With the 2020 U.S. presidential election fast approaching, many people will be glued to the 24-hour news cycle to stay up to date on political developments. Yet, when searching for facts, our own cognitive biases often get in the way.

If this isnt problematic enough, third parties can also take advantage of these biases to influence our thinking. The media, for example, can exploit our tendency to assign stereotypes to others by only providing catchy, surface-level information. Once established in our minds, these generalizations can be tough to shake off.

Such tactics can have a powerful influence on public opinion if applied consistently to a broad audience. To help us avoid these mental pitfalls, todays infographic from PredictIt lists common cognitive biases that influence the realm of politics, beginning with the Big Cs.

People exhibit confirmation bias when they seek information that only affirms their pre-existing beliefs. This can cause them to become overly rigid in their political opinions, even when presented with conflicting ideas or evidence.

When too many people fall victim to this bias, progress towards solving complex sociopolitical issues is thwarted. Thats because solving these issues in a bipartisan system requires cooperation from both sides of the spectrum.

A reluctance towards establishing a common ground is already widespread in America. According to a 2019 survey, 70% of Democrats believed their partys leaders should stand up to President Trump, even if less gets done in Washington. Conversely, 51% of Republicans believed that Trump should stand up to Democrats.

In light of these developments, researchers have conducted studies to determine if the issue of confirmation bias is as prevalent as it seems. In one experiment, participants chose to either support or oppose a given sociopolitical issue. They were then presented with evidence that was conflicting, affirming, or a combination of both.

In all scenarios, participants were most likely to stick with their initial decisions. Of those presented with conflicting evidence, just one in five changed their stance. Furthermore, participants who maintained their initial positions became even more confident in the superiority of their decisiona testament to how influential confirmation bias can be.

Coverage bias, in the context of politics, is a form of media bias where certain politicians or topics are disproportionately covered. In some cases, media outlets can even twist stories to fit a certain narrative.

For example, research from the University of South Florida analyzed media coverage on President Trumps 2017 travel ban. It was discovered that primetime media hosts covered the ban through completely different perspectives.

Each host varied drastically in tone, phrasing, and facts of emphasis, [] presenting each issue in a manner that aligns with a specific partisan agenda.

Josepher, Bryce (2017)

Charting the ideological placement of each sources audience can help us gain a better understanding of the coverage bias at work. In other words, where do people on the left, middle, and right get their news?

The horizontal axis in this graphic corresponds to the Ideological Consistency Scale, which is composed of 10 questions. For each question, respondents are assigned a -1 for a liberal response, +1 for a conservative response, or a 0 for other responses. A summation of these scores places a respondent into one of five categories:

Overcoming coverage biaswhich dovetails into other biases like confirmation biasmay require us to follow a wider variety of sources, even those we may not initially agree with.

Concision bias is a type of bias where politicians or the media selectively focus on aspects of information that are easy to get across. In the process, more nuanced and delicate views get omitted from popular discourse.

A common application of concision bias is the use of sound bites, which are short clips that can be taken out of a politicians speech. When played in isolation, these clips may leave out important context for the audience.

Without the proper context, multi-faceted issues can become extremely polarizing, and may be a reason for the growing partisan divide in America. In fact, there is less overlap in the political values of Republicans and Democrats than ever previously measured.

In 1994, just 64% of Republicans were more conservative than the median Democrat. By 2017, that margin had grown considerably, to 95% of Republicans. The same trend can be found on the other end of the spectrum. Whereas 70% of Democrats were more liberal than the median Republican in 1994, this proportion increased to 97% by 2017.

Achieving full self-awareness can be difficult, especially when new biases emerge in our constantly evolving world. So where do we begin?

Simply remembering these mental pitfalls exist can be a great startafter all, we cant fix what we dont know. Individuals concerned about the upcoming presidential election may find it useful to focus their attention on the Big Cs, as these biases can play a significant role in shaping political beliefs. Maintaining an open mindset and diversifying the media sources we follow are two tactics that may act as a hedge.

Thank you!

Given email address is already subscribed, thank you!

Please provide a valid email address.

Please complete the CAPTCHA.

Oops. Something went wrong. Please try again later.

Read the original:

Visualizing the True Size of Land Masses from Largest to Smallest - Visual Capitalist

Sen. Kamala HarrisKamala Devi HarrisPrimaries renew fears about Democratic unity in presidential race The Hill's Campaign Report: Candidates, lawmakers mark Juneteenth Tulsa becomes battleground in latest Trump controversy MORE (D-Calif.), the front-runner to be former Vice President Joe BidenJoe BidenBolton defends not testifying: 'I don't think it would have made a difference' Bolton says he hopes history will remember Trump 'as a one-term president' Green Party nominee says Sanders, progressives have failed to pull Democrats to the left MOREs running mate, will be a major influence on deciding whether Democrats decide to cut a deal with Senate Republicans on police reform next week.

Harris, along with Sen. Cory BookerCory Anthony BookerThe Hill's Campaign Report: Candidates, lawmakers mark Juneteenth 'The Senate could certainly use a pastor': Georgia Democrat seeks to seize 'moral moment' Group of Democratic senators to propose making Juneteenth national holiday MORE (D-N.J.), is a lead sponsor of a joint Senate-House Democratic police reform proposal, which would ban chokeholds, no-knock drug warrants forfederal drug cases and reform the doctrine of qualified immunity that shields police officers from lawsuits.

For anything to get done in Congress on police reform, Harris will have to sign off on a deal with Sen. Tim ScottTimothy (Tim) Eugene ScottSunday shows - Bolton's bombshell book reverberates Tim Scott: Police 'need more resources, not less resources' to compel reform Tim Scott: 'I do wish that Mr. Bolton would have come into the House under oath and testified' MORE (R-S.C.), who is the lead sponsor of Republican legislation that would incentivize police departments to abandon chokeholds but not mandate it. His bill would only collect data on no-knock warrants and let qualified immunity stand.

Booker and Scott have talked regularly in recent days on finding middle ground, but Harris, as of Friday, had not had any direct conversations with Scott. Theyve traded voicemails, a sign of Harriss lack of enthusiasm for the GOP proposal.

He and I have been playing phone tag since I think the first time I called him was Friday of last week, Harris said.

She said Scotts bill doesnt meet the moment, and I urge him to adopt our bill as a much more relevant opportunity to correct whats wrong with the system.

Booker indicated Thursday that hes unlikely to cut a deal without Harris.

Kamalas my full partner on this and so we are locked in, he said. Kamala and I are open and communicating and we are doing this together.

If Harris agrees to a compromise bill that civil rights advocates view as too weak, she risks getting criticized by groups on the left, something that could hurt her chances of being named to the presidential ticket.

Harris also has to tread carefully as a former prosecutor who had to defend her record earlier this year during the Democratic presidential primary.

Lara Bazelon, a law professor and the former director of the Loyola Law School Project for the Innocent, opined in The New York Timesin January oflast year that Harris was not a progressive prosecutor.

Bazeloncriticized Harris ahead of the primary for fighting tooth and nail to uphold wrongful convictions that the professor said had been secured through official misconduct.

She reiterated some of her criticisms of Harriss record from 2004 to 2015 in an article published in The Appeal in December after Harris ended her presidential campaign

But Bazelon told Politico this month that Harris in recent years has positioned herself on the right side of law enforcement issues.

I dont think theres the interest or the oxygen to re-litigate it, she said of Harriss work as a prosecutor. Shes positioned herself in the last couple of years as someone who really is on the right side of these issues and that carries weight.

She called Harriss law enforcement record a net neutral.

Any billHarrissupports must counterthe negative narrative that emerged during the primaryand not give critics more ammunition, said Democratic strategist Steve Jarding.

Jarding says Harris needs to be bold.

This is a chance for her to show that she can take the lead and she can be an asset on the ticket, he said.

When youre attorney general and effectively a prosecutor, theres a chance in this climate that could hurt you. We saw it with [Sen.] Amy KlobucharAmy KlobucharSusan Rice calls Trump administration 'racist to its core,' says Senate backers belong in 'trash heap of history' Overnight Defense: Navy won't reinstate fired captain | Dems probe use of federal officers in DC | Air Force appoints woman as top noncommissioned officer The Hill's Campaign Report: Candidates, lawmakers mark Juneteenth MORE, he said.

Jarding said if he were Harris, I would be less concerned about getting it passed, warning that if Harris agrees to water down Democratic reforms to get a bill through the Senate, then I think she would look worse.

It would play into the critics who said she was too harsh as attorney general when it came to people of color, he said.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellPelosi on Trump testing remarks: 'The American people are owed answers' Low voter registration poses a threat to American democracy Primaries renew fears about Democratic unity in presidential race MORE (R-Ky.) made clear last week that he has little interest in moving much more in the direction of Booker and Harriss police reform bill.

They want to basically... federalize all of these issues, he said, vowing the Senate-House Democratic proposal is going nowhere in the Senate.

The other thing Harris has to be wary of is the likelihood that any legislation passed by Congress, even if it falls short of what advocates of police reform on the left are calling for, would be seized by President TrumpDonald John TrumpLincoln Project launches new ad hitting Trump over rally turnout Bolton defends not testifying: 'I don't think it would have made a difference' Bolton says he hopes history will remember Trump 'as a one-term president' MORE as a major accomplishment and touted during his race against Biden.

Trump in recent days has trumpeted his signing of the First Step Act criminal justice reform bill in 2018, legislation that according to one of its lead sponsors, Sen. Dick DurbinRichard (Dick) Joseph DurbinWhat Juneteenth celebrations and marches looked like across the US Overnight Defense: Navy won't reinstate fired captain | Dems probe use of federal officers in DC | Air Force appoints woman as top noncommissioned officer Top DHS official: Trump instructed agency to 'restart the DACA process' MORE (D-Ill.), Trump had little interest in moving until his son-in-law and White House adviser Jared KushnerJared Corey KushnerFormer Sen. Kaufman to run Biden transition team Bolton book shows nastiness rules at Trump White House Schumer faces tough choice on police reform MORE stepped in and championed.

Robert Borosage, the co-founder of Campaign for Americas Future, a liberal advocacy group, said Harris has to walk a line.

She has to make it clear that if there is a bill that emerges its only the beginning and it is simply, not even a down payment, but a first step, he said.

But Borosage noted that Harris is also under some pressure to get something moving. Simply nixing the legislation Scott and his GOP colleagues introduced last week may leave fellow Democrats disappointed.

I do think people are ready for things to move, he said.

Borosage said if Harris can move a modest bill with bipartisan Senate support and makes it clear that it was all she could get from Republicans but that she had a broader multipoint reform bill, "I think she can navigate it.

But its tricky, he cautioned.

One such Democrat is Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiPelosi on Trump testing remarks: 'The American people are owed answers' Sunday shows - Bolton's bombshell book reverberates Schiff says committee chairs, Pelosi discussing potential Bolton testimony MORE (Calif.), who told reporters that she would like to enter into a bicameral negotiation on any police reform bill that emerges from the Senate.

Borosage cautioned that Harris still has to prove herself to the partys liberal base.

Shes seen as somebody who ran out of the Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonBolton defends not testifying: 'I don't think it would have made a difference' Green Party nominee says Sanders, progressives have failed to pull Democrats to the left Bolton book puts spotlight on Pompeo-Trump relationship MORE posture and made a few gestures to the left early and then backed away from them, he said, citing Harriss evolution to the center on the issue of Medicare for All.

I dont think anyone on the left sees her as a progressive in the Sanders-Warren tradition, he added, referring to Sens. Bernie SandersBernie SandersGreen Party nominee says Sanders, progressives have failed to pull Democrats to the left Editor of American Conservative warns of more civil unrest if populist concerns go unaddressed Primaries renew fears about Democratic unity in presidential race MORE (I-Vt.) and ElizabethWarren (D-Mass.), who ran the best with progressives in the primary.

This story was updated at 11:37 to reflect Lara Bazelon's more recent remarks about Harris.

Follow this link:

Harris's path on police reform littered with land mines | TheHill - The Hill

WASHINGTON Justin Walker epitomizes the conservative judicial project. He became a federal judge at 37 with sterling right-wing credentials and no trial experience. Eight months later, he has been promoted to the powerful U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, a frequent feeder to the Supreme Court.

Walker's confirmation Thursday by a Senate vote of 51-42 puts President Donald Trump one shy of his 200th judicial confirmation, which is teed up for next week. It's a number not achieved by any president at this stage of his administration in four decades.

The meteoric rise of Walker, a Harvard J.D., was aided by his Kentucky ties to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a family friend for whom he once interned, and his outspoken conservatism just two years ago he called the 2012 Supreme Court ruling to uphold Obamacare "catastrophic."

"He's sort of the classic case. They've designed their perfect judicial nominee: He's young, white, male and incredibly conservative with a record of activism to back it up," said Chris Kang, a co-founder of the progressive group Demand Justice and former deputy counsel to President Barack Obama.

"This is all part of the broader Republican plan to take politically minded people and put them into judgeships, thereby making sure that the rulings that come out are going to be more political, more partisan and less committed to the rule of law," Kang said.

The push to install young and ideologically rigid judges, spearheaded by the Federalist Society, a network of conservative lawyers and activists, is poised to steer the law rightward on cultural issues like abortion rights and civil rights to the economic policy rooted in the authority to legislate and regulate.

Trump has been something of a bystander in his own towering judicial legacy, delegating the task to McConnell and activists on a mission to curtail legislative and regulatory authority. Most of his nominees are in their 40s or 50s, while some are older, and others, like Walker and 4th Circuit Judge Allison Rushing, are in their 30s.

"That impact will last generations," said David McIntosh, a co-founder and board member of the Federalist Society who runs the conservative group Club For Growth. "It's one of the most, if not the most, significant achievements of the president."

Let our news meet your inbox. The news and stories that matters, delivered weekday mornings.

McIntosh said Trump's picks are true believers in Justice Antonin Scalia's philosophy that "judges should be bound by the original intent of the Constitution," referring to the conservative icon who helped steer the legal debate to the right during his three decades on the Supreme Court. Scalia died in 2016.

The judges were picked as part of an ideological war against the progressive vision of a "living Constitution," a belief that the document was crafted with broad language to adapt to changes in society that the framers could not have foreseen.

While liberals were relieved this week by two Supreme Court decisions, one that upheld LGBTQ workplace rights and the other temporarily keeping alive the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program for young immigrants, conservative legal experts said the two decisions were narrow and don't set back the movement's larger goals.

In total, Trump has appointed more than one-fifth of the entire judiciary, which may exceed one-fourth this year. While his Supreme Court picks, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, have solidified a slim 5-4 conservative majority, his impact on federal circuit courts has been enormous. He has flipped the majority for Republicans on three circuits, which have the last word on a vast majority of federal cases.

The Senate is poised to confirm Trump's 53rd circuit judge next week. Obama landed 55 circuit judges in all of his eight years.

Trump "realizes he's not a lawyer and that, unlike in some other areas, judges have gotten continually good press for him for his base," said John McGinnis, a constitutional law professor at Northwestern University's Pritzker School of Law. "So it's not surprising that he isn't changing a successful strategy. He sees that it's working."

McConnell has made judges the Senate's top priority, scorching various obstacles in his path. He has eliminated the "blue slip" courtesy that lets home-state senators hold up circuit court nominees. He nuked the Supreme Court filibuster after Democrats used it to try to block Gorsuch. He has stiff-armed senators with threats to work through holidays. And he has soldiered on under the radar as crises like the coronavirus pandemic or Trump's various self-inflicted controversies dominate the headlines.

McConnell's actions represent the latest escalation of a judicial war that dates back decades. He warned Democrats in 2013 that they would regret eliminating the 60-vote threshold for lower court judges to confirm stalled Obama nominees.

Roger Pilon, a Federalist Society member and a constitutional scholar at the libertarian Cato Institute, said the judges are "far and away" Trump's biggest accomplishment. The new crop of judges see the Constitution as "a document of law," he said, and not "a political document and empty vessel to be filled by transient majorities."

"We are today in a world of two fundamentally different conceptions of the Constitution, and the people that Trump has been nominating and that the Senate has confirmed are deeply informed about this contrast," Pilon said. "And they almost entirely stand on one side of it, and it's not the side that the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee stand on."

"That's why the battle has been so vicious," he said.

Liberal and conservative experts say the Trump-appointed judiciary has the potential to push American law rightward on many consequential issues, including religious exemptions, campaign finance, guns, affirmative action, civil rights and abortion rights.

