In one sense, this has been a difficult period for Fox News: a star anchor fired after being accused of sexual harassment, a lawsuit depicting a misogynist workplace, a top writer exposed as a racist internet troll, advertiser boycotts and outrage after Tucker Carlson called protesters criminal mobs and questioned the patriotism of a senator who lost her legs in Iraq.

In another sense, business has never been better.

In June and July, Fox News was the highest-rated television channel in the prime-time hours of 8 to 11 p.m. Not just on cable. Not just among news networks. All of television. The average live Fox News viewership in those hours outstripped cable rivals like CNN, MSNBC and ESPN, as well as the broadcast networks ABC, CBS and NBC, according to Nielsen.

That three-hour slot is a narrow but significant slice of TV real estate, and it is exceedingly rare for a basic-cable channel to outrank the Big Three broadcasters, which are available in more households and offer a wider variety of programming.

Even the return of live sports did little to stop the momentum: The Fox News programs hosted by Mr. Carlson and Sean Hannity drew more live viewers than competing baseball and basketball games, including a Yankees-Nationals matchup on Opening Day.

Fox Newss big summer has been boosted by a rise in audience for news programming in general, an increase driven by interest in the pandemic, civil rights protests and the presidential election. ABC, CBS, and NBC, meanwhile, have more reruns on the summer schedule; the coronavirus has suspended most TV productions; and viewers are being lured away by streaming services and on-demand Hollywood movies.

But the Fox News ratings also demonstrate the size and resilience of Americas audience for pro-Trump opinion, and the loyalty of Fox News viewers who shrug off the controversies that routinely swirl around the network.

Massive news events that conservatives view through a highly partisan lens are driving the ratings, and none of the controversies really land with loyal Fox News viewers, said Nicole Hemmer, a scholar at Columbia University and a historian of American conservative media.

Lachlan Murdoch, the executive chairman of Fox Newss parent company, bragged on an earnings call last week about the networks astronomical ratings. He also said its ad revenue was up from a year ago a reminder that Fox News, for all the flak it takes from critics, politicians and the advertisers that fled Mr. Carlson, remains an unrivaled profit engine for the Murdoch empire.

Complaints that Fox News prime-time hosts downplayed the coronavirus and, in the case of Laura Ingraham, encouraged the use of hydroxychloroquine, a drug shown to be useless, and even dangerous, for Covid-19 patients made little difference.

The belief that hydroxychloroquine is something between a therapeutic and a miracle cure is wildly popular in conservative media, especially talk radio, Ms. Hemmer said. Tucker Carlsons controversies have never really hurt his ratings, though they have cost him advertisers.

Two days stood out when Fox News ratings fell significantly: the funerals of George Floyd, the Minnesota man who died after a police officer pinned him to the ground during a routine stop, and Representative John Lewis, the towering civil rights figure.

Like its rivals CNN and MSNBC, Fox News carried the memorial services live. During Mr. Floyds funeral, viewership on all three networks dipped. On both occasions, the drop in Fox Newss audience was stark, down to numbers more typically seen during overnight hours. (CNN and Mediaite previously reported on the ratings dips.)

Over all, viewers have shown a strong appetite for news on politics, public health and natural disasters.

The evening newscasts on ABC, CBS and NBC are notching their biggest audiences in years. David Muirs World News Tonight on ABC has been a standout: In July, its episodes were the top 18 telecasts across all of broadcast and cable television, drawing more viewers than usual summertime ratings leaders like NBCs Americas Got Talent.

All three of the network newscasts, which air at 6:30 p.m., draw more viewers than Fox Newss prime-time shows, with Mr. Muir more than doubling Mr. Hannitys average in July.

Cable channels define prime-time as 8 to 11 p.m., but the Big Three broadcasters include the 7 p.m. Sunday slot in their average prime-time audience counts. That is when 60 Minutes airs on CBS another news show that is hugely popular with viewers and the broadcast networks definition of prime time allowed CBS to eke out a win against Fox News in June and July.

But Fox News was the king of 8 to 11 p.m., in part because conservative viewers have few options for right-wing political commentary. Smaller networks like Newsmax and One America News have tried to siphon off viewers but lag far behind.

MSNBC, whose liberal prime time is an ideological inverse to Fox News, has increased its audience from a year ago. But Rachel Maddow, once neck and neck with Mr. Hannity at 9 p.m., has fallen behind all three of Fox Newss prime-time stars in total viewers. Ms. Ingraham, who appears in the less desirable 10 p.m. slot, has drawn more viewers than Ms. Maddow for many months.

Fox News won praise this summer thanks to several news-making interviews with President Trump, including Chris Wallaces grilling on Fox News Sunday and an interview with Harris Faulkner in which Mr. Trump struggled to address racial grievances. Even Mr. Trumps June forum with Mr. Hannity yielded headlines when the president could not name a policy priority for a second term.

But the networks critics say the language of its prime-time hosts can be reckless. Mr. Carlson has faced a particular backlash since Mr. Floyds death in Minneapolis in late May sparked nationwide demonstrations for civil rights.

Major advertisers, including the Walt Disney Company, T-Mobile and Poshmark, boycotted his program as Mr. Carlson denounced the protesters as violent anarchists. Later, the host called Senator Tammy Duckworth, a wounded veteran, a moron and questioned her patriotism. In recent days, Mr. Carlson called former President Barack Obama a greasy politician and wondered if Mr. Floyds death had been caused by drug use rather than being pinned to the ground by a police officer.

Mr. Carlsons ratings have never been higher. And based on Mr. Murdochs telling, the boycott had little effect on Fox Newss bottom line. Mr. Carlsons show has virtually no major sponsors, but many ads were redistributed to other programs on the network. Fox News also continues to make a fortune in so-called carriage fees, the money paid by cable and satellite providers to keep the network in their lineups.

Fox News vigorously defends itself from critics who say its news coverage is biased or its commentators are extreme. When a writer for Mr. Carlson, Blake Neff, resigned in July because of racist and sexist messages he had posted in an online forum, Fox Newss chief executive, Suzanne Scott, publicly denounced his conduct as abhorrent. Mr. Carlson issued a halfhearted mea culpa, saying Mr. Neffs posts were wrong but also warning that his critics would be punished.

Mr. Murdoch was made aware of Mr. Carlsons on-air remarks before the broadcast, according to two people with knowledge of the exchange, which was reported earlier by The Daily Beast.

CBS remains neck-and-neck with Fox News in the 8 to 11 p.m. slot, and could still take the summer crown.

On Wednesday, however, CBS aired what should have been a major draw: the two-hour season premiere of the reality show Big Brother, a rare new episode amid a raft of summer reruns.

Big Brother was seen by an average of 3.7 million live viewers. Tucker Carlson Tonight lured 3.9 million and Hannity just shy of four million the most-watched telecast of the night.

Read more:

Boycotted. Criticized. But Fox News Leads the Pack in Prime Time. - The New York Times

It was a sure thing. And the rematch was a sure thing as well.

But well get back to that.

Democrats and most of the news media have already declared the 2020 Colorado Senate race over and done with.

Oh, sure, U.S. Sen. Cory Gardner has more than $10 million in the bank, and he has been lauded by Democratic Governor Jared Polis for their collaborative work on the coronavirus pandemic. He has a long litany of Colorado accomplishments such as securing permanent financing for the Land and Water Conservation Fund, getting the United States Space Command headquarters located in Colorado Springs, authorizing funding for the Arkansas Valley Conduit water improvement project that had been delayed for almost sixty years, and relocating the national headquarters of the Bureau of Land Management to Grand Junction from Washington, D.C.

But everyone knows the general election is a mere formality even though the recent primary election exposed former Gov. John Hickenloopers ethical lapses and profound weaknesses as a candidate. This is a sure thing!

Hickenlooper defeated underfunded Andrew Romanoff not because of his dogged pursuit of the nomination he claimed he couldnt debate because he needed his sleep but because the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee in Washington, D.C. spent $7 million to drag him across the line.

Hickenlooper is owed this Senate seat! This is a sure thing!

And everyone knows that Colorado is now a deep blue state that will never again elect another Republican for statewide office. Just ask the newly arrived Democratic Socialist political activists who think Colorado politics began when they showed up.

Wasnt Colorado an impregnable Republican bastion before Democrats started winning in 2004? A little political history:

When Gov. Bill Owens the only Republican governor in the last fifty years was elected in 1998, Democrats had won six consecutive gubernatorial elections since 1974. Only two Republicans, Senators Bill Armstrong and Hank Brown, had won Senate elections between 1970 and 1994. So much for being a Republican bastion.

So when U.S. Sen. Hank Brown announced he would not seek reelection in 1996, Democrats were giddy. Winning the seat was a foregone conclusion with the formidable Republican incumbent out of the way.

Their giddiness went into overdrive when conservative Congressman Wayne Allard, a soft-spoken veterinarian from Loveland, won the Senate nomination over a respected Republican attorney general.

Meanwhile, Democrats nominated a powerful, wealthy lawyer-lobbyist straight from Denvers 17th Street power corridor, Tom Strickland, whose campaign said when they had won the primary that the general election was in the bag as well. They derided Allard as an inferior, inevitable loser to the much more polished Strickland. And early polls did show a substantial Strickland lead. It was a sure thing!

But Colorado voters are discerning, and they were terribly uncomfortable with a candidate whose campaign slogan could have been conflicts-are-us as many of Stricklands lobbying clients were at odds with his public positions. The low-key workhorse Allard ran an aggressive campaign on their professional contrasts, and he won an improbable upset victory.

Dismissing his loss as a lucky fluke by Allard, Strickland ran again in 2002 after trying to polish his resume with a brief tenure as the U.S. Attorney for Colorado. Allard didnt have a chance this time! This was a sure thing!

But U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard touted several environmental accomplishments while sharpening the contrast of the veterinarian versus the lobbyist. Allard was reelected by just about the same margin as he won in 1996.

Democrats will argue that Colorados electorate has fundamentally changed in the last decade and indeed it has. More than 800,000 people have moved to Colorado, many of them younger and instinctively liberal, especially on social issues. Unaffiliated voters have exploded to 40% of the electorate while Republicans have slipped behind Democrats.

They will argue that President Trump is like an anchor pulling Gardner into oblivion.

This is a sure thing!

But not all of those unaffiliated voters even those who vote for Biden over Trump will buy off on this sure thing Senate race. They are unaffiliated for a reason. They shy away from partisan labels, and they will give Senator Cory Gardner a fair hearing. Meanwhile, John Ethics-Laws-Are-for-Other-People Hickenlooper will continue to be unfocused and uninspiring.

The race is already tightening. A respected national polling firm, Morning Consult, shows the Hickenlooper lead has slipped to just six points, 48-42.

Cory Gardner is once again the aggressive, young, dynamic challenger, and Hickenlooper is the tired, old, self-entitled, ethically challenged incumbent.

The ghost of Tom Strickland haunts Hickenlooper.

Dick Wadhams is a Republican political consultant and a former Colorado Republican state chairman who managed campaigns for Gov. Bill Owens and U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Read more:

Wadhams: The ghost of Tom Strickland haunts Hickenlooper - The Denver Post

Golden hour took over Los Angeles as Rage Against the Machine marched onto a small stage in a sanctioned protest zone across from the Staples Center, where President Clinton was about to deliver the keynote address at the 2000 Democratic National Convention. Thousands of young Angelenos packed into the area to scream along to the quartets final live performance before a seven-year hiatus. From the stage, guitarist Tom Morello could see a big screen outside the coliseum showing Hillary and Bill giving their speeches while their guests sipped champagne and dunked shrimp into ramekins of cocktail sauce. In his strident call to action, Zack de la Rocha introduced the concert from the stage: Brothers and sisters, our democracy has been hijacked!

Not only did the ad-hoc concert fit neatly into Rages political animus, but it was also a microcosm for American activism writ large in the 1990s: a multiracial group of pro-revolutionary leftists vs. the white figurehead of elite neoliberalism. The two sides flexed and preened for their respective crowds, separated by a tall barbed-wire fence and a phalanx of riot police armed with rubber bullets and tear gas canisters. For concerned parents asking their teenagers exactly whom this band was raging againstKnow what enemy? Fuck who I wont do what who tells me?on this afternoon in August, the answer was right there, standing at a podium, speaking to his delegates, with silver hair and an Arkansas drawl.

Backstage, Morello gave an interview about why this ostensibly liberal band had shown up to protest the coronation of the ostensibly liberal Democratic nominee, Al Gore. Hes practically indistinguishable from a President George Bush, Morello said with unequivocal bravado. Theyre both pro-death penalty, both pro-NAFTA, both pro-big business...I dont feel represented by either one. When the band kicked into Guerilla Radio, the lead single from their third album, 1999s The Battle of Los Angeles, de la Rocha said as muchincluding a line about the Republican nominee, branding Bush as the offspring of the corrupt former head of the CIA: More for Gore or the son of a drug lord/None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord! A film crews birds-eye camera view revealed five mosh pits going off simultaneously.

