the fact there was no protocol. Police concern for security, and DHHSs concern for infection control, meant the deliveries were frustrated. Food was left in foyers and on steps, attacked by rats overnight.

The people on the outside were desperate knocking their heads against a system failing to care for the community, yet prevented from doing the job themselves.

That was the first 48 hours.

On Monday night, I began to get texts telling me things were going very wrong. Residents looking down from their windows, hoping for deliveries, could see hazmat-clad workers carrying away bags of food. The DHHS infection control officer had knocked off for the day, and so the order went out that deliveries from the community were to be stopped.

The bags being carried away were the food that had been left to spoil overnight, but the combination of events meant that people in the flats believed goods bought for them by family members were being stolen.

They are starving our people, one social media post said.

Everyone pitched in. The local MPs hit the phones. I tweeted that it was a mix-up. I got replies saying I was just a lickspittle for racist authorities. The police were heard arguing with the DHHS orders.

I am not sure which part of this effort worked, but the order to prevent deliveries was rapidly reversed, and DHHS issued an apology.

This whole crisis took about 90 minutes to brew, peak and dissipate, but during that time I thought there might be a riot that the whole situation might slip disastrously out of control. Some police confessed the same fear.

By Tuesday, things were beginning to improve. The emergency management commissioner, Andrew Crisp, was brought in, as were many volunteers, emergency services and local government. Coles repurposed an entire supermarket to the provisioning effort.

It was an immense effort, with many people working ridiculously hard hours, all in the knowledge that they were still in some ways failing.

Pallets of food and supplies were trekked into the estate and up the tiny, decrepit lifts. Nevertheless, that night there was an arrest during another conflict between police and young African-Australian volunteers delivering food.

Meanwhile, the huge effort to test every resident for Covid-19 was underway. In the end, they managed to test 85%.

By Wednesday, there was plenty of food far too much food and much of it was wasted.

But the help was still generic. MPs and family members were hearing of urgent medical needs and mothers without nappies for their babies. The hotline established for residents had a wait of over an hour to be answered.

One MP described dealing with DHHS as struggling with institutional somnambulance, including an inability to realise that more than a nine-to-five effort was needed, and a stark refusal to embrace the efforts by the community to look after its own. Some called for the community to be allowed to run its own hotline.

It was paternalism, said another community representative. The fact that people wanted to help their own was seen as a problem, not a strength.

Behind the scenes the Labor MPs for the area, Bill Shorten and Danny Pearson, the Trades Hall Council and other Labor groups were pushing a mutually agreed log of claims about what needed to be done to save the state government from getting this wrong. The Greens MPs, Ellen Sandell and Adam Bandt, with their colleagues on the Melbourne city council, were pushing a similar message.

Top of the list was arguing for the young people of AMSSA to be taken into the heart of the effort, instead of being resisted and frustrated. By Wednesday morning that was beginning to happen. Protocols for community deliveries were established and the authorities began to cooperate with the community.

By the afternoon, the relief effort was at last adequate and impressive. It was a mighty thing just three days late. There were dedicated workers on site, consistently identifying individual household needs.

Thursday was intense. Testing had been finished the night before an immense effort by many health workers. Residents were to be given news of their results, and the future of the lockdown. The premiers press conference was to be at 11 am, then early afternoon. He finally got to his feet at 4.30pm.

All but one of the towers were to be moved to the same stage 3 restrictions as the rest of Melbourne. Alfred Street, on the North Melbourne estate, with 53 people testing positive, would remain in quarantine for another nine days.

Most significantly, AMSSA would become the host of the continuing work of provisioning Alfred Street. The police minister, Lisa Neville, even thanked them.

That night, the young people of AMSSA posted images of themselves to social media, dancing as they delivered the food parcels.

The Greens have called for an inquiry into the public housing lockdown. It seems inevitable there will be a reckoning and only that can determine whether such action was justified.

Questions will surely include why there was no planning for this scenario. The states pandemic plan, written in 2015, makes no mention of public housing. But surely when the coronavirus crisis began in March, plans could have been made that included consultations with community leaders on the estates.

As Daniel Andrews likes to say, this isnt over.

Some residents who were not on the estate when the lockdown occurred did not return. About 10% of residents did not open their door to the authorities at any stage during the lockdown, whether from fear or anger.

Almost certainly, more Covid-19 cases will emerge. But lessons have certainly been learned.

Awatif Taha, who told the Guardian her story at the beginning of the crisis, said on Friday afternoon: Last night we were all screaming with joy.

Perhaps, she said, the government had learned something about her community, its strength and resourcefulness. Perhaps now they would be heard.

See the article here:

'It was paternalism': how government support for Melbourne's locked down public housing blocks fell short - The Guardian

(Editors Note: This article is part of a specialJust SecurityRacing National Securitysymposiumedited by editorial board memberMatiangai Sirleaf. Thegoal of the symposium is to render race visible in national security to shift the dominant paradigm toward addressing issues of racial justice.)

In the pre-Trump world, the Obama Administration endorsed economic reparations, truth commissions, and memorial building for countries transitioning out of repressive regimes. Promoting these processes was a core moral responsibility of the United States, it said.

When a New York Times columnist asked whether the United States is such a country in transition, an Obama State Department spokesperson replied: I wont have anything further for you.

This uncomfortable silence reflects a broader trend within the field of transitional justice, which addresses how societies can deal with conflictual histories. For decades, U.S.-based discussions of transitional justice have gazed outward internationally, while overlooking the legacies of slavery, segregation, and white supremacy at home.

Certainly, there have been exceptions to this trend. Greensboro, North Carolina and the states of Illinois and Maryland engaged in localized truth and reconciliation processes. Civil rights leader Sherrilyn Ifills 2007 book On the Courthouse Lawn elaborated transitional justice principles for American struggles with racism. Ta-Nehisi Coatess 2014 Atlantic article reminded Americans that broader reparations are still pending more than two centuries after freedwoman Belinda Royall successfully petitioned for a pension of 15 pounds and 12 shillings from her former enslavers estate. Religion professor Anthony Bradleys 2018 essay applied the Chicago Principles of Post-conflict Justice to individual American states. Yet, despite these efforts and arguments, the United States has proceeded as if transitional justice does not belong here.

No more. Following the tragic killings of Breonna Taylor, Tony McDade, George Floyd, Rayshard Brooks, Ahmaud Arbery, and countless others, protestors and advocates have reissued demands for civilian accountability boards to address police violence, reparations for decades and centuries of racist oppression, and truth and reconciliation processes to acknowledge historical and ongoing injustices.

Such demands are fundamentally calling for transitional justice.

My recent and forthcoming work argues that the United States remains a nation in transition, still far from surmounting its racist past. Laws concerning affirmative action, school desegregation, voting rights, and disparate impact are part of Americas racial transition. Yet, a number of factors have prevented widespread application of a transitional justice framework to the United States.

Some factors have to do with the field of transitional justice itself. Since its inception, this field has been more concerned with transitions to democracy such as in Argentina and Chile as they emerged from dictatorships than with transformations within established democracies. From a traditional viewpoint, transitional justice is inapposite to the American context because the United States is assumed to be an established democracy, because it lacks the sort of explicit regime break found in many transitional contexts, or because too much time has passed since its antebellum and Jim Crow histories.

Other factors are specific to the United States, such as a belief in American racial exceptionalism. This notion depicts the United States as the leader in the global struggle for liberty whose own march to racial equality was completed with the Civil Rights Movement, or the election of Barack Obama. As United Nations Special Rapporteur on racism, E. Tendayi Achiume, recently wrote for Just Security, this exceptionalism implicitly treats existing domestic law as a high watermark for achieving justice and equality, when this law falls short even of global human rights anti-racism standards. The United States is exempted from political and legal considerations applied to other transitional societies, despite its centuries-long struggle with state-sponsored racial violence.

On a closer look, such distinctions between the United States and the rest of the world are as illusory as they are problematic. If Canada could be moved to address Indian Residential Schools dating back to the 1800s through the establishment of a truth commission, nothing should prevent the United States reckoning with its racist legacies. For three sets of reasons, beliefs about Americas democracy and exceptionalism must not place it beyond the reach of transitional justice.

American Democracy

Some claims place the United States outside the purview of transitional justice by assuming its status as an established democracy. However, such claims ignore the denial of basic political rights and representation during slavery, up through Jim Crow, and into the present day. Writers from W.E.B. Du Bois to Nikole Hannah-Jones have argued that the United States was not a real democracy until Black people forced it to move toward becoming one.

Political scientists Francisco Gonzlez and Desmond King distinguish between restricted and full liberal democracies and characterize the United States as a restricted democracy prior to the implementation of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Pointing to the barriers that Black voters faced in Alabama in 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. similarly asked in his letter from Birmingham Jail: Can any law enacted under such circumstances be considered democratically structured?

In this light, it is possible to characterize periods of major racial change in American history as regime changes. Historian Eric Foner and others have framed the Reconstruction era as Americas second founding. Political scientist Andrew Valls describes the Civil Rights era as a regime transition that was woefully incomplete, and therefore unjust.

As Hannah-Jones writes in her Pulitzer Prize winning 1619 Project: Without the idealistic, strenuous and patriotic efforts of black Americans, our democracy today would most likely look very different it might not be a democracy at all. Today, that struggle for democracy continues. These arguments highlight how American democracy has been and still is incomplete, given the nations lack of racial justice. Interrogating fundamental assumptions about the state of democracy reveals a nation in transition.

Comparative Experience

There are also deep similarities between American racial injustice and the kinds and degrees of oppression that have been found to necessitate transitional justice in other contexts. As I show elsewhere, the United States is most clearly comparable with one of the paradigmatic case studies of transitional justice: South Africa. Both the United States and South Africa have deep histories of the state enforcing and enabling racial subordination; the pre-Civil Rights United States was arguably no more an established democracy than apartheid South Africa. The increasing understanding of the history and legacies of Americas racial apartheid only bolsters such comparisons.

More fundamentally, the transitional justice canon demonstrates that historic injustices and their legacies need to be addressed, even within democracies and even without regime change. A transitional justice lens reveals commonalities between the United States and other societies dealing with oppressive pasts and allows the experiences of one to inform the other.

Transition Process

Ultimately, individual laws and policies must be understood in relation with one another and as elements of a broader transition process. The United States struggles with racism in part because government agencies and institutions such as the Supreme Court believe that brief implementation of discrete measures has resolved centuries of racial subordination, when transitional justice is a generational process requiring holistic approaches.

In 1915, W.E.B. Du Bois argued that a longer period of distributive and welfare policies following the Civil War could have created a more equal United States, but the country would not listen to such a comprehensive plan. Todays Movement for Black Lives similarly demands reparations for past and continuing harms to black people; investment in healthcare, housing, and education for Black people; economic justice for Black people; and a political system in which Black people can exercise their political power, among other changes.

These demands are linked as much to the past and future as to the present. From a transitional justice viewpoint, protesters today are not demanding discrete remedies for discrete harms. Instead, they are calling for a comprehensive and coordinated transition process that addresses the United States traumatic history with racism, its enduring legacy, and future threat.

The passage of significant time since slavery and Jim Crow has not rendered this transition process complete. Countries spanning from Canada to the Philippines have taken centuries to grapple with the legacies of their past. Until the United States takes adequate steps to address its racist legacies, its transition will be delayed as harms compound and past progress is erased.

An enduring feature of Black oppression in the United States has been a backsliding away from democracy. Transition can thus be conceptualized not only as the attainment of a truly democratic regime, but also as the sustainment of democratic rule. For example, as I argue in a forthcoming article, the preclearance requirement of the Voting Rights Act, which prevents public officials from using discriminatory voting practices on a continuous basis, supports transition by sustaining democratic rule.

Transition is not only a move toward democracy and the rule of law, but also charts a path toward peace and justice. In his letter from Birmingham Jail, Dr. King expressly called for transition from an obnoxious negative peace to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality. Recurring protests against police violence and structural racism indict the governments failures to secure such a substantive and positive peace. Civil rights leader Bayard Rustins warning to New York City mayor Robert Wagner rings as true today as it did in 1965: Either you creatively meet the causes of discontent in spring, or negatively face another long, hot summer. This warning reminds us of the need to target our transitional efforts not only at American democracy, but at racial justice.

Conclusion: From There to Here

In 1963, James Baldwin wrote about the collection of myths to which white Americans cling: that their ancestors were all freedom-loving heroes, that they were born in the greatest country the world has ever seen. Today, those same beliefs in American creed and exceptionalism impede recognition of the United States as a nation in transition. However, the enduring and increasingly international criticisms of the United States failures on racism should lead us to consider this country alongside others with conflictual histories.

A key promise that transitional justice holds for the United States is a shifting of the burden of proof. Transitional justice demonstrates that the centuries-long oppression of Black Americans is precisely the kind of massive human rights violation that necessitates systematic and ongoing redress. Moreover, it places the United States alongside other countries that have taken, or are in the process of taking, steps to address historical legacies of oppression. Once we acknowledge that transitional justice applies here, the question becomes how mechanisms of justice and accountability should be implemented rather than whether such mechanisms are needed.

Of course, the United States should not uncritically adopt transitional justice approaches from elsewhere. Transitional justice has limitations and needs to be considered with careful attention to specific contexts and local demands. At the same time, Americans must recognize that their nation is still developing in ways that place it alongside or behind others it considers less developed. If transitional justice belongs there, it belongs here too.

(Editors Note: Readers interested in the potential of pursuing transitional justice in the United States as a means of addressing systemic racial oppression may also be interesting in thisrecent Just Security article by Zinaida Miller and an upcoming article by Colleen Murphy).

Read more here:

Does Transitional Justice Belong in the United States? - Just Security

Claudia Jones. | CPUSA Archives

WASHINGTONThe Claudia Jones School for Political Education and Black Women Radicals came together virtually on the evening of July 3rd to co-host an event uplifting the life and work of Black Communist Claudia Jones. Over 300 attendees from around the world attended the event, including scholars and activists from Kenya, Toronto, London, Brazil, the Caribbean, and the United States.

The event was centered around Joness life and, in particular, her essay in A Right to be Radical, which was published as in the pamphlet Ben Davis: A Fighter for Freedom, distributed by the National Committee to Defend Negro Leadership in November 1954. The booklet was written by Claudia Jones in defense of Benjamin Davis, Jr., the former Communist Councilman of Harlem. Like Jones herself and many other reds, Davis was persecuted for his Communist ideas. Joness booklet argued for his right to have those ideas and for the groups of Black leaders being tried during the McCarthy Red Scare period.

The event featured Dr. Carole Boyce Davies, author of both Left of Karl Marx: The Political Life of Black Communist Claudia Jones and Claudia Jones: Beyond Containment. Like Jones, Boyce Davies was born in Trinidad and Tobago; she is currently Professor of Africana Studies and English at Cornell University (recently appointed the Frank H.T. Rhodes Professor of Humane Letters at Cornell).

The life of Claudia Jones

Jones was born in Trinidad and Tobago (then, the British West Indies) in 1915 and immigrated to the U.S. with her family when she was just eight years old. Her family moved to Harlem, where her mother worked as a garment worker and died five years later due to poor working conditions.

Jones joined the Young Communist League (YCL) in 1936, when she was 21 years old, after being impressed with the Communist Partys work on behalf of the Scottsboro Nine. The defendants were nine young Black men tried for raping two white women in a box car in Scottsboro, Ala. The Communist Party, through its legal defense front, the International Labor Defense, spearheaded the campaign to have them taken off death row and to have the bogus charges dropped. This was also in the period of Jim Crow apartheid in the U.S. and the onset of the Great Depression, when millions were put out of work.

While in the YCL, she became a journalist for the Weekly Review and the Daily Worker and was eventually elected to the National Committee of the CPUSA in 1945, becoming the only Black woman on the partys leading body. In 1948, Jones became secretary of the Womens Commission of the Communist Party and, along with Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, traveled around the U.S. to organize women into the Party.