Another cause conservatives are optimistic about is scrapping the doctrine of "Chevron deference," which would restrict the power of federal agencies to make rules, a tool that progressives often rely on.

Pilon said the goal is "to start rolling back the modern administrative state, the executive state." He said a conservative judiciary can also chip away at broad federal powers rooted in the New Deal era that imposed economic rules and created safety net programs like Social Security and Medicare.

"Economic liberty, in short, is an area where these Trump judges are going to be very important in the future," he said. "Yes, I do see us moving in this direction."

Progressives, however, fear Trump's court picks will haunt them for years to come.

"It's a devastating impact," Kang said. "Not just for the sheer number of judges, but for the fact that they serve for the rest of their lives."

Continue reading here:

Trump is about to land his 200th federal judge. The impact will last 'generations.' - NBC News

Our system, most specifically members of Congress, have been handed an opportunity to finally get this right. All of us should insist that they do just that, and with all deliberate speed.

Dreamers, by the policy definition of President Obamas Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, are people who were brought illegally to the United States from another nation, mostly in Central and South America, when they were children.

They are, by definition, innocent bystanders in our nations bitter and often cruel immigration policy disputes. In general, they are as American as any of us, in many cases speaking only English, fully steeped in American culture. They are students at, or graduates of, our schools and universities, members or veterans of our armed forces, and have no memory of or connections with the land of their birth.

The sitting president has, at times, exhibited sympathy for the plight of the Dreamers and, at other times, shown brutal disdain for their hopes and humanity. His Department of Homeland Security issued a policy order aimed overturning DACA and clearing the way for deporting hundreds of thousands of them to nations where they would be lost and alone.

In its 5-4 ruling Thursday, the court made a point of saying that it was offering no opinion on whether DACA or its reversal was the better policy. The opinion from Chief Justice John Roberts, joined by the four members of the courts liberal wing, was based on the letter of a law requiring such decisions to hew to a set of procedural requirements which, the chief found, the administration failed to do.

The administration did not even consider the fact that many thousands of people living in the United States had made serious life plans -- going to college, launching businesses, starting families -- based on the promise of DACA. Many of them are the essential workers who have powered us through the COVID-19 pandemic, and suffered a disproportionate share of its damage.

Taking away that lifeboat without at least going through the required steps made the removal of DACA, in lawyer-speak, arbitrary and capricious, and therefore void.

The bad news is that the court has provided the administration with a road map to cancel DACA again, and this time make it stick, by laying out the whys and wherefores of its move in a way that will be no less cruel but much better able to stand up to judicial review.

Unless Congress moves quickly to pass a bill making DACA, or policy very much like it, not just an executive pronouncement but the law of the land. Such a bill passed the House of Representatives on a vote of 237-187, but has yet to be taken up by the Senate.

Rep. Ben McAdams, the lone Democrat in the Utah delegation, rightly voted for that measure. Rep. John Curtis joined the two other Republican House members from Utah in opposing it, yet he spoke Thursday of an opportunity to finally resolve the issue.

Utahs senators, Mitt Romney and Mike Lee, have offered little that is hopeful on the matter. Romney has yet to walk back any of his remarks about being more of an immigration hard-liner even than the president. And Lee, as is his wont, is droning on about Obamas executive overreach.

But offering DACA protection, and adding a legal path to citizenship, is an idea supported by the public, by long-time champions of immigration reform such as Utahs former Sen. Orrin Hatch, as well as politicians at all levels and of all ideological stripes and business interests that include the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and top management at Apple and Microsoft.

It could be said that the Supreme Court punted on this issue, kicking it back to the democratic process where it belongs. Good.

Now, let us show the wisdom and humanity that democracy is capable of, and welcome the Dreamers, once and for all time.

Read the rest here:

Tribune Editorial: Make DACA the law of the land - Salt Lake Tribune

Israel is planning a move on July 1 that the international community has long regarded as one of the gravest assaults on the international order and international law: annexation of land that does not belong to it. The annexation plan developed by the Netanyahu government in consultation with the Trump administration would declare not only the decades-old settlements in the West Bank which the U.N. Security Council in 2016 declared illegalto be permanent Israeli land, but also other swaths of Palestinianterritory, including the Jordan Valley, that is central to Palestinian agriculture.

There are multiple reasons why Israel is not just willing but seemingly eager to incur condemnations from the international community by proceeding with this plan. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is beset by political problems as he struggles to form a governing coalition for a new term and, even more importantly, by legal problems as he stands trial on felony charges of bribery and fraud. Emboldening the Israeli population and causing them to unite behind him in the face of international denunciations could distract attention away from those crises and solidify his hold on power.

Most importantly, Israel has become increasingly xenophobic, expansionist, militaristic, hostile to Arabs, and fascistic over the last decade. Aside from the Trump administration, its primary allies are no longer liberal democracies but Arab despots and far-right political movements in Central and Eastern Europe and in Latin America.

Illustrating the cultural and political shift among younger Israelis in particular, Netanyahus son, Yair, this week advocated that all minorities be removed cleansed from Tel Aviv. The Israeli left and even center are virtually nonexistent. That is the climate that now shapes Israels identity. Annexation oflarge chunksof the West Bank is, if anything, too moderate for a growing far-right Israeli movement that believes, on religious and militaristic grounds, that they are the owners of all of Palestine.

Regardless of motives, it is virtually certain that annexation of any part of the West Bank would trigger intense pressure in the west to impose serious sanctions on Israel. The last significant annexation took place in 2014, when Russia declared Crimea a formal part of its country, and that event triggered multi-level sanctions from the west despite the fact that a large majority of people in Crimea wanted to be part of Russia rather than Ukraine. Palestinians, needless to say, are virtually unanimous in their opposition to further control over their land and their lives by a foreign occupying government that grants them no political rights of any kind. Any attempt by the west to avoid sanctioning a post-annexation Israel would destroy whatever residual credibilityis vested in their claims of a consistent system of international law.

This weeks SYSTEM UPDATE episode explores the implications of Israels annexation plan: what the fall-out would be both in Palestine and in the international community. This issue deserves far more attention that it has received, particularly in the U.S. where, pursuant to a 2016 agreement between the Obama and Netanyahu governments, billions of dollars in taxpayer money are transferred every year to the Israelis that enable this aggression.

Joining me to explorethese questions is the long-time Palestinian human rights activist Omar Barghouti, one of the co-founders of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement that is almost certain to see increased support if annexation occurs.

The episode debuts today at 2:00 p.m. on The Intercepts YouTube channel. A transcript will be posted below after the shows airing, and audio-only version will be available on Saturday

The rest is here:

With the World Focused on the Pandemic, Israel Prepares to Annex Large Swaths of the West Bank - The Intercept - First Look Media

OPINION: Although the Black Lives Matter protests have been far more vociferous in the US than here, and more statues have been pulled down, New Zealanders are increasingly aware of the arguments about our colonial heritage.

As I watched images of the Hamilton statue being removed by the council after repeated requests by iwi, and I read that the name of the city may be a shared Hamilton/Kirikiriroa, I smugly thought to myself how lucky I was not to have oppressive, colonial skeletons in my Pkeh closet.

Getty-Images

A defaced statue of Sir George Grey in Albert Park, Auckland. One of Dave Armstrong's tpuna was fired by Governor Grey as Protector of the Aborigines because he was too liberal.

You see, I have a perfect whakapapa of liberal and considerate colonial settlers who did nothing but work hard and help the locals. My ancestors didnt come here, like Captain Cook did, and kill Mori. I am no relation to Edward Gibbon Wakefield and his cronies in the New Zealand Company who cajoled and tricked their way into providing masses of land to colonial settlers in Wellington and the Hutt Valley.

READ MORE:* Vandalism of Sir George Grey statue 'misdirected anger', historian says* New Zealand has long history of attacks on statues* West Coast man appeals for great grandfather's statue to remain * Who are New Zealand's statues, monuments and places named after?* Two monuments to 'sexual predators and colonisers' could be scrapped in Wellington

There are no relatives in my whakapapa of the dastardly Governor Grey, who invaded the Waikato to 'protect' Pkh Aucklanders in a massive deceptive land grab that made Blair and Bushs 'weapons of mass destruction' pale into insignificance. Even better, one of my tpuna was fired by Governor Grey as Protector of the Aborigines because he was too liberal.

Yes, despite being 100% Pkeh, I am 100% pure. There are no colonising white supremacist skeletons in my closet. I am descended from George Clarke, a kind Anglican missionary who built the biggest farm, at the time, in New Zealand in the Far North. He built a wonderful Mission House at Waimate North and was on good terms with many locals, including Hongi Hika (whom he called 'Shongi').

George even unsuccessfully tried to stop Shongi from raiding iwi further down the island. The great man Charles Darwin visited Waimate in 1831 and wrote about it in Voyage of the Beagle. 'At Waimate there are three large houses, where the missionary gentlemen, Messrs. Williams, Davies, and Clarke, reside.'

Supplied

Dave Armstrong: ''My ancestors didnt come here, like Captain Cook did, and kill Mori.''

Darwin didnt think much of New Zealand but he liked my tpunas farm. 'I look back but to one bright spot, and that is Waimate, with its Christian inhabitants.''

The Dictionary of New Zealand Biography even said that 'unlike most of his compatriots in New Zealand, George Clarke had a genuine sympathy for the Mori people''. Yay! OK, that entry was probably written by a Pkh with heaps of unconscious bias, but not bad. If there was a statue of Clarke next to Cook or Grey or Picton or Wakefield or Hamilton, youd definitely take them out first.

But recently I wanted to check the meaning of the Mori word mtau. The excellent online dictionary I use always gives a definition followed by a sentence in Mori using the word. Mtau means clever or knowledgeable and the following sentence gave context.

'He tangata mtau ki te waihanga p a Hri Karaka'. 'George Clarke was a knowledgeable person at making guns'. What the flintlock? A gunsmith?

Robert Kitchin/Stuff

Dave Armstrong frets about the role his ancestors played in the colonisation of New Zealand.

Funny how Dad, who was so proud of his one notable ancestor in among the gambling addicts and fraudsters, never told us that our tpuna had this particular talent. But surely Hri only made guns for good people?

When the Imperial Forces tried to storm Pene Tauis P at Ohaeawai, just a musket shot away from Waimate North, George Clarkes son in a fit of conscious bias worked as an interpreter for the British. But surely Hri Karaka would have told his fellow Brits to get lost if they wanted him to fix a couple of muskets for the assault in a hurry? Yeah right.

OK, so maybe Im not quite as 100% pure as I thought. But a further examination of my whakapapa on my mothers side finds some good hearty Scandinavian immigrants. No gunsmiths, no land grabbers, just a dedicated bunch of Scandis in the Wairarapa helping to chop down one of the largest stands of native forest in the country when they werent making patchwork quilts. If you cant find a huia today, you can partly thank them.

As a progressive liberal, I fretfully sleep and fitfully dream about the role my ancestors played in the colonisation of New Zealand. Yet Im still not sure where I stand on the statue issue.

But I do know that most of the people who say, 'its just history, we shouldnt change it' are the same ones who have resisted commemorating the New Zealand Wars and teaching our history in schools.

The Its just history crowd love commemorating Gallipoli and buying into its 'birth of the nation' myth while refusing to accept that the battle sites of rkau, Gate P, Ruapekapeka and countless others are just as worthy of study.

Whether you want to pull statues down or leave them standing is up to you. In the meantime, to try to improve our mtauranga about our colonial history, to understand how and why it happened, is possibly the best thing we could do.

See the rest here:

How my colonial smugness evaporated with one explosive revelation - Stuff.co.nz

Japan's decision to withdraw from a U.S.-developed land-based ballistic missile system will herald the first rewriting of its National Security Strategy, according to a high-ranking government source.

The newstrategy will reflect growing concerns over the novel coronavirus pandemic andinclude measures for a post-corona world as well as steps to strengthen the nations economic security, the source said.

Future discussions will also focus on the ballistic missile threat from North Korea, which was the rationale for installing the now-scrapped land-based Aegis Ashore interceptor missile system, as well as China's growing maritime advances in the region.

The latest moves stem from Defense Minister Taro Konos announcement on June 15 that he was halting plans to deploy theAegis Ashore system due to spiraling costs and time needed to ensure the safety of local communities that were to host it.

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, in a June 18 news conference, said "concentrated discussions" would be held from this summer to augment Japans ballistic missile defense structure in light of the decision to junk the Aegis Ashore system.

The decision to withdraw from the Aegis Ashore system will be made next week by the four relevant Cabinet ministers within the National Security Council (NSC).

Discussions will begin in the NSC from late June regarding steps that need to be taken to bolster the nations missile defense system. The discussions will continue until the end of September when government ministries and agencies are required to present their requests for the fiscal 2021 budget.

The government will then ask a panel of experts to hold discussions related to a revising of the National Security Strategy, which was first compiled in December 2013 by the Abe Cabinet.

The strategy is expected to be revised by year-end, along with changes to the National Defense Program Guidelines and the Medium-Term Defense Program, which spells out the defense equipment needed by the Self-Defense Forces.

In addition to ballistic missile defense, some of the key topics to be discussed for a new National Security Strategy related to a post-corona world will likely be strengthening the supply chain for medical care products and equipment as well as measures to handle future pandemics, including restrictions on entry into Japan.

Among the topics related to economic security that will likely be discussed are preventing leaks of advanced technology, securing maritime interests and dealing with cyber-attacks.

A sensitive area of likely discussions will be what to do about attacking enemy military bases.

The government position since 1956 has been that even under the pacifist Constitution, an attack on enemy bases would be considered within Japans range of self-defense if it was the only way to prevent the destruction of the nation.

The government interpretation until now has been that the Constitution does not prevent the possessing of the capability to attack enemy bases. However, it was always assumed the U.S. military would jump into the breach if such an emergency arose.

However, some members of the ruling Liberal Democratic Partyhave called for Japan to possess such capabilities, and future discussions with the U.S. Pentagon may include the possibility of a new division of roles related to this issue

Discussions about the National Security Strategy were needed even before the decision to withdraw from the Aegis Ashore missile defense system, given the rapidly changing security environment surrounding Japan.

Not only has North Korea sharply improved its ballistic missile technology, but China has also been making major maritime advances. New domains of security such as space and cyberspace have also emerged in recent years.

(Yuki Nikaido and Ryo Aibara contributed to this article.)

Read more from the original source:

Japan to revise security strategy with halt to Aegis Ashore system : The Asahi Shimbun - Asahi Shimbun

June 22, 2020

Posted: June 22, 2020

Updated: 8:31 AM

AP

(AP) President Donald Trump said Friday he will renew his effort to end legal protections for hundreds of thousands of immigrants brought to the United States as children.

Trump denounced a Supreme Court ruling that the administration improperly ended the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program in 2017. Splitting with Trump and judicial conservatives, Chief Justice John Roberts joined the four liberal justices inthe 5-4 vote Thursday.

Through executive action, Trump could still take away the ability of 650,000 young immigrants to live and work legally in the U.S. And with no legislative answer in sight in Congress, uncertainty continues for many immigrants who know no other home except America.

Immigration attorney Esther Valdes joined Good Morning San Diego to discuss the ruling and what the administrations next steps might be.

In a tweet Friday, Trump said, The Supreme Court asked us to resubmit on DACA, nothing was lost or won. They punted, much like in a football game (where hopefully they would stand for our great American Flag). We will be submitting enhanced papers shortly.

Many believe Trump could modify the rescinding of DACA in the same way he changed a travel ban on mostly Muslim countries. The ban was upheld by the Supreme Court after two revisions in over a year, including adding North Koreans and some Venezuelan officials to the ban.

In a 5-4 opinion with a stark rebuke from liberal justices, the high court found that Trump was well within a presidents considerable authority over immigration and the responsibility for keeping the nation safe.

Groups that support DACA said they will remain on guard against further action by Trump.

Whats important to note: NOTHING has changed since yesterday and wont change unless SCOTUS decides otherwise, the immigration legal services provider and advocacy group RAICES, based in Texas, wrote on Twitter. Well remain vigilant & ready to fight anything that may come.

Hareth Andrade, a national staffer with Mi Familia Vota, an organization that focuses on voter engagement, said the presidents tweet is a sore loser remark. Andrade is also a DACA recipient.