On The Battle of Los Angeles, Rage made clear the aim and origin of their anger, especially for those who didnt surf to ratm.com in the 90s to learn the word praxis from an animated gif. Here they cast their gaze back through history to reel in half a millennia of theft, enslavement, and slaughter at the hands of the colonial state in the Americas. The gravity of hip-hop and the thick brow of metal met the sincere gaze of radical politics, creating an album that upended the prevailing critical idea of what good rock music should be doing. It was obvious, didactic, heavy-handed, bluntly delivered to the thick of the nation, because you dont overthrow a racist police state with weepy songs about feeling alienated by technology. What better place than here, what better time than now to empty the missile silos at the so-called New Democrats and crypto-fascist Republicans, to give the opposition contour and dimension, to even embody it themselves, to show the world what an autonomous, dignified life could possibly look like.

There was this interesting thing that was happening during the Clinton administration, de la Rocha would later tell the Los Angeles Times. People were looking inward and not outward, and not addressing what was going on. The malaise of the 90sa tone set by the self-defeatist laconism of Gen Xsettled in during eight years of relative peace and economic prosperity under Clinton. While the bull market lined the pockets of the growing professional class, Clintons legislative victories broke from traditional liberal values and ballooned inequality in America. His disastrous welfare reform gutted the core tenet of the New Deal; his administration deregulated banking, allowing the most powerful financial institutions to amass unseen amounts of capital until they were too big to fail in the crash of 2008; they passed the abhorrent 1994 crime bill, the most sweeping in American history, a steroid injection to the carceral state that put thousands of disproportionately Black men into newly constructed prisons and increased the number of federal death penalty cases from three to 60.

Most egregiously, and perhaps most important to Rage lore, was the North American Free Trade Agreement. The treaty sought to accelerate the economy by opening borders between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. In doing so, it moved profit away from workers and their communities toward business owners and shareholders, all while crippling unions and the American labor force, who could now be replaced by unconscionably cheap labor. For Mexico, free trade was seen asand has proven to beeconomically devastating: Some two million Mexican farmers have lost their land in the age of NAFTA. Indigenous workers, like those in the southernmost state of Chiapas who faced the importation of corporate American agribusiness, predicted correctly that free trade would decimate their heritage and livelihood.

And so on January 1st, 1994the day NAFTA went into effecthundreds of men, women, and children emerged from the Lacandon jungle and the canyons of Chiapas as a guerilla army and demanded autonomy from the Mexican government. Marking 500 years of genocide against indigenous peoples by colonial rule, the workers wanted control of their Mayan land and their food; they wanted democracy, peace, and justice on their own terms. They called themselves the Zapatistas (the armed faction is known as the Zapatista National Liberation Army, or EZLN) and carried a flag bearing a single red star centered against a black backgroundthe same insignia that peppers Rage iconography and stage shows. The Zapatistas bandoliers and rifles (some real, many fake) were a theatrical show of military might, but their real power lay in their philosophy, called Zapatismo, and the writings and speeches of the groups de facto leader, Subcomandante Marcos.

Quixotic, pseudonymous, and filmed wearing a balaclava smoking a pipe, Marcos spoke in winding allegory and professorial verse about the revolution of the Zapatistas. The Zapatista revolution was not for them, but for the greater world. Para todos todo, para nosotros nada, goes the most famous Zapatismo maxim, For everyone everything, for us nothing. As Alex Khasnabish, a professor and researcher of radical collectives, explained in one of Rages unauthorized biographies, Know Your Enemy, the cornerstone of Zapatismo is this: Rather than insisting that you support [the Zapatistas], they want you to struggle in your own way, in your own place, with your own commitment to dignity in a revolution that makes sense to you and the people around you. The grandiloquent ideas of the Zapatistas and Subcomandante Marcos took on the hue of surrealism and romance, a way of sounding a revolution through the tones and rhythms of language.

At heart, the music of Rage Against the Machine is a direct extension of Zapatismo: paradoxical, militaristic, generous, a conduit for power, not a concentration of it. De la Rocha visited Chiapas four times between 1995 and 1996, working closely with the Zapatistas and strengthening his connection to his Mexican heritage (his Sinaloan grandfather fought in the Mexican Revolution). These trips helped shape the idea of revolutionary bridge-building, of connecting the struggle of one to the many. I think every revolutionary act is an act of love, de la Rocha told Rolling Stone in 1999. Every song that Ive written, it is because of my desire to use music as a way to empower and re-humanize people who are living in a dehumanizing setting.

On its surface, it was easy to classify Rage as music for teenagers staging a leafy suburban rebellion against their parents or doing curls in the squat rack. But by The Battle of Los Angeles, Rage had ascended to something far more personal, spiritual, and bohemian. If 1996s Evil Empire came with a leftist library starter pack, Battle came with a politics of emotion, music that was nimble and serious. In her book Hope in the Dark, the writer and activist Rebecca Solnit describes the words of Subcomandante Marcos as the language of the vast, nameless, current movement that globalization has drawn together, a movement...driven by imaginations as supple as art rather than as stiff as dogma. It is from this delicate branch of politics that Zack de la Rochas words were formed.

In 1999, however, the context in which most people engaged with The Battle of Los Angeles was not through the insurrectionary poetry of Subcomandante Marcos or a readily accessible anti-globalization platform. The album was released in the last gasp of the monoculture, dropped into the scum pond of rocks commercial nadir. Korn led the nu-metal charge on radio, while Limp Bizkit and Kid Rock were rap-rocking without cause on TRL. There were only a few American anti-war protests against Clinton bombing a pharmaceutical factory in Sudan or the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia (in the press throughout the late-90s, Morello would often parry a journalists question about, say, the violence at Woodstock 99 with an indictment of Clintons warmongering, like his Tomahawk missile [that] destroyed the childrens hospital outside Belgrade). There were no wars predicated on a lie about weapons of mass destruction, no social media to disseminate revolutionary tweets to the masses, just pockets of left-wing activism fighting against the WTO in Seattle and the IMF in D.C. as Creeds Human Clay sat atop the charts.

The benefit of Rage reentering the mainstream during this odd musical and socio-political dead zone was that they sounded both nostalgic and of the moment. They had cleared the way for nu-metal and rap-rock with their first two albums, 1992s groundbreaking self-titled debut and 1996s angsty and downtrodden Evil Empire, both of which eventually went triple platinum. When they swung back in with The Battle of Los Angeles, it was like a reminder of the prophecy they foretold at the beginning of the decade. Once iconoclastic rap-rock alchemists, Rage now sounded pretty much like what was on the radio. Moreover, they sounded like the same band they always were but more lethal, more agile, able to fully disarm with a verse and a hook. What I did a lot on [Evil Empire] was, This is what I think. This is my comment, de la Rocha told Rolling Stone. Ive had to change. I want people to see reflections of themselves in the songs. His personal accountability fit squarely with the Zapatista ethos of wanting people to create a revolution in their own way, now bolstered with songs that moved quicker, had bigger hooks, and carried more weight than anything Rage had ever written.

It took nearly a year for de la Rocha to complete all the vocals on Battle, during which he gravitated to another plane of rapping. He is exacting and dynamic, the generalissimos preacher. On Calm Like a Bomb, he loops himself around the band in long ribbons of verse: I be walkin God like a dog/My narrative fearless/My word war returns to burn like Baldwin home from Paris. Then on the pre-chorus, as the band lurches into their signature mosh-rock cadence, de la Rocha hugs the turn on two wheels to deliver this slinky triplet: What ya say, what ya say, what ya say, what! When the chorus hits, it does exactly what he says: Ignite! The chameleonic ease with which de la Rocha slides between rap, funk, and rock on Calm Like a Bomb is indicative of the bands full symbiosis of all those genres on Battle; a chemical compound perfected, a longshot theory finally proved.

With Brad Wilk on the drums and Tim Commerford on the bass, Rage cut deep into the groove. The verse of Sleep Now in the Fire is the rhythm section at its best: the feel has that crab-creep shuffle with Wilk and Commerford laying down an Amen break while Morello makes his guitar sound like a British dial tone. The formula of Rages rhythm section can be largely predictablehushed intro, blues riffs, experimental sound-bed under the verse, more blues riffs, wacky guitar solo, breakdown with blues riffsbut theres just enough variety and mobility to let de la Rocha be the star. Hell blow a word out of his mouth in a huff with big pockets of air in his cheeks, or hell wrap his throat around a word like a snake, sucking the air out of it. The space he leaves between the names of Columbus ships, the trilled r on Maria, the oddly swung rhythm of a line dripping with sarcasmSo raise your fist and march around just dont take what you needsometimes there are more ideas in the rhythm of his raps than the raps themselves.

When the band was on tour with Gang Starr, DJ Premier told Spin that hed try to get a remix of a new Rage song onto rap radio, but that it might not be as easy as it was with Fred Durst. Zack is trying to penetrate the whole soul hes speaking the real, and that takes longer to sink in. One of the bands longest-running causes clbres was the fight for the freedom of Black Panther and radio journalist Mumia Abu-Jamalwho, it is widely believed, was unfairly convicted of killing a Philadelphia police officer in 1981. Long as the rope is tight around Mumias neck/Let there be no rich white life we bound to respect, de la Rocha stage-whispers on Voice of the Voiceless, a short ode to Mumias struggle. While the phrase Free Mumia became something of an activist meme in the 90s, Rage never took his sham trial or his then-impending death sentence for granted (Mumias execution case was dropped in 2011 and he is now serving life without parole). In January 1999, Rage threw an infamous benefit concert in New Jersey that raised $80,000 for Mumia and sparked a media war between a right-wing cop union and the band. And in April of the same year, de la Rocha flew to Geneva, Switzerland to speak on Mumias behalf at the International Commission of Human Rights.

Each song on Battle comes from an outgrowth of personal political conviction. Rage werent fretting from afar and hoping for change like Live Aid; de la Rocha was writing about the abject horror of immigrant sweatshop labor on Maria after Morello was arrested demonstrating against sweatshops in Santa Monica in 1997. De la Rocha wrote of the wealth inequality he saw in his hometown of L.A. (Born as Ghosts) and a final salvo about the Zapatistas struggle on War Within a Breath, the last in a series of songs about the Zapatistas stretching back to Evil Empire. Hidden in that track is a brief line that could be the albums subheadline: Its a war from the depth of time.

Perhaps most striking is Born of a Broken Man, a slow dirge cut from the cloth of Black Sabbath about de la Rochas father, the artist and muralist Beto de la Rocha. Beto was a member of the landmark Chicano painting collective Los Four; in 1974, he was one of the first Chicano artists to be exhibited at the L.A. County Museum of Art. After suffering a nervous breakdown in 1981, Beto fell into a destructive spiral of religious fanaticism. He would fast for weekends, sometimes making a young Zack fast beside him. One night, in a fit of anger and guilt, Beto destroyed over half of his paintings in front of his son. Born of a broken man, but not a broken man, Zack screams of complicated pride on the hook.

The anomaly of Born of a Broken Man, the only Rage song that ever pulled directly from de la Rochas personal life, lends emotional credence to the political screeds around itharanguenroll as Rolling Stone once derisively tagged the band. Few bands have been given more purity tests than Rage Against the Machine over the years, but the question inevitably arises with any group that stakes their identity on revolutionary thought and leftist causes: Do you buy it? You know these avowed socialists are signed to Epic, a multinational major label, right? They made millions of dollars from record sales, and Battle debuted at No. 1 on the Billboard charts, just as Evil Empire did in 1996. Are they redistributing their wealth? When de la Rocha left the band in October of 2000, he hinted at his own discomfort, saying that the groups decision-making process had undermined our artistic and political ideal. How do you square the bands leftist ideology with the defanged arena rock of Audioslave in the ensuing years?

Perhaps the biggest hurdle for buying into Rage Against the Machine is simply their name. All these years later, it has curdled into something sophomoric, trite, somehow too specific and too vague at the same time. If it is an albatross around the bands neck, its created a tautology that has forced them to stay true to themselves: The immutable law of a Rage Against the Machine album is that it must, by nature, rage against the machine. And so inherent in their silly band name lies the uncynical, righteous, and repetitious work of activism and fighting for justice, the search for the will to continue even when it seems like the battle is lost.

Im not buying this bullshit line that says the situation in Chiapas or with Mumia or with the garment workers somehow has nothing to do with middle-class white kids at our shows, de la Rocha told Spin in 2000. All this alienation has roots; its not just TV or boredom or bad parents. This was the great ambition of The Battle of Los Angeles, and perhaps Rage itself: to draw a line between their millions of Gen X and Millennial fans and the causes they fought for, from conquistadors to Clinton, from the Intifada to the Zapatistas, from Francis Fukuyamas claim that the end of the Cold War was the end of history to the spark of the anti-globalization movement around the world. Battle revealed the extentchronologically and geographicallyto which none of us live with dignity. They showed us this is a war we cant win but its a war we dont deserve to lose.

Correction: An earlier version of this review incorrectly stated that Mumia Abu-Jamal was convicted of killing a New York police officer in 1981.

Get the Sunday Review in your inbox every weekend. Sign up for the Sunday Review newsletterhere.