Around this time, she wrote An End to the Neglect of the Problems of the Negro Woman, which further developed the ideological foundation of triple oppression and We Seek Full Equality for Women, demanding full emancipation for women. She also wrote a column in the Daily Worker in the early 1950s called Half the World, focusing on how women represent half the world and how they should receive half of the worlds resources.

She was arrested three times, with one of those arrests following a speech she gave called International Womens Day and the Struggle for Peace. Eventually, she was arrested and tried with twelve other Communists under the Smith Act amidst the Red Scare. She served ten months of a sentence but, because of health issues, was released early from the Womens Penitentiary in Alderson, W.V.

After her release, however, she was ordered deported to the United Kingdom at the end of 1955. After arriving in London, she got involved with the local Caribbean community, developed the West Indian Gazette in 1958, and organized the first London Carnival in Notting Hill. Toward the end of her life, she traveled to Japan, China, and the Soviet Union before dying in December 1964. Her ashes were buried to the left of Karl Marxs grave in Londons Highgate Cemetery.

The right to be radical

In the Jones essay, A Right to be Radical, which was the focus of the July 3rd seminar, she wrote: Over 115 Communist and working class leaders, thirteen of whom are Negroes have been arrested under the Smith Act. These Black leaders were: Ben Davis, Henry Winston, Pettis Perry, James Jackson, Jr., Thomas Dennis, Ben Carreathers, Al Murphy, Thomas Nebried, Robert Campbell, Paul Bowen, James Tate, Claude Lightfoot, and Jones herself.

The introduction of the booklet is written by Eslanda Goode Robeson (the wife of Paul Robeson) and says Jones holds a position of leadership in the Communist Party and plays a major role in the work for equality for women and peace. For her beliefs, Claudia Jones was victimized by reaction and prosecuted under the Smith Act. She also faces deportation to her native West Indies under the Walter-McCarran Act.

Joness International Womens Day speech was brought into the context of her ideas on radicalism. She asked, Do not an oppressed people have a right to have radicals? Do not our people have the right to seek some radical solutions to their highly oppressed status? And have a right to be radicals? It would surely seem they have.

Jones six justifications for radicalism were being against slavery, oppression, and capitalism, and being for equal rights, suffrage, and socialism. Boyce Davies explained that Jones always tried centering the following in her radicalism:

Boyce Davies further said on this point that once Black women move, then the rest of society moves, referencing the Black radical feminists who have come before and those who are organizing now, like those in the Movement for Black Lives.

Boyce Davies also centered the interlocking oppressions of class, race, and gender throughout this discussion, further explaining the super-exploitation of Black women workers. Jones was further quoted: The very core of all Negro history is radicalism against conformity to chattel slavery, radicalism against the betrayal of the demands of Reconstruction, radicalism in relation to non-acceptance of the status quo!

Is there a conflict between being radical and being loyal to ones country? History can best answer this question. For the history of our people is rich in examples that, because the oppression of our people comes from the ruling class, the very survival of our people required nonconformity to preserve the dignity of manhood and womanhood. We can conclude as a result of these examples that the entire history of the Negro people has been one of radical solution to the sorely oppressed status. We and Frederick Douglass, Sojourner Truth, and David Walker, Nat Turner and Denmark Vesey, Ben Davis and Henry Winstonthose who have been assailed as radicalsare the staunchest fighters against slavery and Jim Crow, for freedom and equality. Claudia Jones

Jones had said that the very any serious leadership in the fight for Negro rights brings one into opposition with the foreign and domestic polices of government. Seeing all those, like her, whod been charged with trumped-up charges under the Smith Act, Jones said that no matter if it was in writings, speeches, or needed organization endeavors, any Negro leader who pursues any necessary manifestation of leadership is labeled subversive, communistic.

Throughout the conversation on July 3rd, Angela Daviss work on Women and Capitalism in the Black Feminist Reader was connected, since similar ideas were expressed about triple oppression by both her and Jones, each of whom were members and leaders of the CPUSA in different time periods. It was Davis who argued, The objective oppression of Black women in America has a class, and also a national origin. Because of the way the structures of female oppression are tethered to capitalism, she said, female emancipation must be simultaneously and explicitly the pursuit of Black liberation and of freedom of other nationally oppressed groups.

The second half of the event included Jaimee Swift, the founder, creator and executive director of Black Women Radicals, engaging in dialogue with Boyce Davies, as well as a question and answer from the audience. Black Women Radicals is a Black feminist advocacy organization dedicated to uplifting and centering Black womens radical political activism. It is a collective of Black women who represent and uplift Black women of diverse gender identities and gender expressions, educational backgrounds, nationalities, religious and/or non-religious affiliations, languages, ethnicities, and more who have diverse pathways of and to Blackness and to Black womanhood(s) but who are all committed to uplifting, centering, and honoring Black women in their entireties. Swift is a Ph.D. candidate at Howard University, with concentrations in Black Politics, International Relations, and Comparative Politics. Her dissertation focuses on radical, Black feminist politics and resistance against state, structural, and symbolic violence in Brazil.

In their dialogue, Boyce Davies noted that Joness work always centered on womens rights, Black rights, and workers rights. She also spoke on the global foundations of racism and how the current uprisings are not only in solidarity against police violence in the United States, but everywhere in the world. Boyce Davies also mentioned how more Caribbean people died in New York from COVID-19 than in the Caribbean and connected this to Joness migration to the United States when she realized the contradictions of values in the country.

Swift asked about the role of other Black women radicals, such as Maude White and Louise Thompson Patterson of the Communist Party, and also connected the international struggles of the late Marielle Franco and other Black feminist radical leadership. Boyce Davies added that people must also not forget the role of Grace Campbell, who was a Black woman leader in the African Blood Brotherhood (ABB) and became the first Black woman member of the CPUSA once the ABB merged.

They also spoke on their future thoughts on the Black feminist tradition. Some thoughts came to mind such as how the Black Lives Matter movement was birthed by all Black women, who are really concerned about the impoverishment in communities and intersecting racial, class, and gender oppression.

Speaking further, Boyce Davies argued that by deporting Claudia, they [the U.S. government] deported a radical Black female subject, and you can see the same with Assata Shakur.

Later during the conversation, an audience member asked about self-care. Boyce Davies mentioned that radical self-care is a fundamental part of being an activist and protecting oneself from oppressive people. She further said that this new generation is leading the conversation around radical self-care unlike former generations of activists.

Jaimee, who is a journalist herself, also asked about radical Black journalism. Boyce Davies pointed to Ida B. Wells as a model, noting her work in fighting against the lynching of Black people in the South.

To end, Boyce Davies said that Black radical women want to challenge the way that society operates and have the right to challenge the oppressive structures due to their super-exploitation.

Read the rest here:

The right to be radical: Uplifting the life of Claudia Jones - People's World

Key Points

On July 1, 2020, the U.S. Departments of Commerce, Homeland Security, State, and the Treasury issued a joint advisory on the Risks and Considerations for Businesses with Supply Chain Exposure to Entities Engaged in Forced Labor and Other Human Rights Abuses in Xinjiang. The advisory follows months of increased attention by Congress, the Trump administration, and nongovernmental organizations (NGO) on labor conditions in Xinjiang and the treatment of Uyghurs and members of Muslim minority groups in China. Specifically, the advisory describes a range of specific abuses including mass arbitrary detentions, severe physical and psychological abuse, forced labor and other labor abuses, oppressive surveillance used arbitrarily or unlawfully, religious persecution, political indoctrination, forced sterilization, and other infringements of the rights of members of those groups in Xinjiang. The advisory also describes how these concerns are, in the words of Secretary of State Pompeo, no longer confined to the Xinjiang region but spread across China through government-facilitated arrangements with private sector suppliers.

Against this backdrop, the agencies warn businesses of the reputational, economic, and legal risks of involvement with entities that engage in human rights abuses, including but not limited to forced labor in the manufacture of goods intended for domestic and international distribution. The agencies specifically call on [b]usinesses, individuals, and other persons, including but not limited to academic institutions, research service providers, and investors [businesses and individuals] that choose to operate in Xinjiang or engage with entities that use labor from Xinjiang elsewhere in China to heed the warnings in the advisory and implement human rights-related due diligence policies and procedures.

Towards this end, while the advisory itself is explanatory only and does not have the force of law, the agencies outline a range of ongoing U.S. government efforts to curb alleged human rights abuses related to Xinjiang in the areas of import and export controls and financial sanctions. They also provide specific guidance to importers, exporters, and financial institutions on how to identify Xinjiang-related risks. The advisory further urges businesses and individuals to evaluate their exposure to Xinjiang-related risks and to the extent necessary, implement due diligence policies, procedures, and internal controls to ensure that their compliance practices are commensurate with identified risks and international best practice across the upstream and downstream supply chain, and in making investment decisions.

In particular, the advisory highlights three types of supply chain exposure that broadly track export, import, and financial activities implicating Xinjiang:

(1) Assisting in developing surveillance tools for the PRC government in Xinjiang.

(2) Relying on labor or goods sourced in Xinjiang, or from factories elsewhere in China implicated in the forced labor of individuals from Xinjiang in their supply chains, given the prevalence of forced labor and other labor abuses in the region.

(3) Aiding in the construction of internment facilities used to detain Uyghurs and members of other Muslim minority groups, and/or in the construction of manufacturing facilities that are in close proximity to camps operated by businesses accepting subsidies from the PRC government to subject minority groups to forced labor.

On the subject of surveillance, the advisory recounts recent efforts by the Department of Commerce to list and leverage Entity List restrictions against a range of Chinese technology companies and public security bureaus allegedly implicated in human rights violations and abuses in Xinjiang. The advisory goes on to describe the Xinjiang surveillance infrastructure as an unprecedented, intrusive, high-technology surveillance system across Xinjiang, as part of a province-wide apparatus of oppression aimed primarily against traditionally Muslim minority groups. According to the advisory, this system is enabled by technologies including artificial intelligence, facial recognition, gait recognition, and infrared technology, as well as mobile apps used by police to track personal data about Xinjiang residents and cloud databases used to centralize collected information. The advisory notes the role of Chinese surveillance and technology companies supported by PRC government contracts, but also points to evidence that these [Chinese] businesses also get support from foreign academics, scientists, businesses, and investors.

With respect to these concerns, the advisory warns that businesses and individuals engaged in certain activities or who are otherwise directly linked to those in Xinjiang engaged in certain listed activities may face reputational risks and/or trigger U.S. law enforcement or other actions.... These activities include:

On the subject of forced labor, the advisory and related comments by Acting DHS Deputy Secretary Ken Cucinelli recount various recent and ongoing efforts by the Trump administration and Congress to increase scrutiny and enforcement related to labor conditions in Xinjiang and for Muslim minorities throughout the PRC.

As we described in our publication on this topic in March of this year, 2019 marked an uptick in DHS attention to and enforcement of forced labor authorities, beginning with a memorandum of understanding between Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Liberty Shared in July 2019 and culminating in Customs and Border Protections (CBP) issuance on September 30, 2019, of what would be the first of a string of Xinjiang-related WROs. Following a series of congressional hearings and NGO activity in late 2019 calling for further scrutiny of labor conditions in Xinjiang, DHS released a formal strategy describing its commitment to combatting human trafficking and forced labor on January 15, 2020, which included among five key goals leveraging DHS law enforcement and national security authorities to investigate, take enforcement action, and refer [human trafficking and forced labor] cases for prosecution. Since CBPs September WRO, it went on to issue additional Xinjiang-related WROs on May 1 and June 17, 2020, and announced on July 1 the seizure of nearly 13 tons of hair worth more than $800,000 that it suspects may have been produced using forced child labor and imprisonment. In describing the seizure, Brenda Smith, CBPs Executive Assistant Commissioner for the Office of Trade, said that [i]t is absolutely essential that American importers ensure that the integrity of their supply chain meets the humane and ethical standards expected by the American government and by American consumers (CBP, July 1).

In Congress, Rep. McGovern and Sen. Rubio introduced, with bipartisan support, companion bills entitled the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (Bill Text,Reuters, March 11), which would, if enacted as written, create significant obligations and restrictions for textile and other importers with supply chains connected directly or indirectly to Xinjiang. While the bills remain pending in Congress, they continue to gain co-sponsors and in some respects have had their political paths cleared by the passage and enactment on June 17, 2020, of the Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act of 2020 (S. 3744), which received overwhelming support in both the House and Senate before being signed by President Trump. As noted in the advisory, the Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act directs the President to impose sanctions on each foreign person the President determines is responsible for certain actions with respect to specified ethnic Muslim minority groups in the Xinjiang region in China.

Against this backdrop, the advisory focuses on several areas of PRC government activity contributing to forced labor conditions in Xinjiang and elsewhere in China, including:

(1) The governments mutual pairing assistance program linking companies from eastern China to factories in Xinjiang (described further in Annex 2 of the advisory).

(2) Involuntary transfers of Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities from Xinjiang to factories across China (described in Annex 3 of the advisory).

(3) The use of prison labor in the cotton, apparel, and agricultural sectors (described further in Annex 4 of the advisory).

To aid businesses and individuals in identifying and evaluating forced labor risks, the advisory goes on to describe six potential indicators of forced labor or labor abuses, including:

The advisory also includes (Annex 3) a nonexhaustive but illustrative list of industries in Xinjiang reported to be involved in labor abuses, including:

Finally, the advisory discusses certain due diligence strategies and challenges for identifying and evaluating Xinjiang-related supply chain exposure. For example, the advisory describes the role and limits of third-party audits as credible sources of information for indicators of labor abuses in light of repressive conditions on the ground. It further encourages businesses and individuals to collaborate with industry groups to share information, develop Chinese language research capabilities, and build relationships with Chinese suppliers and recipients of U.S. goods and services to understand their possible relationships in Xinjiang under the mutual pairing assistance program. The advisory also points to several forced labor and human trafficking due diligence tools produced by the Departments of Labor, State, and Justice, among others (see our March publication for additional resources, including a summary of CBPsnine-step processfor initiating and adjudicating forced labor allegations).

As described in the advisory, the foundational authority for regulating imports of goods produced from forced labor is found in Section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1307) (see our earlier Client Alert on Section 307here). This law prohibits the importation of [a]ll goods, wares, articles, and merchandise mined, produced, or manufactured wholly or in part in any foreign country by convict labor[,] forced labor[, or] indentured labor, which includes forced or indentured child labor. Such merchandise is not only subject to exclusion and seizure; its importation may lead to criminal investigation of the importer and other parties involved in the import transactionand the imposition of civil or criminal penalties (e.g., 19 U.S.C. 1592 (penalties for fraud, gross negligence, or negligence) and 18 U.S.C. 545 (smuggling goods in the United States)).

In addition to the advisorys guidance for the import and export communities, it also urges entities with banking ties to the U.S. financial system to be aware of requirements for financial institutions to adopt risk-based antimoney laundering, counter terrorist financing, and countering proliferation financing (AML/CFT/CPF) programs to identify, assess, and mitigate risks related to those regulatory regimes. The advisory specifically urges financial institutions to assess their potential exposure to the risk of handling the proceeds of forced labor on behalf of their clients and, as appropriate, implement a mitigation process in line with the risk. As noted in the advisory, money laundering crimes generally require the involvement of proceeds of a specified unlawful activity, which may include sex trafficking, forced labor, and other crimes related to trafficking in persons.

To address these risks, the advisory recommends that financial institutions:

In addition, all U.S. persons and financial institutions with ties to the U.S. financial system must comply with U.S. economic sanctions administered by the Treasury Departments Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC).

On July 9, OFAC and the State Department took the first concrete Xinjiang-related actions following the July 1 joint advisory. OFAC sanctioned four PRC officials and one Public Security Bureau pursuant to Executive Order 13818, which implements the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act (OFAC Press Release). These individuals and entities include:

As a result of the designations, U.S. persons are broadly prohibited from dealing with these persons and entities that are 50 percent or more owned, directly or indirectly, by one or more Specially Designated Nationals (SDNs) (collectively, blocked persons), absent a license from OFAC. U.S. persons must also block and report to OFAC any such property that is in, or comes into, their possession or control.