This appeal tactic will only run out the time he has left as president, she said. Our movement knows better, we have deeply organized our communities, and for now, have a SCOTUS decision on our side to keep our DACA benefits intact.

Megan Essaheb, director of immigration advocacy for the Washington-based nonprofit Asian Americans Advancing Justice, said that while Trump can still terminate DACA, he could also choose to support legislation that provides legal status to recipients along with 300,000 people who have temporary status and the estimated 11 million who are in the U.S. without permission.

If he chooses cruelty, it will be on him, Essaheb said.

The Trump administration says its moving forward against DACA, even though experts say there isnt enough time to knock down the program before the November election.

White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said the president has vowed to take care of DACA far better than the Democrats ever did.

We want to find a compassionate way to do this, McEnany said.

Were going to move as quickly as we can to put options in front of the president, Ken Cuccinelli, acting head of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, told Fox & Friends.

That still leaves open the appropriate solution which the Supreme Court mentioned, and that is that Congress step up to the plate, he said.

Activists are vowing to keep fighting for a long-term solution for young immigrants whose parents brought them to the United States when they were children. They not only face a White House thats prioritized immigration restrictions but also a divided Congress that is not expected to pass legislation providing a path to citizenship anytime soon.

The high court decision on Thursday elicited surprise, joy and some apprehension from immigrants and advocates who know its only a temporary development.

This is a huge victory for us, Diana Rodriguez, a 22-year-old DACA recipient, said through tears.

Rodriguez, who works with the New York Immigration Coalition, said she hasnt been back to Mexico since she was brought to the U.S. at age 2. The ruling meansyoung immigrantscan keep working, providing for their families and making a difference in this country, she said.

But the work isnt over, Rodriguez said: We cant stop right now, we have to continue fighting.

Congressional Democrats, meanwhile, appeared satisfied to let the courts decision stand as the law of the land for now.

While some Republicans asserted that now is the time for Congress to clarify the immigration system, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made it clear that Democrats were done with their legislation before the summer break and had little interest in meeting GOP demands to fund Trumps long-promised border wall as part of any comprehensive immigration overhaul.

Democratic presidential contender Joe Biden said that if elected, he would send lawmakers proposed legislation on his first day in office to make DACA protections permanent.

For now, immigrants who are part of DACA will keep their protections, but there are tens of thousands of others who could have enrolled if Trump didnt halt the program three years ago.

The Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan think tank, estimates that about 66,000 young immigrants meet the age requirement of 15 to join the program but havent been able to do so because the government has only been renewing two-year permits for those already enrolled.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services hasnt signaled whether it will accept any new applications and its unlikely the Trump administration would do so without being forced by the courts. Still, pro-DACA organizations are encouraging those who qualify to file first-time applications.

Biden, meanwhile, has promised to send legislation to Congresscodifying DACA on his first day as president, if elected.

___

More here:

President says he will renew effort to end DACA protections - - KUSI

Many of the landmarks of Paras Tyagis life remain the same in Budhela village in Delhi where he grew up: the house he lived in, the school that he, his father and grandfather attended, the homes of neighbours he knew as a child.

But the farmland that Tyagis grandfather once owned is long gone, a pond that the cattle used to drink from has been filled in and walled off, and around the village, high-rise apartment and office blocks and a Metro station have sprung up.

Budhela is one of 135 urban villages in Delhi, settlements that are exempted from building codes and excluded from its plans leaving nearly a million people, most of whom have no titles to their homes, without a blueprint for the future.

We are among Delhis oldest residents, yet we are losing what we had and suffering from pollution, congestion and gentrification, said Tyagi, co-founder of the Centre for Youth Culture Law and Environment, a public policy non-profit. Urban villages provide housing options for low-income families and migrant workers, commercial spaces for factory outlets and upscale markets, but they are largely neglected and desperately in need of infrastructure upgrades.

Large parts of Delhi were once agricultural. As these were acquired by authorities, some residents stayed on in adjacent areas that came to be known as lal dora, or red thread in the Hindi language, for the red line that demarcated them.

Some lal dora lands were designated as urban villages small islands in the constantly changing metropolis growing in number from 20 in 1962, when Delhis first master plan was made, to 135 today. The city also has scores of rural villages.

Lacking property records, the governance structure of their rural counterparts and left off the citys plans, Delhis urban villages are largely run by influential families, with little oversight by civic authorities, residents and urban experts say.

As pressure increases to integrate lal dora lands into the citys master plan, authorities must consider their unique character and history, said Kanchi Kohli, a fellow at the Centre for Policy Research, a think tank in Delhi.

Lal Dora areas have grown exponentially with risky and inadequate civic infrastructure. These areas need to be a part of Delhis urban planning, but their inclusion has been and continues to be a complex process, she told the Thomson Reuters Foundation. Any attempt to integrate them into the master plan will need to protect them from land grabs, and be a careful, informed process that looks at class stratification and historical marginalisation.

Almost 70% of the worlds population will live in urban areas by 2050, according to estimates by the United Nations. In India, as elsewhere, rapid urbanisation is putting pressure on governments to build more apartment blocks and metro rail networks, which has led to the razing of old buildings and neighbourhoods.

Cities risk losing not just their history and heritage, but also the traditional knowledge that is key to promoting inclusiveness, sustainability and resilience, according to urban experts. This is particularly true of large cities such as Delhi and Mumbai, which every day draw thousands of migrants from Indias villages looking for better economic opportunities.

Faced with a critical shortage of affordable housing in the cities, many settle in slums and other informal settlements, which lack basic amenities such as drinking water and toilets.

In Delhi, urban villages with lower rents compared to flats, and with better amenities than slums, have become the preferred option for students, migrant workers and small businesses that often rent the ground floor of the low-rise buildings.

Some, like Hauz Khas and Shahpur Jat, which abut upscale neighbourhoods, have lured designer boutiques and trendy cafes and bars a reflection of how land use in urban villages has been altered over the years, sometimes illegally, said Kohli.

A scheme to improve civic services in urban villages was launched by the Delhi Development Authority in 1979, and then transferred to the Municipal Corporation. A committee set up by the federal housing ministry to study integrating lal dora areas into the Delhi Master Plan to 2021, noted in its 2007 report that urban villages had not seen the desired and expected improvements of urbanisation.

It recommended modern, decent living accommodation for residents, proper amenities, a liberal land-use policy, and updated property records.

Delhis Master Plan to 2021 noted that redevelopment of urban villages was a critical focus area, but failed to provide a separate legal framework, said Ruchita Gupta, an assistant professor at the School for Planning and Architecture in Delhi.

If we bring urban villages under the same planning model, we will get the same high-density buildings, she said. These settlements have their own indigenous character, and a cultural and historical value. Can we work with the existing fabric, and make customised norms with the involvement of the community?

Leenu Sehgal, a planning commissioner at the Delhi Development Authority, said it was drafting new laws for the management of urban villages. We are re-examining all aspects, from sanitation to building codes, and we will have a framework in the next Master Plan to 2041, she said, without giving further details.

Across India, cities have been slow to meet the needs of people living in informal settlements, with only a few introducing laws to upgrade housing and provide amenities a task made more urgent by the spread of the coronavirus in slums.

Last year, the federal government said it would legalise nearly 2,000 unauthorised colonies in Delhi, upgrading infrastructure and giving more than four million poor residents the right to own their homes.

In Budhela, a settlement of 350 households and about 4,500 people, there is growing discontent with the narrow lanes that get waterlogged in the rains, the open drains and lack of green spaces.

Residents are also frustrated by their inability to use their homes as collateral for bank loans, as most do not have titles. The process of registering for one is too onerous and costly, Tyagi said. We are asking for just the basics, so we can live with dignity and respect, he said, pointing to piles of trash lying by the road.

But the lal dora is no mans land no one in the city wants to take responsibility. We dont know what the future is.

This article first appeared on Thomson Reuters Foundation News.

See the original post here:

Delhis urban planners must stop ignoring the shoddy infrastructure in its 135 urban villages - Scroll.in

People gather to stage a demonstration to protest against the annexation plan of the Jordan Valley, located in the occupied West Bank and illegal Jewish settlements in West Bank, Tel Aviv, Israel on June 6, 2020. Nir Keidar/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

While the world has had its attention fixed on the George Floyd protests and the ongoing threat of COVID-19, a political development with monumental implications has been brewing in the Middle East: Israels potential annexation of parts of the West Bank.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu promised his supporters during multiple election campaigns last year that he would make areas outside of the countrys borders part of the state. Now his chance is fast approaching.

The terms of a government coalition deal he struck with political rival Benny Gantz allow Netanyahu to put annexation to a government vote as early as July 1. The pair reportedly differ over details, but the U.S. ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, is trying to broker an agreement.

What happens with annexation has potentially steep stakes for Israels relationship with the United States, with its allies in Europe and beyond, and with American Jews. Some of the countrys fiercest supporters oppose Netanyahus annexation push.

Giant posters on buildings in Jerusalem feature photos of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (right) and President Donald Trump, beneath slogans supporting West Bank annexation and opposing a Palestinian state. They were hung by the Yesha Council, an umbrella organization of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, which is split on Netanyahus annexation plan. Ahmad Gharbali/AFP via Getty Images

The opposition and other factors complicate the chances of annexation happening on July 1, but the possibility remains on the table. So heres what you need to know before that important date.

What could happen July 1

Netanyahu, who has opposed a Palestinian state during most of his career, sees annexation as a way to safeguard Israels control over parts of the West Bank, which much of the Israeli right views as Israels historical heartland. Annexation has also been a key demand of Netanyahus base, so he would see this as a major political victory.

If the prime minister had his way, he would immediately try to annex the land that Israel was allotted under the Trump administrations Middle East peace proposal in January approximately 30 percent of the West Bank, including the Jordan Valley. He could put the idea up for a vote either in parliament or his own Cabinet, according to the coalition agreement.

But he may be starting small. According to a Times of Israel report, Netanyahu currently plans to annex just a small portion of West Bank territory on July 1 namely the land occupied by over 100 Jewish settlements.

The rest could come later, but the limited approach for now reportedly stems from the fact that a U.S.- Israeli team is still determining the exact lines of territory described in the peace deal. (The Palestinians have been unequivocal in their rejection of the plan.)

The mapping process and the time it takes could be up to Jared Kushner, Trumps point person on the entire Middle East project. While Friedman pushed early on for annexation to happen as quickly as possible the ambassador is an outspoken supporter of the settlements and has close ties to them Kushner has been more hesitant. An Israeli TV station reported last week that the U.S. administration, caught up in handling the George Floyd protests and the coronavirus pandemic, wants to greatly slow the process of annexation, although Friedmans intervention suggests continued interest in making it happen.

Supporters and opponents

The right wing of Israeli politics is a major backer. That includes even Netanyahus other bitter rival, Avigdor Liberman, the hawkish head of the Yisrael Beiteinu party.So does the Trump administration, which authored the peace plan that essentially gave Netanyahu the green light for annexation.

The administrations supporters, including many evangelical Christians who have a religious interest in the West Bank territory remaining under Israeli control, also support the move.

Many right-wing leaders, politicians and organizations in the U.S. support the move as well.

But outside of the right wing in Israel and the U.S., its difficult to find much support.

The speculation about annexation has already prompted a wave of critical responses from liberal Jewish groups, whose opposition might be expected to U.S. politicians and world leaders, as well as prominent Jews who dont always weigh in on politics. In the United States, the caution around annexation has been bipartisan, with Republicans and Democrats alike warning late last year that such a move would threaten efforts to reach a two-state solution.

Some of the more centrist pro- Israel groups, such as AIPAC the American Israel Public Affairs Committee the largest Israel lobbying group in the U.S., have yet to show their cards. The issue puts groups like AIPAC in a delicate position does it support Israel at all costs, or does it draw a line on actions it believes endangers the Jewish states future?

So far, AIPAC has remained publicly silent about annexation. But according to two sources a donor and congressional aide AIPAC is privately telling lawmakers that as long as they dont push to limit the United States aid to Israel, they can criticize the annexation plan without risking tensions or a clash with the lobby group.

In a statement to JTA, AIPAC spokesman Adam Harris said, AIPAC does not encourage members of Congress to criticize the government of Israel. Our role is to strengthen the relationship between the two allies.

In another twist, several Israeli settler leaders, mayors and other activists whose homes would become part of Israel under annexation oppose the move. They say annexation would stunt settlement expansion and freeze the currently disparate settlements, which are sprinkled across the West Bank, in an insecure position. They also oppose a Palestinian state of any borders.

Either the settlements have a future or the Palestinian state does but not both, right-wing lawmaker Bezalel Smotrich, who at one point pushed for annexation, told the New York Times earlier this month.

Possible consequences

If Netanyahu plows ahead with annexation without winning over some of his critics at home and abroad, there could be consequences for Israel.

Most of the international community sees the settlements as part of an illegal Israeli occupation of land that could make up a Palestinian state. Annexation would also be viewed as illegal according to United Nations standards, just as Russias annexation of Crimea was in 2014, for example.

The move would certainly trigger intense international condemnation, and even a possible shakeup in international allegiances. While many European and other countries including the United States under President Obama have disagreed with Netanyahu over policy, they have held on to hope of a future two-state solution. Annexation would at least alter what the traditional two-state solution looks like.

Politicians in some countries, including at least one staunch ally of Israel, have already called for sanctions on Israel if it carries out annexation as threatened.

For the more than 400,000 Israelis who live in the settlements and are full citizens, the specifics of post-annexation governance are still unclear. But its undeniable that the move would shape the contours of future peace efforts in the region, as Israel would unequivocally see the West Bank settlements as part of the official state in any negotiations with the Palestinians.

Those negotiations would almost certainly be set back by annexation. The Palestinians have already renounced their responsibilities agreed to under the Oslo Accords, the 1993 agreement that established security cooperation between them and the Israelis and launched the peace process. (Serious, direct talks have not happened for more than six years.) They say that unilateral annexation, which both sides agreed to forgo in the accords, is a deal breaker when it comes to negotiating with Israel on anything moving forward.

Neighboring Jordan could be next to back away from security agreements with Israel, as the countrys king has said it will bring massive conflict. The Arab League also has issued a warning to Israel. Some have speculated annexation could spark Palestinian violence in the area as well.

We dont want things to reach a point of no return, Hussein al-Sheikh, a close adviser to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, told the New York Times earlier this month. Annexation means no return in the relationship with Israel.

JTA staff writer Ron Kampeas contributed to this story.

See more here:

Move to annex parts of West Bank could come as early as July 1 - jewishpresstampa

Esteban Nunez visits the Capitol to advocate for voting rights for Californians on parole. Photo by Anne Wernikoff for CalMatters

###

In early March, before the pandemic closed the state Capitol to visitors, Esteban Nez led former prisoners through the regal building where his father was once one of Californias most powerful politicians.

He exuded know-how, his shiny loafers clicking across marble floors as they moved toward an elevator. Down a hallway. Into the office of a lawmaker they hoped to convince to grant voting rights to Californians released from prison, but still on parole.

Not long ago, Nez himself had been one of them.

As you know, Im personally impacted, Nez told a legislative aide, inviting others to share their rehabilitation stories.

Nez didnt say much more about himself at that meeting. He didnt have to.

The 31-year-old son of Fabian Nez, a former Democratic Assembly speaker, Esteban Nez is well-known by insiders as the beneficiary of one of Californias most notorious acts of clemency. His fathers bipartisan friendship with then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger helped Nez win early release after he pleaded guilty to manslaughter for his role in a 2008 knife fight that injured two men and killed Luis Santos, a 22-year-old college student.

On Schwarzeneggers last night in office in 2011, he announced cutting Nezs 16-year prison sentence to seven years, saying the term was excessive because Nez did not inflict the fatal stab. Schwarzenegger later acknowledged he had also acted to help a friend. The Republican governors decision infuriated the victims parents and led the California Republican Party to formally rebuke Schwarzenegger for sending the wrong message to potential criminals with connections to those in power.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, shown on June 13, 2007, became friendly while working together at the Capitol. Photo by Rich Pedroncelli, AP Photo

The younger Nez was released from prison in 2016 and is now a regular at the statehouse where, in tailored suits and sleek black hair, he resembles a taller version of his father. Soft-spoken and quick to acknowledge the damage that I personally caused, Nez combines an inmates understanding of prison with a politicians understanding of the Capitol. As a policy director for the criminal justice nonprofit program Cut50, Nez is part of the tide pushing Californias penal system from tough-on-crime laws toward giving criminals a second chance.

