Daily Archives: January 28, 2022

What better way for Freedom High Schools wrestling team to celebrate senior night than with a victory over archrival Liberty.

The Patriots recognized their six seniors prior to Wednesday nights match at Joseph McIntyre Gymnasium, and the four who competed all contributed something to the 39-20 Eastern Pennsylvania Conference Division B triumph.

This was a good win because I grew up wrestling for the Little Canes, and now I beat them as a senior, said Freedoms Reinaldo Lebron, who avenged a loss in the Bethlehem Holiday Classic to Kamal Abboud with a wild 10-5 decision at 126 pounds in the matchs final bout.

Patriots senior Chris Jurado earned a 16-7 major decision over Ed Force at 145. Jurado gained the bonus team point with a takedown with 1 second remaining after he allowed Force to escape with less than 10 seconds to go and reduce the score to a regular decision.

One bout later, at 152, Freedom senior Connor Bevan built an 11-2 lead over Elijah Reid before slapping on a headlock for the fall 35 seconds into the second period.

Bevans pin was the Pates third straight win after Libertys Javien DeLeon, ranked fourth this week by lehighvalleylive.com, opened the match by converting five takedowns into a 12-3 major decision over Cameron Wickemeyer at 132.

We came in 15-2 as a team, and we wanted to push on the gas and get the momentum with our fans, said Bevan, who also weighed in at 145. We feed off the crowd. I think getting the pin sparked us.

Freedoms fourth senior competitor, Anthony Lyden, gave up 14 pounds to Sawyer Quayle in their 189-pound bout. Lyden saved a team point by avoiding Quayles late cradle to drop a 9-2 decision.

Limiting the oppositions bonus points has been key to the Patriots current nine-match win streak. Its something they didnt do in a 38-18 loss to Easton two weeks ago.

The team message in the locker room tonight was Do your job, Bevan said. Even if you lose, dont get pinned. Easton wasnt our best match because we gave up way too many bonus points. When we limit bonus points, like we did against Parkland (32-24 win on Jan. 20) we look like a team ready to take that next step.

Coach Dante Terenzio certainly got his message through to his Patriots.

Easton was a wake-up call; we had a long talk with the kids after the Easton match, Terenzio said. We told the kids whove been struggling that their contributions are just as important as the ones who are winning for us.

Freedom won eight of the 13 bouts, including pins from Joey Bodnar at 138 and Jared Karabinus at 172 and a 22-6 technical fall from fourth-ranked CJ Horvath at 120.

I think weve got more chemistry and were working harder, said Lebron of the Patriots win streak though they have Bethlehem Catholic on deck Thursday night. Were not individuals. Were learning how to win as a team.

There were bright spots for Liberty (9-8, 2-4), which was missing a 113-pounder and had wrestlers competing despite nursing injuries.

We fell short, but the effort was there, said second-year Liberty coach Brandon Hall, who had spent eight seasons as Freedoms head coach and was greeted by many of his former Patriots after the match. Ed Force was out there with some busted up ribs, but we needed him, and Chandler Drew was out of the lineup (at 138) because hes been sick. It certainly was an entertaining match for the fans.

Senior Christian Reids 29-second pin over Freedom freshman Noah MacIlroy in a battle between a pair of wrestlers ranked among the honorable mentions this week at 160 was a Hurricane highlight.

Liberty also gained a major decision at 215 from Rafi Harrington and a 7-4 decision from Jasiah Pagan over Jomar Medina in a test of talented freshmen at 106.

Freedoms Nick Farrel edged John Notchey Jr. by a 6-4 decision at 285 and was presented the Daniel P. McIntyre Award as the matchs outstanding wrestler. Farrel scored all his points by countering a trio of Notcheys offensive shots into takedowns, including the go-ahead takedown with 1:23 left in the third period.

Two years ago, Nick Farrel weighed 180 pounds and wrestled at 220; he didnt have any wins, Terenzio said. Hes put on 60 pounds and put the work in. Now hes around right around .500. Hes been doing a heck of a job for us.

While Notchey came up a few points shy of the victory, he, too, was a winner in the eyes of his coaches, teammates and anyone who knows his story.

John Notcheys been battling cancer for the last two years, said Hall who became emotional talking about his senior heavyweight. I told him if we can get him back in shape we were going to get him on the mat.