Also on July 9, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo designated Quanguo, Hailun, and Mingshan under Section 7031(c) of the FY 2020 Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act; as a result, they and their immediate family members are ineligible for entry into the United States (State Department Press Release). Secretary Pompeo indicated that he is also placing additional visa restrictions on other CCP officials believed to be responsible for, or complicit in, the unjust detention or abuse of Uyghurs, ethnic Kazakhs, and members of other minority groups in Xinjiang pursuant to the State Departments October 2019 visa restriction policy under Section 212(a)(3)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Original post:

U.S. Agencies Issue Business Advisory Warning of Xinjiang-Related Supply Chain Exposure and OFAC Imposes Blocking Sanctions on Chinese Persons Related...

The ongoing awakening to the long-standing realities of discrimination against African Americans is marked by a scope and intensity that were unimaginable even one month ago. Polling shows a significant increase from 2015 among Americans who believe racial and ethnic discrimination in the United States are big problems, and widespread protestsincluding in rural and suburban communities where such activism is unprecedentedagainst systemic racism and police misconduct have erupted. The United States has thus entered a window of opportunity where real social change is more likely than at any time in recent history.

But are there foreign-policy implications for this moment? Could this enhanced recognition of racial discrimination at home result in meaningful differences in how the United States engages with the world? Its tempting to think sobut the answer to both questions is almost certainly no. The structural impediments to more seriously accounting for social justice and human rights in foreign policy are simply too great.

There are at least four such structural factors. First, the composition of foreign-policy shapers (think tank experts, columnists) and implementers (government officials) remains disproportionately white (and male). This is visibly evident from any photograph of senior military officials. But it also pronounced in Americas diplomatic corps. In 2002, 70 percent of all State Department employees were white; by September 2018, it remained nearly unchanged at 68 percent. Moreover, in 2018, the more senior the role, the greater the proportion of employees who were whitegoing from 35 percent for midlevel GS-10 rank up to 87 percent for the most senior civil service executives.

This relatively homogenous composition of the foreign-policy eliteincluding yours trulymatters because the recognition of racial oppression at home and abroad is a glaring blind spot. In 20-plus years of working at academic institutions and think tanks, I can recall very few mentions of race. And even these observations were made not out of inherent concern for racial underrepresentation or discrimination within the United States but because the lack of progress toward combating those twin evils could lessen Americas relative power on the international stage.

Second, the predominant frame through which foreign-policy debates are conveyed is as national security interests. These seemingly neutral concepts are conveyed through principles or objectives, ranked by their purported interest-ness: vital, extremely important, important, or secondary. Those categories come from a landmark 2000 report by the Commission on Americas National Interests, which was representative of many comparable bipartisan initiatives. The 23-member commission included just three women, one of whom was the only person of color (Condoleezza Rice). The sole mention of individual rightsone of 10 important national interestswas in promoting pluralism, freedom, and democracy in strategically important states as much as is feasible without destabilization. The caveats that this august group of geostrategic thinkers added on demonstrate that rights are not universal and should never hinder stabilitymeaning a government that endorses U.S. interests retains power.

Though the facts shift, and allies and adversaries come and go, the narrative of Americas global role is always conveyed via static interests, which remain wholly uninformed by human rights concernsunless it can be weaponized selectively to highlight an adversarys human rights abuses. Foreign policy cannot be reconfigured in enduring and impactful ways without updating the thinking and language that could enable such change.

Third, and relatedly, a consistently missing element in elite foreign-policy debates is the livelihoods of actual humans. The central unit of analysis is countries, which are overwhelmingly evaluated through the words and actions of their leaders. When people are considered at all, it is as demographic clusters that might influence the countries or regions where they residethe Arab youth bulge, Russias population decline, and Chinas graying citizenry are popular examples. So-called voices from the regions are those few media-tested, English-speaking people who reside in the rolodexes of TV producers, serve as visiting think tank fellows, or are escorted through Capitol Hill offices by K Street lobbyists.

Without a reimagining of Americas global influence from the perspective of the individuals who experience hatred, bigotry, and oppression, it is impossible to conceive of a foreign policy that ever truly confronts racism.

Finally, the defining manifestation of U.S. foreign policy for 75 years has been the threat or use of military force. The global architecture required to use force anywhere at any time requires host nation basing and overflight permissions. These, in turn, require permanently stationing U.S. troops abroad, which increases civil wars and enables human rights violations by host nation governments. These governments enjoy military assistance in the form of arms sales. According to the State Departments latest World Military Expenditures and Arms Transfers report, the United States is the top arms exporter to the least democratic countries (meaning those in the lowest quintile as determined by Polity Project rankings)accounting for 66 percent of all such sales. In short, to project military power, the United States tolerates or abets subjugation.

Moreover, military spending ($712 billion) absorbs more than half of all federal discretionary spending, towering over the diplomacy and development budget ($48 billion), which could be far better suited to promoting individual rights and freedoms globally. Unfortunately, when you review what country receives the most foreign assistance from the United States, it is a conspicuous list of occupiers, autocrats, and illiberal regimes. The top six proposed recipients for 2020, in order, are: Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Afghanistan, Nigeria, and Uganda. These are so-called strategic partners showered with aid because of their geographic location, security partnerships, or a consequence of great-power competition (Uganda). Congress could vastly increase funding for international and nongovernmental organizations that work to protect groups experiencing prejudice and seriously hold recipients of foreign aid to account for their human rights violations. But there is nothing in recent history to suggest that legislators will fulfill this needed role or even its most basic oversight functions.

For these four reasons, and many others, an overdue turn toward an individual, rights-centric foreign policy is unimaginable, at least for now. The current defensiveness among elite foreign-policy institutions toward considering the role that race plays in U.S. foreign policy is simply too overwhelming. A more diverse group of future foreign-policy thinkers and leaders could one day lead the waybut that group wont arrive in time to keep pace with the current push for racial justice across the rest of U.S. society.

See original here:

From National Interests to the Diplomatic Elite, the Foreign-Policy Blob Is Structurally Racist - Foreign Policy

AFGHANISTAN

If I had dreamed of such a situation, I would have died, says Aziza. But now I have to tolerate it and wait hopelessly for what might happen. (Her name has been changed to protect her livelihood.)

The COVID-19 pandemic officially reached Herat on 23 March via an individual from Qom province in neighbouring Iran. There may have been earlier cases, but little is known given frequent border crossings.

The pandemic has had a severe impact on the livelihood and subsistence of individuals, especially students and teachers in the countrys fragile education sector. And like in other developing countries, Afghanistan has limited resources to counter the public health threat and socio-economic disruption.

Access to quality education in Herat is now acute. With 19 districts, the province includes more than 1,000 villages and 1.8 million residents, with an additional 700,000 to one million internally displaced persons. The education sector in Herat is nearly paralysed given weak IT infrastructure, high cost and low speed internet services and modest e-learning systems.

Students and lecturers suffer from these conditions, which continue to worsen as the city is in quarantine.

Without effective systems in place, school and university closures are increasing learning inequalities and hurting vulnerable children and youth disproportionately, especially girls and women. To respond, inclusive quality education and the role of universities are critical to protect the socio-economic stability of Herat and throughout Afghanistan.

Social impact

In a country where some 3.7 million children are already out of school and do not have regular access to primary education, COVID-19 increases the probability of permanent dropouts and affects childrens general well-being. The closure of schools exacerbates the burden of unpaid homecare responsibilities for young girls, who usually absorb the additional load of supervising other children in Afghanistan.

COVID-19 is quickly changing the context in which children live. Quarantine measures, school closures and restrictions on movement disrupt childrens routines and social support structures, while placing new stressors on parents and caregivers who may have to find new childcare options or forego work.

Stigma and discrimination related to COVID-19 make children more vulnerable to violence and psychosocial distress. Disease control measures that do not adequately consider the gender-specific needs and vulnerabilities of girls and women can increase risks and lead to negative coping mechanisms. UNESCO reports that violence, harassment and oppression against women and girls during every type of emergency tend to increase.

Women who are displaced, refugees and those living in conflict-affected areas are particularly vulnerable. Children and families who are already vulnerable due to socio-economic exclusion or those who live in overcrowded settings remain at risk. Supporting the role of teachers and university lecturers is critical as part of Herats social response network.

Online education

Internet, radio, TV and e-learning programmes are available as distance learning opportunities but remain expensive and are not considered equivalent to the growing quality of Herats public and private universities.

The government of Afghanistan launched online education for students, but they continue to struggle given slow internet speeds and electricity outages. These realities impact students who are already under pressure and now face exhaustion as well as growing mental health concerns.

Students throughout the city have a similar challenge ahead. The specific risks facing children and students include physical and emotional maltreatment, gender-based violence, mental health and psychosocial distress as well as specific child protection-related risks such as child labour, separation and social exclusion.

Herat province has a fragile economy and it depends on aid and tailored technical assistance from donors, much like Afghanistan as a whole. To overcome the impact of COVID-19, research on the extent of the local crisis and the response of NGOs and donors is critical without meaningful action informed by valid research, such as needs assessments, emergency donations and coordinated cooperation, it will be difficult to cope with a worsening situation and recover.

In response and in coordination with the national and provincial government, the government has put together a plan to promote self-learning, small-group learning and distance learning, which draws not only on IT-enabled teaching and learning via television and mobile apps, but also on strong communities.

Literate parents, religious leaders and upper secondary school students are part of a growing network, including in hard-to-reach areas, who meet in open-air settings while observing physical distancing. Nevertheless, significant gaps remain.

Partnerships

For a peaceful and resilient community, ongoing research and development towards equitable access to quality education is key. Herat needs coordinated engagement to meet urgent needs for infrastructure, for low-tech solutions around e-learning, faculty professional development and local economic development with government, donor, private sector, higher education institution and community engagement.

Herat needs locally available solutions and committed international partners. The world has much to gain from seeing the cultural province of Herat thrive by combatting the pandemic and making a better future for all. Aziza need not wait when there is hope.

Dr Abdullah Faiz is chancellor of Herat University, Afghanistan, Ali Mohammad Karimi is education and research consultant with Rayan Asr R&D Company and Dr Wesley Teter is senior consultant with UNESCO Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education.

More here:

Universities are the key to pandemic recovery - University World News

The national security law imposed by Beijing over Hong Kong went into effect on 30 June. By writing this piece, I may be in violation of it.

On the evening the law came into effect, I lay wide awake at my apartment in Chicago, my eyes glued to the screen for the latest developments. The bill had been swiftly drafted, passed and signed by the central government before its content was revealed, the process foreshadowing its draconian measures. The legislation marks an end to Hong Kongs judicial independence and the beginning of a new police state. It also assumes extraterritorial powers for the Chinese government that may subject a person from anywhere in the world to punishment for breaches of speech against its national security.

I stayed up as late as I could, hoping to bear secondhand witness to a fleeting freedom the city and its people had fought so hard to preserve. I fell asleep with my phone in hand, my heart racing, pumping blood and oxygen to a fervent dream, where millions of Hong Kong residents would once again flood the streets, as they did a summer ago, nullifying the law with united disobedience.

I woke up to a shattering reality. Hundreds of protesters had been arrested, some under the new legislation. Prominent activists stepped down from leadership positions. Pro-democracy posters disappeared from public spaces. Once-active social media accounts went silent. I felt ashamed for the fantasy I had clung to the night before. In my relative security from an ocean away, I had selfishly projected an impossible burden on a people.

Eleven years ago when I left mainland China for graduate school in the US, I proudly declared that I was going to live in a free country. Freedom cannot be eaten like rice, my mother said, quick to puncture my naivety. I argued that liberty and prosperity are not mutually exclusive. I was not wrong. Neither was my mother. But only one of us had endured starvation as a child. Only one of us had to feed a family under authoritarian rule.

Do you think the Chinese people will one day rise up? I have often encountered this question from well-meaning Americans, who read my writings critical of the Chinese government and loudly wonder if my country has more people who are courageous like me. To them, political oppression exists only in the abstract, afflicting an alien people on a distant land. Similarly vague is their notion of rising up, as if martyrdom is the only valid response, and whoever fails to do so must deserve servitude. They regard themselves as freedom-loving without contemplating its meaning. They cheer rebels from faraway places without shouldering the cost. An honest reflection would complicate this worldview.

I am not free, despite living in an ostensible liberal democracy. A free person must be able to return to her birthplace at any time without risking persecution; I cannot. A free person must be able to exist with nothing to prove and live without fear; I cannot. I am neither brave nor exceptional. I am fortunate to have options afforded by the luxury of my degrees. I made a calculation and traded one set of freedoms for another, knowing that both are incomplete and I will forever be grieving for what I have lost.

It is from this personal experience that I am troubled by much of the language from politicians and governments around the world promoting resettlement policies for Hong Kong residents. Boris Johnson announced that Hong Kongers with a British national overseas passport would be able to live and work in the UK. The Australian government is extending skilled visas to attract the best and the brightest from the city as well as its businesses. The US Congress introduced a bipartisan bill to grant refugee status to Hong Kong protesters.

Migration is a human right. Every state has an ethical and moral obligation to open its doors to people in search of safety or better opportunities. However, the dominant rhetoric from western countries goes beyond the humanitarian principle to emphasise economic self-interest. Relocating the concept of Asias World City to its isles has occupied a corner of the British imagination for decades, the idea revitalised in light of the new national security law. Hong Kong citizens are described as enterprising and highly educated, who would enrich their new host nation and boost its competitiveness.

The glistening phrases are not compliments. They are dehumanising. They paint a caricature of a population where Hong Kongs poor and disenfranchised are never part of the picture, where a lifes worth is defined by its productivity. For those of us who have faced the menace of a border, the price of crossing means turning a part of ourselves into currency: our savings, our diplomas, our labour, our despair as well as our pain. Unconditional gratitude is demanded of us in exchange for a probationary dwelling. Our resilience becomes justification for continued exploitation.

A person may go through multiple countries of residence, but can only have one true homeland, where no matter how much time has passed, the itinerant may touch the ground with her feet and in that instance become whole. Those who do not know the open wound of exile can callously suggest uprooting a people and congratulate themselves for being generous and clever. The thoughtless self-righteousness stems from an age-old superiority complex, a colonial mindset that insists people from lesser parts of the world must prefer life in the civilised west, if given the chance.

In a recent survey of Hong Kong citizens, Taiwan topped the chart as their first choice for relocation, while Britain and the US ranked below mainland China. The result is not surprising, as most people favour geographical, cultural and linguistic proximity to their place of origin. What the residents of Hong Kong want is of little concern to the politicians and pundits who appropriate their plight. By portraying Hong Kongers as the right kind of immigrant, distinct from migrants at the US-Mexico border or refugees across the Mediterranean, western lawmakers see the Asian city as their own political theatre. They claim the mantle of human rights defenders by feigning solidarity, while espousing racist and xenophobic policies at home.

The heartbreaking reality of Hong Kong is a continuation of its fate as a chess piece in great power politics. Sandwiched between empires, the financial hub derives its status from its usefulness to global capital; the interest of its people has always been secondary. With the new law, Beijing has called the worlds bluff, exposing both the Communist partys ruthlessness and the wests hypocrisy.

I do not know what shape or how long the path to liberation might take for Hong Kong and the rest of China. What I do know is that it must start by focusing on the most marginalised, the people whose work is considered low-skill, whose bodies are deemed sacrificial. The edge of our struggle is not its limit but a new beginning. The road that will lead me home can only be forged through radical imagination and collective effort. The kind of freedom that is upheld by national borders is always fragmented and fragile. Emancipation cannot be achieved through flight for the privileged few. No one is free until everyone is free.

Yangyang Cheng is a particle physicist and a postdoctoral research associate at Cornell University

See original here:

Allowing the privileged few to flee Hong Kong isn't liberation - The Guardian

Trans rights demos have found a united fight with the black lives matter movement

Its a shame theres no invisibility cloak to throw at transphobic authors. Author JK Rowling chose Pride month for her latest Twitter rant on transgender rights, coupled with a lengthy website entry spreading misinformation.