Read the rest here:

Rage Against the Machine: The Battle of Los Angeles | Review - Pitchfork

The image of a small Midwestern college is one of quiet, peaceful campus nestled in a rural town.

Some now fear the global pandemic could silence many small schools altogether.

The coronavirus upended higher education this spring. Colleges had to lock down and refund thousands of dollars of tuition to students.

On the heels of financial struggles in higher education, the pandemic could land a death blow to smaller colleges dotting rural Missouri and Illinois. Over the past several years, economists have made dire predictions that many small colleges, possibly up to half, will go bankrupt and close in the next decade.

We get concerned about it. However, we've been fortunate that we see more folks wanting to be here, said Don Lofe, interim president at Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri.

Through the Civil War, world wars and plenty of economic downturns, colleges like Westminster have continued to graduate students. But over the past two years, about a dozen small colleges have closed for good. Among them is MacMurray College in Jacksonville, Illinois. After 174 years, the coronavirus pandemic was one punch on the chin too many.

School leaders argue they still hold a valuable position in the higher education landscape: a robust liberal arts education rooted in small class sizes, strong student support services and idyllic settings.

I still believe personally, and I think a lot of people do, that there is a need for traditional college education, said Dan Westhues, a board member at William Woods University, also located in Fulton.

Higher education financial experts are less rosy on the outlook.

Forbes magazine gives colleges letter grades based on their financial health. Numerous small schools in Missouri and Illinois earn poor marks. Westminster and Williams Woods get Cs. Culver-Stockton College, Hannibal-LaGrange University and Quincy University all have Ds.

These organizations are going to tell you We're going to survive, but they're not in large numbers, said Gary Stocker, a college administrator-turned-analyst.

Stocker worked at Lindenwood University and Westminster College before starting College Viability, a website aimed at tracking and presenting college financial data to worried college officials and curious parents.

And you see some really, really ugly numbers, he said.

Many of these colleges rely too much on endowment spending and alumni donations, rather than strong student bodies to pump in tuition dollars, Stocker said. They have little cash on hand and endowments too small to weather strong headwinds.

These small rural colleges are not profitable enough year in and year out to be able to have long-term viability, Stocker said.

Itll also be harder to promote the picturesque college experience if colleges have to remain locked down and there are no in-person classes or athletics another big recruitment tool for some small schools.

We feel we provide a unique experience, said Lofe, the head of Westminster. Many colleges are going to say that, but we've been able to demonstrate that with actions. For instance, athletics, the other experiences we have on campus.

COVID-19 also upended finances for colleges. Having to send students packing in March and issue refunds was a major expense. Federal aid programs enacted by Congress in the spring helped cover some of the losses.

I would just tell you this, we managed it well, Lofe said. Our college is very stabilized right now with respect to financial matters. But throughout the years, like many colleges, revenue streams have caused issues as well as the demographics that are changing, as you know, with respect to available students in the population to go to college.

Ryan Delaney

/

St. Louis Public Radio

Westminster College Board of Trustees Chair Jim Morton and Interim President Don Lofe on the campus in Fulton, Missouri, in July.

Fewer high school graduates and the growing sticker shock of a private college education will mean schools have to evolve or possibly die out.

I don't expect a mass extinction of small private colleges, but we may see several years' worth of closures in just a few weeks or months, so I wouldn't be surprised if a few of the small private colleges in the Midwest end up closing, said Robert Kelchen, a Missouri native and associate professor of higher education at Seton Hall University.

While Westminster boasts being around since the Civil War, Culver-Stockton College can brag that it survived a tornado shortly after graduation in 2003.

Douglas Palmer is the new president of Culver-Stockton in Canton, Missouri. Any big aspirations he had when he accepted the job in February, before the pandemic, may need to wait.

I would not expect that many colleges and universities in the area or even in the country are going to be doing a whole lot of hiring or investment in capital projects until we're through this crisis, he said.

He first must focus on maintaining an enrollment of 1,100 students and paying the people who educate them. I think it's been harder here, and I think it will continue to be hard.

Recruiting traditional students to rural pockets of the Midwest, even with appealing tuition discounts and scholarships, is getting harder, said Westhues, the William Woods board member. And so we certainly have seen that over the years, but I think that's actually kind of a decent thing because what it's forced us to do is be creative, and it's forced us to evolve.

William Woods is investing in online programs and degree completion for older adults. Westminster is focused on expanding recruitment and supporting students. It also wants to find a new niche, such as cybersecurity, that "will be a strong selling point."

But going after nontraditional students will have to balance with the core product.

"The liberal arts education gives you the ability to think, think just not analytically, but creatively. And those are words but they're really, I believe in those very strongly," Lofe said. "And I believe this type of education, this type of institution provides that."

Stocker and other industry watchers advocate for mergers of small colleges to reduce costs. Health care provides an example. What were once dozens of small hospitals run by religious orders around the region are now operated by a single hospital system.

Still, the worst-case scenarios many predicted for colleges and universities this fall so far dont appear likely. Some estimates this spring suggested fall enrollments would be down by up to 20%, with students perhaps choosing to stay closer to home or take a gap year.

But as of now Westminster, William Woods and most other small colleges say students are planning to return when campuses reopen this fall, even if it won't be for a typical semester.

Follow Ryan on Twitter: @rpatrickdelaney

Read more:

Small Midwestern Colleges Have Been Through It All. Can They Make It Through The Pandemic? - KRCU

news, latest-news, donald trump, civil war, us presidential election, 2020

The United States Civil War of the 1860s was one of the bloodiest imaginable. Deaths were vastly greater than many external conflicts in which the USA has been involved. Whereas Vietnam cost 50,000 American lives, over 600,000 Americans died in the American Civil War. That was out of a population of around 31 million, compared to 205 million at the time of Vietnam. Some estimates say that if the Civil War was fought today and a similar proportion died, the death toll would be over 6 million. Of course, there were many reasons for the high death toll. Battlefield injuries were horrific due to the weaponry and tactics, and medical aid was rudimentary to say the least - it was almost a century before bacterial infection could be controlled. Many of the deaths occurred in prisoner-of-war camps, hellholes like Andersonville. But contributing to the toll too was the culture behind the war. When countries turn inward against themselves, the results can be truly horrific. Just look at the Taliban's killing of fellow Afghans over several decades, the Syrian Civil War, or Islamic sect fighting in Iraq. In the US, the battle between the anti-slavery north and the pro-slavery south knew almost no bounds, and had predecessors as far as violence goes. Even before the war there were bloody skirmishes between pro- and anti-slavery people. During the "Bleeding Kansas" years, anti-slavery forces, including the so-called Jayhawkers, launched attacks against pro-slavery civilians. Looting, burning and killing was under way even before the war officially began. The US was formed out of a belief in "manifest destiny", a God-given right to occupy the land, and that right was enforced by the firearm. First Nations people bore much of the brunt of those gun battles, but so did fellow Americans as the power of arms, enshrined in the constitution, meant that weaponry was resorted to alarmingly readily. The popularity of the "Western" genre of films and TV underlines how that gun violence was normalised in US culture. Maybe today's police culture emanates from the same roots. This right to bear arms has led to a situation today where each year nearly 40,000 Americans die of gunshot wounds, and 100,000 are injured. That 40,000 is two-thirds the size of Australia's losses in World War I. The shocking horror of mass shootings - Columbine, Sandy Hook and all the rest - has done nothing to stop this. The power of the National Rifle Association to quell any attempt to restrict gun ownership means that the present climate seems to show no sign of improving - rather the opposite. The US leads the world in civilian gun ownership on a per capita basis, with over 125 firearms (small arms) per 100 people. So, we find the US heading to a presidential election in a few months. Donald Trump's ascendancy to the highest office in the land was forged by forcing divisions in US society. Trump demonised anyone "liberal", meaning the Democrats, much of the media, virtually anyone remotely centrist, let alone anyone near the left. His following has been that vast segment of American society that felt itself disempowered by the so-called elites (never mind Trump being a New York billionaire who inherited a large portion of his wealth). As the world changed, they had lost jobs, lost self-worth, lost a sense of pride. Trump's chant of "Make America Great Again" was music to their ears - regardless of veracity or cost. Trump's populism has widened divisions in American society. His dog-whistling has promoted anger, giving air to rightist, racist and well-armed groups. Rather than promoting harmony, Trump has banked on pitting Americans against one another. The militias - like the famed Minutemen - that formed a significant role in the War of Independence loom large in the mindset and pantheon of his followers. Militias can be found widely today, armed with a firepower not dreamed of back in the 1770s when George Washington crossed the Delaware. READ MORE: Despite Trump and Republican small government sentiments, Trump has had no hesitation in using federal forces to try to quell Black Lives Matter protests and other outbreaks of unrest. His overriding of state governments would have drawn howls of outrage if undertaken by a Democrat leader. Today the US population is bitterly divided, dangerously armed, and sooled-on by a Commander in Chief who has trashed the once-noble office of President. Trump's bullying, aggressive defensiveness, capricious changes of personnel and policy, and mind-numbingly simplistic tweets are in stark contrast to his predecessor. Barack Obama's grace, gentility, caution, intellectual depth and empathy are a world away. That Trump has hinted he might not accept the result of the coming election (already alleging postal votes as potentially fraudulent, without a shred of evidence) has set an incredibly dangerous tone. Then there is his latest threat, to delay the election; even fellow Republicans have baulked at this, in the land of the free. He is determined to hold onto power, regardless of cost. We can only hope that somehow sense will prevail, that Trump will be seen even by his followers for the danger that he is, that the powder keg that is the armed population of the US will not be lit. The COVID-19 pandemic has done its worst in countries led by rightist leaders - the US, Brazil, Great Britain. Given the US death toll of over 150,000, and the enormous economic impact of the virus, perhaps it is COVID-19 that might finally turn his followers against him and avert a far bigger catastrophe. One that might well put the first US Civil War in the shade. As the Australian son of an American mother, I certainly hope so.

https://nnimgt-a.akamaihd.net/transform/v1/crop/frm/tPntrWhUbGLyDWYCTv46rt/1ebf9624-e443-4aad-9e30-68543f44fb7d.jpg/r2_427_4685_3073_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg

OPINION

August 5 2020 - 12:00AM

The United States Civil War of the 1860s was one of the bloodiest imaginable. Deaths were vastly greater than many external conflicts in which the USA has been involved.

Whereas Vietnam cost 50,000 American lives, over 600,000 Americans died in the American Civil War. That was out of a population of around 31 million, compared to 205 million at the time of Vietnam. Some estimates say that if the Civil War was fought today and a similar proportion died, the death toll would be over 6 million.

Of course, there were many reasons for the high death toll. Battlefield injuries were horrific due to the weaponry and tactics, and medical aid was rudimentary to say the least - it was almost a century before bacterial infection could be controlled. Many of the deaths occurred in prisoner-of-war camps, hellholes like Andersonville.

But contributing to the toll too was the culture behind the war. When countries turn inward against themselves, the results can be truly horrific. Just look at the Taliban's killing of fellow Afghans over several decades, the Syrian Civil War, or Islamic sect fighting in Iraq.

In the US, the battle between the anti-slavery north and the pro-slavery south knew almost no bounds, and had predecessors as far as violence goes. Even before the war there were bloody skirmishes between pro- and anti-slavery people. During the "Bleeding Kansas" years, anti-slavery forces, including the so-called Jayhawkers, launched attacks against pro-slavery civilians. Looting, burning and killing was under way even before the war officially began.

The US was formed out of a belief in "manifest destiny", a God-given right to occupy the land, and that right was enforced by the firearm. First Nations people bore much of the brunt of those gun battles, but so did fellow Americans as the power of arms, enshrined in the constitution, meant that weaponry was resorted to alarmingly readily. The popularity of the "Western" genre of films and TV underlines how that gun violence was normalised in US culture. Maybe today's police culture emanates from the same roots.

US President Donald Trump points to the media during a rally he held to mark 100 days in office. Picture: Shutterstock

This right to bear arms has led to a situation today where each year nearly 40,000 Americans die of gunshot wounds, and 100,000 are injured. That 40,000 is two-thirds the size of Australia's losses in World War I. The shocking horror of mass shootings - Columbine, Sandy Hook and all the rest - has done nothing to stop this. The power of the National Rifle Association to quell any attempt to restrict gun ownership means that the present climate seems to show no sign of improving - rather the opposite.

The US leads the world in civilian gun ownership on a per capita basis, with over 125 firearms (small arms) per 100 people.

So, we find the US heading to a presidential election in a few months. Donald Trump's ascendancy to the highest office in the land was forged by forcing divisions in US society. Trump demonised anyone "liberal", meaning the Democrats, much of the media, virtually anyone remotely centrist, let alone anyone near the left. His following has been that vast segment of American society that felt itself disempowered by the so-called elites (never mind Trump being a New York billionaire who inherited a large portion of his wealth). As the world changed, they had lost jobs, lost self-worth, lost a sense of pride. Trump's chant of "Make America Great Again" was music to their ears - regardless of veracity or cost.