He wrestled for the first time for us this weekend, and I made the decision to let him wrestle tonight. It was probably tough for Levi (Levy, Libertys other 285-pounder) not to wrestle against Freedom, but we have a team thats pretty close. You only get to do this one time, and some things are bigger than winning the match.

Thank you for relying on us to provide the journalism you can trust. Please consider supporting lehighvalleylive.com with a voluntary subscription.

Corky Blake may be reached at sports@lehighvalleylive.com.

View original post here:

Freedom senior wrestlers bring the noise on their night to topple Liberty - lehighvalleylive.com

In San Diegos often overlooked underground hip-hop scene, few voices standout like Tulengua, a bilingual, binational and multiracial group composed of recording artists Amari Jordan, Alan Lilienthal, and Jaime Mora.

Members of the group claim residency on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border, with roots tethering the trio to San Diego and Tijuana. For the past several years, Tulengua has made a name for themselves in the underground hip-hop scene of the San Diego border region. Producing their own brand of music, the trio has crafted a sonic tapestry composed of different cultures, languages, and sounds that transcend borders and genres.

Since the groups formation in 2018, Tulengua has been anything but predictable. Tulenguas music features live instrumentation and sampling from a variety of genres such as hip-hop, psychedelic, progressive rock, soul, Spanish-language music and even obscure movie soundtracks. Their lyrics are bilingual and often carry a strong social commentary by regularly touching on topics of immigration, racism and the struggles of undocumented immigrants.

Their unique sound has brought them success and support from those who relate to the stories they tell, but the last two years have been difficult. The pandemic wreaked havoc for the performing artists. Music venues closed around the same time they released a new album. Then the border closed and separated the bandmates.

But now, Tulengua is in the middle of a rebirth. The group is exploring the concept of crowdfunding.

Just like streaming changed the music industry, theres a new wave of web3 technology bringing more freedom to musicians, Lilienthal said. Web3 is an idea for a new iteration of the World Wide Web based on the blockchain, which incorporates concepts including decentralization and token-based economics. Lilienthal hopes that by using this technology the group can be transformed into a digitally tradable asset amongst fans via-tokens through the same block-chain technology utilized with NFTs and cryptocurrency.

Were trying to imagine a world where our biggest supporters can in a sense be like our shareholders where the binational community around us can grow as we grow, he said.

The humble origins of the group trace back as the brainchild of Tulengua frontman Alan Lilienthal. Lilienthal and his family moved from Mexico City to San Diego when he was 8 years old.

Lilienthal was an avid musician from a young age and played in a number of local bands in various cities. He also maintained a revolutionary spirit. At the age of 21, at the suggestion of his brother, Lilienthal took a Greyhound bus out to New York City to take part in the Occupy Wall Street movement, a protest against economic inequality and the influence of corporate money in politics that began in Zuccotti Park, located in New York Citys Wall Street financial district, in 2011. Following New York, Lilienthal spent some time traveling abroad until he felt compelled to return home to San Diego.

By the time Lilienthal returned to the States, vitriol regarding the border and immigration had reached a zenith, propelled by the incendiary rhetoric of then Republican frontrunner Donald Trump. In the days and months following Trumps election in 2016, Lilienthal and fellow rapper Slack Barrett began work on a cross-border musical collective. Although the collective didnt have a solidified lineup, let alone a name, Lilienthal and Barrett were laying the foundations for what would eventually become Tulengua.

At that point it wasnt even a solid group, it was more like a loose collective of people from both sides of the border, said Lilienthal, who at the time was doing cross border work. I was seeing so much cooperation, fluidity and collaboration between both sides, but that wasnt really being spoken about in the media. So we wanted to create something that showed the unity and community between both sides, and could represent the beauty thats created when people come together despite their differences.

Lilienthal and Barrett quickly began working on songs together, with the two emcees trading bars, going back and forth in both English and Spanish. The first five or six songs were just us kind of processing our feelings about the political climate that was going on in America. You hear that because it was such a shit show, and we just wanted to write about what was going on, Lilienthal recalled.

It was around the same time Lilienthal also met Amari Jordan, a local artist who had grown up in San Diego and was working on her solo career as an emcee in San Diegos local hip-hop scene as well. The two met in a chance encounter at a Wu-Tang-themed rap battle in Barrio Logan, after Jordan battled local battle rap heavy weight Ric Scales. After witnessing Jordan go head to head against one of San Diegos most versatile battle rappers, Lilienthal was compelled to introduce himself and eventually asked Jordan if she wanted to join the group. Jordan found the idea of joining a group (especially one regularly addressing topics of social justice) appealing and agreed to join Lilienthal and Barrett.