His focus this year, as the pandemic replaced in-person lobbying with Zoom meetings: voting rights for Californians on parole, a period of government supervision for criminal offenders that typically lasts about three years. A measure asking voters to do that cleared the Assembly and faces final votes in the Senate this week if approved, it will land on the November ballot.

Nezs transition underscores Californias increasingly liberal shift on criminal justice he credits the leader of a prison rehabilitation program with inspiring him to pursue an advocacy career. But it also reflects the reality of Sacramento, where family ties run deep inside the Capitol.

I think I do have a unique opportunity to use the doors that my father has worked hard to open, for the greater good, Nez said.

He said he hopes he can help other people in the way that I was helped.

Fabian Nez, now a partner at a prominent lobbying firm, declined to be interviewed for this article but said he is proud of his sons work.

The effort to allow California parolees to vote is part of a broader nationwide push to restore voting rights to people with criminal histories. Recently Nevada, Colorado, New York and Florida have expanded voting rights for felons. Sixteen states and the District of Columbia allow people to vote as soon as theyre released from prison, even while on parole, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

In 2016, former Gov. Jerry Brown signed a law allowing people in local jails to vote. But granting voting rights to parolees from state prisons requires voter approval. The last time they changed the rules about who can vote was in 1974, approving a measure allowing felons to vote only after completing both prison and parole.

That leaves about 40,000 Californians who have completed their prison sentences unable to vote while on parole, according to an analysis of the pending measure, Assembly Constitutional Amendment 6.

Parole by definition is not punishment its to help reintegrate people back into the mainstream. Assemblyman Kevin McCarty

Nez is part of a large coalition of civil rights advocates that have been pushing for this change for the last three years. Its taken on heightened urgency now, amid widespread protests against racism and calls to revamp the criminal justice system following the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis. With African Americans overrepresented among parolees making up 26% of the parole population but only 6% of California adults the measure is a top priority for the Legislatures Black caucus.

Parole by definition is not punishment its to help reintegrate people back into the mainstream, said Assemblyman Kevin McCarty, the Sacramento Democrat who wrote ACA 6.

Parolees are many times working, paying taxes, raising their family, doing right. And they cant vote on policies that affect their lives.

The measure raises questions about how far California should go in reducing consequences for crimes.

Its a matter not of prejudice or denying a right its about justice, GOP state Sen. Jim Nielsen said at a recent hearing. Historically, justice has required a forfeiture of voting because of the severity of the impact of crime on society and on individuals.

Parole is a transition between incarceration and freedom that involves many restrictions intended to incentivize further appropriate behavior, argue conservative election watchdogs cited as opponents in the bill analysis.

He never completed the sentence he was handed down because he was able, through political favors, to change things in his favor. Nina Salarno, Crime Victims United

An advocate for crime victims opposes the policy and the messenger.

We have somebody lobbying behind it that has not even taken responsibilities for the violent crime he committed, said Nina Salarno Besselman, a board member of Crime Victims United.

He never completed the sentence he was handed down because he was able, through political favors, to change things in his favor.

As an attorney, Salarno represented the parents of the man killed in the fight with Nez and his friends in a lawsuit against Schwarzenegger. They alleged that his commutation violated a victims rights law, but an appeals court ruled in 2015 that while Schwarzeneggers conduct could be seen as deserving of censure and grossly unjust, it was not illegal.

The victims father called Nez a total abuser of the system.

I dont think people that committed violent crimes should be allowed to vote, Fred Santos said. Because they violated other citizens rights, they should not have their rights.

Santos, a Bay Area software engineer, is resentful that Nez is trying to earn more rights for criminals while he and his wife still grieve for their son. The family visits Luis grave several times a year, Santos said, on Christmas, Valentines Day, his birthday and the anniversary of his murder. They return at the start of every football and basketball season to adorn the gravesite for Luis favorite teams: black and silver for the Raiders, blue and gold for the Warriors.

People get together and talk to their children; we go to the cemetery and put flowers and decorate, Santos said. Thats as much as we can do.

From left: Brigida, Kathy, Luis and Fred Santos pose for a family portrait. Photo courtesy of Fred Santos

Luis was going to college in San Diego when a 19-year-old Nez and three friends traveled there from Sacramento for a weekend of partying in October 2008. Prosecutors alleged that Nez and his buddies drank heavily, then grew angry when they were turned away from a party near San Diego State University. A fight erupted.

I jumped in when I saw my friend on the floor and he had a stab wound in his leg, Nez said in an interview with CalMatters. Had I seen Luis bleeding out, I would not have jumped in.

Nez and his friends returned to Sacramento, burned the clothes theyd worn and tossed their knives into a river.

Two months later, they were arrested. Two pled guilty to conspiracy and assault. As the trial drew near for Nez and the other friend, Ryan Jett, the pair pleaded guilty to two counts of assault with a deadly weapon for the two men injured and voluntary manslaughter for Santos death. The district attorney announced that both men admitted responsibility for Santos death, and both were sentenced to 16 years.

Fred Santos said he holds them equally culpable because it was a mob attack.

But Schwarzenegger drew several distinctions in his commutation. Jett stabbed Santos once through the chest, severing his heart, he wrote, while Nez aided and abetted but was not the actual killer. The governor also noted that Nez had no prior criminal history, while Jett had multiple convictions.

I saw it on the ticker and I just started crying. Esteban Nez

Nezs supporters say he and Jett never should have gotten the same sentence.

The case became highly politicized, said Kevin de Leon, a former state Senate leader who has known Nez since he was a baby because he is close friends with his father.

There is no question that Esteban had to pay a price, as well as the other young men, because of the tragic outcome But theres always been this gross narrative that he was the one that stabbed (Santos), when he wasnt.

While in prison, Nez was aware of the clemency efforts, but says he was caught by surprise in January 2011 when he learned his sentence had been reduced while watching the news with his cellmate.

I saw it on the ticker and I just started crying, Nez said.

The Santos family also learned of it from the media a shock that deepened their pain. The fight Esteban Nez took part in stabbed my son in his heart, Fred Santos said. And Fabian Nez stabbed us in our back.

The pain doesnt go away. We are serving a life sentence. Victims father Fred Santos

The incident led to a new state law that requires a governor to notify prosecutors at least 10 days before shortening a criminal sentence, so that prosecutors can inform victims families.

The pain doesnt go away, Fred Santos said. We are serving a life sentence.

Nez has not apologized to the Santos family, but said hed like to someday.

Santos said he wouldnt accept an apology now. He and his wife just want Nez not to hurt anyone else, and to make his court-ordered restitution payments to them so that each month he remembers their loss.

At Mule Creek State Prison east of Sacramento, Nez was focused on survival. The young man who had once dined with his family at Arnold Schwarzeneggers home was now a prison cook making 16 cents an hour.

Everybody knew my father was a politician, Nez said. For people inside, it was like I had a life that I squandered away, which I understand and respect. And for correctional officers, I think it was like, Oh, youre in our house now. Let me show you how it goes down in here.

I think there was just a lot of desire to humble me.

When he found out he had only a few years left in prison, Nez said he started reading self-help books from his mother and analyzing his childhood. He was determined to, in his words, figure out whats wrong, where I fell short, what mistakes I made, what influenced those decisions.

He connected with Scott Budnick, a Hollywood producer who runs rehabilitation programs in California prisons through the Anti-Recidivism Coalition he founded.

I met him in a large group of incarcerated men, Budnick wrote in an email to CalMatters, and right away he stated that he wanted to use this experience to work with kids and be a mentor, so they would never have to see the inside of a prison, and would have the support to go into college instead. He has maintained that focus and commitment to being of service to others and helping others find a better path.

Released in 2016, Nez remembers telling his parole agent his plans for his first day of freedom. First up: steak and shrimp. Next: enroll in college and register to vote.

You cant vote, Nez recalls the agent telling him. Youre legally not allowed to vote because youre on parole.

Nez had sworn to himself that he would not follow his fathers path into politics. The thought of walking into the Capitol filled him with shame, a reminder of both the crime that sent him to prison and the political connections that helped set him free.

Esteban Nunez meets with legislative aides to advocate for voting rights for parolees on March 9, 2020. Photo by Anne Wernikoff for CalMatters

I wanted to pretend like it never happened, Nez said. I wanted to live under the radar.

He moved in with his mom in the Sacramento suburbs and began studying to become a mechanical engineer. But he was haunted by calls from his friends who were still locked up.

They would ask like, Whats it like? How are you? And I just couldnt bring myself to answer, Nez said.

I felt guilty that I was out here, able to be with my family, when I knew there were people who were in very similar situations, like myself, and still inside.

Soon he decided that instead of ignoring his criminal past and political connections, he wanted to make the most of them. He called Budnick. The Anti-Recidivism Coalition encourages formerly incarcerated people to advocate for changes to the system; it took him on as an intern. Over the next three years Nez was promoted to policy coordinator.

We at ARC believe that those closest to the problems are closest to the solutions, Budnick said. Because of Estebans experience in prison, he is an incredible guide to those that are navigating their own change.

As an advocate now making about $80,000 a year, Nez has pushed for new state laws that prohibit prosecuting youth under age 16 as adults and repealed prosecutors power to file murder charges against people who didnt directly kill someone, but were involved in a felony that led to a death. He also worked to qualify a ballot measure permitting prisoners and parolees to vote. When it failed to get enough signatures, Nez and fellow advocates narrowed the scope to parolees only, and asked the Legislature to put it on the ballot instead.

Assemblyman McCarty agreed to carry the measure. He had gotten to know Nez and found his transformation compelling.

He acknowledged that he had all kinds of privileges that other people did not, so he was able to get a second chance, McCarty said. He noticed that a lot of people in the justice system did not. And he was going to use his life and his opportunity to be back in the mainstream to work on these issues.

A key piece of Nezs work is encouraging people who have committed crimes to become more civically engaged. Nez believes they will make better choices if they feel more invested in society.

Voting is really like the most traditional way that somebody can voice their opinions, he said.

Nez was unable to vote in the 2016 presidential election because he was on parole. It had ended by the midterm election, so he cast a ballot in 2018. And then, on a blue-skied day in March, Nez tucked his 2020 primary ballot into its envelope. The sun was out, a breeze wafted through the trees. He headed to a polling place in downtown Sacramento, joined by friends who also were discharged from parole in recent years.

United once by their criminal status, they are united now by their work to change the justice system. Together, with broad smiles, they dropped their ballots into the box.

From left: April Greyson, Michael Mendoza and Esteban Nunez submit their presidential primary election ballots at the California Museum in Sacramento on March 2, 2020. Photo by Anne Wernikoff for CalMatters

###

CALmatters.org is a nonprofit, nonpartisan media venture explaining California policies and politics.

Read the original post:

From Prison to the Halls of Power: A Politician's Son Lobbies to Let People on Parole Vote - Lost Coast Outpost

Quebec City, April 2001 Every head of state from the Americas, except Fidel Castro, was in Quebec City for negotiationson the Free Trade Area of the Americas, a proposed duty-free zone stretching from Canada to Chile, excluding Cuba. Although it was lauded as revolutionary by big business, many believed the neoliberal FTAA (ALCA in Spanish) would only intensify poverty and inequality across the region and threaten the survival of rural and indigenous communities. It was a crisp spring day and Berta Cceras was there wrapped up, pumped and ready to resist on behalf of the Lencas, her indigenous group.

Tens of thousands of spirited protesters armed with drums, flutes, confetti and canny banners had descended on the picturesque French colonial city in eastern Canada, determined to force the continent's leaders to pay attention. Amid the colorful crowd were indigenous leaders, environmental groups, trade unions, students, fringe political parties and anti-poverty campaigners, all ready for open debate and direct action. A giant catapult was being winched up to launch teddy bears towards the summit site, in contrast to the secretive negotiations taking place inside.

Berta was with the Mexican environmentalist Gustavo Castro. They had travelled to Quebec up the east coast as part of a speaking tour organized by Rights Action, a not-for-profit group investigating the impact of North American trade, economic and security policies in Central America. "Berta's family history and early experiences fostered a clear local-to-global perspective,"said Rights Action's Grahame Russell. "She understood that free trade agreements were just the latest repackaged tool of repression, a new twist on the same exploitative economic model imposed on Central America for hundreds of years."

Berta told audiences in Toronto and Montreal: "Free trade deals are legal tools to impose a model that advocates taking control over the planet's natural resources for profit."She went on: "I don't accept a system that must destroy some in order to thrive. Cutting down forests our ancestors protected for centuries cannot be called development . . . we need to fight this oppressive political and economic model together. This is our problem."

Details were already emerging about the Plan Panama Puebla (PPP), a US-inspired Mexican brainchild, soon to be launched as the missing development piece of the neo-liberal jigsaw puzzle. It was extolled as the mother of all development projects, tackling poverty by opening up the "backward"Mesoamerican region to the global market. The two central pillars of PPP were transport infrastructure a network of highways, dry canals and ports to speed up the movement of freely traded products and energy liberalization: specifically, an increased capacity to generate energy by constructing dozens of dams and gas and oil pipelines, and then transport it further and faster by connecting the region's energy grids from North America to Colombia (a sort of NAFTACAFTA energy grid).

The multibillion-dollar, mainly publicly funded, project promoted and depended on a momentous shift of the region's economy, from small-scale farming to agro-industry and manufacturing, and expanding private control over natural resources. It included the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor, which sounds like a good thing a mammoth protected nature reserve but in reality involved patenting the genetic codes of plants and animals in the second biggest bank of bio-genetic resources in the world. Why? To provide essential raw material for biotechnologies that could revolutionize medicines and food production, but without sharing economic benefits with local people. You could call it corporate bio-piracy.

PPP enthusiasts such as the Mexican president, Vicente Fox, considered this the only way to lift rural communities out of entrenched poverty. However, the Zapatistas and the Convergence of Movements of the Peoples of the Americas (COMPA) the fledgling regional coalition where Berta and Gustavo first met saw PPP as a poverty plan masquerading as development, which would force thousands of rural families to migrate to overcrowded cities or north to the US. Auctioning off rivers, seabeds, fertile plains and forests to the private sector threatened to raze or prohibit access to vast swathes of the ancestral land and natural resources that define the economic, social and cultural survival of countless rural and indigenous peoples.

In Honduras, Berta warned back in 2001 that PPP would be a death sentence for the Lenca people, and the Agua Zarca dam turned out to be a perfect example of this.

Berta was right: it was the PPP that killed her, according to Annie Bird.

At the anti-capitalist gathering in downtown Quebec City, people had had enough of talking. It was time for direct action. But the summit organizers were determined to shield political leaders from the deafening crowds branded as anarchists by Canadian intelligence. A three-metre-high concrete and wire partition was erected around Parliament Hill as a first line of defence. Hundreds of riot cops unleashed a wave of brutality the protesters weren't prepared for. Tear gas engulfed the city in dense, eye-stinging smoke. So much of it was fired that it seeped into the summit hall, forcing delegates to take cover. Berta and Gustavo stood in front of parliament facing the impenetrable chain of riot cops, among protesters drumming and singing. It struck Berta that the demonstration was too far back. "Hermano! Let's get closer. Vamos,"she shouted, grinning at Gustavo, grabbing one end of the blue and white Honduran flag. Gustavo seized the other end and they rushed forward into a cold jet of water from a cannon behind police lines. They were pushed back and soaked, the flag went flying. But Berta jumped up and yelled, "Let's go again."This time, blinding tear gas forced the pair back. But they surged forward again and again, recalled Gustavo. "That was Berta. Always tenacious and always willing to put herself in the middle of every act of resistance. She never lost that energy."

* * *

COPINH in English, theCouncil of Popular and Indigenous Organizations of Honduras was founded as a grassroots organization, and managed to stay true to its roots partly because Berta was never power-hungry. Whenever possible, everywhere she went, busloads of COPINH members went with her, meaning she and the organization evolved together. At one anti-FTAA meeting in Cuba, Gustavo and Berta were invited as speakers and put up in a fancy Havana hotel. Berta preferred the cheaper digs with the rest of the COPINH faction. "COPINH was never a closed shop,"recalls Alba Marconi, who worked alongside Berta for over a decade. "For Berta, sharing ideas and experiences was fundamental to ensure COPINH was a true grass-roots organization where the power and energy came from its base."