Rowlings comments come at a worrying time. In Hungary, Orban has exploited the lockdown to scrap legal recognition for transgender people. The British government has its own transphobic plans.

Rowling peddles the dangerous myth that predatory men couldgain access to public bathrooms if the Gender Recognition Act changes went through.

Yet its trans people who are far more likely to be victims of crime. In 2018, it was reported that two in five have experienced a hate crime due to their gender identity.

Rowling has signed an open letter calling for freedom of speech.

Lets use ours to shout loudly that trans women are women and trans men are men.

Martha Snow

York

I was on the recent trans rights demonstration in London and it was great to feel the return to campaigning on the streets. We have to find safe ways to protest because the government is attacking us so hard.

The changes that were proposed to the Gender Recognition Act to allow people to self-declare their identity are set to be dropped and instead the old system of demanding a medical diagnosis will be retained.

It means the hope of a small amount of extra freedom will be crushed. Thats why we need protests.

But we also need to reach out to other oppressed groups. And for me, the best aspect of the London demonstration was the support for Black Lives Matter. I dont want a trans movement that is closed off from the inspiration and militancy of the great anti-racist movement.

Perhaps some trans people think its best to keep our struggle separate from others.

But that will weaken us against our enemies.

Together we can fight the system that produces both trans oppression and racism.

Molly Reynolds

North London

The SNPs mental health spokesperson Lisa Cameron has voted against legislation that prevents pro-life protesters harassing women outside abortion clinics.

For whatever reason women choose to have an abortion they should not have to cope with pro-life activists waving placardsof dead babies on them as they enter the clinic.

MP Lisa Camerons vote was submitted by proxy by the SNPs Chief Whip and was the only vote submitted by the party, which typically abstains from voting on English-only laws.

So why do it?Why was she allowedto do it by her ownparty?

It has to be said that this puts the SNPs commitment to abortion rights in question.

She can cite her reactionary views all she wants.

But that does not give her the right to try to use her position to force her personal views onto other women, setting womens rights back decades.

Thankfully the motion proposed by Labour MP Dr Rupa Huq passed with 213 votes to 47.

But on behalf of women everywhere I say shame on you Lisa Cameron.

We must protect womens right to choose without being harassed, humiliated and traumatised.

It is time to move forwards, not to be dragged back in time.

Catriona Mackay

Dundee

Karen started out just being someones name, but the Karen meme on the internet has now gone viral.

What began as a stereotype of middle aged white women that likes to complain to managers is being used as a label for any racist, middle aged white woman.

Its good to make fun of racists, but this particular meme is problematic.

It seems this term has become a way of suggesting that white women of a certain age are more likely to be racist.

While we should be challenging racism when it comes from ordinary people, we should be pointing the finger at those at the top of society who benefit from racist divisions.

And when a white woman is being racist, she should be called what she really isa racist.

Jasmine Fischer

North London

Millions of British pensioners live in poverty. Its scandalous that we have the lowest state pension in Western Europe at 29 percent of average income while the EU average is 70.5 percent.

Shamefully, last year BBC bosses allowed the Tories to make them responsible for providing free TV licences for over 75s.

Now they have announced the scheme will be scrapped next month. At the same time, various commentators are calling for the ending of the triple lock on state pension annual increases and the means testing of other pensioner benefits.

Large numbers of pensioners have been shielding during this crisis. For many of them, the TV has been their only connection with the outside world and their only entertainment.

It has always been literally a lifeline for some pensioners.

We need trade unionists and campaign groups to link up with pensioner groups to support anyone who is threatened with court proceedings. Todays trade unionists are tomorrows pensioners.

Fran Postlethwaite andGeorge Arthur

Barnsley

The black lives Matter (BLM) movement in Scarborough has had local successes, which will make life that bit more uncomfortable for racists in the town.

Gollywogs have been removed from local gift shops after a BLM campaign.

A racist DFLA meeting was cancelled by the Star pub in Cayton when BLM told her who would be using the room.

If a hundred or so activists can achieve this in a small seaside town, just think what we can do when thousands of us act nationally.

John Atkinson

Scarborough

The Tories have implemented sanctions against those complicit in human rights abuses.

Unfortunately, they have left themselves and Tony Blair off the list.

John Curtis

Suffolk

Labour is no longer a party that represents fairness, equality, and working people facing a very uncertain future right now.

A multimillionaire Knight of the Realm can never understand the lives we lead.

Fiona Grace Barling

Facebook

The Mayor of Bedford wrote to the government pleading for dispensation not to open non-essential shops as the pandemic continues, and this was rejected.

And the per capita rate of infections in Bedford was over twice that of Leicester.

Jim Peters

Via Email

I thought it was utter hypocrisy when health secretary Matt Hancock posted on social media about his happiness that the new domestic abuse bill passed. Its a bill he voted against.

Annalise Greenwood

Bristol

See the original post here:

Letters: Unite against all of those who peddle racism and transphobia - Socialist Worker

The State Department dismissed Chinese government sanctions leveled against U.S. officials, saying that these threats will not deter us from holding China accountable for its oppression of the Uighurs.

The United States is committed to holding accountable those involved in human rights abuses around the world, including those responsible for the human rights crisis in Xinjiang, China, a State Department spokesperson told the Washington Examiner following the Monday sanctions. Beijings July 13 announcement to impose retaliatory sanctions on U.S. government officials and organizations who have worked tirelessly to expose the PRCs human rights abuses further demonstrates the CCPs refusal to take responsibility for its actions."

"These threats will not deter us from taking concrete action to hold CCP officials accountable for their ongoing campaign of human rights abuses against members of ethnic and religious minorities in Xinjiang, including mass detentions, coercive forced abortions and forced sterilizations, and restrictions on religious and cultural identities," the official added. There is no moral equivalency between these PRC sanctions and actions taken by countries holding accountable CCP officials for their human rights abuses.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said earlier in the day that it would be imposing corresponding sanctions against Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom Sam Brownback, Republican Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Marco Rubio of Florida, GOP Rep. Chris Smith of New Jersey, and the Congressional-Executive Commission on China.

"We urge the U.S. to immediately withdraw its wrong decision, and stop any words and actions that interfere in China's internal affairs and harm China's interests, Hua told the Chinese press. The U.S. actions seriously interfere in Chinas internal affairs.

Last week, the Trump administration announced sanctions, including the denial of travel visas, aimed at Chinese Communist Party officials who the U.S. believes have been involved in carrying out human rights abuses against Uighurs and other minorities in China. The U.S. said the Chinese government officials were being designated for their connection to serious human rights abuse against ethnic minorities in Xinjiang, which reportedly include mass arbitrary detention and severe physical abuse, among other serious abuses.

The U.S. officials targeted by China on Monday roundly derided Chinas decision.

Cruz sarcastically tweeted: Bummer. I was going to take my family to Beijing for summer vacation, right after visiting Tehran. Cruz has long been a China hawk and recently introduced legislation targeting Chinas cover-ups of the coronavirus pandemic, Hollywood censorship at the behest of China, and the Chinese Communist Partys propaganda efforts inside the U.S.

The senator later put out a statement saying that the Chinese Communist Party is terrified and lashing out after being criticized for its treatment of the Uighurs.

They forced over one million Uighurs into concentration camps and engaged in ethnic cleansing, including horrific forced abortions and sterilizations, Cruz said. These are egregious human rights atrocities that cannot be tolerated. Unfortunately for CCP leaders, I dont have plans to travel to the authoritarian regime that covered up the coronavirus pandemic and endangered millions of lives worldwide.

Back in March, Cruz and Rubio also introduced the bipartisan Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, which was aimed at holding the Chinese Communist Party accountable for using forced Uighur labor.

Rubio responded to Chinas targeting by tweeting: The Communist Party of #China has banned me from entering the country. I guess they dont like me? Rubio, who is also the co-chair of the Congressional-Executive Commission on China, introduced the Uyghur Human Rights Policy Act of 2019, which passed the Senate unanimously and was signed into law by President Trump in June.

The U.S. sanctions Chinese officials for abusing human rights; Beijing sanctions us for defending human rights, the CECC said Monday. Instead of blaming others, the Peoples Republic of China must stop the mass internet, forced labor, and human rights against Uyghur and other ethnic minorities ... The CECC will not be silenced.

Brownback had tweeted that this administration continues to lead on efforts to protect #religiousfreedom & address the PRC govts abuses" following the imposition of sanctions against China.

The State Departments International Religious Freedom Report for 2019, released through Brownbacks Office of International Freedom, spent 115 pages hammering China for its persecution of religious minorities, zeroing in especially on its repression of the Uighurs.

Walter Lohman, the Director of the Heritage Foundations Asian Studies Center, told the Washington Examiner on Monday that Chinas retaliatory actions were likely targeted messaging for its own people and aimed at intimidating other countries, rather than truly aimed at scaring the U.S. itself.

The U.S. is not the primary target the U.S. is just the context for it, Lohman said. I think the point here is aimed at other countries and aimed at a domestic audience. The point is that China is not going to stand for this and shows they can do this too The message is China is strong like the United States, and its not going to take this sitting down.

Rep. Michael McCaul, a Texas Republican and ranking member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, tweeted that the #ChineseCommunistPartys sanctions on the U.S. Ambassador for International Religious Freedom & U.S. lawmakers is just the latest example of Chairman Xi's totalitarian leadership that has turned China into a pariah state.

Since 2017, as many as 2 million Uighur Muslims and other ethnic minorities have been moved into detention camps, often referred to as concentration camps, in the western Xinjiang province of China. There, Uighurs are allegedly put through rigorous "deradicalization" programs and are mocked and tortured by Chinese guards. But the camps are just one part of alleged large-scale surveillance and oppression inflicted on Chinas Uighur population.

The Chinese Communist Party has reportedly imposed forced birth control, sterilizations, and abortions on the Uighur population in a race-based effort to reduce the minority Muslim population in the country. A late June analysis by the Associated Press found that Beijing is imposing draconian measures to slash birth rates among Uighur Muslims and other minorities as part of a sweeping campaign to curb its Muslim population while the Chinese government encourages some of the countrys Han majority to have more children.

Go here to see the original:

Threats will not deter us: State Department dismisses Chinese sanctions against Cruz, Rubio, and others - Washington Examiner

In general, on the issue of respect for human rights, governments across the world seem to claim that their constitutions and laws protect full fundamental rights of the people or its citizens, but on the other hand, they also formulate legal regulations that do not guarantee the most important and basic democratic, political and economic rights of the people, and also establish an iron fence around human rights through laws that duplicate government claims.

According to some experts and educators, in all societies where political and economic systems and state structures have been established on the basis of national and class oppression and the exploitation of human beings by human beings, despite all government claims, the question of human rights in such societies has turned into a question of the fundamental rights of human groups. And nations and classes that have been victimised or forced into exploitation on national, ethnic, class and other grounds under a particular system and law becomes a cause of concern.

This exploitative practice made it clear that the issue of the restoration of rights in the colonial and capitalist system is not a matter of all human beings but about the dignified existence of the subjugated nations and the oppressed class and the working people, because the supreme forces are also a minority of human beings.

In this regard the promotion of human rights without identifying the disenfranchised forces sometimes obscures the real issues and the question of the rights of the oppressed and downtrodden people on which the ruling forces are also increasingly propagating human rights.

But when the question of fundamental economic and political rights of subjugated nations and peoples arise, the laws that the ruling powers call the protectors of human rights that are used to suppress the national and class question, and then this ruling ideology of violating fundamental rights is called national interest, and those who do not accept it are considered traitors and beheaded.

The current crisis situation in Balochistan is also demanding an accurate identification of the basic political and economic rights of the people here. And the real problem is that the Baloch national question does not emerge accurately.

Although the manifestation of missing persons, enforced disappearances, retrieval of mutilated bodies and irreparable loss of life and property to civilians in the operations of the forces are considered as human rights violations, they are in fact violations of basic Baloch national political and democratic rights but also the superficial expression of which only bringing it to the fore in its original form can accurately identify the basic problem.

In this regard, Baloch political circles have repeatedly stated that the real problem of Balochistan is not just the ongoing security operations here and the human tragedy that has arisen from it, but the fundamental question is the Baloch national right to sovereignty. Which has been trampled on since day one.

And with the passage of time, instead of shrinking and shrinking, this chain seems to be so widespread today that the whole of Balochistan has now taken the form of resistance, a glimpse of this is the conscious struggle of the Baloch nation that has come to the fore in shape of Baloch sacrificial attacks .

The Baloch have an enemy that lacks positive human values and traditions. It would be unrealistic to expect them to abide by the laws of war, like living nations in war situations. A beast cannot be expected to abide by human and moral values and international law.

In the struggle for independence, the Baloch nation has presented the testimonies of such gigantic personalities that language and pen seem incapable of speaking or writing on them. It is not possible to cover their character, their greatness with words and in this the Baloch sacrificial martyrs are also included.

Many nations in the world have succeeded in achieving their national independence through such bloody series and today this stage is also being faced by the Baloch nation.

The Baloch nation is second to none in the known history of the world for fulfilling its duty before history. Today, the Baloch nation is creating history through sacrifices without any hesitation, which is the hallmark of living nations. In front of the international community, Baloch has to some extent proved to the world that Balochistan is a disputed region and it is one of the biggest and most important issues in the world which cannot be ignored for long.

Today we have the Baloch national voice in every corner of the world. In every country of the world there are names of Baloch nation. The issue of Baloch is being discussed several corners of the world. This is a great achievement and credit for this success goes to the great personalities who have sacrificed their lives for Baloch national liberation.

There is no dearth of such leaders, teachers, comrades in the history of the world who have made their dead proud and gave new life to the young generation and comrades with their ideas and teachings. There is no shortage of the Baloch martyrs who have proved through their sacrifices that the only destination of their conscious struggle is an independent Balochistan.

Excerpt from:

Free Balochistan is the ultimate aim of all Baloch martyrs - News Intervention

The Russian Revolution of 1917 changed everything. Heres why, over 100 years later, its still vital to study this momentous event.

It was the first time workers seized state power

In October 1917, the working class in Russia went further than any have before or since: they took power away from the capitalist government and replaced it with control by and for workers.

This new form of government was based on the soviets, or workers councils.

The soviets were a different kind of representative body from the privileged, unaccountable parliaments of capitalism. Delegates were elected from workplaces. They remained in the workforce, were paid the same wage as a skilled worker and were subject to immediate recall. This meant they were directly known and accountable to the people who elected them.

These soviets were set up during the February revolution, which overthrew the tsarist dictatorship. They developed as a way to organise, debate and push forward the struggle.

District and city-wide soviets authorised an eight-hour working day and democratisation of the army. Soldier and peasant soviets were established. Inside workplaces, factory committees organised everything from maintenance work to political meetings.

Crucially, these democratic organisations overcame the capitalist divide between politics and the economy. Real power in capitalism is not held by elected representatives, but by corporate boards and billionaires. Parliament rarely encroaches on their control of the economy, and when it does, the capitalist class can overpower it.

Based in the factories, the power of the soviets rested on workers control over production. It directly challenged the capitalists rule. When, in March, the Petrograd city soviet signed a deal with an employers organisation for an eight-hour day, this recognised a reality that had basically been enforced already at the point of production by workers themselves.

In August, when the right-wing general Kornilov tried to crush the revolution, railway and telegram workers were able to use their control over transport and communication to sabotage the attempted coup.

By democratising the workplace, the revolution had a profound effect on everyday life. Every factory or soldiers barracks was turned into a place of debate and discussion. Old assumptions were shaken. In a deeply sexist society, women became increasingly involved in political organising.

Initially the soviets operated alongside the capitalist Provisional Government, made up of the unelected remnants of the old tsarist parliament. In October, this capitalist government was overthrown and replaced by soviet power, demonstrating that it is possible for workers to lead a socialist revolution and run society in their own interests.

The new soviet state embarked on a series of path-breaking reforms in health care, education and work. It made major advances in the rights of women and LGBTI people. And it ended Russia s involvement in the imperialist slaughter of the First World War.