Shortly afterward, Lilienthal discovered Jaime Moras music on the music-streaming platform Soundcloud. At the time the idea for Tulengua was for it to be a cross-border collective, so I wanted to find someone in Tijuana that also made beats. With Mora added to the line-up the group began work on the remainder of the project.

The groups debut album, Baja Funk, received praise from both fans and local music critics upon its release in 2018. Tulengua received even more attention after the members decided to donate all profits from the project to Border Angels, a San Diego-based migrants rights nonprofit organization that serves the countys immigrant community through various migrant outreach programs, including day laborer outreach and legal assistance. The group even collaborated with the org on a music video for their single, Selva. After Baja Funk completed recording, Slack Barrett moved to the East Coast, effectively leaving the group and solidifying Tulenguas lineup as Lilienthal, Jordan, and Mora.

Almost immediately Tulengua was hailed for both outspokenness on border issues and also for the groups ability to break down language barriers as well as ethnic and racial stereotypes.

Music is this great kind of weapon or tool that is so much more than entertainment. Its this amazing vessel to inspire change and bring people together, so I always knew that whatever I did musically I wanted that element to be very present, Lilienthal said. The group was born from this political tension and all this bullshit that was being spewed from Washington, so from the very beginning I wanted to make it very clear what Tulengua stood for. Yes, its entertainment and its Hip-Hop, its fun, its a party, and its lit. But, its also being put at the service of something else thats beyond just ego.

Jordan also expressed the important role the group plays touching upon topics seldom discussed among most hip-hop artists.

Theres so many people out there that dont have a voice, so why not put forth a voice that they can attach themselves to whether they speak our language or not, Jordan said.

Following a six song EP entitled Feelins, Tulengua released their sophomore effort in the spring of 2020. The groups follow-up album LOWKEYBANGERSVILLE was a stark break from the groups more old-school hip-hop oriented sound cultivated on Baja Funk, veering into more modern territory with more trap inspired and experimental production.

Lilienthal acknowledged that the groups change of direction might turn some fans off, but stressed that pushing boundaries has always been a major component of the groups dynamics

We dont ever want to just be in the conscious rap box or the underground box, Lilienthal said. We make music that we love. I think that the fact that were from both sides of the border, erasing boundaries, and bringing people together, that infuses anything we do with this weight that its more than only music. Jordan agrees and believes that the groups fluidity is what sets them apart. We found a way to bridge not just hip-hop, Jordan said.

Promotion for LOWKEYBANGERSVILLE was short lived however, three weeks after its release the country shutdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which effectively shut down all musical venues and placed any chance of doing live shows on hold.

When it became clear that the pandemic was not ending anytime soon Mora returned to his home in Rosarito before the border was closed. For almost a year the group was unable to gather.

Those obstacles, though, encouraged the group to embark on a new path with web3 technology. Soon, the group will be launching a crowdfund around the LENGUA token, which will essentially give fans who are holders access to unreleased music, shows, community events, and even allow fans the chance to vote on the direction of Tulenguas musical and creative direction. Proving that even in the midst of a still uncertain climate surrounding the border, Tulengua is still inspired to continue the mission they embarked on back in 2018.

Weve all let go of a lot these past few years. This whole trip has always been about more than music for us. Its about community, family, borderless dreams, and visions of a more united region.

See the article here:

Binational Hip-Hop Group Tulengua Is Looking to Secure Its Freedom Voice of San Diego - Voice of San Diego

What GAO Found

The COVID-19 pandemic affected some measures of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) administration government-wide. For example, FOIA requests received declined government-wide by 8 percent in fiscal year 2020, the first year of the pandemic, compared to fiscal year 2019. Overall, agencies processed about 12 percent fewer requests during this same period. Other measures continued longer-term trends, such as increasing FOIA request backlogs.

FOIA Requests Received and Processed Government-wide, Fiscal Years 2012 through 2020

Four of the five selected agenciesthe Departments of Agriculture (USDA), Homeland Security (DHS), and Labor (DOL), and the Environmental Protection Agencyinitially faced pandemic-related challenges such as access to information technology networks and FOIA requests received by mail. FBI's use of a classified FOIA system meant that staff could not telework. Thus, they had to ensure workforce safety in the office.