Berta's early years were filled with Cold War drama and meeting the guerrillas seeking sanctuary at her family home. She grew up looking beyond borders, and in COPINH connected the dots between far-flung boardrooms and parliaments and everyday struggles in Lenca communities. Berta wasn't an avid reader or particularly academic: bearing four children at a young age and launching a new organization made university impossible, and her children agree that studying wasn't her thing. But she was an avid learner, an insatiable sponge, who evolved through experiences and through the people she met and debated with late into the night. Her ability to cite community struggles in Kurdistan, Brazil, Guatemala or Canada to explain big issues like capitalism, militarization and patriarchy was impressive. "I always remember Berta," said Gustavo, "with an open notebook under her arm and a pen in her hand, taking constant notes, absorbing everything, and encouraging COPINH colleagues to learn and grow alongside her."

Convergence of Movements of the Peoples of the Americas (COMPA)

Berta first met Gustavo Castro in 2000, at a three-day event in San Cristobal de las Casas, a colonial city in the Mexican state of Chiapas (site of the Zapatista uprising that six years earlier had inspired COPINH). It was a ground-breaking confluence of diverse movements from across the Americas and Caribbean, with the aim of formulating a unified political strategy. No easy task, but COMPA united as an anti-capitalist coalition at a time when identifying as such still carried the risk of being branded as communist. Berta, then twenty-nine, was assigned a high-profile role alongside Gustavo to draft the coalition's message of intent. The six agreed objectives were struggle for gender equality, indigenous rights and sustainable rural development, and against the FTAA, militarization, and external debt and structural adjustment policies imposed by international banks under the Washington Consensus.

Berta demonstrated intelligence, sharp analysis and political know-how beyond her years, alongside an indomitable 'yes we can' attitude. 'Berta helped make Honduras visible,' said Gustavo. "Until then, its social movements, political struggles and resistance were largely unknown to the rest of the region."

COMPA served as a bridge connecting communities across the continent during six intense years of resistance. The collective produced educational radio soaps, worksheets, books, and videos about PPP, biodiversity and free trade which Berta took back to her base in Honduras. COPINH travelled to Guatemala, where Canadian mines were already polluting water sources and displacing communities; Guatemalans gave workshops in La Esperanza on genetic modification and crop diversity. This fluid exchange of ideas and experiences across borders was pioneering. Over time, the central themes evolved through spin-offs such as the COMPA women's collective where gender equality developed into a broader anti-patriarchal model that Berta sought to integrate into COPINH.

Berta and Salvador separated around 2000, but continued to lead the organization together. In its second decade, COPINH's national profile declined as the indigenous struggle consolidated on the back of important wins. But its international profile grew as it evolved into an organization whose struggle identified with the anti-globalization movement opposed to the neo-liberal economic model. Berta's involvement in COMPA helped her develop a deeper, more structural understanding of the role of international financial institutions and free trade agreements in local land struggles, forced migration, biodiversity and natural resources. COMPA's six original objectives remained central to Berta's struggle to the end.

Every conflict in Latin America is, at its heart, about land. Why? Because the distribution of land is directly linked to the distribution of wealth. In Honduras, both are scandalously unequal. This is the most unequal country in Latin America, with the most regressive tax system, and the gap between the richest few and the poor majority keeps growing. Over two-thirds of the population live in poverty. While big cities are marked by gang violence and precarious employment and living conditions, the great majority of the poor are landless peasant farmers and indigenous or Afro-descendant Garifuna and Miskitu peoples. The most arable plains are in the hands of a few: approximately 70 per cent of farmers hold only 10 per cent of land in small plots, while 1 per cent of farmers hold 25 per cent in massive estates. Redressing land inequalities was a central issue for Berta and COPINH, and that meant taking on the country's elites.

The Elites

Las elites, las familias, la oligarquia, los turcos . . . catch-all terms used interchangeably for the small group of transnational families whose vast wealth and political power allow them to influence, some would say dictate, public policies to benefit their economic interests. The origin and trajectory of the Honduran elite are unique in the region. These ten or so families played only a supporting role during the first half of the twentieth century, when Honduras was subservient to US capital and geopolitical objectives. Back then, local landowning elites who got rich and powerful primarily from timber, cattle, cotton and sugar plantations, and mining were still the biggest cojones in town, yet they were in fact the poorest and politically weakest rural elites in Central America. So, in the 1990s, unlike their peers in Guatemala and El Salvador, Honduran landowners found themselves outwitted and unable to evolve fast enough to take advantage of globalization and international capital. Instead, waiting in the wings was the incipient bourgeoisie, composed largely of Christian Palestinians (mostly from Bethlehem) and eastern European Jews.

The ethnic mix of this elite class most with surnames like Kattan, Canahuati, Nasser, Kafati, Atala, Larach and Facusse is the result of the liberal migration policies of the late nineteenth century. With the Ottoman Empire in decline, there was a wave of migration of Christian Palestinians to Central America, and a handful of families settled in Honduras during the 1870s and 1880s, when the liberal government was trying to attract immigrants with knowledge of modern agricultural techniques to jump-start the economy. Most came via Turkey, where they sought refuge first with Turkish passports, hence the umbrella term "turcos"for them all. But the new arrivals rejected generous farming incentives in favor of commerce, to slowly establish themselves as the new merchant class. Initially, they jostled for market position in the shadow of Americans who controlled trade through general stores stocked with cheap merchandise arriving on empty banana cargo ships. But the Arabs brought knowledge of external markets lacking among local landowners, and quickly applied commercial rules (buy cheap, sell dear) to the import-export market. The traders accumulated wealth independent of politics, until the late 1980s and early 1990s when structural adjustment policies free-market privatization programsfavoring big business were imposed by international financiers to guarantee loans and debt payments (aka the Washington Consensus). This sparked a massive transfer of state wealth to the private sector, and opened up unparalleled access to global markets, credit and political power for the transnational merchant elites. Soon they were acting not unlike the banana companies, running Honduras like a collection of private fiefdoms and 'counselling' presidents, ambassadors and the military.

The main gold-rush industries to emerge were manufacturing in the maquilas, African palm oil for biofuels and processed food, and coastal tourism. Then, armed with their new capacity to amass capital, the elites smartly diversified, opening banks, newspapers and meat processing plants, as well as investing heavily in energy projects and mines. The locally prominent landowners didn't miss out entirely on the benefits of globalization: by positioning themselves as the bridge between international investors and new transnational elites, they became the boots on the ground, so to speak, in both business and politics. This economic and power shift happened hot on the heels of the US-backed counterinsurgency war which alleged military and business interests determined to protect the status quo. The most formidable manifestation of this symbiotic relationship was the anti-communist, some say fascist, Association for the Progress of Honduras (APROH), founded in 1983. This club, joined by most major Honduran industrialists, promoted deregulation, free trade and a ruthless response to social movements demanding better wages and conditions. APROH's founding president was General Gustavo Alvarez Martinez, commander of Battalion 3-16.

Since then, the rural poverty generated by land inequality has been compounded by climate change and natural disasters like Hurricane Mitch in 1998; rising food prices; systematic land grabs by agribusiness and tourism developers; and shocking levels of violence perpetrated by state security services and private militias contracted by organized criminal gangs, corrupt politicians and seemingly reputable businesses, at times all working together.

Paradoxically, it was this complex set of harsh conditions which sparked new grassroots social and political movements like COPINH and campesino collectives challenging land distribution in the Bajo Aguan. This pitted the campesinos against feudal king and political heavyweight Miguel Facusse Barjum.

Facusse trained as an aeronautical engineer in Indiana, in the American Midwest, and started his career by converting war planes into commercial carriers, but he built his fortune and notoriety through Dinant Chemicals. In the 1980s, during the Contra years, he served as chief economic adviser to the Liberal president Roberto Suazo Cordova and vice-president of APROH; he even endorsed selling off Honduras to foreign investors to resolve its fiscal woes. This was Facusse's breakthrough decade, a time when political connections and capitalist instinct helped him take lucrative advantage of a controversial debt restructuring programme. This, and other economic policies blueprinted in the Facusse Memorandum, acted as a springboard to convert the evolving merchant class into a cash-rich globally oriented agro-industrial bourgeoisie, perfectly positioned for foreign investors.

But Miguel Facusse was no political ideologue. He believed in making money, and that is what drew him to the fertile Bajo Aguan.The Bajo Aguan was dominated by banana plantations in the first half of the twentieth century, but the population and crop production nosedived in 1974 after Hurricane Fifi destroyed everything, including the railway, and the fruit moguls abandoned the region. Fifi accelerated major agrarian reforms designed by military dictator General Lopez Arellano, who used public funds and post-hurricane international aid to rebuild the region and entice landless peasants to farm uncultivated plains in exchange for community land titles. The general became an unlikely campesino hero, sanctioning technical and financial support to more than 4,000 farming families organized into eighty-four cooperatives. It paid off: by the 1980s the lower Aguan valley was one of the most diverse crop regions in Honduras, known as the grain basket of Central America. But the glory days were short-lived thanks to the imposition of inedible, invasive African palms.

The lofty palm species was aggressively promoted from the early 1990s by World Bankfunded modernization programmes. The palms were lauded as the ultimate cash crop which would finally lift peasant farmers out of poverty. Then the official line changed: campesinos were no longer capable of farming palms, because they were too tall and required machinery to extract the fruit and oil. Technical assistance and credit from the government plummeted just as global prices crashed, a devastating combination which asphyxiated the farmers. This wasn't down to Lady Luck: the plan was always to let the cooperatives fail, affirmed campesino leader Yoni Rivas. Waiting in the wings to pounce was Facusse.

Agrarian law prohibits collective or ejidal legal titles from being sold or mortgaged without permission from the National Agrarian Institute (INA). To circumvent this inconvenience, President Callejas approved a municipal law in 1993 which allowed local governments to sell land titles for a period of three months only. This they did via hundreds of small trans-actions benefiting a handful of powerful businessmen, who had woken up to the profit potential of exporting palm oil for biofuels and processed food. The sales were rushed through with total disregard for ejidal and ancestral land titles owned by Garifuna communities. How did they get the deeds? Some campesinos sold up for the money, but far more were duped or intimidated into signing over the land. The wannabe palm magnates made alliances with local politicians to convince cooperative leaders that there was no hope of competing with modernization, so best to sell up and move on. To deal with those who couldn't be convinced, the cooperatives were infiltrated and divided, and secret meetings known as misas negras (black masses) were convened under menacing military supervision. And if that failed, stubborn campesino leaders were tortured, abducted and killed, starting with the president and treasurer of the San Isidro cooperative in 1990. In other words, good old-fashioned corporate counterinsurgency.

Thousands of campesino families were evicted: they went from being landowners to pawns on their own land a starting gun for a protracted bloody struggle that has yet to end. Facusse was the biggest beneficiary, gaining control over large swathes of Aguan and beyond for industrial palm oil production. The other major winners were the Salvadoran Reynaldo Canales and the Nicaraguan-born Rene Morales, whose legal affairs were handled by lawyer Roberto Pacheco Reyes, who later became the secretary of the Agua Zarca dam company, DESA. The three men rapidly acquired the majority of the cooperatives and began importing unregulated armed private security guards to work alongside the military to protect their interests. This toxic mix of ambition, political connections, bullish tactics and military alliances helped turned the Aguan into one of the deadliest parts of the country. The violence was fuelled by the West's drive for "clean energy." The big fat clean energy lie. But as always, it's about the land.

Then the coup happened.

Adapted from Who Killed Berta Cceres? Dams, Death Squads, and an Indigenous Defender's Battle for the Planet by Nina Lakhani, out through Verso Books.

More here:

The remarkable life and legacy of indigenous leader Berta Cceras - Salon

Sun and anger fill the Bowral library forecourt. Black four wheel drives with riot squad written on the side sit ominously out the front.

It is 21 June and around 60 people have gathered for a Black Lives Matter rally. Gundungurra elder Trish Levett surveys the attendees as smoke from burning eucalyptus leaves drifts in the air. Cops in dark blue uniforms swarm behind the demonstrators and she starts a chant: Too many gungies [cops], not enough justice!

Bowral is one of the whitest towns in Australia, and one of the richest in the Southern Highlands region of New South Wales. Rolling hills and multi-million dollar mansions make it a popular choice for wealthy retirees and professionals from Sydney and Canberra looking for a weekend house. A 2016 Weekend Australian article described a morning tea at Bowral library where the heavily Liberal voting populations key concerns about the coming election were miserable superannuation returns and the changes to tax concessions.

Very different concerns are being aired today. After an introduction by Trish and more chants, various community members speak about racism, Black deaths in custody and the killing of George Floyd.

A young woman holds a placard bearing a photo of her brother, Tane Chatfield. Tane died in police custody in 2017 at the age of 22. His family took photographs of his body, which they say showed the marks of battering. He had skin under his nails. He had scratch marks on his body, his father told Sydney Criminal Lawyers at the time. There were bruises all over his face, a busted lip and a practically broken nose and jaw. Corrective services told the public that he committed suicide. His family doesnt believe it.

After the chants and spontaneous speeches, the crowd is ready to march. One of the cops walks into the protest and reads a move-on order. Protesters quickly discuss what to do. Trish eventually declares that the protest will, in fact, move on, by marching out of the square and onto the street. Then the cops close in. They insist that attendees leave only as individuals. The protesters proceed to leave as individuals, only to gather on the road and begin a march down the towns main street.

As the march progresses, chants and excitement fill the air. People stop to stare, crowds come out of cafes to stand and watch the spectacle. Every shop has a huddle in the doorway, straining to get a look.

Say their names! Tanya Day! David Dungay Junior! Kumanjayi Walker! Tane Chatfield! The names of those killed in police custody are shouted by the crowd as the march proceeds down and back up the main street. It ends with chants of Well be back!

As things wind down, Bandjalung artist Djon Mundine tells Red Flag Were very emotionally moved. Hes lived here for around nine years, and this is only the third protest hes known of here, and the first for Aboriginal rights.

I dont think anyone here thinks any Aboriginal people even exist here. Its a really white neighbourhood. They shot everyone to clear the land ... Hundreds of thousands of people were shot. Not just starved, but shot. And this is the way they kill us now by putting us in jail. Elders tell of the massacre sites around the area, not officially acknowledged, but knowledge of them is passed orally down the generations.

But tragedy and horror are not the only things that are remembered: resistance is too. Hopefully today will be remembered, as Djon puts it, as the day the riot cops came to Bowral.

Read the original:

When riot cops came to Bowral - Red Flag

Following the unprecedented physical brawl at the Line of Actual Control (LAC) that cost the lives of 20 Indian soldiers and an undisclosed number of Chinese troops, Chinas Peoples Liberation Army (PLA) blamed India and claimed that the sovereignty of the Galwan River Valley has always been ours. It was a classic instance of Chinese Communist deceit, backstabbing and propaganda to conceal territorial aggrandisement.

China had previously agreed in military commander-level talks with Indian counterparts that it would disengage from Galwan. For decades before the PLAs ingress into Galwan in May, China had not asserted claims on Galwan. But the gap between what China says one day and what it does on the ground the next day is vast, and is part of its time-tested ploy of keeping adversaries off balance through surprise.

As Mao Zedong, the founder of Communist China and legendary war planner, held during the period of Chinese resistance to Japanese colonialism in the 1930s, make the enemy uncertain and then attack him by surprise at one point. While the PLAs military doctrines today are drastically different from those of Maos guerrillas, the strategic culture of Communist China remains the same because the underlying philosophy of historical materialism (belief that the world goes by material power, i.e. economic and military force, rather than ideals or morals) still guides President Xi Jinpings foreign policy.

Chinas playbook is to use brute force in limited form where necessary, establish a fait accompli on the ground or waters with quick military thrusts, and then use historical revisionism to claim more and more territory. As cover for this skullduggery, Chinese officials incessantly promote diplomatic concepts like harmonious world, win-win cooperation, universal love and non-aggression, and a new type of international relations based on jointly upholding the authority and sanctity of international law.Lurking beneath the verbose shibboleths is a menacing great power that wants to be acknowledged as the greatest, which is inherently expansionist and dissatisfied with the status quo.