Russias revolution shows that workers power is the path to the radical change we need.

It shows us the role of a revolutionary party

This revolution could never have succeeded without the Bolshevik party.

The Bolsheviks were a revolutionary socialist party. They were the most radical of the political forces in Russia. They called for an end to the capitalist Provisional Government and for all power to be transferred to the soviets of workers, soldiers and peasants.

At the start of the revolution, support for the Bolsheviks and their radical politics was a minority position in the workers movement. The largest parties in the soviets were the moderate socialists who argued for continued political support for the Provisional Government. This left power in the hands of the capitalists.

Even at the heights of struggle, workers can hold onto ideas absorbed through years of capitalist oppression. Most of the time, workers and other ordinary people get little say over how society is run. Bosses and managers make decisions about working life, economic decisions are made by corporate boards and government policies decided by politicians and state bureaucrats. When most people think of who has the power to reshape society, they look to the government. Within the working class, this reinforces reformism, which seeks to implement socialism through parliamentary institutions.

These ideas persisted even after the February revolution, and they were backed up by the arguments of the moderate socialists. While most workers distrusted the unelected elites in the Provisional Government, the moderate parties argued for compromise, even taking leading positions in the government.

The continued support for the Provisional Government meant many of the aspirations of the revolutionary workers, soldiers and peasants went completely unfulfilled. Russias involvement in the violent slaughter of the First World War continued, and land stayed in the hands of rich landlords.

It took the intervention of a revolutionary party like the Bolsheviks to overcome the influence of the moderate socialists.

Over decades, the Bolsheviks and their central leader, Lenin, had built the party through intervention into the struggles and debates of the Russian working class movement. Navigating the ups and downs of class struggle and state repression, the Bolsheviks debated other political currents, made connections with worker militants and struggled alongside them.

This meant that in 1917 they were in a position to intervene into the heightened debates and struggles of the revolution. This struggle exposed the flaws of the moderate socialists and demonstrated to the masses that the Bolsheviks were right: the Provisional Government had to be overthrown and replaced with soviet rule.

The Bolsheviks were able to grow from a party of a few thousand, in the minority in the soviets and with many of their best leaders in exile, into a mass party of the working class with around a quarter of a million members and a majority in the soviets. Through each twist and turn, they advanced the case for workers power, culminating in the successful insurrection in October. This overthrew the capitalist state and established a government of soviets: the first time workers had ever taken state power.

The history of the Bolsheviks shows that workers can organise to fight for revolutionary socialist politics. It shows that with organisations like that, revolutions can win out against their enemies. Thats the kind of organisation we need to build today.

It shows why we need internationalist politics

Marx and Engels Communist Manifesto ends with a famous call for international solidarity: Workers of the world, unite! In their lifetime they established an organisation bringing together the workers movements of different countries, known as the First International.

In the capitalist system, blocs of capital compete against each other in the drive for profits. This competition drives ever larger blocs to seek out new markets and resources in opposition to their rivals. On a global scale, this results in a world divided between imperialist powers.

Working class internationalism is a recognition of the fact that workers have no stake in this competition. Siding with our nation only binds us to our exploiters, while dividing us from workers in other countries.

In the decades prior to the Russian Revolution, such internationalism seemed to be uncontested among socialists. Working class parties were part of an international socialist movement and allied together under the banner of the Second International. This international stood against the growing threat of war, which characterised the start of the 20th century.

But when the war broke out in 1914, this movement was shattered. Most of the parties of the Second International abandoned their internationalist principles. They joined with their nations ruling classes in support of sending workers to the imperialist slaughter.

The Bolsheviks were one of the few to stand against this nationalist fervour, calling for a workers revolution to end the war. They led resistance to the war wherever they could, while the brutal reality of battle radicalised workers and pushed them into further revolt. Internationally, they worked to cohere anti-war socialists and lay the basis for the re-emergence of a revolutionary socialist movement.

Just as the globally interconnected system had created a world war, the shared experience of its horrors created the basis for a world revolution. Towards the end of the war, this began to become a reality.

The victory of revolution in Russia transformed global politics. Revolution spread to Western Europe, and mass revolts spread across the world. This world revolution was crucial to the success of the revolution in Russia. Capitalism is a global system, and Russia was an underdeveloped, mostly rural society. The Bolsheviks knew that if their revolution didnt spread, then it was doomed. A socialist society could never be built in poverty-stricken Russia alone. Their only hope was revolt elsewhere.

Revolts did break out outside of Russia, but ultimately they failed, held back by the weakness of the revolutionary movements. The revolution was isolated, surrounded by capitalist reaction.

Socialism must be an anti-imperialist, internationalist movement, based on building solidarity among workers all over the world. It cant be built in a single country at the expense of others.

Its defeat shaped the next century of politics

This isolation laid the basis for a defeat that still reverberates today.

In Russia, production collapsed and with it the power of the working class. The soviets remained in name only, with the democratic life that animated them destroyed by poverty and starvation. Increasingly it was the state bureaucracy that took charge of society.

Stalin became the political leader of this growing bureaucracy, eventually leading a counter-revolution that destroyed the revolutions gains. A vicious campaign of state terror and repression targeted political opponents. All opposition was outlawed, and political and economic power was concentrated in the hands of the bureaucracy.

This counter-revolution had devastating results in Russia, but the impact on world politics was even more destructive. While they overturned the core ideas of Marxism, the new bureaucracy continued to claim the name. Socialism came to be associated with the Stalinist regime, rather than the international struggle of the working class.

After the Russian Revolution, revolutionary workers parties had gained a mass working class membership and following, with people inspired by the example of revolt. These Communist parties were now transformed into tools of the new Russian ruling class. These parties became a barrier to workers liberation. In Germany, the Communist Partys policies ruined the possibility of an effective struggle against Hitler.

Stalinism has also held back generations of activists from properly exploring socialist ideas. Marxism has been both distorted and discredited by its association with Stalins regime. This has cut off activists from the legacy of revolutionary working class politics, which remains the only solution we have to the horrors of global capitalism.

Only by really studying and understanding how Stalinism distorted and betrayed the legacy of the revolution can we rescue the revolutions lessons and build on its achievements.

The high point of working class politics remains the Russian Revolution. As long as we continue to struggle against capitalism, we need to return to and study it, to learn from its successes, understand its defeat and rebuild today the vital tradition of revolutionary socialism.

See the original post here:

Five reasons everyone should study the Russian revolution - Red Flag

Srinagar, Jul 13 (PTI) For the first time in the history of Jammu and Kashmir, no official function was held to commemorate Martyrs'' Day observed on July 13 every year in memory of those killed in firing by soldiers of Dogra ruler Maharaja Hari Singh in 1931.

In a break from past, there was no function at the Martyrs graveyard here after the government dropped July 13 from the list of gazetted holidays last year, officials said.

The holidays on July 13 as well as on December 5 - the birth anniversary of National Conference founder Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah - were dropped after the abrogation of Article 370 by the Centre on August 5 last year.

Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, the then prime minister of Jammu and Kashmir, had declared July 13 as a holiday in 1948.

Apart from the official function at the Martyrs graveyard, mainstream political leaders also used to visit it to pay homage to the 22 Kashmiris who were killed in Dogra army''s firing while protesting the autocratic rule of Maharaja Hari Singh.

The officials said no mainstream political leader visited the graveyard on Monday in view of the strict restrictions imposed in most parts of Kashmir to contain the spread of coronavirus infection.

Separatist Hurriyat Conference led by Mirwaiz Umar Farooq had on Saturday called for a strike on Monday.

A National Conference (NC) leader, however, said the party had applied for permission to visit the Martyrs graveyard, but there was no response from the district administration.

Meanwhile, both NC and Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) - the two regional forces in Jammu and Kashmir - paid glowing tributes to the martyrs on this day.

In a statement, the NC said the day marked the inauguration of struggle of Jammu and Kashmir against oppression and discrimination.

The day has an emblematic importance for the people of Jammu and Kashmir as it marked the launch of widespread people''s agitation for the restoration of their due human rights...

Every year we invocate, remember the supreme sacrifice of the martyrs of 13 July 1931, the idea behind remembering them is not merely an act of reminiscing past, memorializing, there is more to it, on this day we galvanize our lives with their mission as was done by (NC founder) Sher-e-Kashmir (Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah) all through his life, NC president Farooq Abdullah said.

Farooq Abdullah, the Member of Parliament from Srinagar Lok Sabha constituency, said it is the day of assertion of Jammu and Kashmir''s identity and rights of its people.

The day marks the shift from stoicism to dynamism. It was a fight of the tyrannized against a tyrant, of the oppressed against oppressors... I on this day pay my earnest tributes to all the martyrs who laid their lives on that day to secure a new dawn of freedom for future generations.

The martyrs of 1931 will continue to be a beacon of light for us and for the coming generations. Every single drop of their blood is sacred to us, he said.

NC vice-president Omar Abdullah while paying tributes to the martyrs said the day marks the collective defiance of the oppressed against oppressors.

The day is the watershed moment in the people''s struggle for restoration of their universal human rights. It was their valour that inspired millions of others to rise against the then despotic and autocratic regime. We observe the day to reiterate our commitment to fight evil with kindness, violence with non-violence and peaceful struggle, he said.

The PDP, while paying tributes to the martyrs said, their role in Jammu and Kashmir''s freedom struggle can neither be undone nor can be forgotten.

The memory of 13th July martyrs cannot be erased by changing the government calendar of holidays as they will live forever in the hearts and memories of every freedom loving democrat, a PDP spokesman said in a statement.

He said the PDP reiterates its commitment to the objectives of justice, empowerment and democratic rights that the martyrs have laid their lives down for.

PTI SSB MIJ SRY

Disclaimer :- This story has not been edited by Outlook staff and is auto-generated from news agency feeds. Source: PTI

Read the original here:

First time in JKs history, Martyrs Day observed sans official events - Outlook India

FORCED MIGRATION. Screenshots from TikTok videos taken and stitched by Coda Story.

Videos showing hundreds of Uyghur people being transported to forced labor schemes have shed new light on Chinas continuing oppression of the Muslim ethnic group.

In the early months of the coronavirus outbreak, the government locked down more than 50 million people in Hubei province and imposed strict stay-at-home measures in cities across the country. However, footage shared on social media suggests that, at the same time, a state-mandated mass migration of Uyghurs was taking place in the northwestern province of Xinjiang.

In January, dozens of videos began to surface on Douyin a version of TikTok, made by the same company, only available to Chinese users showing crowds of people being packed onto trains, buses and airplanes.

The footage shows Uyghurs being transported as part of what Beijing refers to as a poverty alleviation initiative. Sent far from home, they are put to work in tightly surveilled factory labor programs and often housed in dedicated labor compounds.

Video: Videos on Douyin show masked Uyghurs lining up outside Yengisar station near Kashgar; preparing to board a plane from Hotan to work in Fujian and Guangxi provinces; and standing in formation outside Akto station.

In February, more videos were posted by a local media center in the Xinjiang city of Hotan. In one, a crowd of people stand in formation, dressed in matching red anoraks, their faces obscured by surgical masks. Each also wears a blue lanyard and has a suitcase beside them. A caption explained that the men and women are migrant workers, ready to board a plane to the heavily industrialized coastal provinces of Fujian and Guangxi.

Chinese national state media also covered the transportation, which took place in late February just as Chinas coronavirus numbers had reached a peak.

One report stated that the workers were being sent on a free charter flight. Another featured images of men and women about to fly to Hunan province, where they were to work on the production line at a technology company. Although the mask covered most of her face, she could still feel her excitement, it said of one Uyghur woman. The article then quoted her as saying, As long as your hands and feet are quick, the more you do, the more you earn.

Chinese authorities maintained they were helping pull Uyghur people out of deprivation. We will do our utmost to help laborers who are willing to go out to work as soon as possible, to ensure that the prevention and control of the epidemic and the struggle against poverty are both addressed, a spokesperson for Hotans Human Resources and Social Security Bureau told state-run Xinhua News Agency.

Another video posted on Douyin in March shows, according to the caption, a group of 850 people being moved to Korla, Xinjiangs second-largest city, to work in the textile industry. Masked Uyghurs are seen walking in single file and lining up to have their temperature checked, before boarding buses and trains.

The government-run relocation of Uyghurs has been described by experts and human rights groups as an extension of Chinas mass surveillance and indoctrination system. Since 2016, as many as a one million Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities have been held in concentration camps, referred to by the Chinese Communist Party as vocational training centers or re-education facilities.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry did not respond to requests for comment.

Video: Uniformed Uyghurs wait to board trains from Yarkant county station (left) and Akto station (right), both near Kashgar, Southern Xinjiang

Darren Byler is an anthropologist at the University of Colorado, who specializes in Uyghur studies. Referring to the labor program, he said, Theres very likely a re-education aspect to it or some really tight form of control in the factory environment.

While information from Xinjiang has been scarce during the pandemic, reports have emerged that in some areas placed under lockdown, Uyghurs were not allowed to leave their homes and were dependent on state deliveries of essential supplies. The Washington D.C.-based Uyghur Human Rights Project has drawn attention to footage circulated on Chinese social media, in which people say that their households were starving.

Xinjiang has reported just 76 coronavirus cases and six deaths since January. Uyghurs living abroad consider these figures to be suspiciously low, given the provinces population of almost 22 million people.

While Beijing maintains that most people have been released from government camps and returned to society, many observers believe that they have been shuttled into labor programs or other forms of detention.

The Chinese government seeks to portray the forced labor program as a benevolent initiative, providing economic opportunities to the people of a historically deprived region. In recent months, state media in Xinjiang has reported that these work placements will emancipate the mind and eliminate old habits.

Video: A video, posted by a Xinjiang media center, looks inside one of the live-work compounds Uyghurs are assigned to.

Zumret Dawut, 38, spent two months in a detention camp in Xinjiangs capital city of Urumqi. While there, she underwent hours of indoctrination, during which she was beaten and made to recite Chinese Communist Party propaganda. A report by the Associated Press in June revealed that China has been forcing birth control and sterilization on Uyghur women. In the course of her confinement, Dawut was given regular injections and pills that tranquilized her and stopped her periods.

After her release in June 2018, Dawut left Xinjiang. The following year, she flew to the U.S., where she now lives. Using a cellphone that she brought with her from China, she is still able to access Douyin, which is usually firewalled outside of the country.

I first started seeing videos of Uyghurs being transferred back in January, she said.

Dawut engaged with the content via likes and comments, so the apps algorithm showed her more. Though some of the footage sent her way originated from state media agencies, dozens of videos were posted by Uyghurs themselves. She noticed that clips in the latter category all featured the same haunting, Chinese-language rendition of the Italian protest song Bella Ciao.

I have to be very quick to download these videos, she said, explaining that the app usually swiftly deletes them.

Asked whether Douyin censors Uyghur-related content, a spokesperson said in an emailed statement that the company treats all users on our platform the same, regardless of ethnicity or religious affiliation.

One video found by Dawut, posted to Douyin by a Xinjiang news outlet in March, shows a group of more than 500 Uyghurs arriving for a work placement in Korla. The footage includes their new accommodation: austere rooms fitted with bunk beds, shared kitchenettes and a common living area.

Such dormitories are often part of larger compounds, complete with watchtowers and onsite indoctrination centers. These facilities feature prominently in Uyghurs for Sale, a report published in March by Australias Strategic Policy Institute.

Its authors state that the forced labor program amounts to re-education 2.0, in which Uyghurs undergo mandatory indoctrination after working long hours in factory jobs, and fear detention if they attempt to quit.

The report also details Uyghur workers being offered to factories in batches of 100, via online forums, then sent to work in supply chains linked to international companies, including Apple, Nike and Gap. It also explains that Uyghur labor is a lucrative industry: companies that hire Uyghurs on a long-term basis receive payments of up to $720 per person from the Xinjiang government.