Trump's populism has widened divisions in American society. His dog-whistling has promoted anger, giving air to rightist, racist and well-armed groups. Rather than promoting harmony, Trump has banked on pitting Americans against one another. The militias - like the famed Minutemen - that formed a significant role in the War of Independence loom large in the mindset and pantheon of his followers. Militias can be found widely today, armed with a firepower not dreamed of back in the 1770s when George Washington crossed the Delaware.

Despite Trump and Republican small government sentiments, Trump has had no hesitation in using federal forces to try to quell Black Lives Matter protests and other outbreaks of unrest. His overriding of state governments would have drawn howls of outrage if undertaken by a Democrat leader.

Today the US population is bitterly divided, dangerously armed, and sooled-on by a Commander in Chief who has trashed the once-noble office of President. Trump's bullying, aggressive defensiveness, capricious changes of personnel and policy, and mind-numbingly simplistic tweets are in stark contrast to his predecessor. Barack Obama's grace, gentility, caution, intellectual depth and empathy are a world away.

That Trump has hinted he might not accept the result of the coming election (already alleging postal votes as potentially fraudulent, without a shred of evidence) has set an incredibly dangerous tone. Then there is his latest threat, to delay the election; even fellow Republicans have baulked at this, in the land of the free. He is determined to hold onto power, regardless of cost.

We can only hope that somehow sense will prevail, that Trump will be seen even by his followers for the danger that he is, that the powder keg that is the armed population of the US will not be lit. The COVID-19 pandemic has done its worst in countries led by rightist leaders - the US, Brazil, Great Britain. Given the US death toll of over 150,000, and the enormous economic impact of the virus, perhaps it is COVID-19 that might finally turn his followers against him and avert a far bigger catastrophe. One that might well put the first US Civil War in the shade.

As the Australian son of an American mother, I certainly hope so.

Excerpt from:

Trump's America is a powderkeg waiting to be lit - The Canberra Times

With a presidential election looming during these fast times when fevers and emotions run high, there is one urgent national crisis that may not be remedied by voting or a vaccine. And it bears directly on the foundational principles of what once united these states of America.

Whether we realize it or not, we are being forced to rethink our origins and reorder our priorities mostly by holding our tongue or liking the same tweet.

Conformity has become a newly dominant ethos, demanding that we reassess American history and regard our founding not as a revolutionary miracle but as original sin.

Yet, in doing so, we are becoming a smaller, meaner and more vengeful America intolerant and all too eager to punish those who dare to express disfavored opinions. Shades of these restrictions on speech can be found across political spectrums, but what is now being called the cancel culture resides mostly with the progressive left.

These cancellations are not to be taken lightly. They are terminal, and like all Terminators, they keep coming back.

Sound ominous? Well, just consider some recent events (there are many more, by the way) and ask whether free speech and critical thought are alive and well in America.

Last month evolutionary psychologist and Harvard professor Steven Pinker was the subject of an open letter signed by hundreds of linguists seeking to have him removed as a distinguished fellow from the Linguistic Society of America. His scholarly credentials were impeccable but some of his tweets and bits of other writing were deemed deplorable. Mostly he was accused of racial insensitivity for relying on data that suggested that overt racism in America was in decline.

A political culture that is hostile to open and respectful dialogue, and that requires ideological conformity and moral certainty, is decidedly illiberal.

David Shor, a data analyst, was fired at the end of May for a tweet that cited an academic study showing that voters were negatively influenced by violent protests, to the benefit of Republican candidates. Clearly, supporters of violent protests wish to keep their options open.

Also last month, professors at The New School in New York, UCLA and Stanford were investigated, and condemned by a student senate resolution in the latter case, for using the N-word while quoting from the works of James Baldwin, Martin Luther King Jr. and the lyrics from the hip-hop group, N.W.A, respectively. How else to discuss the writings of African Americans without examining the chosen words of African Americans was not explained.

A Portland, Ore., burrito shop shut down in 2017 because its owner was accused of stealing and committing culinary white supremacy by having learned new recipes on a trip to Mexico. The audacity of a taco prepared by a non-Mexican. Who knew there were enough Italians in Portland to toss all those pizza pies.

And by now everyone knows the fallout from The New York Times decision in June to publish an op-ed from Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), who argued that the military should be brought in to quell the violence that arose from some of the Black Lives Matter protests. It was a position that a slight majority of Americans shared an ABC/Ipsos poll released June 7 revealed 52% approved even if misguidedly, but it apparently was a position that the Times did not think was fit to print.

Staffers erupted and the publisher disavowed the essay, calling its publication a mistake. James Bennet, the pages main editor, resigned under pressure. A few weeks later, editor and opinion writer Bari Weiss resigned, too, with a stinging letter that accused the papers leadership of capitulating to a progressive mob that undermined the objectivity of its journalistic mission. (In her July 31 appearance on Real Time With Bill Maher, she likened the cancel culture to social murder.)

Of course, cancellation is not limited to chiseled stone. It usually involves real lives and real people. And it can be ruinous. A slip of the tongue, a casual remark, an errant tweet now has the potential to end a career.

On the same day, columnist Andrew Sullivan resigned from New York magazine, citing similar problems with colleagues who no longer welcomed his opinions. Harpers Magazine followed with a published letter signed by 153 writers and cultural figures lamenting the illiberal and public-shaming zeitgeist of these times. With these battle lines fully drawn and career wreckage everywhere, Politico took a survey and found that 46% of Americans believe that the cancel culture has gone too far.

Maybe so, but the so-called progressive left is ramping up for more purges. Not since Stalin has purging been this much in vogue.

Historical statues have become popular targets. Confederate officers and Founding Fathers, to the delight of some, are earmarked for the same rubble. America, after all, is irredeemably flawed, they say. These historical markers are emblems of shame, and roving wrecking crews are performing a righteous task.

Of course, cancellation is not limited to chiseled stone. It usually involves real lives and real people. And it can be ruinous. A slip of the tongue, a casual remark, an errant tweet, an unintended slight, a joke resurrected from an era when social boundaries were broader and a joke was regarded as a joke, a source in a syllabus or a single paragraph within an article now has the potential to end a career. Punishments never seem to fit these thought crimes. Whats more, these cancellations allow for no forgiveness.

Speech now suddenly comes with consequences. Politically incorrect speech is not to be freely spoken. Here, it is the community at large that determines what is to be censored. And some speech is flatly denied a public hearing. Punitive mobs gather, usually in cyberspace, for the sole purpose of creating the critical mass that will lead to cancellation. The hecklers veto has multiplied, resting on the hair-trigger fingertips of those with Twitter accounts.

The presidency of Donald Trump hasnt helped matters, given a leadership style that depends so much on jingoistic slogans and us versus them mind games.

Despite our national love affair with the First Amendment, free expression is being regulated not by the government, but by the intolerant left, which has decamped from college and is now setting the terms for public debate.

Yes, conservatives are capable of the same double standards, but the phenomenon of the cancelation culture stems from a decidedly leftist university worldview, and its spread throughout society should concern all Americans who value free speech.

Theres a new sheriff in town in the form of the thought police. Those insufficiently woke, unmindful of white privilege, oblivious to power differentials and colonial legacies, are likely to be called out and cancelled. And cancellation is not a mere figure of speech. It means what it says: Go away! Its not a disagreement; it is the blotting out of conversation altogether.

And it portends the death of liberalism itself.

Remember liberalism? Its origins are found in the writings of John Locke and his fellow enlightened philosophers. These were the writers who James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and other delegates to the Constitutional Convention were reading when they undertook the task of drafting our founding documents the blueprints to our democracy. It led to a compelling list of freedoms: speech, assembly, press, the right to and from religion, and limited self-government that protected private property and enforced the rule of law.

All of this consensus around rights came under the imprimatur of liberalism. And early Americans were proud to call themselves liberals. A good many of todays Americans are no longer so sure.

To be liberal means to keep an open mind when venturing out into the public square, freely sampling the ideas of the day. Ideas have a tendency to conflict. Thats OK. Making judgments about ideas is all part of the democratic experience.

Only with a liberal openness to ideas can government make better decisions and the electorate become more informed. Healthy disagreement was the secret sauce of the social contract. Americans stood ready to entertain differences of opinion without reaching for pitchforks and muskets.

What we see today in the progressive orthodoxy of the new left is not liberalism, however. The liberal tradition was never so quick to judge and even quicker to indict. Publicly shaming is not the same as debating. And it is not the product of the liberal mind. A political culture that is hostile to open and respectful dialogue, and that requires ideological conformity and moral certainty, is decidedly illiberal.

Politico took a survey and found that 46% of Americans believe that the cancel culture has gone too far.

But thats the junction where the woke-world places itself. Groupthink is all too commonplace. Accusations of racism are far too easily and frequently made. Conversations are forced to end before they even start.

Those who exist in the rarefied precincts of university life already know that American Exceptionalism has been in a freefall for many years now. Whats different today is that the circle of co-conspirators has widened, and moved off campus. Wokeness has declared war on whiteness, with progressives schooling the general public in what is for them an entirely new canon, whether they like it or not.

It is a lesson that centers on America as an unabashed imperialist, colonial power. Racist from birth. Enslaver. Exploiter. Defiler. Despoiler. Appropriator of cultures not their own. Instigator of global conflicts. Magnifier of economic inequalities.

There can be no Greatest Generation in a nation without any positive attributes. Thats the vision of America that many progressives have. To suggest otherwise is to evidence racist intent. In todays cancel culture, the talking point of intersectional oppression is ignored at ones peril.

Think I am kidding? Cancellation is the politics of pink slips. Accusations are more than sufficient. Exoneration is unobtainable. Speech is stifled in mid-sentence and careers are ruined.

The social contract is being renegotiated as we speak.

In case there is any wonder whether the Atlantic Ocean provides a measure of insulation from this cancellation craze, British lecturer Stephen Lamonby was fired last month after he casually mentioned to another academic that he believed Jewish people are the cleverest in the world. Lamonby assumed he was allowed to use a positive stereotype. The university, however, dismissed him for gross misconduct.

Most universities, and The New York Times, could stand to go back to school for a refresher course on basic civics.

Instead, we are instructed that certain words or ideas must be banished, otherwise people of color will be at risk, their lives endangered. But in what sense? Clearly, not in the way that Medgar Evers was murdered, or the four girls killed in the 16th Street Baptist Church bombing in Birmingham, Ala., both in 1963. Arent those very different examples of endangerment surely when compared to a tweet citing data on the decline of racism?

Who knew that liberals were crazy, too? Yes, conservatives scoff at evolution with creationist theme parks that adopt the historical timeline of The Flintstones, where intelligent design enables Neanderthals to ride on the backs of dinosaurs. But is what we are seeing from progressives in squelching any comment that may conflict with the orthodoxy of the moment any better?

Moral revulsion and old-school social distancing is one thing; canceling a life is quite another. Thousands of Twitter users lie in wait, twitching at the thought of rendering someone jobless.

Twitter confers outsized influence on its users, none of whom are smart simply because they own a smartphone. Similarly, faculty infighting, where the stakes on wokeness run high, makes Mean Girls seem positively unctuous by comparison.

Photo illustration by Avishek Das/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)

The presidency of Donald Trump hasnt helped matters, given a leadership style that depends so much on jingoistic slogans and us versus them mind games. There is a daily choreography to taking sides that has polarized the populace and inspired protests that, with another administration, might have remained under wraps.

At the same time, the progressive wing of the Democratic Party is bound to receive carte blanche privileges in a Joe Biden presidency even though he is a longtime moderate. He wont be able to win without them, which will render him beholden. But these are the same people for whom an assault on traditional American liberalism has become the cornerstone of their political philosophy.

How does one reconcile maintaining the rule of law in a nation that defunds and dismantles law enforcement? Its not the job of the community to police itself.

Those who upend the priorities of liberalism and terrorize free thought say that they are compensating for the imbalance of power that historically silenced voices belonging to people of color. True enough. But what seeks to replace it is a radical departure from the liberal tradition, where political pluralism was no less important.With liberalism as their crowning achievement, our Founding Fathers would be surprised to learn that we didnt fight to preserve what was, for them, so hard-won.

Thane Rosenbaumis a novelist, essayist, law professor and Distinguished University Professor at Touro College, where he directs theForum on Life, Culture & Society. He is thelegal analyst for CBS News Radioand appears frequently on cable TV news programs.His most recent book is titled Saving Free Speech From Itself.

Visit link:

The Devaluation of Free Speech in the Land of the Free - Jewish Journal

Betty DeHaven

Martinsburg

"Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act" quoted by Dietrich Bonhoeffer.

Are we disgusted yet by the liberals, Democrats, George Soros and Black Lives Matter? Why isn't our Congress doing something about this? People are being killed. Where is the voice of the people who work for the American citizens? Are we supposed to put up with this anarchy? When will it cease? Are we to allow these thugs to break into our homes and rob, injure and kill us? The liberal leaders are undermining our Constitution. These mayors and governors are no better than the czars who have run other countries and have taken them down to nothing.

We have to fight off the communism encroaching our nation. I will definitely vote for President Donald Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, Representative Alex Mooney, and the conservatives who represent the State of West Virginia. They are the only ones whom I can trust to lead us. I am in fear that this country will end up in a war between the liberals and conservatives. The governors tell us we can't go to the beaches, but allow the thugs to run the streets.