What the PLA did in its savage assault with nail-studded rods and stones against an Indian Army party in Galwan was to show Chinas true coloursan uncompromising hegemon that seeks to extract as much land and leverage to pressurise states like India that stand in the way of Chinese domination.States that are substantially weaker than China or do not resist Chinese supremacy are rewarded with a final resolution of territorial disputes. Communist China has settled border disagreements with 17 countries since its inception in 1949, and in 15 out of these 17, it actually conceded territory. But when it comes to India, Bhutan (viewed by Chinese elites as an Indian proxy), Japan and Southeast Asian countries, China is unwilling to compromise on land or sea borders and is pressing forward fresh claims to apply geopolitical pressure.

Since President Xi took office in 2013, China has flexed its military muscle in disputes with India, Japan, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines and Taiwan. When the Philippines under President Rodrigo Duterte disavowed allegiance to the United States, which Xis China sees as its main opponent, Beijing softened its approach to Manila and offered economic incentives to it. In a reprisal of the ancient notion of Tianxia, China believes it is nominally the ruler of the world, and all the others must accept its superiority and pay tribute to it. Those who dare to deny China its rightful place as the number one power have to face a different China that is fierce and bullying.

The same tradition of cartographic aggression, wherein the PLA ingresses into a contested domain and then presents distorted maps claiming that specific area had belonged to China or fell under Chinas sphere of influence since millennia, is continuing from Mao until Xi. What is new is that Chinas toolbox has expanded. Today, it has accumulated huge financial reserves and deploys them to fulfil Xis Chinese dream of expanded global influence under the umbrella of the $48 trillion Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). By means of a cut-throat debt trap strategy, China has found a commercial pathway to gain control over vital waterways, ports and mineral-rich lands.

Yet, the bare-knuckled violence of the PLA in Galwan Valley is a stark reminder that treating China as a purely economic juggernaut that expands in a less threatening way via trade, aid and debt is missing the full picture. There is more than BRI and chequebook diplomacy to Chinas rise. The less civilised side of China, which people outside Asia and the Indo-Pacific often ignore or dismiss as something too remote to bother them, is growing under Xis hardline authoritarian rule.

The policy need of the hour is for the whole world to take off blinkers, recognise China as it really is and push it back on multiple fronts. Liberal formulae of accommodating China, making it a responsible stakeholder or meeting China halfway by conceding it the strategic space it deserves, have for long confused nations. But the time for such dilemmas is past. Xis China is dropping all pretensions and acting in a far cruder and belligerent manner. Chinese force has to be met with proportionate counterforce on a variety of dimensions. The alternative is subjugation.

Sreeram ChauliaDean at the Jindal School of International Affairs(schaulia@jgu.edu.in)

Go here to see the original:

Beijings violent rise must be checked - The New Indian Express

Tectonic fractures are beginning to demolish the long-standing world order, and the worlds centre of power is rapidly shifting to the other side of the planet. It is undisputable this is happening, and it is only a matter of time until the sun from the East will engulf the entire world and fry it a good bit.

Such and similar claims were filling headlines and they appeared in discussions among politicians and academics even before the COVID-19 pandemic. Now, this discussion is gaining even more momentum.

How is this happening and is the West truly doomed to burn in the rays of the Eastern sun?

The 21st century is quite an odd century. Statistical data indicates that the world has never lived better: more people are dying from diseases related to obesity than die from wars or famine. However, the choir of those dissatisfied with this world order is growing in strength in both the parts of the world that have long not seen any famine and those, who are ceasing to face it. Third world countries are rapidly becoming a part of the second world and as fast as never before catching up to developed countries.

However, once again, there are ever more discontented people. Discontent in the West can be understood, but there is also no lack of discontent in the rapidly developing other parts of the world.

And when you throw the pandemic into the mix, there is no lack of those complaining over lost jobs, but there are also many being driven out of their minds by boredom or even more rapidly growing obesity. Perhaps there is something we fail to understand.

Another paradox is in that increasingly many of those, who should be thankful to fate for being born in the West, are voting for populists, who mingle with the leaders of authoritarian regimes. Some of these elected would even like to implement the forms of government used by the latter.

What is even more interesting is that those populists want to dismantle the West. This is very difficult to understand for the rest of the unfortunate, who live under the sun of authoritarian regimes. Many of them would gladly leave their sunny paradises and move to live in the West, whose own citizens are voting for politicians who would like to demolish all of it.

Perhaps we, the people of the world, do not understand something.

The world and even the powerful rising Eastern sun struggle to understand how the most powerful country in the world is voluntarily letting go of the status of being the most powerful, one that so many lives and so much energy have been sacrificed for.

One could argue that this order still helps the United States remain the most powerful and wealthiest since the end of the Cold War.

Having elected a president, who is demolishing the foundations of this order, breaking down trust in the country, its citizens are prepared to elect the same president for a second term. Because those who are using their energy protesting in the streets, demanding their rights be respected and outraged with the government often tend to lack the energy to go and vote.

Perhaps this is something we Europeans fail to understand.

Why talk of distant countries, when there is no lack of incomprehensible and paradoxical events right in our own vicinity? It is still incomprehensible how a country viewed as the cradle of democracy, even over a few years, allowed itself to vote for Brexit twice in a row.

Once perhaps something went wrong. But doing so twice? Perhaps continental Europeans have failed to understand something.

While visiting Naples in Italy (I have not been further South in Italy), as a newcomer to the European Union, it was incomprehensible that this city and Italy alongside it have been in the European Union since its inception.

After looking around, you are left wonder, where did all the structural aid offered by the EU land? How could it be that the economy of one of the EUs founding countries, having not recovered from the 2009 crisis, has rolled back to levels not seen since 1995?

It is remarkable that in a country, which is risking a financial and economic catastrophe, the number of that intent on exiting the EU is almost tied with those wishing to remain.

Perhaps newcomers to the EU have also failed to understand something.

That said, one must admit that the twenty-first century has been rather successful to those of us escaped from the sway of the Soviet Union. By wisely employing and synchronising our desire to return to Europe, thanks to our talents, hard work and tenacity, we are returning to Europe at an impressive pace.

While nothing is perfect, the Baltic States have become full-fledged members of the Western world, even leading in many an area. These undisputable achievements were possible thanks to hard and tenacious work, as well as revolutionary reforms. But Freedom Houses latest Nations in Transit report, published on May 6, sharply criticises Serbia, Montenegro and Hungary for falling democratic standards and classifies all three countries for the first time as hybrid regimes.

Hungarys decline has been the most precipitous ever tracked in Nations in Transit; it was one of the three democratic frontrunners as of 2005, but in 2020, it became the first country to descend by two regime categories and leave the group of democracies entirely, the report says.

Other Visegrad countries, having previously been frontrunners in democratic reform, are also accelerating in the reverse direction. Why are a democracy and the rights we fought for so hard being handed over not to invading tyrants from the East, but to our own populists?

To us, Lithuanians, who continue to hold upright the flag of liberal democracy, it is even more difficult to understand.

Perhaps even Lithuanians have failed to understand something.

But is it truly all that incomprehensible, why so many are surprised that the world order changing? Three generations have grown up rather affluently in the West since the most tragic war in human history.

For Westerners, living in a consumerist and peaceful world is a natural given, which they receive as soon as they are born. The world order, which in many respects allowed to create such lives, is becoming dated because we will live in our own comfortable worlds anyway because this right was given to us by birth. Unfortunately, this privilege could become distant.

The pursuit of ever-greater profit and greed have blinded eyes and minds in Western societies, their political and business leaders. The system, which was created to facilitate global (initially Western) capital flows and manufacturing moved to other countries, and finally awakened the sleeping giant in the East.

Napoleon once said, Let China sleep, for when she wakes, she will shake the world. The problem is not in that the giant has awakened, but that it took the COVID-19 pandemic for not only North America but also Europe to wake up.

There is nothing terrible in that the rest of the world is rapidly developing; it benefits everyone. The reality is that the world order created by the West has for a time now served authoritarian regimes better than the West.

Even before President Trump was elected, there was an understanding in Washington that if this continues, we will quickly be proceeding toward a threshold, which when surpassed, will make it impossible to catch up with China. It is possible that in certain areas, particularly artificial intelligence development, teaching which demand vast quantities of data, China is already beyond catching.

Washington also understands that if all this continues, the economic potential of the US will continue waning and might even already be too weak to pay the bills for the self-ascribed office of world police.

It comes as no surprise that China wishes to maintain the current world order because it benefits it more than the West. This is gradually being understood in London, Paris, Berlin and Brussels. And you definitely cannot accuse the French president or German chancellor for pandering to yet another US president.

The time is coming when Rome and Budapest will also have to decide.

We are entering a new stage of global development, and the West will struggle to get used to it. For the West to maintain its influence in the world, it will be necessary to take off from the comfortable couch and go to the gym.

A time is coming when it no longer suffices to stand on your feet to retain your positions firmly, you need to run. Exercise is healthy and particularly so for the West. An excellent piece of evidence of this was the Cold War.

It was a long-distance run, it demanded much effort, but the West won, and the muscles built sufficed for a generation.

Some think that namely, the overwhelming victory in the Cold War proved detrimental to the West. The West slacked, began to break apart, no longer has a common goal, and in some areas (weaponry, religion, social security, climate change just to mention a few) there are increasing value differences.

Or, perhaps there no longer is a common enemy with whom to compete. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union held this role. Now Russia is in a wholly different league and might itself rethink its choice of allies. Furthermore, Russia can only threaten Europe.

When analysing events, it is increasingly becoming evident that a second Cold War is beginning and the US is taking China very seriously. The European Union has yet to decide; however, the COVID-19 pandemic and Chinas actions in Hong Kong have seriously irked the Europeans.

After evaluating this reality, Europe will have to choose which side to support. And to obtain sufficient weight in the global arena, Europe will have to get used to paying for its own safety, something that will only benefit it.

The US will also have to restore the now limping Western alliance, perhaps even including more members (India, Japan, South Korea, Australia). The US cannot withstand the second Cold War on its own. Just as a Europe on its own would eventually evaporate in the hot rays of the Eastern sun.

The COVID-19 pandemic, which has yet to be overcome and for now seems unstoppable, has hammered another nail into the coffin of contemporary globalisation. Travel bubbles are forming; eventually, economic, digital and IT bubbles will form. In the short and intermediate-term, the European Union will have no other recourse than to strengthen its bubble.

However, in order to survive in this Cold War, Europe and the US will have to form a single economic bubble. The military bubble will endure if Europe will through actions, and not just words continue to reinforce its military capacities.

In order to retain the EU bubble, it will be necessary to act in solidarity and make some sacrifices. The British benefit from having the European Union next to them, thus they will have to make the sacrifice of being a living example of how it is possible to leave the EU, but also how the departing country shouldnt expect exceptionally favourable conditions.

The incomprehensible Brexit drama must show the other members of the EU and their voters that exiting this club brings no benefits. Brussels and other EU capitals are currently in a thankless situation: dear British people, we really do love you, but your victory could turn into a loss for all of us in the EU, if not the beginning of the end for the union.

Your success would be the wind in the sails of politicians like Marine Le Pen and parties such as Alternative fr Deutschland, Sverigedemokraterna or Freiheitliche Partei sterreichs.

If Brexit proved successful, political parties and populists would always be able to argue that it is possible to leave the EU because the British negotiated a successful departure, still make use of EU privileges and also pay no contributions!

In order to safeguard the EU, London will have to accede to the demands of the European Union.

For the Germans, the European Union is necessary to facilitate the sales of their goods. As ignoble as this may sound, but so it is. The European Union is a mechanism, which excellently regulates the European Unions metabolism: those, who need more, are given and from those with too much are taken from. Without the European Union, Germany would become too big and strong for Europe, but still too small for the world.

And what this ends with, we know well from the history of the twentieth century. You could even say that the European Unions foundations were laid by the European Coal and Steel Community, which namely was created to rein in the German horses in the future. One must say that the Germans, in understanding they would struggle to cope with their powers, are very fairly paying Southern Europeans and later also Eastern Europeans.

Unfortunately, this cannot continue forever because other than the Germans, there are also other thrifty members of the EU, who do not hold guilt over the Second World War. Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz recently mentioned in an interview with the German Der Spiegel that he understands well the desire of Italy, Spain and France to receive more funding from the thrifty Swedes, Austrians, Danes and Dutch.

But the chancellor very accurately noted that Nevertheless, I believe that our task is also to represent our own taxpayers. A decision must be found, but without losing a sense of satiety.

Solidarity is needed, but it is required on both sides. Living La Dolce Vita is my right, but arranging my finances based on the Northern European model thats not for us! Unfortunately, the members of Club Med do not want to reform despite wanting to live as well off as the Germans.

This model is not sustainable and cannot last. I was convinced of this while strolling through the third-largest city in Italy Naples. Italian voters unwilling to change this model could elect Eurosceptics and launch an ItalExit.

But the frustrated German voters could also choose the AfD and organise a GerExit. Europe could survive without Italy (yes, it is the third-largest economy and also the French and German bankers would disagree). But without Germany, the European Union is doomed to fall.

Sustainable economic solidarity is one of the core conditions for the survival and thriving of the EU. However, common values are no less important for a sustainable future for the European Union. The European Union, perhaps the most successful union of countries in all of history, was created by countries, which held common values of Western liberal democracy.

This union gained such success because the values were maintained, and the union was created on the basis of these liberal democratic values. New or old liberal democracies adhered to this unions rules and norms. Turkey sought to become a member of the EU since 1964. Still, it is very dubious whether it will happen because Turkey while being an important country in terms of economy, is not a liberal democracy.

The Baltic States and most of the former Warsaw Pact countries successfully became liberal democracies and were accepted into the EU. The prospect of being accepted into one of the most successful clubs in the world encouraged the Baltic, Central, and Eastern European states to transform. The prospect of losing membership in the EU could also encourage countries to nurture liberal democracy and could deter countries from veering off to illiberal democracy.

A few bad apples could spoil the whole bag of apples.

Governments and countries turning into illiberal democracies should develop these without making use of the fruits of liberal democracy. Mechanisms should be created to bar such countries from the EUs structural funds and voting rights. If this fails to encourage everyone to adhere to common liberal democratic norms, such countries should be expelled from the union.

Changes are already visible and felt, thus a time for big decisions is nearing. The established world order is changing and storm clouds are forming on the horizon. Even under current troubles in the US, it is likely that President Donald Trump will be re-elected for a second term.

If this were to happen, the deterioration of the current global order would accelerate further and the notion of Perhaps we failed to understand something will emerge increasingly often.

However, this process would proceed regardless of who wins the elections in Washington. Everyone knows that when making an omelette, eggs will have to be broken. Lithuania is fortunate to have become a member of two of the most powerful alliances.

We must strive for these alliances to gain strength and where needed to further integrate. We will have to sacrifice much, but only together do we stand a chance at surviving. Failing to understand this will bring an end to the West as we know it.

This article is part of the #DemocraCE project. A Lithuanian version will be available on 15min.lt.

Link:

Perhaps We Don't Understand?- The End of the West - Visegrad Insight

WHO IS RICK STEINER AND WHY DOES HE HATE THE FLAG ON FLATTOP?

Anchorage environmentalist and retired University of Alaska biology professor Rick Steiner says that the American flag on top of Flattop Mountain represents an abuse of power by the Dunleavy Administration and Rep. Laddie Shaw of Anchorage.

For decades, a flag has flown on top of one of the iconic hiking experiences in the Anchorage bowl, and scores of hikers make the flagpole their destination so they can take a picture of themselves at the flag.

Chugach State Park rangers have been taking the flag down, and patriots have been replacing it for years. The flag fight went on because its against State of Alaska policy to fly flags in State-owned parks.

Rep. Shaw has, for years, hiked the peak and replaced the flag.

He did so this past week with Reps. Sara Rasmussen, Lance Pruitt, and Kelly Merrick, all who represent Anchorage. The four huffed and puffed their way to the 3,510-foot peak to take away the tattered Old Glory, and put a fresh flag in its place.

Shaw has a conditional use permit from the Department of Natural Resources to place the flag there, although according to Steiner, this was an illegal action by the Dunleavy Administration.

A permanent flag on Flattop in CSP clearly serves no recreational or bona-fide park purpose whatsoever. As such, the permit for this flag must be rescinded, the flag removed, and no other such permit should ever be issued in any state park, as per state park policy, Steiner wrote, saying that Alaskans climbing Flattop come face-to-face with yet another abuse of power and public process by the Dunleavy administration an illegally permitted American flag on the summit.