A series of advertisements on Baidu Chinas answer to Google suggest that this incentivized market for cheap Uyghur labor has thrived throughout the pandemic. One advert, from April, offered Xinjiang Uyghur workers, all female, 18-35 years old, proficient in Chinese, obey arrangements. Another, from late March, stated that the government assures security, an apparent reference to the widespread perception of Uyghurs as dangerous extremists. The posts said workers could be paid as little as 13 yuan ($1.86) per hour.

Baidu did not respond to requests for comment for this article.

Video: On many of the videos, a Chinese version of the Italian folk song Bella Ciao plays over the top.

Forced labor also forms part of Xinjiangs prison system. Nursimangul Abdurashid, 32, left the province in 2013. She now lives with her husband and six-year-old daughter in Turkey, where she works as a marketing executive. In the years since she left the city of Kashgar, her parents and two brothers have been detained, and the family home now stands empty.

In 2017, Abdurashid learned that her older brother had been put to work in an electronics factory, while being held in a detention camp in the city of Artux for the alleged non-payment of a debt. The same year, her younger brother was arrested and charged with preparing to commit terrorist activities, after applying for a passport to study in Turkey.

Abdurashid recalled how he had been desperate to go to university. He wanted to be a teacher. He gave up his dream, she said.

Abdurashid now fears that both of her brothers aged 30 and 34 have been pushed deeper into Xinjiangs forced labor system. Now, she scours the faces of Uyghur workers in Douyin videos, trying to find out what has happened to them.

I want to see them alive, at least, she said. Seeing so many young boys and girls heading into the unknown makes me so sad.

China experts believe that detentions and forced labor are part of a deliberate strategy to destroy Uyghur life in Xinjiang. While language, architecture, religion and culture have all been attacked and suppressed during the government crackdown, the forced migration of thousands of Uyghurs can be viewed as an attempt to tear apart a whole community.

Video: A group of 179 people line up to hear a speech about the beauty of hard labor before departing on a charter flight from Hotan, southwestern Xinjiang, to labor programs in Fujian and Guangxi.

The main goal is to move people away from their hometowns, to isolate them from their family, from their roots, and to make it harder for them to escape or move around, said Vicky Xiuzhong Xu, the Australian reports lead author, during a Zoom call. They become more dependent on these work arrangements that are assigned to them. This is part of the efforts of the re-education campaign.

In mid-June, President Donald Trump signed into law a bill to sanction China for its treatment of Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang. The new legislation was introduced shortly after leaked extracts from a new book by former National Security Adviser John Bolton alleged that Trump told President Xi that he should go ahead with the construction of prison camps in the province.

Meanwhile, Zumret Dawut continues to monitor Douyin, searching for more evidence of Chinas oppression of her people. She thinks a lot about the Chinese version of Bella Ciao heard in so many of the videos. Once an anthem for agricultural workers protesting against harsh conditions in the rice fields of 19th-century Italy, the songs lyrics include a line that translates as, The day will come when we will all work in freedom.

This is a message to our people, said Dawut. Dont forget about us. Rappler.com

Rachel Sherman and Joseph Gordon contributed research.

Isobel Cockerell is a reporter with Coda Story. A graduate of Columbia Journalism School, she has also reported for WIRED, USA Today, Rappler, The Daily Beast, the Huffington Post and others.

This article has been republished from Coda Story with permission.

See original here:

Revealed: New videos expose China's forced migration of Uyghurs during the pandemic - Rappler

It is said that when Benjamin Franklin emerged from the concluding session of the Constitutional Convention, one Mrs. Powell asked him, What have you given us?

A Republic, he responded, if you can keep it.

That claim, of course, stood glossed by the trenchant irony that, at that point in 1787, the American constitution framed in Independence Hall in Philadelphia did not include the right to vote for American women.

Only after heroic struggles by American suffragettes was that right realised in 1920.

Just as the formal right granted in 1870 to African-American men to vote was actually to fructify as late as 1965 when the Voting Rights Bill was passed.

Yet, some 230 years after the adoption of the American constitution, the United States under the Trump presidency can be seen to be embroiled in another historic battle to preserve the republic and all its democratic and institutional accomplishments.

The situation in India is not too different.

The Indian constitution granted the right to universal adult franchise from its very inception, transcending some stiff opposition from deeply conservative sections of the Constituent Assembly.

The Constitution of India. Photo: Wikimedia Commons

A pivotal aspect of that revolutionary accomplishment was the new emphasis on expanding literacy in order to lift the mass of Indians out of ignorance and render their exercise of franchise sentient and independent. Long decades of struggle were finally to culminate in the legislation by parliament on August 4, 2009, which made access to free school education a legally enforceable right.

Needless to say, that education about republican values and citizens struggles to realise them is transmitted to students in academic institutions through a study of social and political science curriculum, and, overall, through a study of the history of cultural oppressions and aspirations.

Those histories also teach us that when nation-states come to centralise economic and political power, the existence and sanctity of democratic institutions and imperatives notwithstanding, it is not the hard sciences that offer much resistance. Such resistance invariably comes from the social scientists and historians who insist on educating us about the non-negotiable status of republican goals and the required modes of governmental conduct thereof.

Also read: The Republic at 71: Faced With an Unbending Government, Indians Continue to Speak Out

Caveat: There was a time when the hard sciences became the chief instruments of progressive historical transformation (recall Copernicus and all those that followed in changing irretrievably our consciousness of material forces and phenomenon). But, as the new revolutionary classes settled down to profit accumulation, science needed to be reduced suitably to technologies that would no longer ask humanist questions but serve the interests of endowed classes.

For a century or more now, the burden of humanist scrutiny has been carried forward by historians and social scientists. One must always remember that many historians and social scientists have, nonetheless, continued to owe allegiance to revanchist and reactionary structures of thought.

Closed authority structures then develop a vested interest in keeping from citizens critical knowledge of social and political formations and of constitutional values that pertain to principles of republican democracy, even while they obtain executive legitimacy from democratic forms of government formation. The possibility of such a degradation of liberal archives of politics into authoritarianism was eloquently explored by Horkheimer and Adorno in their path-breaking Dialectic of Enlightenment.

Such authorities begin to clip the wings of the sources of progressive humanist knowledge by either cutting resources to the social sciences, or by taking recourse to sundry strong-arm methods available to the state. But, most of all, by reformulating schools curricula to the states ideological requirements.

A demonstrator attends a protest against riots following clashes between people demonstrating for and against a new citizenship law in New Delhi, India, March 3, 2020. Photo: Reuters/Adnan Abidi

Within any educational system, it is a given that the content and quality of curricula suggest what authorities who frame those curricula think to be desirable or deleterious to the development of citizens cognitive allegiance to the ideological preferences of ruling social forces.

And, exclusions from the curricula are often far more indicative of the bent of those authorities than the inclusions.

In that context, the shredding of subjects inscribed in the Social Science, Political Science, and History text books of class 9, 10, and 11 of Indian schools just announced by the Central Board of School Education (CBSE) on directive from the Minister of Human Resource Development, no less, must be seen as a telling pointer to the priorities of the present central government.

Also read: Chapters on Citizenship, Secularism, Federalism Scrapped as CBSE Prunes Syllabus for COVID

Arguing that the burden on senior school students needs to be reduced, for the year 2020-2021 In view of the disruption caused by the COVID-19 calamity, it is proposed that subjects like, inter alia, Democracy and Diversity, Gender, Religion, Caste, Popular Struggles and Movements, Challenges to Democracy, Citizenship, Nationalism, Secularism, Federalism, Planning Commission and Five-Year Plans, Peasants, Zamindars, and the State, Understanding Partition, and Mathematical Reason be excluded from the existing curriculum for purposes of examinations.

In effect, all those materials that bear on the formation of republican citizenship, a republican constitution, and a critical understanding of how we came to be and who we are, and what our role as citizens of a republic is in upholding republican principles are to be ejected as matters of lesser consequence than the imbibing of supposedly ideologically neutral skills. The ejection of such materials, of course, reveals how frustrated authorities are with their critical and social import.

All this of course falls pat within the intellectual parameters of a nationalism that looks upon open liberal enquiry into state formations as anathema. In so far as such enquiry often brings into question the unanalysed or tendentious economic, cultural and historical predilections of closed authority structures, it is always the social sciences and truthful history writing that present the most obstacles to the closure of the governing arrangements of autocratic rule.

Also read: CBSEs Deletion of Chapters on Ecology, Evolution During Pandemic Ironic, Say Biologists

It should be clear from the above list of exclusions that the bad and the ugly must be jettisoned from study and deliberation; unsurprisingly, all of these exclusions impinge on the right of diverse oppressed segments of the citizenry to learn of both their sources of oppression and their republican rights and prerogatives.

Coming as this does in the wake of what we have seen of the plight of millions of trudging immigrantsan instructive episode that brought to the fore the continuing fault lines of caste, class, gender, and religious identitythe diktat seems to announce a clampdown on such learning and pedagogy that may raise questions of macro-historical distress and discrimination that continue to plague the republic.

Note that the honourable minster does not include such subjects in the core values of education or of learning achievement.

Just as one wonders what Franklin may have thought of the current goings-on in the American Republic, one may wonder what the founding fathers of the Indian freedom movement and the framers of the Indian Constitution may have thought of these revanchist moves in the substance and conduct of Indian school education.

John Dewey, that doyen of educationists, once wrote that the true aim and purpose of education is education.

Not so.

Badri Raina has taught at Delhi University.

Originally posted here:

Republican Values, Or Things That Students Need Not Learn - The Wire

Public officials have the responsibility to protect America from rampaging mobs that seek to destroy monuments and demoralize Americans.

The destruction is a means to an end a Marxist reshaping of America that has little to do with protecting the lives of innocents.

If it were only about protecting innocents, we could come to agreement on reforms in civil discussions.

AYahoo News/YouGov surveyfound that 84% of Americans strongly or somewhat approved of the firing of the officers involved in George Floyds death. This would have been a good starting place for real cooperation on the subject of police brutality if the radical Left wanted solutions.

Public officials must stand against lawless destruction and allow Americans the opportunity to engage in civil discussions as they continue the ongoing quest for the ideals in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution.

Politicians who think they can hide in their offices until this crisis blows over are making a monumental (no pun intended) mistake. When you give into mobs, you get more mobs. It is time to stand up.

America can handle a nuanced discussion about race. They can differentiate between an obviously true phrase, Black lives matter, and an organization by the same name that has questionable leadership and some goals that are not shared by most Americans, such as defunding the police. But such understanding requires true leadership not politicians with talking points.

We need thoughtful leadership such as that of Evangelist Alveda King, niece of Martin Luther King Jr., who recently said: While we are protecting our history, we are overcoming our biases; this is happening simultaneously. There is no need to vandalize property and real estate in this process. We must remember the good; thats legacy. We must avoid repeating the bad; bad is sin. Remember, statues can be idols. As one blood, one human race; its time to return to God.

Americas citizens are demanding that elected officials safeguard public and private monuments and buildings from rioters and leftist radicals who are inspired by self-professedtrained Marxists.

The federal government has been spurred on by a recent Executive Order by President Trump, which instructs federal law enforcement to prosecute people who damage federal monuments, and threatens to withhold federal funding from state and local governments that fail to protect their own public monuments and statues.

The Department of Homeland Security took action toprotect federal monumentsover the July 4 holiday; however, many state and local officials have been cowardly and the result is lawlessness and violence in our streets.

The American Constitutional Rights Union is taking names. Literally. Our project Protect Monuments (www.protectmonuments.org) encourages public officials to sign a pledge to protect public and private monuments and buildings.

Why private? Black Lives Matter member Sean King recently called for destruction of images of a European Jesus stating on twitter: All murals and stained glass windows of white Jesus, and his European mother, and their white friends should also come down. They are a gross form white supremacy. Created as tools of oppression. Racist propaganda. They should all come down.

We have no qualms about calling out cowardly politicians and officials who refuse to stand up for civil discourse over lawlessness.

Just as we fight every day to protect the constitutional rights of all Americans. We will not sit idly while domestic terrorists, anarchists and thugs criminally destroy monuments and private property. We will call out any public official who allows lawlessness and destruction, according to ACRUPolicy Board Member Amb. J. Kenneth Blackwell.

Stop the mobs. Then start the discussions.

Lori Roman is President of the American Constitutional Rights Union. She wrote this for InsideSources.com.

See the rest here:

Stop the mobs; start the discussions - Lowell Sun

New Delhi: Every day, an average of five people die in custody in India, with some of them succumbing to torture in police or judicial custody. 2019 was no better, as 117 people died in police custody while 1,606 deaths were recorded in judicial custody. And yet, there has not been a single conviction in the deaths of 500 persons allegedly due to torture in police custody between 2005 and 2018.

A report by the National Campaign Against Torture a platform for NGOs working on torture in India has highlighted how torture continues to remain a favoured tool in the hands of the police to extract information and confessions, or sometimes just to victimise oppressed sections of society.

The India: Annual Report on Torture 2019 has also identified `15 trends of torture and impunity which reveal how torture has also become a systemic tool of oppression, extortion and silencing dissent. Further, it alleges that high levels of criminality exist within the police and amongst jail officials.

Watch: Indias 23-Year-Old Failure to Ratify UN Convention Against Torture is Shameful

Drawing from the past, the report said with respect to the death of 500 persons remanded to police custody by court between 2005-18, 281 cases were registered and 54 policemen were chargesheeted, but not one has been convicted so far.

The report said in 2019, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) recorded 1,723 cases of death in custody. It noted that most deaths in police custody occur primarily as a result of torture. Of the 125 deaths in police custody, 93 (74.4%) were due to alleged torture or foul play while 24 people (19.2%) died under suspicious circumstances such as suspected suicide (16 persons), illness (7 persons) and slipping in bathroom (1 person). Uttar Pradesh had the highest incidence of such deaths with 14 cases, followed by Tamil Nadu and Punjab with 11 cases each.

Many theft suspects allegedly tortured to death

The report also highlighted how while probing non-heinous crimes, police personnel in several states went to the extent of torturing the suspects to death. It said the practice of torturing the suspects in police custody to punish them or gather information or extract confessions continued to be rampant.

From a 17-year-old boy in Tamil Nadu, to Hira Bajania of Gujarat, Karan Kumar of Punjab, Nesar Ansari of Bihar and Ashok Bansal of Madhya Pradesh, the report cited cases where people were allegedly tortured to death only because they were suspected to have committed thefts. This apart, it pointed out how some, like Rajesh of Kerala, died by suicide as they are unable to bear such torture.

Also read: Custodial Torture: It Is the Criminal Justice System That Requires Investigation

In some cases, groups of people are also subjected to torture as the cops want to extract confessions. In this regard, the report cited the case of two Dalit brothers Deepak and Dashrath and 12 labourers, including women, of Gujarat who were tortured to extract confessions in connection with a case of murder. Often, it said, people are also tortured by cops or jail staff to extort money from them or their relatives.

Torture includes beating, pulling nails, burning and even rape

The method of torture revealed by the report show the level of criminality in the police and jail officials. It also shows how operating in closed systems, they have a sense of entitlement and impunity.

The report said from acts like slapping, kicking with boots, beating with sticks, pulling hair, torture also includes barbaric methods like hammering iron nails in the body (as in the case of Gufran Alam and Taslim Ansari of Bihar), applying roller on legs and burning (as happened to Rizwan Asad Pandit of Jammu & Kashmir), and falanga or beating with sticks on the soles (as with Rajkumar of Kerala).

Sometimes, the police and jail staff even go to the extent of stabbing people with a screwdriver (as Pradeep Tomar of Uttar Pradesh was subjected to) or giving electric shock (as with Yadav Lal Prasad of Punjab and Monu of Uttar Pradesh). Often, private parts are also targeted. There have been instances of cops pouring petrol on private parts (as in the case of Monu of Uttar Pradesh) or applying chilly powder to them (in the case of Raj Kumar of Kerala)

Sexual crimes also perpetrated by the custodians of law

As part of torture, the report pointed to cases where the victims were forced to perform oral sex (as in the case of Hira Bajania and 12 others of Gujarat). Also, it said women continue to be tortured or targeted for sexual violence in custody.