The citizens in Cuba and Venezuela have lost their freedoms. Is this what we are willing to do? To give in to a bunch of thieves, bullies, murderers? When are the rest of you going to speak up?

These thugs don't even know their history, because they are tearing down our statues and even threatening to tear down our Jesus statues. They want to keep the chaos going on. Let us fight this tyranny with our words.

While Jack and I were reading scripture this morning from Nehemiah 4:4-5, the words jumped out at me. "Hear us, O our God, for we are despised. Turn their insults back on their own heads. Give them over as plunder in a land of captivity. Do not cover up their guilt or blot out their sins from your sight, for they have thrown insults in the face of the builders." It is always right to pray that God will put down his enemies and their intentions to destroy his work or harm his people. To you thugs out there, do know that there are righteous people who are praying against your evil deeds.

It is despicable how these thugs are treating our police in these liberal cities. To think that each day the police goes out to protect the people and are abused by these criminals is disgusting. John 15:13 "Greater love has no one than this: that he lay down his life for his friends." I want my family protected by the police. Thank you to the police who watch over us. To de-fund them is totally absurd.

When are you going to stand up for what is right? Speak out before it is too late.

Go here to read the rest:

Speak out before it is too late | Journal-news | journal-news.net - Martinsburg Journal

Oran Smith, Special to the Greenville News Published 11:59 a.m. ET Aug. 7, 2020 | Updated 12:00 p.m. ET Aug. 7, 2020

Lyrics are from songs performed by Elvis Presley.

We have a long way to go in the living out of our all men are created equal national creed. So to make real progress as a nation and as a state, all Americans and all South Carolinians conservative, moderate and liberal -- must take stock.

But where will we find common ground in the political world that is 2020?

If I could be you, if you could be me for just one hour. If we could find a way to get inside each other's minds. If you could see through my eyes instead of your ego, I believe you'd be surprised to see that you've been blind.

I know I have looked into my own heart in recent weeks and gotten very uncomfortable. I have asked myself as both a believer and as a person who works in public policy: How have I been blind? What can I do?

"Dowe simply turn our heads and look the other way?"

Perhaps for a person of faith and a policy researcher like myself, it starts with refusing to look away, to understand that there are statues and statutes that are hurting many of my fellow South Carolinians in soul and in sustenance.

Purely political common ground is hard, so perhaps we should start with opportunities for agreement around policy.

1.Civil asset forfeiture. Police can take property without the owner being convicted of any crime.

Recent from the Greenville News: Sweeping civil forfeiture reform could come in SC with case drawing national attention

2. Court fees. According to an Institute for Justice survey of state laws, South Carolina is fourth-worst in the nation for taxation by citation, regressive court fees that trap people financially for minor offenses.

3. Payday lending. The endless cycle of debt lives also in the predatory practices of some in the payday loan industry.

4. Education segregation. A students destiny shouldnt be determined by district lines. Parents should be able to choose any public school that has a seat for their child.

5. Energy inequality. South Carolinians pay the highest power bills in the nation. We know who that hurts most.

6. Reverse Robin Hood. Perhaps without intention, the South Carolina Education Lottery is a wealth transfer from poor to middle-class South Carolinians. More need-based aid is needed.

7. Barriers to work. Small businesses often can't hire willing workers for simple tasks because of overly burdensome licensure requirements from state government.

Oran P. Smith is Senior Fellow at Palmetto Promise Institue.(Photo: Submitted photo)

"If I can dream of a better land where all my brothers walk hand in hand, tell me why, can't my dream come true?"

My list is a only a small part of the answer. But perhaps it could jump start a conversation about specific ways to expand opportunity and grow equality not for the few, but for the many, in the state we love.

Oran Smith is a Greer native and resident who serves as Senior Fellow at Palmetto Promise Institute.

Lyrics are from songs performed by Elvis Presley, who passed away 43 years ago this month in Memphis, eight miles from The Lorraine Motel, where Dr. Martin Luther KingJr. was assassinated. King was killed in the year that until 2020 was Americas worst: 1968.

Read or Share this story: https://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/opinion/2020/08/07/starting-conversation-what-could-sc-do/3288526001/

Read more from the original source:

Opinion: Starting a conversation: What could SC do? - Greenville News

The floating of leaflets and other items posed serious risks to the lives of residents in the border regions by raising inter-Korean tensions; dealt a blow to the regional economy by resulting in a (local governments) ban on entry (into off-limits zones in border areas to fly things into the North) and decline in the number of tourists. Also, most of the leaflets flown were found in the South, increasing the load of trash to clean up, Lee Jong-joo, chief of the ministrys humanitarian cooperation bureau, told The Korea Herald in an email interview.

The ministry has asked the groups dozens of times to stop sending the leaflets into the North via official documents, meetings with them and telephone calls.

The ministry in June canceled its approval for the incorporation of two groups that floated balloons carrying anti-Pyongyang leaflets and other items into the skies hoping they would land in North Korea.

The groups filed an administrative lawsuit against the ministrys action, and the leader of one of the groups claimed that the ministry never asked them to refrain from floating the leaflets.

What is so wrong about sending rice to starving North Koreans? he asked.

Lee rejects this criticism.

Should (private groups) wish to send rice to North Korean residents or promote their right to know, there are various ways to do so while complying with domestic laws, and without infringing on the rights of residents in border areas, she said.

The ministry is also inspecting 25 North Korea-related nongovernmental groups registered with the ministry, including 13 run by North Korean defectors, to see if they are run according to the provisions under which they were allowed to register with the government.

In return for the governments approval of their incorporation, the nonprofit, private organizations are required to submit annual reports on their income and spending, lists of their property, and activities that they have engaged in.

The UN Special Rapporteur on North Korea (Tomas Ojea Quintana) recommended in an email to the Unification Ministry that we put the inspection on hold, and continue dialogue with the groups, Lee said.

The government has understood this request as an emphasis on communication with the groups.

The government has already explained its position to the groups pending inspection via individual meetings or phone calls, and has been hearing them out, Lee said.

The senior official also said she anticipates that such communication allowed the groups to better understand the governments intent regarding its inspection.

Inter-Korean exchanges have been stalled for over a decade since Seoul imposed its own sanctions against Pyongyang in response to North Koreas torpedo attack on a South Korean naval ship Cheonan in March 2010.

South Korean nongovernmental groups, which had engaged in projects in North Korea such as hospital building and helping improve farming techniques for 10 years under the liberal administrations until 2007, were not able to enter North Korea in the next decade under former Presidents Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye whose North Korea policy prioritized denuclearization.

Unification Minister Lee In-young, who was sworn in late last month, is pushing for a breakthrough in the impasse through resumption of humanitarian projects, starting with health and medical aid.

The ministry has already approved 21 requests from private groups this year to send disease prevention and medical supplies to North Korea, including 800 million won ($673,000) worth of COVID-19 prevention devices approved in late July.

Last week, it announced the provision of $10 million for a World Food Program project to supply food and nutrition to young children and women in North Korea.

As for matters that have to do with eating, illnesses and seeing things before dying, the government will immediately push for nonstop inter-Korean cooperation, without any political or national security-related calculations, the bureau chief Lee said, referring to the three priority areas set by the unification minister.

Through close communication and collaboration with the groups, the government will continue to help expand their autonomy and responsibility, while faithfully playing our part to get exemptions from (international) sanctions and approve exports of items (to the North).

By Kim So-hyun(sophie@heraldcorp.com)

Go here to read the rest:

[Herald Interview] Flying leaflets into NK was against basic rule of democracy: senior official - The Korea Herald

Whats the difference between Trump conservatism and Gainesville liberalism?

When he killed Obama-era fair housing rules, Donald Trump bragged that he did it so suburbanites wont be "bothered or financially hurt by having low income housing built in your neighborhood."

But we Gainesville liberals arent comfortable demonizing the poor. So when we want to torpedo affordable housing, we call it a sneaky plot to benefit greedy developers.

That certainly took care of GNV Rise, a modest proposal to incentivize lower-cost housing construction in Gainesville that died in the face of nearly hysterical opposition from neighborhood associations.

That was in 2018, and virtually nothing has happened on the affordable housing front since.

But, listen, things are going to come to a head pretty quickly.

Call it the looming clash of the moratoria.

Theres a good chance the city will impose a development moratorium in an attempt to head off the spread of student housing into historic black neighborhoods like Fifth Avenue and Pleasant Street.

A time out period of, say, a year, would give the city time to engage in better neighborhood comprehensive planning, advocates say.

Maybe so. But another moratorium is going to be lifted a lot sooner than that the stay on evictions of people who have lost their jobs to the coronavirus crisis and can no longer pay their rent.

When that happens, homelessness is going to explode, both locally and nationally.

And "people of color" will be "especially vulnerable" to the coming eviction crisis, reports CNBC.

"We know evictions have always had a disproportionate impact on tenants of color due to discrimination and lack of wealth," John Pollock, of the National Coalition for a Civil Right to Counsel, told the network.

Weve been talk, talk, talking about Gainesvilles affordable housing shortage for years.

And the fall of GNV Rise is a textbook example of why Gainesville remains all talk and no action.

Essentially we expect our commissioners to achieve goals that, on their face, appear to be mutually exclusive.

Lower housing costs so that everybody can afford to live in Gainesville.

But protect existing residents from policies that, homeowners perceive, will hurt their property values.

You would think a progressive university city like ours would be up to solving that conundrum, right? But town-gowns can be just as obstinate when it comes to deciding who should be allowed to live where.

"My own city of Berkeley, renowned for its progressive values and liberal politics for 50 years has suppressed new housing of all kinds and now has an almost unsolvable problem of affordability and homelessness."

This from Dorothy Walker, founding president of the American Planning Association in an important Streetsblog essay.

"The fact is, local control over land-use decisions has obstructed efforts for racial justice and social equity in housing since the beginning of our profession," she argues.

If you think a one-year time out will finally give Gainesville "equitable development," you havent been paying attention. Itll do no good unless we are willing to confront, and change, long entrenched zoning and land use restrictions that "perpetuate classism and racial segregation," as Walker puts it.

Single-family residential zoning, for instance, is the most rigidly enforced, and effective, instrument for segregation in American society.

Trump understands that, and he intends to use that ugly truth to his advantage.

We Gainesville liberals probably get it too. But greedy developers.

Ron Cunningham is former editorial page editor of The Sun. Read his blog at http://www.floridavelocipede.com. Email him at rondarts2008@gmail.com.

View post:

Ron Cunningham: Single-family zoning is an instrument for segregation - Palm Beach Post

Derek Thompson: Three decades ago, America lost its religion. Why?

Yet the Judeo-Christian tradition excluded not only Muslims, Native Americans, and other non-Western religious communities, but also atheists and secularists of all persuasions. American Jews themselves were reluctant adopters. After centuries of Christian anti-Semitic persecution and philo-Semitic fantasies of Jewish conversion, many eyed the award of an honorary hyphen with suspicion. Even some anti-communist politicians themselves recognized the concept as ill-suited to Americas postwar quest for global primacy in a decolonizing world.

The mythical Judeo-Christian tradition, then, proved an unstable foundation on which to build a common American identity. Today, as American democracy once again grasps for root metaphors with which to confront our countrys diversity and its place in the world, the terms recuperation should rightfully alarm us: It has always divided Americans far more than it has united them.

Although the Jewish and Christian traditions stretch back side by side to antiquity, the phrase Judeo-Christian is a remarkably recent creation. In Imagining Judeo-Christian America: Religion, Secularism, and the Redefinition of Democracy, the historian K. Healan Gaston marshals an impressive array of sources to provide us with an account of the modern genesis of Judeo-Christian and its growing status as a linguistic battlefield on which conservatives and liberals proffered competing notions of America and its place in the world from the 1930s to the present.

Before the 20th century, the notion of a Judeo-Christian tradition was virtually unthinkable, because Christianity viewed itself as the successor to an inferior, superseded Jewish faith, along with other inferior creeds. A good example of this comes from Reverend Ezra Stiles, president of Yale College and the most important intellectual in the early American republic, who wrote of religious freedom in 1785:

The most ample religious liberty will also probably [be obtained here] The United States will embosom all the religious sects or denominations in Christendom ... The Baptists, the Friends, the Lutherans will cohabit together in harmony That liberal and candid disquisition of Christianity which will most assuredly take place in America, will prepare Europe for the first event, with which the other will be connected, when, especially on the return of the Twelve Tribes to the Holy Land, there will burst forth a degree of evidence hitherto unperceived, and of efficacy to convert a world A time will come when six hundred millions of the human race shall be ready to drop their idolatry and all false religion, when Christianity shall triumph over superstition, as well as Deism, and Gentilism, and Mohammedanism.