Steiner says the conditional use permit that Shaw has circumvented the public process and he goes on to say it was issued at an illegal meeting between Shaw and DNR.

Steiners name also appears on the official application for a recall petition against Gov. Mike Dunleavy, and he is a frequent critic of Dunleavy and President Donald J. Trump.

SHAW HELPS RETIRE FLAG WITH EAGLE SCOUTS

On June 15, Rep. Shaw spent the afternoon with Scout Troop 210 at Mirror Lakes Camp Gorsuch, and brought some of the old and tattered flags that he had replaced over the years on Flattop Mountain. He spoke to the scouts about the symbology of the flag and then participated in a retiring ceremony for the tattered emblems over a bonfire.

Every person forms their ownrelationship with our flag. For me, my relationship to it is shaped by the years I spent serving under that flag, and the legacies of the men and women I served with some of whom never returned home, said Shaw a retired Navy SEAL.

I want to thank the troop leaders for inviting me to tell the scouts about my relationship with the flag, and to share some of my experiences as a veteran and a legislator with our young scouts. What an impressive group of future leaders, he said.

READERS, WEIGH IN

Should the flag on Flattop Mountain remain or should it be prohibited? Leave your comments and vote in Must Read Alaskas poll on Facebook.

Like Loading...

More here:

Flag flap: Retired UA prof says the American flag on Flattop is abuse of power by Dunleavy Administration - Must Read Alaska

Normal text sizeLarger text sizeVery large text size

Like many mining executives, Jean-Sebastien Jacques has been trying to "change the barbecue conversation". Eager to promote minings contribution to human progress and prosperity, yet knowing full well that perceptions of greed and environmental damage loom large in the publics mind, sometimes this can seem like a losing fight.

"I hate to tell you," the Rio Tinto chief once said. "Our industry is one of the least-trusted on the planet."

In 2018, Jacques invoked Oscar-winning movie Avatars portrayal of miners - inflicting destruction on a fictional moon and displacing its Indigenous inhabitants in pursuit of the mineral "unobtainium" - to drive home the point hes been pressing for years: "We need to be better at telling our story."

Which is why for many in the industry and investment community, Rio Tintos destruction of two ancient Aboriginal rock shelters at Western Australias Juukan Gorge last month came as something of a shock. The saga has devastated the areas traditional owners, incensed the Australian public and, in an instant, made the task of repairing minings image problem seem a whole lot harder.

Rio Tinto's CEO Jean-Sebastien Jacques in Melbourne.Credit:Josh Robenstone

Expectations around the role of business in society continue to ratchet upwards and the world is growing increasingly sensitive to social and environmental issues. At the same time, money managers are placing exponentially more importance on how companies minimise these risks, commonly referred to as ESG (environmental, social, governance). Nowhere is this more apparent than in "high-impact" industries such as mining.

The inclusion of ESG into financial decision-making is based on an understanding that such issues will increasingly present a financial risk to investments and ought to be considered alongside other performance metrics. ESG pressure in recent years has been most evident in lobbying the mining sector on climate change action. At risk of being screened out by ESG-conscious investors and seeing their shares dumped, many of the worlds top miners have ploughed billions of dollars into carbon-reduction initiatives, investing in renewable energy generation, signing up to goals to become "net-zero" emitters and where possible reducing their exposure to the heaviest-polluting fossil fuels.

But there is now a gathering verdict in the investment community that the Juukan Gorge disaster is setting the scene for heightened focus on the S or "social" side of ESG. This will lift scrutiny of a long-running but often unspoken problem that has been lying beneath the mining sector for decades: an extreme power imbalance between miners and the Indigenous custodians of land on which they often operate.

Some difficult questions are now being asked. Do the lands traditional owners have enough protections? And should there be instances in which significant sites must be permanently protected, no matter the amount of compensation offered?

We wouldnt ever think of blowing up the pyramids because theres a coal seam underneath.

Some investors and governance experts are likening the significance of Rio's Juukan Gorge saga to Australias banking royal commission, which focused the public on systemic issues that breached community standards.

"The banking royal commission has a lot of parallels with this in as much as it really raised an underlying issue that was a point of contention with the community before and turned it into a catalyst for regulatory action," says Zoe Whitton, head of ESG at Citigroup.

"Both industries - mining and banking - have to perennially renegotiate their bargain with society, their licences to operate. These feel like catalyst moments in those renegotiations."

For nearly 30 years since traditional ownership rights were recognised in Australia, Indigenous owners in WAs iron ore-rich Pilbara have been entering into legally binding native title agreements with mining companies, under which miners provide valuable royalty streams - a share in economic prosperity which they have long been denied - in exchange for the impact to their land and cultural heritage.

As far as the law is concerned, however, WA legislation gives no right of review to landowners after a decision has been reached, and no state or Commonwealth acts offer traditional owners the ability to veto projects that would harm significant artefacts or sites.

"Its a right to sit at the table, its not a right to say no," Griffith University law professor Kate Galloway says.

Wiradjuri man and chief executive of the NSW Aboriginal Land Council James Christian says the Juukan gorge blast shows the laws designed to protect ancient Indigenous history are broken. "It is an indictment on the archaic policies across the country which continually fail to protect the cultural legacy and heritage of First Nations people," he says.

The imbalance of power sits at the heart of Rio Tintos controversy at Juukan Gorge. There is no dispute about the legality of Rio's actions, obtaining all necessary legal approvals and consent back in 2013, nor is there dispute about the significance of the Juukan Gorge site, which has evidence of continual human occupation stretching back a staggering 46,000 years.

The mining giant led investigations in 2014 which revealed the site to be more significant than first thought, and then collaborated with the traditional owners - the Puutu Kunti Kurrama and Pinikura Aboriginal Corporation - to retrieve key artefacts so that they could be preserved.

What is being disputed is whether Rio Tinto was aware of any formal requests by the traditional owners that the site itself be preserved following the finding of the artefacts and went ahead with it anyway, a claim that Rio denies. Regardless, Rio has apologised unreservedly and committed to a board-led review of its bungled decision and heritage management policies.

Should there be a line drawn in the trade-off between Aboriginal heritage and the economic benefits of developing a resource, and where should that line be? In the wash-up of the Juukan Gorge disaster, its a question on the minds of many in the mining and investment communities.

"We wouldnt ever think of blowing up the pyramids because theres a coal seam underneath," one Rio Tinto investor said. "We do need to have a serious conversation."

"Wherever the line is," one mining insider said, "the public clearly thinks Juukan Gorge was on the wrong side of it."

What happened at Juukan Gorge and the adequacy of the frameworks that failed to protect the site are set to be reviewed under a parliamentary inquiry to be headed by Liberal MP Warren Entsch, which will recommend legislative changes required to prevent this happening again.

"The existing process is very much focused on agreeing on compensation, its never been about undertaking not to mine," Citi's Whitton explains. "I suspect the process we are about to go through will result in being able to protect some sites permanently, which would be a huge change. The community response has very much been that some sites, some artefacts, should not be destroyed."

WA Aboriginal Affairs Minister Ben Wyatt has been under fire for granting approvals to BHP and Rio Tinto.Credit:Lauren Pilat

However, there are some concerns of reforms in this area going too far. Western Australia Treasurer Ben Wyatt, an Indigenous man, is an advocate of traditional owners' self-determination. Although deeply critical of the failing's of WA's heritage legislation which failed to prevent Juukan Gorge's destruction, he is cautious about growing calls for government intervention in traditional owners' negotiations.

"Well-meaning third parties can't say self-determination that we support is fine but can only take place on the terms that we insist upon," he told Perth radio 6PR. "Aboriginal people are going to make decisions that they make in their own interests and I support that self-determination."

In the weeks that followed the Juukan Gorge disaster, a groundswell of concern about threats to Indigenous sites has been spreading across the Pilbara, and then across the country. Australias top miner, BHP, put on hold plans to destroy dozens of Aboriginal sites as part of its South Flank iron ore mine. And in NSW, a fresh legal push by the Gomeroi people to halt the destruction of ancient spear marks, burial sites and ceremonial grounds at a proposed open-cut coal mine being developed by China Shenhua Energy near Gunnedah, has put the topic of reform back on the agenda in the state parliament.

Aberdeen Standard Investments, one of the top shareholders of BHP and Rio Tinto, says the response from the investment community following the Juukan disaster has been significant, in part due to the ever-rising awareness among asset owners and managers of the importance of ESG risks and their ability to act and engage rapidly when issues like these arise.

Danielle Welsh-Rose, Aberdeens ESG investment director for Asia-Pacific, says there appeared to be a heightened focus on traditional owner issues emerging across the industry and a likely reframing of the sector's social licence to operate.

"Weve already seen BHP pausing part of their expansion project in South Flank, and there are commentators talking about whether some sites should be permanently protected for environmental and social value," Welsh-Rose tells the Age and Herald. "That will become part of the broader conversation, where it hasnt been part of the conversation before."

As well, the investment company says, the timing of the gorges destruction coinciding with the Black Lives Matter movement sweeping the world has "amplified" wider concerns surrounding inequality.

"The intersection with the global Black Lives Matter movement means there is a lot of extra scrutiny because of this inequality conversation," Welsh-Rose says.

"Changing community expectations do lead to pressure on companies and pressure on investors to change, and that might speed up any changes that happen in this area."

Mary Delahunty, the head of impact at $52 billion super fund HESTA, says the investment community has undertaken a crash course in traditional owner land rights following the "horror of Rios issues".

"Ive learnt more about this in the last two weeks then I have through all my formal education," she says. "There is room for improvement, we are really conscious to do that very quickly."

The failure of mining companies to demonstrate robust processes for engaging with traditional owners could have consequences that go far beyond a hit to their reputation.

Similar to the aftermath of Australias banking royal commission, social issues often such as these end up being prosecuted through tougher regulatory reforms and much higher cost of compliance, says Whitton.

"In this case, you can well and truly imagine the response to this being an Indigenous consultation framework that is even more thorough than the existing one, and an approval process that is more thorough than the existing one," she says. "And these will weigh on costs."

What is also likely to happen, she says, is boards of poorly performing companies will find themselves on the receiving end of significant investor demands both in behind-the-scenes engagements and facing the threat of protest votes at their annual general meetings, as well as greater attention from investor activists.

While miners, investors and lawmakers ponder what change might look like, First Nations people like Gomeroi man Steve Talbott are doubtful at the likelihood of being given a meaningful say.

"Every time they change the act its not for the better its for the worse. You go around every state in the country and theyre watering down the culture and heritage act," he says. "Its just frustrating. Its like banging your head against a brick wall. Weve been fighting and arguing the point for years."

Talbott, who has been working in land rights since 1983, says traditional owners need to be given veto power over projects that destroy culturally significant sites and gag orders that prevent Indigenous groups objecting publicly to works must not be used.

"Weve been told for over 230 years by governments whats important to us and what isnt. Its about time, we as Aboriginal people, stood up and took control of our own culture rather than people telling us whats important."

Business reporter for The Age and Sydney Morning Herald.

Charlotte is a reporter for The Age.

See the rest here:

Rocked to the core: Mining giants confront an ancient, incalculable risk - Sydney Morning Herald

As I mentioned before, exposure to true information does not matter anymore. A person who is demoralised is unable to assess true information. The facts tell him nothing, even if I shower him with information, with authentic proof, with documents and pictures.he will refuse to believe it Thats the tragedy of the situation of demoralisation.Yuri Bezmenov [1983]

Providence seem to have played out an uncannily similar script for two disparate communities, namely the Jews and the Bengali Hindus, divided by geography but united in tragedy. Both communities boast of illustrious citizens, great thinkers, scientists, philosophers and poets, great minds who made a difference to the world. Both have also suffered a fair share of genocide and ethnic cleansing. While the Jews have suffered ages of religious persecution culminating in the Final Solution by the Nazi, the Bengali Hindus have endured the likes of Great Calcutta Killing, Noakhali Genocide and the 1971 pogrom, orchestrated by genocidal Islamists like Hussain Sohrawardy, Yahya Khan and others of their ilk.

Yet there is a third similarity in the terms of the concept of The Promised Land, bestowed upon Abraham and his descendants, which if extrapolated to modern times would translate to Homeland For the Jewish People. The concept of the Promised Land is the central tenet of Zionism whose discourse fortify the legitimacy of the state of Israel.

On 20 June 1947, legislators from predominantly Hindu western part of Bengal at the Bengal Legislative Assembly voted against the inclusion of western Bengal in Pakistan and for the Partition of Bengal to create West Bengal, the Promised Land for the Bengali Hindus and include it in the Indian Union marking the culmination of the Hindu Homeland movement at the backdrop of gruesome genocide during the Partition.

The Messiah was none other than Dr Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, whose superhuman efforts in the face of insurmountable odd, ensured that India retained a third of Bengal, a sanctuary for Bengali Hindus to live with dignity and honor, safe from the unspeakable atrocities of the Muslim league, corroborated by the terrible fate suffered by their co-religionists unfortunate enough to be trapped in the Eastern part of Pakistan. 20th June, the birthday of West Bengal, is fondly remembered as a symbol of victory of Hindu Bengal against Islamist Tyranny. It is proudly remembered that while Jinnah divided India, Shyama divided Pakistan a moth-eaten Pakistan by Jinnahs own admission.

The similarity between the Hindu Bengalis and the Jews ends right here. The Jews have remembered and documented every single atrocity committed on their people in the form of literature, art, sculpture and movies since they have realized that those who forget history, are condemned to repeat it. The Holocaust have been immortalised in Oscar winning Schindlers List, scripted by the Jewish Filmmaker Steven Spielberg. The Jews have fought and kept the surrounding malevolent Arabs at bay, with the resolve Next Year in Jerusalem.

The case with the Bengali Hindus on the other hand is that of selective amnesia coupled with a liberal dose of Stockholm Syndrome. West Bengal boasts of a plethora of Intellectuals, authors, poets, and filmmakers who have scripted an abundance of tearjerkers on the plight of the refugees but have never bothered to elaborate the root cause for their misery, not even in whispers lest it ruffle liberal feathers. This self-imposed censorship spawned generations of zombies oblivious of their past, clueless about the present and defenseless about the clear and present danger which stares them in the eye.

This business of whitewashing stooped down to such a ridiculous level that a prominent Bengali daily photoshopped the picture of a Bangladeshi Hindu riot victim to remove her vermillion mark, lest it disturb the fragile religious equilibrium by betraying her religious identity. While the progenies of these refugees proudly flash their Bangladeshi ancestry in matrimonial advertisements and boast of huge landed ancestral property in Bangladesh, it is often mentioned in a lighter vein that if all these forgone lands as claimed by the refugees are added up, might actually overshoot the boundary of Bangladesh itself. However the topic never discussed is the raison detre of their mass migration, often in rags leaving their treasured lands. Or the topic is trivialized to the extent that the refugee crisis looks like a tourist immigration procedure. The fanatical football fans never ask the loaded question as to why East Bengal Club is in West Bengal but not where the name is suggestive of. Expectation of a spirited exaltation like Next Year in Dhaka or Faridpur or Barisal seem like only a pipe dream.

The decadence of West Bengal commenced after the demise of its founder Dr Shyama Prasad Mukherjee when the treacherous communists stepped in to fill in the void. The refugee movement was hijacked and their tyrannical reign set off the Bengali Hindu homeland in self-destruction mode. The rot that set in, continues to fester till date, prompting ridicule of the promised land as Waste Bengal.

The first onslaught of the Left front was on the basic premise of the creation of West Bengal, its demography favouring a Hindu majority. The farcical LiaquatNehru Pact ensured that population exchange never took place in West Bengal, as it happened for Punjab. The Muslim minority of India stayed put and prospered, whereas the Hindu Minority of East Pakistan was hounded out wave after wave. The left front encouraged Muslim infiltration from Bangladesh and created a captive vote bank for themselves after legitimizing their locus standi with fake documents, which was one of the trade secrets of their 34-year mammoth tenure in West Bengal.

This policy of legitimizing the Muslim infiltration drastically altered the demography of bordering districts resulting in the mass migration of Hindus to other regions, given the lack of safety and security from these unchecked infiltrations. The circumstances of their migration can be summed from a jeer popular among Bangladeshi criminals Taka rakhbi Banke, Goru rakhbi campe, Bou rakhbi kothay. Meaning you can keep your money secure in banks, your cattle in BSF camps, but how will you ensure the security of your wives?