In this regard, the report said a 35-year-old Dalit woman was allegedly illegally detained, subjected to torture and raped in police custody by nine police personnel at Sardarshahar police station in Churu district of Rajasthan. Her nails were also plucked by the cops who tortured her, the report said.

Most victims from poor, marginalised sections

The report said most victims were from poor and marginalised sections and were targeted because of their socio-economic status. It said 75 of the 125 people killed in police custody belonged to such communities with 13 of them being Dalits or from tribal communities, 15 being Muslims and 37 being those who were picked up for petty crimes.

Also read: Most States Have Flouted Mandatory Judicial Inquiry into Custodial Deaths for 15 Years

After these heinous crimes of torture, the report said, the police often tries to cover up by destroying incriminating evidence of torture, not conducting post-mortems or cremating the bodies of torture victims in haste.

The NCAT recorded at least four such cases. These included the 17-year-old boy from Tamil Nadu; Hira Bajania of Gujarat, and Mangal Das of Tripura.

Even minors not spared

On how minors also end up being victims, the report said it was because the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 has not been implemented properly. It pointed out that those allegedly killed due to torture include four children in police custody and one in a juvenile home.

In jails too, the report said, torture was common. In this regard, it referred to how Nabbir, an inmate of Tihar jail in Delhi was allegedly tortured by a jail superintendent who branded Om symbol into his back before depriving him of food for two days.

Torture by armed forces

The NCAT report also accused the Indian Army and Central Armed Forces deployed in the insurgency affected areas and the border areas of being involved in torture. It said Mungshang Konghay was allegedly tortured in the custody of 17th Assam Rifles at Litan in Ukhrul district of Manipur in May 2019. The victim alleged that he was tortured to make him confess that he is a member of an underground group, it added.

Similarly, it said, in June 2019, 17-year-old Tarun Mondal was allegedly tortured to death in the custody of Border Security Force (BSF) in Murshidabad district of West Bengal. Suspected of cattle smuggling, he was first shot below the knee and then beaten with boots and rifles till he fell unconscious.

Also read: Justice for Jayaraj and Bennix Means Ending a Culture of Impunity

The report also blamed armed opposition groups like those in Jammu and Kashmir and Nagaland of using torture against informers. It said two people Arif Sofi of Khudwani and Mehraj Ahmed Dar were abducted by militants from their homes in Kulgam district of J&K on the suspicion of being informers. Though they were later released, one of them succumbed to his injuries.

Similarly, Hangkon Solting was tortured to death by alleged National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN) (R) militants in Changlang district of Arunachal Pradesh, it said. It also spoke about how Maoists use brutal killing and torture of their hostages, including after being subjected to summary trial in so-called `Jan Adalats or peoples courts, in full public view to instil fear among the people.

Centre not keen on bringing own law, ratifying UN law against torture

Finally, despite the large number of cases of torture being reported each year, the NCAT lamented that the Government of India has no intention to ratify the United Nations Convention against Torture (UNCAT) or enact a national law against torture despite the Law Commission of India submitting the draft Prevention of Torture Bill, 2017 for enactment by the parliament in October 2017.

It added that the refusal of the Supreme Court, in its judgment of September 2019, to issue directions to the Centre to enact a national anti-torture law has further emboldened the government to not ratify the UNCAT.

Excerpt from:

Custodial Torture Continues Unabated in India Amidst Culture of Impunity: Report - The Wire

MinnPost photo by Tom Nehil

Rep. Ilhan Omars most prominent challenger in the DFL primary is Antone Melton-Meaux, a newcomer to DFL politics.

Welcome to this weeks edition of the D.C. Memo. This week from Washington, the Fifth District primary, Jason Lewis responds to MinnPosts coverage and Andy Slavitt says something hopeful on COVID-19.

Rep. Ilhan Omars most prominent challenger in the DFL primary is Antone Melton-Meaux, a newcomer to DFL politics. Whos funding Melton-Meaux? Where did he come from?

You can read more at MinnPost.

HuffPost also has a breakdown of the race, primarily looking at how right-leaning Israeli policy groups are targeting Omar and assisting Melton-Meaux. Heres a bit of it:

Antone Melton-Meaux, 47, the Minneapolis attorney seeking to unseat Omar, 37, in the states Aug. 11 Democratic primaries, raised more than $1.5 million in May alone.

Much of that cash comes from political action committees opposed to more U.S. pressure on the Israeli government. Two such groups, Pro-Israel America and NORPAC, have bundled upwards of $450,000 for Melton-Meaux to date.

These Israel hawks investment in unseating Omar follows an expensive and ultimately unsuccessful intervention on behalf of House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot Engel. Given Engels massive deficit in the in-person vote, the New York Democrat has all-but-officially lost to Jamaal Bowman, a progressive challenger who is more critical of Israel, in his June 23 primary.

I reported last week that Jason Lewis, the endorsed Republican for Senate in MN, previously said Trayvon Martin was a thug, a kid in trouble, not a saint, not a role model, and guilty.

On Monday, Lewis was asked by a radio host what he thought about the discrepancy between his words about George Floyd, whose death he called tragic, and his words about Trayon Martin. He laughed.

Host: You called the death of George Floyd tragic, because it was, but you said different things after another person died a long time ago, so how do you rectify that, Jason?

Jason Lewis: I dont know, its kind of amazing.

You can listen to the clip here at about the 42 minute mark.

On July 7, during a speech in front of the Minnesota state capitol, Rep. Ilhan Omar called for dismantling the whole system of oppression. Right-wing media immediately jumped on the clip, suggesting that Omar was saying we need to dismantle the entire U.S. political system.

The Daily Caller ran this headline: Ilhan Omar Calls For The Dismantling Of US Economy, Political System.

Fact-checking website Snopes rates that claim as false.

Andy Slavitt, the former Acting Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, talked to the Minnesota State House about COVID-19 this week. His assessment: Minnesota can have its economy back if it stays hyper-vigilant.

The good news is that with all the time Ive spent with leaders around the country, with scientists, with epidemiologists, that with the right strategy and the right approach, we can get through this virus. We can live with this virus and we can indeed have our economy back, Slavitt told the Minnesota Houses Select Committee on Minnesotas Pandemic Response and Rebuilding.

Today we are asked whether the land these treaties promised remains an Indian reservation for purposes of federal criminal law. Because Congress has not said otherwise, we hold the government to its word, Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote, in a 5-4 decision affirming that nearly half of Oklahoma is within an Indian reservation.

Omar Rashad and Katherine Swartz for CalMatters: UC will sue Trump administration over new international student visa rules

Joining Harvard and MIT, the University of California is set to sue the Trump administration for a policy change that would force international students not taking in-person classes to leave the country.

Thats all for this week. Thanks for sticking around. Until next week, feel free to send tips, suggestions, and sound advice to: gschneider@minnpost.com. Follow at @gabemschneider. And dont forget to become a MinnPost member.

Read the original post:

DC Memo: Focus on the Fifth District - MinnPost

NBC Sports

Peter King is on vacation until July 20, and he lined up some guest writers to fill his Monday spot on Football Morning in America. Today, its Michael Thomas, who plays safety for the Houston Texans.

Previous guest columns: Michael MacCambridge (June 15) Front-Line Workers (June 22) Joe Browne (June 29) Kim Pegula (July 5)

Three months into the 2016 seasonmy friend Colin Kaepernicks last in the NFLthe 49ers came to Miami for a game. The Niners were 1-9. We were 6-4 and headed for the playoffs. I entered the NFL on San Franciscos practice squad in 2012; by 2016, I was in my fourth season playing safety for the Dolphins, and I took the field that afternoon in south Florida knowing our biggest priority on defense was to stop Kap.

In the last four years, Kaps been blackballed from the NFL and has become an international hero for the oppressed. Ill get to that subject in a moment, but I want to express what a great player he was when he last played, and why I believe he absolutely must have the chance to get his job in the NFL back. Now.

The pressure on Kap that hot afternoon was enormous. We had won five games in a row. Though he was a great player, he was getting a lot of attention for other reasons. Kap started protesting during the National Anthem that preseason, to draw attention to systemic racism and police brutality, first sitting during the anthem and later kneeling. Eric Reid joined him in San Francisco. It was not a popular stance with the public. Kenny Stills, a wide receiver on our team, and I joined in solidarity in Miami so during the anthem before that game, while I was kneeling, I could look across the field and see Kap doing the same.

That feeling was monumental. We were getting nothing from the league, no statement of support, no willingness to back the players. There was more tension that day, because Kap had previously worn a T-shirt with a photo of a meeting between Fidel Castro and Malcolm X. In south Florida, with such a large Cuban population, anything pro-Castro does not go over well. So that was a massive thing for the Miami media, and he had a heated discussion with a reporter from the Miami Herald during a mid-week press conference that got a lot of attention. That game had extra juice before we lined up on Sunday.

Kap played an incredible game. It might have been his last truly great game in the NFL. He threw for 296 yards and three touchdowns and he had his last 100-yard rushing game in the league, with 113 yards on the ground. We were up 31-24 but they had first and goal at the six-yard line with five seconds left and Kap was looking to get them into the end zone, tie the game and send us to overtime. He got the snap and tried to run it in, and for a minute it looked like he was going to do it. But he got tackled by Ndamukong Suh and Kiko Alonso at the two-yard line, and that was the game.

We rushed the field, we were celebrating, and I remember being mad at myself afterwards because by the time we were done with all that, Im pretty sure Kap was off the field, and we didnt get to chop it up. Obviously, I was glad we won. When Im playing against Kap, when Im playing against anyone, Im trying to make my plays and win the game as my absolute first priority. But at the same time, Kaps my guy, and I want him to ball. And I was really happy that he balled, because there was absolutely nothing negative anyone could say about that game. We know the added pressure that came with us taking a knee. If you give them any excuse, theyll tear you down and demand you get cut. Youre just a distraction.

That season was life-changing for me. Following the back-to-back unjust murders of Philando Castile and Alton Sterling in the summer of 2016, I knew I had to do something. I was done with t-shirts and hashtags. I was ready to fight, because this was bigger than me. I had zero guarantees in my contract at the time. Miami could cut me at any point and not owe me a thing, not even owe me a goodbye.

I had to make a decision. My parents always raised me to be a leader, to take a stand for what was right regardless of potential punishment, but even they were scared. My wife Gloria and I prayed about it. Heres what it came down to: If I say that I care about my people, if I say that I care about the Black community, I needed to do something. My daughter would be watching.

To be honest, I had no idea what exactly that something was going to be. Until I saw Colin Kaepernick kneel during the National Anthem. When I heard why he was protesting, that he was fighting against systemic oppression and police brutality, it was an incredible moment of clarity.

Kenny, who has conviction like no other, said to me, Mike, thats what we need to do. Players across the league were having conversations about locking arms, raising fists, but we knew that would distract from the message and allow it to be co-opted. We had to kneel in solidarity with Kap, and we had to have that conviction to know that even if we were going to get bashed, we were in it with our brothers. In our hearts, we knew it was the right thing to do.

In 2016, Colin Kaepernick woke me up.

I pray that we figure out a way to make this NFL season work safely amidst the coronavirus pandemic. Im a vice president on the board of directors of the NFL Players Association, and were talking about that right now. If and when it does, I have no doubt that well hear any number of statements and sentiments from the teams, from the league and from Roger Goodell about racial injustice, about Black Lives Matter, about making change. Were already hearing them now. Great. Its the middle of July. But I dont think any player will really believe the sentiments of the NFL if Colin Kaepernick doesnt have a job in the league this season.

When I initially spoke with Peter King about writing this column, he wanted to know if I might propose a creative solution to make that job happen for Kap. I said no. The NFL created this problem. The NFL has to solve it. Its not my job to do that. If the league really feels like its going to back the players when it comes to ending racism, Colin should have a job. Thats the only way that the Black community and the players are going to truly believe the NFL is serious about what they say. Otherwise, people will always reference what you did to your own. You have to look in the mirror and clean your own house first.

Like I said, Ive played against Colin, and hes a winning quarterback. He wasnt winning the last time we faced each other, but hes proven he can compete, and hes taken his team to the Super Bowl. People love to talk about how long Colin has been out the game, how hard it might be for him to get back to that NFL level. But I know hes been working and staying in shape. Thats different than actually playing, and I dont know if his first role when he comes back will be the starting quarterback for a team. But I know for a fact that of all the backup quarterbacks on a roster right now, hed be one of the best, if not the best. And probably better than some of the second-tier starters.

Like the rest of us, hed have to come into camp and prove himself. Thats the beauty of our game. Respect is earned by your play. He built up a lot of that respect in the past. I have no doubt that with all the work hes been putting in, even since hes been blackballed out of the league, that hed be able to come in and compete. And then it would be up to him to prove his worth and earn that respect again.

Beyond that, hes the type of quarterback that todays NFL is built for. Its built for the mobile quarterback, its built for the quarterback who can run but also throw. Hes that dual-threat option. Hes mobile, and he has a big arm that can hit the deep threat. He causes confusion for defenses if he gets into any kind of zone-read option. And obviously the RPO game is bigger than ever. Set aside for a second what the league would gain in terms of credibility by bringing him back. From a pure football standpoint, his style fits the league perfectly.

Colin is always going to be the name and the face of this movement, and he should be. But I dont think his stance is anywhere near as monumental without the unwavering support of Eric Reid. With Eric, you have a first-round draft pick, a Pro Bowl type player whos young, whos checking off all the boxes on the list of things you need to get to free agency and kill it on the open market.

Eric and I both hit free agency in 2018, hes two years younger than me, and for him, nothing? He struggled to get a job in Carolina, and now hes without a team again. All because he used his platform to fight against police brutality and systemic oppression and align with Colin Kaepernick. When you talk about Colin, you have to talk about Eric. In the same breath that Im calling for Colin to by employed, I guarantee you Colin will be calling for Eric to be employed this season as well.

In conversations Ive had with other players, even the player who didnt take a knee, everyone is overwhelmingly in agreement that these men need to be playing in the league. If theres a group thats opposed to that, I certainly havent spoken with them. Most people, myself included, feel like Kap is a hero for what he did. He woke up the next generation of players to use their voice and their platform to protest police brutality and systemic oppression.

Four years removed from 2016, there has been real change, and its come from the players. Players are realizing their power, and they know the impact it has when they speak out against social injustices and racism. The young stars of today and tomorrow are doing it, and its so necessary because everything starts from the top. If the faces of the NFL Patrick Mahomes, Deshaun Watson, Lamar Jackson, Michael Thomas (the other one, of Saints fame) are calling for an end to systemic oppression, and saying it publicly? Putting their faces behind it? Demanding the league back them while doing it? The video Michael Thomas engineered, featuring so many young stars, was so powerful, and Roger Goodell responded. That was a start. Now theres more to do.

If its not the faces of the leaguethe big starscalling for these things, its easy to dismiss. Im not going to name names, but for so long the top players in the NFL of the past, many of whom were not Black, werent going to use their platform to fight for these causes. The league felt okay to talk about faith, family and football and to have players only support the causes that they said we could support. Players got trapped and confined to this clich. And even if you wanted to address non-polarizing issues in our country, this was the feeling: You know I care about these issues, you know that Im Black, you know that I care about the Black Community. But at the same time, there was a serious fear: If I speak out and say something, Ill mess up my money!

But now with all the top players speaking out, theyve applied pressure to the league and left them no choice but to join the fight. Theyre the new faces of the league. If theyre speaking out on systemic oppression and racism in this country, then that opens the door for every other player. And they also know that the next generation of stars is watching. The college athletes. Youve seen players at Texas A&M, Clemson, Oklahoma State, HBCUs across the nation, and at my alma mater, Stanford, using their platforms. It doesnt matter where they are. Theyre seeing their big brothers in the NFL fight to end systemic oppression. They feel strongly about making real change for the Black community too.

In 2016, we looked to the league to back us up. Even if they didnt want to use their platform to express solidarity for our cause, we at least wanted them to come out and say that they supported their players. We couldnt even get a statement with that bare minimum of backing.