Religious freedom meant freedom for Christians. Jews might be accommodated, though not necessarily with full equality, on a temporary basis until their eventual conversion. Like many other founding-era leaders, Stiles actually exhibited deep curiosity about Jews and Judaism. He spent six months attending services at the Newport, Rhode Island, synagogue to learn from a rabbi, Haim Isaac Carigal. The experience inspired Stiles to institute a short-lived Hebrew-language requirement for all Yale College freshmen. Yet he held to a theology of replacement in which Judaism would yield along with other faiths to a world unified in Christianity. Nor was he alone in this conviction. True, Western thinkers spoke of Athens and Jerusalem, but the latter was exclusively embodied in the Christian Church, not the rabbinic tradition. If anything, the shared patrimony of Judaism and Christianity was more a point of theological friction than a site of secular reconciliation.

Excerpt from:

The Problem With the Judeo-Christian Tradition - The Atlantic

Al Diamon

In the complicated debate over how to correct injustices heaped upon Maines Indigenous People, theres a word nobody dares to use.

No, not the former name of whats now known as the Washington Football Team. (Too bad they didnt rename it Washington Team Football, because then the initials would have accurately reflected that organizations long history of racism, sexism and inept sports management.)

The term that everyone is tiptoeing around as the Legislature considers a massive revamping of the states relationship with its tribes isnt one of those unacceptable epithets concerning race or sex. So why isnt anyone courageous enough to come right out and say it?

Because its really about that other thing that makes folks squeamish:

Money.

Obviously, thats not the word nobody will use. People of all ethnicities talk about money all the time. The innocuous collection of syllables that cannot be uttered in public is less about cash itself than the grubby business of how to get it.

So naturally, its in all the parties best interests to avoid the shunned word, and put the emphasis in the debate on something more principled. Unfortunately, that means other serious issues are being employed by the participants as camouflage to obscure what none of them wants to mention.

Change must be made in our education, judicial and law enforcement institutions, Donna Loring, a Penobscot Nation elder, wrote in a June newspaper op-ed.

Hard to dispute that.

In February, Maulian Dana, the Penobscots tribal ambassador, told the Portland Press Herald, Indigenous nations are not special interests, and these are equal rights, not special rights.

Amen to that.

According to a story in the Original Irregular, Bert Polchics, a Penobscot Nation member, told the Carrabassett Valley selectmen last month, We need to be able to control our own destinies. [O]ur ways are not to create harm in any way, to endanger or to destroy. Were trying to protect and make things better.

Everybody get on board. But before the love train leaves the station, make room in the caboose for that thing that isnt being talked about:

The C word.

The 1980 Maine Indian Land Claims Settlement Act gave the tribes that were parties to it lots of land. But it also put lots of restriction on how that land could be used. Native Americans couldnt simply decide to build a nuclear waste dump. They couldnt unilaterally start selling recreational marijuana. And they couldnt legalize gambling.

Which brings us finally to the dreaded C word. Readers whose moral principles prevent them from watching TV shows preceded by warnings that theyre for mature audiences should forego the remaining paragraphs. Because the C word is:

Casino.

Buried in the 22 proposed changes to Maines laws governing its relationship with the tribes is a section allowing gambling on all Indian land. But any clods so lacking in social graces that theyd actually bring up that point should be prepared to be buried in self-righteous indignation.

Were not here for casinos, Michael-Corey Hinton, a lawyer for the Passamaquoddy Tribe told a legislative committee in February. We are here to restore our sovereignty and our ability to self-govern.

Then he added, Under federal law, that would include the right to game.

Hinton wasnt talking about partridge.

I live in an area of western Maine almost entirely surrounded by land the Penobscots bought under the Settlement Act. If this legislation is approved, theres a good chance Ill have a gambling emporium for a neighbor. Ive got no problem with that. Except for one thing.

Maine needs to revise its gaming laws not only to allow Indian casinos, but also to permit any other reasonably qualified entity willing to pay a hefty licensing fee and a ridiculous tax on profits to offer slot machines and table games. For too long, gambling policy has been set by referendums, rather than sensible regulations.

Either everybody should be able to operate a casino, or nobody should.

Thats just a matter of a phrase that also begins with C:

Common sense.

Raise the stakes by emailing me at aldiamon@herniahill.net.

Link:

Politics & Other Mistakes: The C word - Daily Bulldog

The image of a small Midwestern college is one of quiet, peaceful campus nestled in a rural town.

Some now fear the global pandemic could silence many small schools altogether.

The coronavirus upended higher education this spring. Colleges had to lock down and refund thousands of dollars of tuition to students.

On the heels of financial struggles in higher education, the pandemic could land a death blow to smaller colleges dotting rural Missouri and Illinois. Over the past several years, economists have made dire predictions that many small colleges, possibly up to half, will go bankrupt and close in the next decade.

We get concerned about it. However, we've been fortunate that we see more folks wanting to be here, said Don Lofe, interim president at Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri.

Through the Civil War, world wars and plenty of economic downturns, colleges like Westminster have continued to graduate students. But over the past two years, about a dozen small colleges have closed for good. Among them is MacMurray College in Jacksonville, Illinois. After 174 years, the coronavirus pandemic was one punch on the chin too many.

School leaders argue they still hold a valuable position in the higher education landscape: a robust liberal arts education rooted in small class sizes, strong student support services and idyllic settings.

I still believe personally, and I think a lot of people do, that there is a need for traditional college education, said Dan Westhues, a board member at William Woods University, also located in Fulton.

Higher education financial experts are less rosy on the outlook.

Forbes magazine gives colleges letter grades based on their financial health. Numerous small schools in Missouri and Illinois earn poor marks. Westminster and Williams Woods get Cs. Culver-Stockton College, Hannibal-LaGrange University and Quincy University all have Ds.

These organizations are going to tell you We're going to survive, but they're not in large numbers, said Gary Stocker, a college administrator-turned-analyst.

Stocker worked at Lindenwood University and Westminster College before starting College Viability, a website aimed at tracking and presenting college financial data to worried college officials and curious parents.

And you see some really, really ugly numbers, he said.

Many of these colleges rely too much on endowment spending and alumni donations, rather than strong student bodies to pump in tuition dollars, Stocker said. They have little cash on hand and endowments too small to weather strong headwinds.

These small rural colleges are not profitable enough year in and year out to be able to have long-term viability, Stocker said.

Itll also be harder to promote the picturesque college experience if colleges have to remain locked down and there are no in-person classes or athletics another big recruitment tool for some small schools.

We feel we provide a unique experience, said Lofe, the head of Westminster. Many colleges are going to say that, but we've been able to demonstrate that with actions. For instance, athletics, the other experiences we have on campus.

COVID-19 also upended finances for colleges. Having to send students packing in March and issue refunds was a major expense. Federal aid programs enacted by Congress in the spring helped cover some of the losses.

I would just tell you this, we managed it well, Lofe said. Our college is very stabilized right now with respect to financial matters. But throughout the years, like many colleges, revenue streams have caused issues as well as the demographics that are changing, as you know, with respect to available students in the population to go to college.

Ryan Delaney

/

St. Louis Public Radio

Westminster College Board of Trustees Chair Jim Morton and Interim President Don Lofe on the campus in Fulton, Missouri, in July.

Fewer high school graduates and the growing sticker shock of a private college education will mean schools have to evolve or possibly die out.

I don't expect a mass extinction of small private colleges, but we may see several years' worth of closures in just a few weeks or months, so I wouldn't be surprised if a few of the small private colleges in the Midwest end up closing, said Robert Kelchen, a Missouri native and associate professor of higher education at Seton Hall University.

While Westminster boasts being around since the Civil War, Culver-Stockton College can brag that it survived a tornado shortly after graduation in 2003.

Douglas Palmer is the new president of Culver-Stockton in Canton, Missouri. Any big aspirations he had when he accepted the job in February, before the pandemic, may need to wait.

I would not expect that many colleges and universities in the area or even in the country are going to be doing a whole lot of hiring or investment in capital projects until we're through this crisis, he said.

He first must focus on maintaining an enrollment of 1,100 students and paying the people who educate them. I think it's been harder here, and I think it will continue to be hard.

Recruiting traditional students to rural pockets of the Midwest, even with appealing tuition discounts and scholarships, is getting harder, said Westhues, the William Woods board member. And so we certainly have seen that over the years, but I think that's actually kind of a decent thing because what it's forced us to do is be creative, and it's forced us to evolve.

William Woods is investing in online programs and degree completion for older adults. Westminster is focused on expanding recruitment and supporting students. It also wants to find a new niche, such as cybersecurity, that "will be a strong selling point."

But going after nontraditional students will have to balance with the core product.

"The liberal arts education gives you the ability to think, think just not analytically, but creatively. And those are words but they're really, I believe in those very strongly," Lofe said. "And I believe this type of education, this type of institution provides that."

Stocker and other industry watchers advocate for mergers of small colleges to reduce costs. Health care provides an example. What were once dozens of small hospitals run by religious orders around the region are now operated by a single hospital system.

Still, the worst-case scenarios many predicted for colleges and universities this fall so far dont appear likely. Some estimates this spring suggested fall enrollments would be down by up to 20%, with students perhaps choosing to stay closer to home or take a gap year.

But as of now Westminster, William Woods and most other small colleges say students are planning to return when campuses reopen this fall, even if it won't be for a typical semester.

Follow Ryan on Twitter: @rpatrickdelaney

See the rest here:

Small Midwestern Colleges Have Been Through It All. Can They Make It Through The Pandemic? - KBIA

August 7, 2020

Arizona State University graduate Kamra Sadia Hakim is an artist and entrepreneur with a vision to create inclusive spaces for marginalized communities throughActivation Residency, an artist residency and cooperative based in New York.

Hakim first became inspired to create change while earning a bachelors degree in global studies in 2015 from The College of Liberal Arts and Sciences.

My program at ASU was fantastic because I was all over the world by the age of 18, said Hakim, who uses they/them pronouns.

I pursued global studies because I knew that I wanted to make a global impact, but I didn't necessarily know how that would take shape. My service learning trip in Johannesburg (South Africa) and Zambia with theONE Campaignset me off to be a worldly person early on in life by expanding my capacity for human interaction, cultural adaptability and inclusion."

In their sophomore year, Hakim added a minor in social transformation and became exposed to issues on topics including feminism, the patriarchy and white supremacy.

To wake up to all of that information at a young 21 I was taken aback. Having access to queer and feminist studies really started to change the way in which I moved through the world. It also gave me access and more permission to my own personal queer and trans identity. From a fundamental level, ASU definitely equipped me with the confidence that I needed to be able to do this work.

Kamra Sadia Hakim

After ASU, Hakim earned a masters degree in global affairs from New York University and pursued several internships and roles, including as an arts professional development coordinator at Columbia University.

In 2018, Hakim created Activation after being moved by the experiences they had at music festivals and creative retreats, and seeing the lack of creative opportunities available for Black, Indigenous and other people of color (BIPOC) as well as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ) individuals.

By frequenting these festivals and retreats, I was really inspired by the level of community involved and the feeling of coming together around the arts, Hakim said. I found that a lot of healing experiences happen when folks come together for something that they really care about to share wisdom, knowledge, talents, expertise and gifts.

Initially, Activation was promoted as a weekend-long residency for working class and underserved artists. The original group of 20 artists gathered at the Outlier Inn, located in Woodridge, New York, sharing meals together and leading workshops based on their practice.

After what Hakim said was an overwhelmingly collaborative, heartwarming, emotional and transformative experience, they wanted to expand the programs reach. In the second year of the program, Hakim served over 60 artists through the residency program, this time partnering with community organizers to incorporate programming and conversations around race, class, gender and sexuality.

Geodesic dome at the Outlier Inn. Courtesy of Activation Residency.

People got to grapple with white supremacy and internalized homophobia while being in a community space that felt safe enough to have those difficult conversations, Hakim said. We had a conflict around race come up in real time and we had to come together as a community to create solutions for those problems, which is something that you don't really see in this work.

Over the years, Activations mission has remained the same but has grown exponentially with the help of successful online fundraising and community support. In light of the COVID-19 pandemic and an increased awareness of the injustices BIPOC and LGBTQ individuals face, Hakim has received a recent influx of support. Since the end of May, Hakim has raised over $150,000 to support Activation projects through social media fundraising.

Hakim also launched aco-op fundthis year that has raised over $10,000 since the end of April. Funds from the monthly-contribution program are redistributed to community members in need.

Folks really love Activation and the work were doing. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, we had around 1,800 followers on Instagram and now we have more than 9,000, Hakim said. I think the conversation around funding and redistributing wealth has rapidly changed.

When protests against the killing of George Floyd began, Hakim collected funds for necessary supplies like water and hand sanitizer and passed them out to protesters in New York. After experiencing an influx of new followers and an increase in monetary support, Hakim seized that momentum and created online workshops and other digital programming to expand Activation's impact.

The big thing has been figuring out ways to keep the Activation magic alive online, Hakim said. We've had some really beautiful Instagram live and Zoom programming, which was kind of unexpected for me. Online programming can be tedious and the Zoom fatigue is real. I just didn't think it was going to work, but we ended up recreating that soft and healing but challenging and rigorous atmosphere that Activation has in real life in our online programming. It has been so touching to see the human to human connections we've been able to achieve in the virtual sphere.