All five agencies employed strategies and leading practices to maintain operations during the pandemic, including processing requests based on their complexity, increased communication with requesters, and interim releases. These agencies also continued long-term, non-pandemic related planning efforts, such as technology updates to FOIA systems and organizational changes.

Some of the agencies reviewed did not have key performance information in their backlog reduction plans. For example, USDA could better document planned actions and milestones and DOL may not have reliable backlog data. Additionally, DHS components with significant backlogs could develop plans. Such information could help, for example, ensure agencies sustain backlog reduction efforts. GAO found opportunities for the Office of Information Policy (OIP) to collect and publicly report additional data, such as the causes of FOIA litigation, which could help agencies address emerging challenges.

FOIA, enacted into law more than 50 years ago, seeks to improve the public's access to government information and promote the principles of openness and accountability in government.

The CARES Act includes a provision for GAO to monitor and oversee the federal government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic. GAO also was asked to review how the pandemic affected FOIA processes and procedures. This report examines (1) how key measures of FOIA administration changed from fiscal years 2019 to 2020 and over time since fiscal year 2012; (2) how selected agencies adapted their FOIA operations during the pandemic; and (3) how selected agencies' backlog reduction plans aligned with standards for internal control and performance management practices.

GAO selected five agencies based on a variety of factors including the number of FOIA requests received, processed, and backlogged. GAO reviewed documents and interviewed officials from the selected agencies and the National Archives and Records Administration.

More:

Freedom of Information Act: Selected Agencies Adapted to the COVID-19 Pandemic but Face Ongoing Challenges and Backlogs - Government Accountability...

By Rebecca Kaplan, Oakland City Councilmember At-Large

In 1963, hundreds of thousands of people marched in what many now refer to as the March on Washington for Civil Rights. But march organizers called it the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, and sought both justice and equality under the law. They were also fighting to remedy the lack of equal access to economic opportunities and jobs.

This struggle remains, and the work must continue, as today, the Black unemployment rate continues to far exceed the white unemployment rate in America. The racial wealth gap is large, and, in Oakland, our local disparity studies continue to document, year after year, the ongoing exclusion of Black-owned businesses from important city opportunities in contracts and economic development.

That is part of why I and others have been pushing to remedy these problems, and keep pushing to ensure that jobs, business contracts, and development opportunities in the City of Oakland must, much more significantly, include our Black community.

One of the recommendations, which came from conducting the most recent Disparity Study, was to ensure that Black contractors are ready and able to bid on city contracts. As a result, and with strong community support, we fought for and won a budget amendment allocating hundreds of thousands of dollars to fund a project, in conjunction with the Construction Resource Center, to provide training and technical support to ensure that Black contractors have improved access to these opportunities.

And yet, at every turn, there has been opposition and obstruction to these efforts from an Administration that initially tried not to conduct the legally-mandated disparity study in the first place, in an attempt to hide data about the extent of the ongoing inequities. The Administration then tried to block the release of the study.

Once the study was released, and our budget amendment passed, they then continued to obstruct these efforts, refusing to issue funds for the contract. It required repeated and ongoing efforts, including requiring follow-up public reports from the Administration on the status of funds to get them to issue the support that Council had approved.

Similar obstruction also took place with workforce investment fundseven as communities in Oakland continue to suffer the economic fallout from both the pandemic and decades of underinvestment and inequality. Monies the Council has approved to support workforce development, job training, and job placement have been delayed and undermined.

In fact, the issue of delay of funding of these types of vital needs has been such as ongoing problem that former Councilmember Desley Brooks authored a law, which Council passed, mandating prompt payment. This law recognizes that crucial organizations doing work to improve quality of life and opportunity are impeded and undermined when payment is not issued promptly for this work. We have continued to push for full implementation of this law.

Therefore, the plan of the African American Sports and Entertainment Group (AASEG) to develop 30,000 jobs in the revitalization of the Oakland Coliseum Site is so important. This vital development opportunity is one of the most important in the entire county. It is on a large site that is central to the entire region with easy access to BART, the freeways, the airport, and more. The land has been approved for development through the completion of the Coliseum Area Specific Plan, as well as Oakland having completed Californias required Surplus Lands process.

This large site can provide for housing at all income levels, business, entertainment, hotel, convention space, biotech, public services, and much more, and provide for quality jobs for our community, both during construction and after. This important effort also faced ongoing obstruction from the Administration, and nevertheless, we persisted. In November, it was approved by the City Council in a unanimous vote!