But now were hearing from Patrick Mahomes. The league MVP and Super Bowl MVP is starring in a Black Lives Matter video and has made his support for the cause part of who is he as a player and a person. Last week, he signed to a 10-year extension worth about half a billion dollars, one of the largest contracts the sports world has ever seen (rightfully deserved). To have somebody of that caliber stepping up to say something for the Black community is a tremendous thing. The NFL is nearly 70 percent black. He knew they had to pay him. The NFL knew they had to pay him. And to hear him and Lamar and Deshaun speak on this topic is powerful and monumental.

Of course, Im no Patrick Mahomes. When I took a knee in 2016, I was still under a minimum contract, bound to the Miami Dolphins. My daughter was two years old at the time. I had to make a decision knowing that Im not the face of the NFL and that I dont have any sort of guarantee in my contract. My first time hitting free agency came ahead of the 2018 season and I remember communicating with Eric Reid every morning, praying. Teams wouldnt even respond to us. It was a tough time. Ill say this: I was blessed to ultimately be able to sign with the Giants.

There was another team, and I wont name names, that wanted to sign me and thought they could capitalize on my off-field situation. They thought Id be seen as undesirable and that theyd get great value for me. Thankfully I was able to sign with the Giants, and I have nothing but great things to say about that organization. I accomplished a lot of career goals in New York: I made my first Pro Bowl and I finally signed a deal that had some type of guarantee. Some might argue that I didnt get my true market value or that I missed opportunities with other teams because I chose to take a knee. Ive said all Im going to say on that for now, and Ill leave that to everyone else to debate.

Some people make the argument that Colin would rather be a martyr for this cause than be a quarterback in the NFL. Theyll talk about recent news of his docuseries with ESPN and his deal with the Walt Disney Co. to argue hes more interested in telling stories than playing football. But the people who are making those things mutually exclusive are feeding into the same system that keeps players from standing up for their communities. Colin used his voice and his platform to speak out on police brutality and systemic racism on his own terms and the response from some was to assume that means he doesnt want to be a quarterback in this league.

Thats why I love the fact that this next generation is so woke. I have no doubt that Colins initial stance helped plant the seeds and inspire those young stars to realize what happens when you use your platform to fight for causes in your own neighborhood. And that is so powerful. Oh, and here we are four years later and the narrative in our nation around protest, racial injustice and police brutality has changed enormously. Colin was right!

Beyond sports, on a national scale, everyone wants to know where we should focus all this energy. Not just every Black person, but every person period. The protests are great, the activism is important, but how do we really fight to end systemic oppression? To me, that next step is for everyone committed to this fight players, league partners, protestors, politicians to try to attack systemic racism at its core and demand that our government, at both the congressional level and in the Senate, pass H.R. 40, the bill to study and develop proposals for reparations for African-Americans.

Representative John Conyers of Michigan first introduced H.R. 40 in 1989. Texas Representative Sheila Jackson Lee introduced the current bill in June of 2019. The 40 in the bills name is a reference to the promises made to freed slaves following the Civil War that were never delivered. Those freed slaves were supposed to be given 40 acres and a mule from land and resources formerly held by the Confederacy, a systematic government initiative to rectify the ills of slavery and help rebuild the lives it had irreparably damaged.

But that promise went unfulfilled. Instead, slavery merely gave way to Jim Crow segregation and continued systemic disenfranchisement for Black people in America. As Rep. Jackson Lee said, Slavery is Americas original sin, and this country has yet to atone for the atrocities visited upon generations of enslaved Africans and their descendants. Its time.

Im only 30 years old, but throughout my lifetime, we havent even been able to truly have a conversation about the framework for reparations, let alone reparations themselves. The conversation always stalls on how we would do it, how much it would cost, what it would possibly look like. And thats what H.R. 40 is for, to answer all these questions.

It horrifies me that its taken such drastic events for us to get to the place where this idea starts to enter the mainstream. But, okay, were here now. People are starting to talk about it. Thats great. It took protests in the streets. It took countless people being unjustly murdered at the hands, knees and guns of police to finally have a real conversation. But thats what it took.

Ive seen lots of athletes speak out on specific issues that they want to tackle. LeBron James, for instance, has put his focus on fighting voter suppression. I think thats great. The fact that its 2020 and were still talking about the right to vote? That sucks. There are a million single individual battles that need to be fought and won. But does that approach create generational wealth for our kids and our grandkids? I dont think so.

We keep dancing around the conversation. We keep getting incremental little wins, symbolic wins. Thats not enough. The average white family in America has 10 times the wealth of the average Black family. Thats why its not enough to take little pieces of the pie. We have to push for change at the core.

What we really need is for people to accept that this is a system that limits what Black people in America can achieve and accumulate. For everyone asking whats next, let me say it unequivocally: We need to pass H.R. 40 and begin a serious conversation about the framework for reparations for Black people in the United States. We cant let this energy, this moment and this momentum go to waste.

Reading this column thus far, you might decide that I only care about social justice issues, that my life as a football player isnt important to me. Thats not true. I love football, and I love the life its allowed me to lead. Ive been in the NFL since 2012. I came in undrafted, made my way from the practice squad in San Francisco to spend five years in Miami. I became a Pro Bowler with the New York Giants. Ive been a captain and a leader for my teams, and Ive been a leader in the NFLPA. Everyone wants to find safe ways to get back to work and were no exception. And this season is particularly special because Im coming home to Houstonwhere I was born and raisedto play football in my town for the first time since high school. Here are some things I think from my life as a football player.

1. I think its going to be really strange to see Tom Brady play for Tampa Bay this year. Playing for Miami, we came up against the Patriots regularly and in his prime, I think Tom Brady is arguably the best of all time. My very first time facing him was actually my very first game in the NFL, when I was signed off the practice squad from San Francisco in December of 2013.

Early one Monday morning that December I woke up to a bunch of texts and missed calls from my agent, who told me that I had to decide right now if I wanted to go to Miami, because otherwise they were going to move on to the next guy. Shed called 10 times already. So I said of course, got to Miami Tuesday night and by Wednesday Im with the team.

That Sunday, I played in my first NFL game against Tom Brady and the New England Patriots. I wasnt supposed to be touching the field on defense. The fourth quarter comes around and the starting corner is hurt. Okay, so then they need me to run down on kickoff. I run down on kickoff, make my first tackle. Im thrilled, I know that my name is going to be on the stat sheet and theres going to be evidence that I really played.

The next play, another DB gets hurt. We only have seven DBs and we have to play five at a time, so the DB coach comes up to me and says, Mike? Thats your name right, Michael Thomas? I see you played slot in college. Youre going to have to play slot again. Okay. So Tom Brady sees that and literally every play hes coming to me. Theyre either running the ball or hes throwing it to Julian Edelman or Danny Amendola or whoever Im guarding in the slot. Im holding on, I make a couple plays, but theyre driving down the field. Theyve got a first down at the 19-yard line with 27 seconds left and Im guarding Amendola and hes running a go route to the end zone. I look up and the balls coming. Amendola actually gets it in his hands in the end zone but I fight until the end, fight until we get to the ground and the ball pops out. Its an incomplete, the crowd goes crazy, and now Im juiced.

And now its fourth down. Coach calls a timeout and tells me theyre going to help me out and put me in double coverage with the safety. Im thinking, thank God. Even if they win, just dont let it be on me. Its my first game in the league!

We get out there, they line up. Tom Brady says hut, they snap it, and whoever was in the slot dove underneath to the safety, so I free up. I start backpedalling a little to offer some body pressure to the outside corner. I look up and the ball is coming, intended for Austin Collie. Its like a movie scene. Everything is in slow motion. I leap up in the air and catch it and after I fall down in the end zone it hits me. I just caught the game-winning interception! Thats Tom Brady! I just won the game! All my teammates are jumping up and down, cameras are in my face, the crowd is going crazy, I start crying and yelling for my mama. It was absolutely like a movie. That was my welcome to Miami moment, my welcome to the NFL moment, and fans ask me about that play, I kid you not, every other day. Ill never forget it.

2. I think Im a Jim Harbaugh guy through and through. He brought me to San Francisco when I went undrafted out of Stanford. Hes a hilarious guy and hes a guy who knows how to win. Hes very tough. Some might even say hes an a-hole. But he knows how to get the most out of his players, how to put the best guys out there and how to evaluate talent. Hes a great coach and Im glad I had the opportunity to say I played for him.

He recruited me to Stanford too, and Ill tell you the line that got me hooked, because full disclosure, as a 15- or 16-year-old kid, I had no idea what Stanford was, and no idea where it was. I thought it was in the Ivy League or something. My dad had just showed me an article about Harbaugh coaching at Stanford and had told me all about his playing career. I kid you not, I got a text probably 20 minutes later saying: This is Jim Harbaugh. Theres going to be a lot of teams out there that want you, Mike. But we need you. And thats when I said, okay, let me pay attention to this guy. I saw that the school was in California, that they played in the Pac-12, and the rest is history. Jim Harbaugh knows how to recruit.

3. I know I just got through saying that Tom Brady is the greatest of all time. But I think Ill never forget playing the Packers in Miami in 2014, facing Aaron Rodgers, on the last play of the game, in the red zone. Were up 24-20. He breaks the huddle, looks at our defense, smiles, doesnt even buckle his chin strap, says hut and throws the game-winning touchdown. That guy was so smooth, and his arm talent is unbelievable.

Now when youre talking arm talent, you have to include Patrick Mahomes. But I dont think its a coincidence that Rodgers and Mahomes are doing State Farm commercials together. They have the one-two punch in the league when it comes to pure arm talent. But Rodgers has that thing where he can just make any throw. I think most DBs would tell you that hes one of the absolute best and most dangerous quarterbacks well face, ever.

4. I think Rob Gronkowski was that guy where it didnt matter how great you defended him all game. The defense knew that he was going to find a way to seal himself off or get himself open and find a way to score. He was definitely the toughest tight end to face, because he knows Tom Brady is going to find a way to get him the ball. He was a mental problem because he had a great quarterback (and this season hell have him again) and hes a big dude who can move and be physical. It was always a battle. But we knew to keep guarding him, keep battling, because otherwise hes going to make plays.

5. I think that the fact that I had to come into the NFL the hard way, undrafted, practice squad, building my way up from nothing, is the reason that so many players around the league respect me. They know nothing was handed to me. I wouldnt change anything about my career. Ive had to work hard for everything I got. But the fact that Ive had so many great experiences, met so many great people and been able to give back to my community helps me feel like Ive done it the right way. I have veered outside of the box in many things, whether its business or activism, when the moment calls for it. But to me, its all a blessing. My life and career are things Ive been graced with, and I dont take any of it for granted.

6. I think that one of my favorite parts of living and playing in New York was being able to see Broadway shows on date nights with my wife. The last two we saw were two of my favorites, Aint Too Proud, about the Temptations, and Tina, the Tina Turner Musical. Those left a lasting impression on me.

Before I actually signed with New York, we saw Hamilton on Broadway with the original cast. Id heard so much about it and Id seen how high the ticket prices were, so I knew there was hype, but when the curtain went up and they started rapping? It blew my mind, it blew my wifes mind. My first thought was the play was something classes should be taking their students to see, to start that conversation on U.S. history.

I have a bunch of different playlists on my phone depending on the mood Im in and Wait for It, where Leslie Odom Jr. sings as Aaron Burr, is on my Inspiration playlist. It gives me chills and goose bumps. Sometimes thats what Im listening to before games, its that good.

7. Like I said, Im coming home to play in Houston this season, and I think my quarterback, Deshaun Watson, will be this years league MVP. You can call me a homer because hes my quarterback and my hometown quarterback. But I believe he has the skill set and the weapons around him to play at that level. He has a team thats built to win right now.

The DeAndre Hopkins trade was a major story for the entire NFL community, and now its all clearly on Deshaun. The team believes in him and he believes in himself, and I think that hes the type of dynamic quarterback who can rack up points for his offense. Like I said, everyone is going to be looking to him now that DeAndre Hopkins is in Arizona, and I feel that hes built to answer that call. At the end of this season, hell not only be in the race for MVP, but hell win it.

8. I think Saquon Barkley is in for a record-breaking season in his third year. I remember when I first saw him with the Giants ahead of the 2018 season. This was pre-pandemic times, so everyone was bringing draft talent in for visits. I saw him in the hallway taking a tour before the draft and I said, Thats the guy from Penn State? He just looked like a player crafted in a lab, and that was while he was in regular clothes.

When it came to the draft, with Cleveland having the first and fourth pick and us in between with the second, I knew that if they used their first pick on a quarterback, we had to do the right thing and take this kid. And thank God we did. From the day he stepped into our facility, he brought a different energy to the team and I think it was much needed at the time. You just knew he would be a captain. Hes a natural-born leader.

Im talking about all his qualities off the field. But when you see him on the field, it just feels different. Everybody whos ever seen him, played with him or played against him knows this kid is a generational talent. He had an amazing first year and made the Pro Bowl. Then he got injured last year and I know it hindered him. Now, hes hungry. You can see from the workout videos hes posting that hes primed to get back to it. Hes the type of guy who can run the ball, catch the ball, bring it out of the backfield, just do it all. With a new head coach and a new system in New York this year, I dont think anything, short of injury, will stop him from having a breakout year.

9. I think that if you lined up all the NFL players with the fastest 40-yard dash times for a foot race, Tyreek Hill would win. I think he could beat just about any player in the league in a foot race. There are so many guys that are blazing fast, can run a quick 40 or have that speed on the track, but his football speed is just different. Tyreek has the track background and it translates to the game.

To be clear, this is coming from me, a guy who isnt even in the conversation. Even if we did race, it wouldnt be entertaining. They wouldnt even put odds on it in Vegas, because everyone already knows how that story would end.

We always see a lot of competition between players on social media, and its especially pronounced right now when everyone has a lot of time on their hands. Were all itching to just get out there and compete. Thats what we do. Thats whats separated us from other kids all our lives. Hes been posting to see if anyone will take him up on a foot race, and a few people have weighed in but honestly, I dont think many people want that smoke. My friend Jakeem Grant did step up and say hed take the challenge. Jakeem, I love you, Ill root for you, but I think that Tyreek could beat all the fastest guys in the league on pure speed.

10. I think I want to see defensive players have the same marketability and opportunities as the faces of the league as offensive players. Richard Sherman is probably the closest thing we have. He built that larger-than-life persona at the height of the Legion of Boom in Seattle and thats the sort of thing we need. The bigger a player like Richard Sherman is, the better it will be for the next generation of defensive superstars, like a Jamal Adams, so that they can continue to grow their marketability and raise their platform.

I think about Ndamukong Suh getting an $100 million deal while I was in Miami, and how crazy people thought it was, because he was a defensive lineman. Maybe this is just wishful thinking for our next generation of players, but Id love to see day of the $200 million contract for a defensive player, a half a billion-dollar contract like were seeing for the quarterbacks and offensive players.

Beyond that, its about the off-field marketability, and I think to achieve that from the defensive side of the ball, you have to be willing to be the villain. Everyone wants to see points scored, to see the 50-50, high-flying game marked by touchdown after touchdown. Fans need it, fantasy football needs it, Vegas needs it, the television ratings need it. But as defensive players, were here to stop all that. Were here to shut people down. To get as many opportunities as we can, I think we have to be willing to embrace that villain person to become the larger-than-life figure thats sought after for deals, endorsements and big contracts.

Obviously that persona has to come with performing on the field, and thats why I think Jamal Adams is probably the next big thing who could fill that outsized role after Richard Sherman. His productivity on the field is there. I dont know what exactly the hype looks like maybe its commercials, like Troy Polamalu with the hair, or maybe its getting to the point where, like Sherm, hes big enough to make it on the cover of Madden. Whatever it is, I just want that for our defensive players, that shine, visibility and compensation, even if it means leaning in to that role as a villain.

Link:

Why Colin Kapernick should be in the NFL, by Michael Thomas - NBC Sports - NFL