The funds raised over the past few months will be used to hostRespite as Resistance, a care and healing program for BIPOC, LGBTQ, disabled and immigrant activists, organizers and artists. The fall program will incorporate COVID-19 health and safety precautions including physical distancing, required mask wearing, gathering in outdoor spaces and small cohorts of eight to 10 people.

NK and Asha Grant lead a Praise the Lorde Sunday in the dome at the Outlier Inn. Courtesy of Activation Residency.

I think folks are being galvanized to go hard and fight for the struggle without realizing that part of moving through oppression is caring for ourselves, Hakim said. I feel like my job in the revolution is to center care and provide folks with the opportunity to care for themselves and be cared for by other community members.

Hakim hopes to continue to increase Activations reach, and is fundraising for a variety of ongoing projects, includingFarming Futurity, a permaculture farm and healing space on 15 acres of land in upstate New York that will provide short-term residencies for artists and community members who want to explore transformative justice healing arts.

As a Black person who grew up poor and is also trans, this is the kind of liberation that people like me have fought for forever and ever, Hakim said. So in a lot of ways, I feel like I'm living my dream and that is a motivation enough for me to continue to do the work.

Top photo:A group of artists sit on the ground in anticipation of a Family Constellation at Activation Residency. Courtesy of Activation Residency and Tonje Thilesen.

Communications Specialist and Lead Writer , The College of Liberal Arts and Sciences

eballi@asu.edu

View original post here:

Transformation through healing justice, community and art | ASU Now: Access, Excellence, Impact - ASU Now

As a candidate and then as president, Donald Trump has criticized and complained about U.S. alliesand especially about the amount of money that they pay toward their own defenses. And it hasnt all been talk: His administration recently announced a major reduction in the number of U.S. forces in Germany. (We dont want to be the suckers anymore, he said.) Reports claim that South Korea may be next.

As has so often been the case with the Trump administration, the presidents words and deeds force us to go back to basicsto understand and make the case for norms and practices that he has ignored or rejected. So lets try to answer a simple question: What are allies and what do we need them for?

First, some background. For most of history, alliances were situational and short-term, like the two Grand Alliances formed to halt the expansionism of France under Louis XIV, or the series of coalitions formed to defeat Napoleon. Outside of wartime, alliances tended to be unbalanced, and they were not necessarily friendly and consensual: There was the exploiter and there was the exploited. Participation in regionaland later globalhegemonic orders used to be more forcible than voluntary, and usually the hegemon benefited in a mercantile sense while the subjects received protection. Only in the nineteenth century did a world powerthe United Kingdomfor the first time use its hegemony to liberalize trade to benefit all participants. In time, the United States would take on that responsibility, and expand upon it.

One indicator of how historically anomalous the U.S.-led world order since 1945 has been is the fact that some U.S. allies ask, or even beg, the United States to house its troops in their countries. The United States has only reluctantly accepted this responsibilityand that reluctance is itself part of what has made U.S. global leadership appealing to much of the world. As Robert Kagan notes in his 2012 book The World America Made, never in history have small powers been so desirous of having a great power station troops within their borders, never in history has a great power been so reluctant to accept this invitation, never in history has a great power been so forceful in asking smaller powers to spend more on military capabilities, and never in history have smaller powers been so resistant to such a request.

Podcast August 07 2020

On today's Bulwark Podcast, Bill Kristol joins Charlie Sykes to discuss the President's new religious case against Joe B...

Now on to the question of what allies are good for. First, there is the obvious answer: They increase the aggregate military power of their bloc. This is what Trump has been complaining about for yearsthat some of our allies dont pay as much as they ought to for their own defenses, and so dont do enough to increase the alliances aggregate military power. On this point, he is not factually wrong. (There often are, though, good reasons to think twice before asking allies to pay more.) Nor is he the first president to push NATO allies to spend more; his two predecessors did as well.

But increasing aggregate military power is not an alliances only benefitnor necessarily the most important one. Allies also provide each other with geographic access and knowledge. The United States is unlikely to have to fight a land war in its home territory. But if the United States ever needs to fight another war in Europe, the current presence of U.S. troops allows the United States not to have to worry about having to lead another Normandy invasion. Additionally, this presence helps to acquaint the U.S. military with Europes terrain, geography, and climate. And forward deployments of troops to Europe and Asia have created buffer zones between the United States and Russia and the United States and Chinain Americas favor. The Russians and the Chinese are not at our doorsteps, but we are at theirs.

Alliances can also legitimize the collective actions of their participants. Americans remember the Iraq War as a unilateral move due to Frances and Germanys objections. The truth, however, is that a half-dozen other nations participated militarily alongside the United States, and dozens of others joined in other ways. Russians unilateral actions in Georgia in 2008 and Ukraine starting in 2014 resulted in punitive action against it. But American actions in the Balkans in the 1990s, Iraq starting in 2003, Libya in 2011, Pakistan for the past two decades, Yemen in the 2000s, Somalia in the 1990s, and so on, never resulted in any international punitive backlashsanctions, for instancein part because those actions were taken alongside allies.

Alliances also share intelligence. Five Eyes is an intelligence-sharing coalition of five English-speaking countriesthe United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. In Asia, Americans benefit from South Korean intelligence services spying on North Korea. Israel has been a useful intelligence provider to the United States, and not only about Iran and potential threats in the Middle East: In 2015, for instance, it was Israel that informed the National Security Agency about the Russians access to the agencys hacking tool.

By providing our allies with security guarantees, the United States prevents them fromor at least reduces their likelihood ofaccommodating our enemies against our interests. Indeed, because of our security guarantees, our allies often go out of their way to accommodate our interests, sometimes even against their own, so they can stay on our good side.

Last but not least, by allowing the forward deployment of the U.S. military, Americas allies make it possible for the United States to resolve what Peter Feaver calls the civil-military relations problematique: that Americans needed a large standing army but feared that it would be used to undermine liberalism in the United States. The resolution was forward deployment. Americans got to keep their large Army but far away in somebody elses country.

Among the anomalies of the U.S. liberal world order is how relatively little the United States, compared with previous hegemonic powers, spends on its military, despite its large responsibilities around the world. From 1960 until the demise of the USSR, the Soviet Union never spent less than 10 percent of its GDP on military expenditures, while occasionally getting close to 20 percent of it. By contrast, the United States never spent more than about 9 percent of its GDPwhich would have been impossible without Americas liberal alliance system.

The United States is lucky to have its many great allies, and they are lucky to have us. Only a fool would choose to endanger the current system.

Visit link:

What Are Allies Good For, Anyway? - The Bulwark

One of the most overlooked factors of accelerated climate change is animal agriculture. Could changes to the human diet help us slow down the climate crisis?

Reading Time: 6 minutes

One of the most overlooked factors of accelerated climate change is animal agriculture. Could changes to the human diet help us slow down the climate crisis?

Animal agriculture has long left its mark upon the earth. Forests have fallen and grasslands trampled in favor of crops and pastureland. Now, however, this sectors impacts are being felt in the atmosphere carrying troubling implications for every living thing on the planet.

The agriculture sector is one of the biggest drivers of anthropogenic meaning human-caused climate change. Animal agriculture, which sees the raising and processing of ruminants, poultry, and marine life, accounts for some of the biggest sources of greenhouse gasses. Global temperatures rise as forest cover decreases, and oceans warm as they absorb ever-more carbon dioxide.

Yet there are solutions to these problems among which is the adoption of plant-based diets. It is not too late for the world to take action against the perils of a changing climate, but time for action is now.

Practicing agriculture does not necessarily come naturally to us as a species. For much of human prehistory, people lived in societies oriented around hunting and gathering. The earliest signs of agriculture can be dated at around 12,000 years ago, yet since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution, agriculture has taken on an entirely new face, adopting intensive practices such as concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) which foster truly heartbreaking conditions for farmworkers, animals, and surrounding communities alike.

Called humanitys greatest mistake by some due to the resulting hard labor, diminished nutrition, and social inequality brought by agriculture, this system of food production now presents the world with a new quandary: environmental destruction on scales that can no longer be ignored.

CAFOs produce enormous amounts of waste, which collect in vast open-air lagoons that can be breached by extreme weather events or gradually seep into groundwater. Water pollution from CAFOs can cause algal blooms which can devastate entire marine ecosystems. Air pollution is generated from CAFOs as manure is vaporized, sending toxic wafts through the air to surrounding communities.

Vast fields of monocrops also cause a host of environmental effects, including air pollution. Pesticides and herbicides are sprayed in liberal amounts, which can cause a host of debilitating illnesses, including cancers, for farmworkers and surrounding communities. Soil depletion is also a serious looming issue. Monocropping, along with the overuse of agrochemicals including synthetic fertilizers like nitrogen and phosphorus, are denying fields a fallow period or crop rotation has the effect of leeching soils of their nutrients. These practices render soils far less productive over time. It takes hundreds, if not thousands, of years for soils to become abundantly fertile again.

Out of all the human activities that cause climate change, agriculture is one of the biggest contributors. Estimates as of 2020 put the sectors global contributions at 37 percent. Below are a few key factors accounting for climate change emissions resulting from human-cased agriculture.

A full 50 percent of the worlds livable land meaning land that is ice-free and fertile is being used for agriculture. No other human activity takes up more space. In contrast, all urban areas account for around one percent of livable land use. A whopping 77 percent of agricultural land is dedicated to raising animals, including grazing and the land used to grow their feed, including vast monocrops of species like corn and soy. Surprisingly, this huge expenditure of resources and land use provides only 18 percent of the worlds calories.

Land used for any type of agriculture be it livestock or crops meant for people or animals is brought under cultivation by clearing forests and grasslands, which are carbon sinks due to their abilities to absorb carbon. Currently, forests consume roughly a quarter of all anthropogenic CO2, yet the more forests are slashed and burned to make way for pastureland or monocrops, the less carbon will be absorbed, resulting in accelerated climate change.

Farmed animals referred to as livestock generate over 14 percent of all anthropogenic emissions, with estimated totals hovering around seven gigatonnes of carbon dioxide emitted every year. The bulk of these emissions are due to raising cattle for meat and dairy, contributing 60 percent of total livestock emissions. These emissions are thanks to the vast amounts of resources cows consume, the land they require for pasture (in the case of beef cattle), and other manure they produce. Cow manure contains nitrous oxide and methane, the latter being one of the most potent greenhouse gasses due to its outsized ability to absorb heat.

Marine life, including fish, shellfish, shrimp, and other animals are taken from the seas in astronomical numbers. Nets, some of which are large enough to contain 12 jumbo jet airplanes, are dragged through the water or across the bottom of the seafloor, capturing everything in their path. Direct fishing activity, plus the energy expended to transport, process, and refrigerate carcasses amounted to an estimated total of 179 million tonnes of greenhouse gasses in 2011 and this number likely will continue to grow as demand for seafood increases.

In greenhouses designed to grow plants, the transparent glass structure allows sunlight into the greenhouse while preventing heat from escaping. The earths atmosphere functions in a similar way, with gas molecules acting like the glass. Certain gases are more effective at absorbing heat than others; these include methane, nitrous oxide, and perhaps the most infamous, carbon dioxide. These three gasses are among the main culprits of climatic warming and change caused by human activities.

One of the biggest drivers of global warming has been the release of carbon into the atmosphere due to the burning of fossil fuels such as natural gas, oil, and coal, which power many aspects of modern life. Even electric cars, which run on batteries and do not themselves generate carbon emissions, draw electricity from grids still run on fossil fuels (although the goal of using 100% renewable energy for electric grids is more achievable than ever). When carbon released from fossil fuel burning is released into the atmosphere, it binds with oxygen and forms carbon dioxide and begins trapping heat in the atmosphere. Because carbon emissions make up the vast majority (81 percent, as of 2018) of total greenhouse gases, they pose one of the gravest threats to climate stability.

Although carbon is the greatest emitted by volume, other greenhouse gases can be much more potent. For example, one ton of nitrous oxide emitted by agricultural processes including the use of nitrogen fertilizers in crop production is equivalent to nearly 300 tons of carbon dioxide.

Methane is approximately 30 times more potent in its ability to absorb and trap heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide.

By far, the most effective way to reduce the animal agriculture sectors greenhouse gas footprint is to significantly reduce, and eventually eliminate animal agriculture. While this might sound extreme, it is the state of industrial animal agriculture characterized by inhumane CAFOs, waste lagoons teeming with pathogens and antibiotics, and requiring enormous land and feed inputs which is even more extreme.

This is not to say that eliminating animal agriculture is something easily accomplished. Demand will have to decrease, thanks to people turning to plant-based diets. The ease of adopting these diets is not the same for everyone, however. Many lower-income neighborhoods in the United States are classified as food deserts, where a lack of grocery stores forces people to endure extremely limited options, such as gas stations or fast-food restaurants.

People in nations like the United States who do not live in food deserts bear much of the responsibility for reducing demand for animal products. Fortunately, plant-based options abound to replace animals in a wide range of products, from cheese to milk to burgers and sausages. Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods are two of the leading companies in the plant-based meat sector, helping the idea of plant-based meats go mainstream and helping people understand that its possible to achieve the BBQ-worthy tastes without the climate side-effects. Plant-based meats use up to 99 percent less land and emit up to 90 percent fewer greenhouse gas emissions.