We cant wait for jobs and freedom, and the work continues. Giving up this fight is not an option.

Councilmember At-Large and Council President RebeccaKaplanwas elected in 2008 to serve as Oaklands citywide Councilmember; she was re-elected in 2016 and 2020.She also serves on the Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC). Follow CouncilmemberKaplanon Twitter@Kaplan4Oakland (https://twitter.com/Kaplan4Oakland) and Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/Kaplan4Oakland/).

Published on January 27, 2022

Original post:

We Can't Wait for Jobs and Freedom - San Francisco Bay Times - San Francisco Bay Times

Seton Hall's Board of Trustees' gave final approval on Friday, January 21, to two University-wide institutional statements: Diversity, Equity and Inclusion and Academic Freedom Beyond the Classroom.

This approval follows in-depth presentations made in December 2021 to the Board of Regents on draft statements that were developed for these high-priority strategic action items grounded in the University's Catholic mission.

Prior to being presented to the Board of Regents, both statements had been unanimously endorsed by the Executive Cabinet and the Board's related committees. Regents voted unanimously to recommend these statements to the Board of Trustees.

Products of shared governance, the statements were developed by representative committees with membership from across the University as part of iterative processes.

Development of the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion statement was led by Vice President Reverend Colin Kay, Vice President Monica Burnette and Special Advisor to the Provost Jonathan Farina and the rest of the drafting committee.

The Academic Freedom Beyond the Classroom Institutional Statement was drafted by members of the ad hoc committee, appointed by Provost Katia Passerini, and led by Professor Deirdre Yates and Rector/Dean Msgr. Joseph Reilly.

"These statements were made stronger at every step of the drafting process because of the robust and helpful feedback received from the University community at-large," said Michele L. Nelson, vice president for board affairs and University strategy.

"They affirm Seton Hall's commitment to inclusion, inquiry, robust dialogue and academic freedom as are called for and grounded in our Catholic educational mission."

Go here to see the original:

Institutional Statements Approved for DEI and Academic Freedom Beyond the Classroom - Seton Hall University News & Events

The constitutional right to vote

Voters rights have been in the headlines recently because of the controversial bills that have been seen before the Senate. Of these important hot-topic bills is the Freedom to Vote Act.

It has recently come to my attention that now we are arguing as a society about voting. This time last year, I thought that we were talking about how more people should be voting. Furthermore, the last election had a record-breaking voter turnout.

However, for a reason I suspect is more malicious than it may seem, Republicans dont want people to vote anymore, and that is the stupidest, most antithetical, un-democratic thing I have ever heard.

The Freedom to Vote Act

The Freedom to Vote Act is a revised version of the For the People Act. The legislation is exactly as it sounds; it protects voters rights.

Some of the key provisions of the act include early voting, mail-in voting, making the election day a holiday, voting rights restoration to those who were previously incarcerated, protections for individuals with disabilities, enhanced ballot and protection record, redistricting reform and campaign finance, among many other important changes.

It didnt pass the Senate

All of these changes will help Americans who otherwise wouldnt be able to make it to the polls get there. It helps make sure every American voice is counted and is heard. Simply put, its common-sense legislation.

And yet, it didnt pass. It needed 60 votes to pass, and it was 51 to 49. Not a single Republican senator voted in favor of passing the bill.

That is so disappointing. Republican states have been on a voter-restricting trend recently, with the Brennan Center for justice reporting, People in Georgia can now be charged with a crime for handing out water or snacks to voters waiting in line at the polls. In Iowa and Kansas, people could face criminal charges for returning ballots on behalf of voters who may need assistance, such as voters with disabilities.

Republicans should be making their policies to align with the wants and needs of the people, not making it so less people will vote so they can win.

Why pass legislation to make voting more difficult? Republicans should be making their policies more aligned with the wants and needs of the people, not making it, so fewer people will vote so they can win. I cant help but feel that the passing of legislation comes from that reasoning.

Voting is so foundational to our country. After so many years that women and people of color have worked for voting rights, it seems like a step backward to enact these new restrictive laws.

Was the bill unconstitutional?

The main argument posed by Republicans was that the bill was federal overreach. Garret Epps, a writer for the Atlantic, said it best, Neither the American people nor the federal courts would tolerate restrictions of this sort if they were imposed on free speech, free assembly, freedom of religion or freedom to petition the government for redress of grievances.