During the Communist satrap Jyoti Basus iron curtain rule from 1981 to 1991, West Bengals percentage of Population growth exceeded that of India. Curiously while the Hindu population growth percentage declined, Muslim population growth increased from 29.55% to 36.89%. The demographic calamity that should have been defused with alacrity, was quietly kept in the back burner and allowed to fester where the sun never shines. Indias first Communist Home Minister Indrajit Gupta estimated the number of infiltrators to be around 1 crore on 6th May 1990. If the figure is extrapolated to the current date, alarm bells should be ringing at the highest quarters.

As per the census of 2011, the Muslim population in West Bengal is 27.2%, a jump of eight percentage points from the population of 19% in 1950. Another terrifying factor, is the demographic distribution of children between 0-6years. While the Muslim population was 25.2% in 1991, their children were 33.17%.This is a harbinger of the future of the demography of West Bengal, the very foundation of its being. To reap the fruits of the demographic dividend, the number of Bidhan Sabha seats declined in Hindu dominated areas and increased in Muslim dominated border areas like Murshidabad, Malda and Dinajpur. No political party worth its salt can ignore this trend. This altered demography is at the root of the howling in unison when CAA was formalised in parliament.

During their tyrannical rule, the ruling left tried every trick in the book to break the back of the Bengali Hindus, from massacring Hindu refugees in Marichjhapi, to trivializing the rape of Hindu women as a routine affair. Orkom to kotoi hoi (It is just another one of the routine crimes) remarked Jyoti Basu with characteristic nonchalance on the infamous Bantala Rape and murder case. The cycle of communal violence during the left reign was majorly censored owing to their stranglehold over the local press and administration and absence of the electronic media.

The present Trinamool Congress regime has turned Communal riots into some sort of a cottage industry but owing to the abundance of social media, such occurrences can no longer be hidden from public discourse. Hence different localities of West Bengal, like Baduria, Kaliachak, Dhulagarh and the latest Telenipara pop up on the national radar for the wrong reasons, betraying the ticking time bomb that West Bengal really is.

Another nail in the coffin of West Bengal was implanted by left front was in the form of 10% reservation for Muslims in government jobs and education even though it is downright unconstitutional. The present incumbent has improved upon the act by including 97% of the Muslims in OBC A category, paving the way for future dominance of Muslims in the administrative machinery. Another well-known legacy of the Left Front is the destruction of West Bengals industry. The former Sheffield of the East is now only a shadow of its former self thanks to the militant trade unionism of the left front. The disgruntled unemployed population, dependent on party doles, was easy picks for the ruling party to bolster their ranks and deployed as muscle during the state election.

The final and the deadliest assault were at the soul of Hindu Bengali consciousness, their traditions and culture. When the socialist revolution failed to materialise beyond the Soviet Union, Marxist thinkers like Antonio Gramsci and Georg Lukacs tried a root cause analysis. Their answer was that culture and religion blunted the proletariats revolutionary fervour, and the solution was that Marxists should carry out a long march through the institutions universities and schools, government bureaucracies and the media so that cultural values could be progressively altered to suit their purpose.

West Bengal was a text book case of a vision of Cultural Marxism in action.

The left front through its stranglehold over administration, media,intellectuals, and elite university campuses controlled the narrative in West Bengal. Age old traditions, religious beliefs, notions of nationalism were ridiculed to be replaced by their own versions of atheism and the utopia of classless society. There was a written circular for the deletion of the mention of Islamic atrocities from text books. Nationalism was dirty world in the lexicon of the left and imported Communist icons like Lenin, Marx and Stalin adorned the walls of many Bengali households. Ridiculing Hindu symbolism was hailed as progressive while turning a blind eye to similar dogma practiced by Islamists was an established norm.

A notorious case in point is a piece of pornographic poetry called Mahayan carefully spread and popularised by radical atheist cabals which directed blasphemous sexual slurs at Hindu Gods, like Ram, Sita and Hanuman, ignoring Bengals age-old reverence to these deities. There was another furor, when Left Front Strongman Subhash Chakraborty visited the famous Tarapith temple and claimed his identity as a Hindu and a Brahmin. Consequently, his stakes dropped rapidly in the corridors of power and was swiftly banished from Marxist paradise by the all-pervasive Politburo. While liberals of Kolkata exploded in protest at the slightest pretext on topics as diverse as the atrocities in Vietnam to the plight of the potato farmers in Limpopo, or the vanishing penguins in Antarctica, their acute myopia and apathy with respect to unspeakable beast-like treatment ironically against their co-religionists in their own backyard, namely Islamic Republic Of Bangladesh is a case study in itself.

The progressive intellectuals of the left front stable, spawned truckloads of literature, films and plays glorifying interfaith romance, only when the man is a Muslim and the woman is a Hindu but never ever the other way round as a sort of unwritten convention. They understood that the threat to life and limb exists from the Islamists, unlike from the brainwashed zombified Bengali Hindus. A popular example being Sunil Gangopadhyays novel Dhulibasan where an elite married woman with a married NRI daughter settles down with a Muslim Rif-raff in rural Sundarbans who attempted to rape her previously. These supari literature and motion pictures aimed at societal behaviour modification were celebrated as highest forms of Literature in leftist circles, promoted by the state machinery and rewarded in cash and kind.

The tradition of cultural aggression continues till date under the present regime. Some prominent examples being selective distortion of school syllabus, changing the Bengali word for rainbow Ramdhanu to Rangdhanu in keeping with pseudo-secular conventions. Some other equally ridiculous examples being Ram came from the word roaming, and the latest gem, Hussain Shah depicted as the avatar of Krishna. However lacking the subtlety of the crafty left, their brazen attempts at social re-engineering have almost always resulted in social media outrage and grabbed media headlines,only to be left with egg on their face.

Another subtle attempt is to rename West Bengal as Bangla, so that a curious teenager in the future would never ask the loaded question, where is East Bengal? Effectively burying the brutal history of partition. The aim is the ultimate Dhimmification of the Bengali Hindus, for easy assimilation into Greater Bangladesh, just like a boa constrictor softens its prey before swallowing it.

We must understand that West Bengal is not merely a landmass, but a concept. It was a statement of defiance against the Islamists who wanted Calcutta to be the capital of Pakistan. With the digital revolution and the social media phenomenon and the blatant Muslim appeasement of the present regime, the youth of Bengal are longer susceptible to the narratives that leftist cabals dish out to them. They are now asking uncomfortable questions beyond comprehension of the apologists. The panic reaction of the administration has been brutal state repression and stoking fires of Bengali sub nationalism through splinter groups.

These fringe elements are working overtime to drive a wedge between Bengali Hindus and rest of India with their vitriol in National media. With the stellar performance of Nationalist elements in the last Lok Sabha elections, these fringe elements have been temporarily relegated to the sidelines along with their mentors but are by no means dead and looking for the opportune moment to strike.

Rest of India has strong role to play for the consolidation of nationalism in Bengal. They must understand that to stop Ghazwa-e-Hind in its tracks, Indias Eastern flank must be protected. It should not be forgotten that the British domination of India started with the battle of Plassey in Bengal. The difference in threat perceptions from the eastern and western flanks must be analysed and acted upon. To drive home a Medical analogy, the security threat from Pakistan is like malaria, predictable and easily detectable through its symptoms and cured by medicine. On the other hand, the threat from Islamic Bangladesh is like Diabetes, not easily detected until at a fatal stage. The nationalists of Bengal need to be distinguished supported and not stereotyped as Communists by the rest of India.

For the Bengali Hindus, West Bengal is our last stand and need to be protected at all costs or be permanently stateless like the Sindhis and Kashmiri Pandits.

The future is uncertain but certainly not hopeless. Such a vision in indeed possible in the future where the bloodlines of Khudiram Bose, Surya Sen, Rashbehari Bose and Bagha Jatin will meet under the ruins of a Lenin statue over a steaming earthen cup of tea and greet with Next Year In Dhaka.

Author: AbhishekSen

AbhishekSenis a West Bengal based Business Consultant for consumer goods sector, political analyst and blogger. A travel enthusiast with an avid interest in the stock market.

The rest is here:

West Bengal- The Israel for Hindu Bengalis? Its time to redeem the pledge on the day Bengal was partitioned - OpIndia

Last month, the Ham & High reported a row over the postponement of Haringey Councils Annual Meeting by a full year to next May. Opposition Liberal Democrats leader Liz Morris claimed the councils Labour leader, Joseph Ejiofor, had driven through the decision unilaterally behind closed doors and that it would have been perfectly possible for her group and the Labour majority to agree to hold the meeting by remote means far sooner as, indeed, a number other council meetings have been since. The Lib Dems also suggested the move was prompted by internal Labour politics rather than the Covid-19 crisis. Some Labour councillors agree. How can that be?

As ever with Haringeys Labour Group, the story is sprawling, tangled and discordant. Recent history provides helpful context. As regular readers know, Ejiofor secured his position as leader after a campaign led by Haringey Momentum, supported by sundry non-Labour allies and egged on by a Guardian columnist, to deselect sitting Labour councillors prior to the May 2018 council elections and replace them with candidates more to their taste. This resulted in the then council leader Claire Kober standing down and an in-flow of Corbynites to the Labour Group. After the elections, which Labour won with a reduced majority, Ejiofor, a senior Momentumite, was elected leader of the Group and therefore became council leader too. But not everyone was happy and there has been talk of plots against him ever since.

Ejiofor has had recurring problems with his cabinet. In October 2018 Ishmael Osamor son of Edmonton MP Kate Osamor resigned after pleading guilty to drugs charges. Two months later, on 31 December 2018, Ejiofor enlivened New Years Eve for councillors Zena Brabazon and Peray Ahmet by sacking them amid claims and counter-claims about leaks to the media. Brabazon had run against Ejiofor become the Labour leader and had been favoured by local Labour members. The following March, cabinet member for finance Pat Berryman resigned, and two months after that Brabazon was back in the cabinet after Labour Group members elected her as their deputy leader in preference to Ejiofor ally and cabinet member for housing Emine Ibrahim. Following precedent, Brabazon was made deputy council leader too and returned to the cabinet. A moderate, Elin Weston, was jettisoned to make way for her to take on responsibility for children and families.

For a year, the cabinet revolving door stopped turning. But Ejiofors internal critics did not go away. The Annual Meeting what other boroughs would call an Annual General Meeting postponement infuriated some of them, who say the Labour Group was by-passed when it should have been consulted. Then, a month later, Ejiofor sacked Brabazon for a second time, saying she had failed to keep him informed about a court case relating to the protection of two vulnerable children. Brabazon, though saying it would be wrong to address the specific claims against her, has defended her record.

The way at least some of Ejiofors critics tell it, both Brabazons latest dismissal and the Annual Meeting postponement should be understood within the wider context of discontent within the Labour Group. What are the reasons for it? One councillor says Labours crushing general election defeat last year and the partys change of leader to Keir Starmer has caused some colleagues, previously seduced by the radical rhetoric of the Corbyn years, to review their positions. Conversely, there are complaints that Ejiofors administration, once dubbed the nations first Corbyn Council by a local activist, has been failing to stick to manifesto commitments, including on supplying council housing.

A virtual meeting of the cabinet on Tuesday considered a report on the councils housing delivery programme, which Ibrahim, who has remained cabinet member for housing, expressed pride in. The document describes progress towards the councils target of delivering 1,000 council homes for council rent by 2022 and sets out an initial assessment of the likely impact on it of the Covid-19 crisis, including its viability. The introduction says construction has begun on 331 such homes on seven different sites and the prospective locations for further homes have been established.

The report says sufficient land has been identified to accommodate the full 1,000, much of it on infill sites basically spaces on and around existing estates or involving the conversion of shops into dwellings, or the redevelopment of larger pieces of council-owned land. But it also notes that the pandemic has meant the suspension of work on all sites where construction work had begun and that because of this, even though enough planning consents and even starts on construction to eventually reach 1,000 homes might have happened by May 2022, the number of completions is likely to be severely curtailed. Potential Covid-related limitations on the councils ability to borrow the money it needs are also spelled out.

The report on the housing programme has prompted some backbench vexation. There has been some, perhaps rather purist, objection to the definition of a council home used, such as including dwellings secured through Section 106s deals with private developers or bought from other owners. Ibrahim is unimpressed by such arguments. Whats important is tenure, rent and the landlord, she says. Who built these homes means absolutely nothing to the thousands of families on our waiting list. She also defends the likely slippage of the target date for completing the 1,000 homes, a major manifesto pledge. Whilst the global pandemic will inevitably delay our completions, the safety of workers across the construction industry is of paramount importance to me. She adds: That should not be put at risk for those who wish to play politics. We promised our residents 1,000 council homes and we will deliver those, and the next 1,000.

Another seam of complaint seems to be not so much the reasons given for the likely delay in completing the 1,000 homes as an alleged failure to provide the Labour Group with an opportunity to discuss those reasons and their implications. And here, perhaps, is where any post-Corbynite re-think tendency (which is not especially vocal or coherent) and the diehard backbench Corbynites within the Group (who certainly do exist) find common ground a contention that Ejiofor and those most loyal to him make big decisions without involving them.

That, at any rate, is the heart of the case being made by Labour Group members exercised about the postponement of the Annual Meeting. It is important to stress that that decision was taken in accordance with provisions in the councils constitution. This says in relation to the Annual Meeting: The Mayor or Deputy Mayor may in any case when he/she considers it necessary following consultation with the Leader alter the date or time of it. Even so, critics of Ejiofor, contend that his backing for the long postponement might have quite a lot to do with a desire to forestall a formal leadership challenge not that it is crystal clear that such a challenge would be mounted or succeed.

Its all to do with timing not only of the Councils Annual Meeting, but also of the next Labour Group Annual General Meeting, which dissenters have been viewing as a potential opportunity to vote Ejiofor out. It is usual for Labour Group AGMs to precede council Annual Meetings, which are normally held in May. But, of course, normal procedures have been disrupted by the coronavirus. In March, Labours national governance and legal unit sent out guidance for Labour Groups seeking clarity about conducting their affairs under these difficult new circumstances. This said that while it was vital to follow government rules on controlling the spread of Covid-19, it was also very important to ensure local democracy is not unduly disrupted.

With that in view, the Labour guidance very much in line with that of national government for local authorities said it was fine to conduct entire meetings remotely and that where council AGMs are going ahead, Labour Group AGMs should also go ahead. It also encouraged Groups to consider voting for executive positions (such as leader) by post, email, phone or video conference. However, the guidance also said that Where council AGMs are postponed, Labour Group AGMs should also be postponed. Therefore, if the council Annual [General] Meeting was postponed, the Labour Group one would be too and with it any immediate prospect of a change of Group and council leadership.

So what grounds did Ejiofor have for seeking a year-long postponement of the council AGM when both Labour Party and national government guidance which had been distilled and circulated to councillors by the relevant Haringey officers had encouraged using remote technologies to continue business as usual as far as possible? A curiosity of the saga in that in April, after Labours guidance had been produced, the then director of Labours London region Hazel Flynn she has since been replaced informed Ejiofor that the region had received what she called statutory guidance that Council AGMs did not need to be held until at least September 2020. The source of this statutory guidance, which contradicted both Labours and the governments, remains mysterious.

There was also discussion between Ejiofor and Liz Morris about what to do about the council Annual Meeting. The Lib Dems maintain that it had been perfectly possible to agree to hold it in July, but that Ejiofor had gone ahead with the year-long postponement anyway hence the Lib Dem remark that internal Labour politics had been a greater consideration than adapting to the constraints of Covid-19. Likewise, a Labour critic of Ejiofor says the Group would probably have supported July dates for both meetings had they been given the chance. Several boroughs have rescheduled their AGMs for the near future and it is pointed out that Hounslow, which, like Haringey, has put it back by a full year, has publicly explained its decision at some length.

On London has invited Ejiofor to discuss the whole affair, but he has yet to respond. In fairness, he probably has more pressing matters on his mind.

Image of Joseph Ejiofor from Haringey Council remote overview and scrutiny committee, 26 May 2020.

OnLondon.co.uk is committed to providing the best possible coverage of Londons politics, development, social issues and culture. It depends on donations from readers. Individual sums or regular monthly contributions are very welcome indeed. Click here to donate via PayPal or contact davehillonlondon@gmail.com. Thank you.

Related

More:

Haringey: Further tales of Labour Party discontent on the 'Corbyn... - onlondon.co.uk