Flying in planes or driving SUVs have long been understood as having negative impacts on the global climate. While these are certainly deserving of critique and change, the agriculture sector deserves time in the spotlight. If industrial agriculture continues to grow unchecked, global warming will increase with potentially disastrous impacts, the beginnings of which are being felt today. Methane, produced by livestock including sheep, goats, and cows, is a greenhouse gas with a terrific ability to trap heat in the atmosphere. The agriculture industry is responsible for fully 40 percent of the total anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions.

In order to curb global warming, and keep the global temperature increase below 1.5 degrees Celsius, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says that global emissions will need to be reduced by around 40 to 50 percent. According to the U.N., the only way to achieve these reductions is to drastically increase forested land which means reclaiming land currently under cultivation and to stop intrusions into existing forests.

Due to its profound impacts on the climate and environment around the world, agriculture may well be humanitys gravest mistake because it may be our undoing. Unless greenhouse gas emissions are seriously curbed, the world is going to be a far more difficult place to endure. Reducing demand for animal agriculture and adopting a plant-based diet is among the most important actions any individual can make.

Go here to read the rest:

Animal Agriculture and Its Negative Impact on Climate Change - Sentient Media

Kaleigh Par has been named to the newly created position of executive director of Haverhills Whittier Birthplace.

Par, an experienced museum professional, specializing in historic sites, was previously associated with the Buttonwoods Museum, Ipswich Museum and, most recently, as director of the Patton Homestead in Hamilton, where she will continue to assume a leadership role.

Making strategic hires like this is essential in supporting our core strategy to become a premier museum in Essex County, said Arthur H. Veasey, president of the trustees of the John Greenleaf Whittier Homestead. During these challenging times, we remain focused on our mission to perpetuate the reputation, visibility and popularity of our museum and grounds as a destination for visitors and as a welcoming venue for special events, he added.

The homestead and museum is at 305 Whittier Road in Haverhill. The historic land and buildings, a fixture among the citys cultural treasures, was deeded to the trustees by James H. Carleton in 1892 to preserve as nearly possible the natural features of the landscape and buildings as when occupied by a young Whittier, who was later renowned as a fireside poet and advocate of the abolition of slavery in the United States.

Par is a Haverhill native and a graduate of Bates College. She received a Master of Liberal Arts specializing in Museum Studies from Harvard University.

Like Loading...

Related

Continued here:

Adapting to the Times, Whittier Birthplace Names Par to Newly Created Post of Executive Director - WHAV News

The Civil Union Amendment Bill that has recently been submitted to the president of South Africa for consideration is cause for grave concern. South Africa is regarded as a fully-fledged democracy, which naturally implies a commitment towards the advancement of diversity; diversity in the deepest sense of the word.

The Bill discards the right of state-employed officers and magistrates to object to the solemnisation of same-sex marriages based on their right to freedom of belief. Should the president decide to sign the Bill into law it would mean that state-employed marriage officers and magistrates who conscientiously object against the solemnisation of same-sex marriages would run the risk of, among others, having to find other employment.

The Constitution affords the president the right to refer the Bill to the National Assembly for reconsideration, instead of signing it into law. Why should the latter approach be the preferred choice?

The answer to this lies in the importance of the protection of the right to freedom of religious belief (as is the case with non-religious belief) against the background of the nature of the public sphere, which also substantively overlaps with a proper understanding of the relevance of the advancement of diversity.

A reading of section 15 of the Constitution confirms the right to freedom, not only of religious beliefs but also of non-religious beliefs, and the inextricable relationship between these beliefs and opinions, thoughts as well as convictions. This then also relates to our views on morality and justice.

This, in turn, finds application pertaining to views on, for example, the origin and meaning of human life; the teaching of sexual morality in schools and the purpose of education in general; forms of punishment to be meted out for crimes committed; the parameters of tax exemptions; the redistribution of land to previously disadvantaged groups; trade in pornographic material and modes of entertainment; government subsidisation of private schools; the degree of autonomy to be awarded to religious associations; and restrictions imposed by the authorities during the outbreak of a pandemic.

Accompanying this are the different meanings accorded by persons and groups to freedom, equality, harm, fairness and human dignity. In this regard, it is not only the individual that ascribes to specific views, but also the civil authorities and the laws of the land. This is illustrated in the following example: not providing subsidies to private schools that teach and practise a specific religious ethos (as opposed to public schools who may not formally ascribe to a specific religious ethos) is indicative of a government taking a specific moral stance on the teaching of religion in basic education.

In this regard, the governments interpretation of, for example, harm and human dignity, exudes the view that it does not regard this approach as being profoundly violatory towards the human dignity of a pupil who comes from a religious home. The parents of the said pupil, however, may view this as unfair and constitutive of a gross violation of their right to freedom of religion, which in turn is inextricably related to having an adverse effect on their and their childs human dignity.

This explains the fact that democratic societies (including the civil authorities and the laws of the land) are permeated with a multitude of differing views and related practices on matters of moral importance and the exercise of justice; views that ascribe to some or other platform that rests on belief, whether religious or non-religious, and which guides interpretations of morality, justice, freedom, harm, equality, fairness and human dignity.

The spaces that we enter on leaving the home (spaces that are constitutive of the public sphere) is as much a space for the religious believer to occupy and experience in all sorts of ways as it is for the non-religious believer. Just as the non-religious believer is accompanied by her or his moral convictions and views on justice and allowed the freedom to exercise these accordingly when in the public domain, so then the same should apply to the religious believer. Yet, not only is religion substantively relegated to the private sphere in liberal democracies around the world; it is also dominated by a type of liberalism that propagates a subjective measure (or single morality), a liberalism that philosopher John Gray sternly warns against.

This type of A B C D liberalism understands toleration as an instrument of rational consensus, and a diversity of ways of life is endured in the faith that it is destined to disappear. An ideal of ultimate convergence on values is typified by this liberalism. In contrast to this, there is a liberalism that views toleration as a condition of peace and that different ways of living are welcomed as features of diversity in the good life and the coexistence of conflicting views is supported.

An example is Grays, Two Faces of Liberalism. It is this latter type of liberalism that signifies the advancement of diversity. This slots in with John Inazus call for the pushing of the boundaries for freedom of diversity against the background of government and community needing to make concerted efforts to allow for freedom not only of difference, but also of substantial difference, except where extreme disadvantage (such as violence) threatens.

Bearing in mind Grays cautioning against a type of liberalism that seeks ultimate consensus and convergence of values, cognisance needs to be taken of the risk of having the law assist in this regard. To allow for the law to envelope the whole of society in a specified moral understanding regarding matters that lend themselves to deeply layered moral views is a smack in the face of the advancement of diversity as an essential attribute of an effective democracy.

In the words of Iain Benson, we are in danger of the law extending its ambit beyond where it should go to a kind of juristic theocracy if we are not careful. We are at risk of comprehensive law that fails to understand its competence and its jurisdiction and that would thus threaten the various plural goods that a richly federated state needs to nurture.

This does not purport to suggest an absolute exclusion of limitations to be levelled at the right to freedom of religion. Limitations should indeed be warranted in instances where it is, to quote section 18(3) of the International Convention on Political and Civil Rights, prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others the gist of which is supported by the Constitution.

The preamble of the Constitution includes the following: We, the people of South Africa Believe that South Africa belongs to all who live in it, united in our diversity , and it is especially rights in and of themselves which are included in the Constitution such as freedom of religion, as well as freedom of cultural practices that are indicative of the Constitutions endeavour towards the advancement of diversity.

In addition to the Constitutional Courts affirmation of the importance of religion, for example in Christian Education South Africa v Minister of Education 2000, it also emphasises the importance of diversity. Also bolstering the prominence of diversity and the voice of religion in South Africa is the South African Charter of Religious Rights and Freedoms, which was formulated and endorsed by representatives of all the mainline religions in the country (signing of this charter took place in 2010). This initiative flows from section 234 of the Constitution (although it still needs to be passed into law).

The option provided for by the Constitution allowing for the president to refer the Bill to the National Assembly for reconsideration (as alluded to earlier) should therefore be the preferred route to follow. The solemnisation of a marriage constitutes an act that is inextricably related to substantive and deeply layered moral and religious views regarding an intimate (in various ways) relationship between human beings. Also, beliefs and convictions rested on religion should be allowed the freedom awarded by the law to substantively share the public sphere with all the other non-religious beliefs and convictions.

Consequently, the required protection should be awarded to the marriage officer or magistrate who objects to solemnise same-sex marriages, an objection based on a conscientiously prescribed conviction. Related to this, the civil authorities, as tasked by the Constitution itself, must respect, protect, promote and fulfil the rights in the Bill of Rights.

The final outcome in this matter will clearly indicate the degree of commitment and urgency by the government to truly advance diversity and by doing so, to live up to one of the central doctrines proclaimed by liberal democracies themselves, namely the advancement of the different meanings of freedom itself.

In an article published by the Mail & Guardian on August 4, Ropafadzo Maphosa argues that public officials must treat all marriages equally. Read the article below.

Read this article:

Marriage officers should have the right to object on religious grounds - Mail and Guardian

One of the simplest indicators of how a given geographic location will vote is whether the area is rural or urban. In general, rural areas tend to vote Republican, while urban areas vote Democrat. (As you can see in the image above showing how counties across the country voted in the 2016 Presidential Election.)

As someone who lives in one of those blue blobs in the middle of a sea of red, I can anecdotally attest to that general rule. Residing in the middle of a triangle of universities, in the capital of a southern state, you come across many centrists, and fellow liberally-minded moderates. However, travel 30min by interstate in any direction, and the political environment youre used to quickly changes. The sprinkling of Thanks Jesus signs become a sea of them. The occasional Trump supporter bumper sticker becomes a fleet of them, and while many billboards may be empty or advertising a sporting event, even more ask the question, Got Jesus? The comedian Marc Maron once performed in my home town, and commented (and Im paraphrasing), Wow, whats the deal with all the Thanks Jesus signs? Not very welcoming to the Jews. You dont see any Thanks Yahweh'.

Living in the blue blob means you have to get used to your views not being expressed by your home state as a whole. My state was a win for Trump in 2016, and our state House is controlled by the Republicans. This site is partially a way for me and other writers to express their views, frustrations, news, and perspectives as people sequestered by the Urban/Rural divide.

Continue reading here:

Liberal Island Liberal Views From Inside a Red State

Boris Johnson has laid the ground for a Whitehall power grab over Englands planning system with the central Government dictating how many homes every council must build and the wealthiest areas forced to grow fastest.

Ministers published a white paper laying out proposals for a new planning regime which removes the right of councils to decide planning applications on a case-by-case basis. Instead every local authority will define set rules for its area, giving developers carte blanche to build on designated patches of land as long as they meet certain minimum standards.

Businesses and free-market campaigners endorsed the policies, saying they would help fix a broken housing market. But charities and councils including Conservative officials warned the Government against watering down local control of planning and claimed the effect of loosening restrictions could be the next generation of slum housing.

Attacking the status quo on planning, the Prime Minister said: The whole thing is beginning to crumble and the time has come to do what too many have for too long lacked the courage to do tear it down and start again.

That is what this paper proposes. Radical reform unlike anything we have seen since the Second World War. Not more fiddling around the edges, not simply painting over the damp patches, but levelling the foundations and building, from the ground up, a whole new planning system for England.

Liberal Democrat MP Tim Farron responded: These reforms are just yet another power grab by ministers as part of Johnsons and Cummings agenda to hoard power in Whitehall. This Government is tying the hands of our councils so that ministers can impose top-down decisions which will not have the best interests of our communities at heart.

As part of the Governments plans to build 300,000 new homes a year, every council area will be given a local target for housebuilding. The figure will be based on the projected increase in demand meaning that wealthy areas which attract new arrivals from elsewhere will have to build the most.

Authorities which refuse to set aside enough land for new homes will face unspecified sanctions from Whitehall. All new housing developments will continue to need permission from the local council, but planning officers will only be able to block those projects which fall short of minimum standards set well in advance.

Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, Conservative MP for the Cotswolds, claimed that watering down the council veto could lead to lower-quality homes, saying: We have got to be really sure that we are not building slums of tomorrow by building today at low quality.

Tory councillor James Jamieson, chair of the Local Government Association, added: Any loss of local control over developments would be a concern. It would deprive communities of the ability to define the area they live in and know best and risk giving developers the freedom to ride roughshod over local areas. Charities also claimed that reforms to the levies imposed on developers would reduce the stock of affordable housing, which the Government denies.

Writing for i, London Mayor Sadiq Khan said: Its disappointing to see in recent weeks that, rather than talking about building well-designed, sustainable, genuinely affordable homes, ministers have instead been championing changes to the planning system, scrapping the requirement for developers to deliver social and affordable housing as part of their developments and allowing the conversion of more small, cramped flats out of old offices and shops that are unfit for families.

Visit link:

Government to dictate number of homes to be built in England with demolition of planning rules - iNews