If the Republican party is going to hold true to our right to bear arms and our right to free speech, it should equally support our freedom to vote.

Article 1 of the Constitution says that the right to vote and hold elections should be held and managed by the states. However, historically there have been many amendments to this article.

There is the 15th amendment, the 19th amendment, the 24th amendment and the 26th amendment. All of these amendments essentially are various forms of voter protection bills.

All of these amendments make it so that you can not prevent anyone based on color, gender and age. The 24th amendment also makes it so that things like poll taxes cant be used to prevent people from voting.

Preventing water from being given to people waiting in line and making mail ballot boxes more scarce seems almost worse than a poll tax because it is so underhanded, disconnected from what it would be like to vote in the 21st century. It goes to show how little these government officials understand their constituents.

So not only do we have historical precedence for protecting the peoples vote, we have constitutional precedence. And all of these amendments have a second section that says, The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

The argument that the passing of this bill is government overreach is shaky at best. If the Republican party wants to protect my rights, fantastic. Do what you say youre going to do. Actually, protect my constitutional rights then.

This leads me to my earlier statement that Republicans dont want people who disagree with their policies to vote. That is the only other explanation I can think of for why all 50 choose not to move forward with a vote.

I think we are about to see some major changes to the filibuster laws that prevented this bill from being passed, and I cant wait to see what happens because removing the filibuster to pass the act would be unprecedented.

Link:

The Freedom to Vote Act - the Spectrum - NDSU The Spectrum

Getty Images

Much has been made of Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce and quarterback Patrick Mahomes setting up the game-tying field goal in Sundays win over the Chiefs with a decision in the moment that wasnt actually the play that had been called. Mahomes said Chiefs coach Andy Reid encourages players to do that.

Theres a lot of that during the game, Mahomes said. Everybody has their input. I think thats what makes us such a great team, a great offense, is we have communication throughout the game. Then we go out there and execute because Coach Reid gives us that freedom.

Mahomes said the play calling isnt always as on-the-fly as Mahomes screaming, Do it Kelce! at the line of scrimmage to tell Kelce to run a route he had said on the sideline he thought would be open. More often, its about the players looking at their tablets while the defense is on the field to see what was working and what wasnt on the previous drive, and preparing for the next drive accordingly.

Of course, its easy for Reid to give the players freedom when he has players as good as Mahomes and Kelce he can count on to execute.

Read the rest here:

Patrick Mahomes glad Andy Reid gives players the freedom to improvise - NBC Sports

It was none other than the French thinker Montesquieu who noted that, in acommercial republic, social penalties foroffensive behaviour are afeature, not abug.

Montesquieu, who greatly influenced Alexander Hamilton and other American founders, admired thepower ofshaming. Hethought that commerce cures destructive prejudices, and that acommercial society could inflict more effective punishments than the state forextremist, prejudicial and unethical behaviour. Such asociety would encourage aspirit offrugality, economy, moderation, work, wisdom, tranquility, order andrule.

One need not agree that commercial society always results in such a utopia to recognise the wisdom of Montesquieus point: that social sanctioning mechanisms, including the labour market and the employment relationship, often serve to regulate behaviour. That wisdom is worth keeping in mind as American academia in general and the University of Pennsylvania in particular confront the case of AmyWax.

Wax, the Robert Mundheim professor of law at Penn, has made numerous statements about Americans generally and Penns own students specifically that are widely considered racist. Her latest offering calls for clearly illegal and unconstitutional anti-Asian discrimination in immigration policy.

Penn Law School dean Theodore Ruger has called a meeting of the faculty senate to consider sanctions for this and an aggregation of other incidents. Inresponse, the Academic Freedom Alliance (AFA), of which Iam a proud member, has argued that Penns only appropriate response is to publicly reaffirm the free speech rights of the members of its faculty. Inthis case, Ithink the AFA is wrong. As a private institution and as an educational institution, Penn can both censure Wax and impose limited sanctions on her without in any way violating academic freedom.

Academic freedom protects what professors do. It doesnt apply although the First Amendment does to other university staff. It defends a professors core office: their position as a teacher and scholar and their voting membership on a faculty body. It does entail that a person should not lose her professorial position because of public statements alone, but there are other ways to impose sanctions without violating principles of academic freedom. These include censuring, limiting the implicit power that a professor has, and removing the professor from non-essential positions.

The AFA statement neglects to acknowledge that Ruger has already sanctioned Wax once before, by removing her from teaching a required course for law students. And he was not wrong to do so; as Ihave previously argued, teaching a course that students are formally or informally required to take is not a right but a rent, a position of power conferred by expertise. Nor does academic freedom confer upon any professor the right to be a dean or the head of a lab or centre, for instance.

Other sanctions against Wax are also potentially appropriate. Whether Penn should revoke her named chair, for instance (while keeping her as professor of law), Ido not know: that is a question for a faculty senate or committee to examine. But whether it can do so while maintaining a robust commitment to academic freedom Ihave nodoubt.

That these sanctions might be employed by educational institutions is a virtue of our system, not a jeopardy. It was precisely in a republics system of education, Montesquieu thought, that moderation, even a renunciation of selfishness, should be taught.

There are other things to consider. First, as in any system, the level of censure and sanctions should be appropriate to the behaviour in question. A single tweet that crosses a line of ethical behaviour should not, in and of itself, justify penalties. And the AFA is right to insist that pedagogy that some people may find offensive (assigning a reading or a test that includes the N-word, or showing a certain movie in class, for instance) should never result in the removal of a teacher from a classroom.

Second, some speech acts so undermine professional behaviour that they are not protected by academic freedom. Were a professor to repeatedly call her students be they Black, LGBTQ, Jewish, Native American or White by an offensive epithet, to their face, then removal from office would potentially be defensible. When a Ferris State University professor recently insulted his students openly and repeatedly (engaging in a clear pattern of unprofessional behaviour), the university was plausibly within its rights to suspend him from teaching.

Third, while all societies sanction behaviour, many critics of cancel culture are right to argue that in the US, excessive shaming especially instantaneous and herd-driven censure on social media has led to a form of unhealthy puritanism in which many remarks are intentionally or unintentionally taken out of context. Our culture too often pathologises what were differences in judgement or honest mistakes.

Yet these are matters for public debate. In a healthy society, those who shame too much are themselves liable to be shamed. If a dean oversteps the bounds of reason and ethics in sanctioning or censuring a professor, she too can face removal without violating academic freedom.

Academic freedom is not full-fledged ethical licence. Neither social shaming nor private sanction are penalties of state, and it is entirely unpersuasive to argue that they, on their own, chill free expression. As Montesquieu wisely recognised, the operation of a commercial republic such as ours depends upon the appropriate deployment of shame.

Daniel Carpenter is Allie S. Freed professor of government at Harvard University.

View original post here:

Professional sanctions are perfectly compatible with academic freedom - Times Higher Education (THE)

Conservative Leader Erin O'Toole speaks during a news conference responding to the federal governments COVID-19 response, on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, on Jan. 6, 2022.Justin Tang/The Canadian Press

Conservative Leader Erin OToole has been putting down internal rebellions ever since last falls general election. This week, he is facing his greatest challenge yet: a new variant of concern running wild in his party.

Three high-profile MPs have openly defied Mr. OToole by coming out in support of the convoy of dont-vax-me truckers snaking its way eastward on the Trans-Canada Highway as a protest against Ottawas newly imposed cross-border vaccine mandates for drivers.

One of the three, Pierre Poilievre, was named as the best choice to lead the Conservatives into the next election in a recent Nanos Research poll conducted for The Globe and Mail. Another, Candice Bergen, is the deputy leader of the party. The third rebel is Andrew Scheer, the previous leader.

As well, heading into a caucus retreat on Wednesday, Mr. OToole faced calls for an early leadership review from at least two riding associations. All of this has led to speculation that Mr. OToole has run out of allies, and may have to consider stepping down.

Heres a better idea for Mr. OToole: Step up.

Ever since the Trudeau government brought in vaccine mandates for federal employees and people travelling by rail or plane last year, Mr. OToole has tried to straddle the fence, saying he supports vaccines but not mandates, and opposes mandates but not vaccines.

That weak position, and his obvious lack of enthusiasm for it, left him without answers (again) this week when reporters repeatedly tried and failed to get him to take a position on the truckers protest.

This page has spent the past year advocating for the scientifically obvious, which is that vaccination is key to getting beyond the pandemic. We have supported vaccine passports in non-essential businesses, and vaccine mandates in workplaces and higher education.

We also questioned the cost-benefit analysis behind the vaccine mandate for truckers, which requires a cross-border driver returning from the U.S. to be fully vaccinated in order to avoid a 14-day quarantine.

But whatever the merits of Canada doing away with the border mandate, the case is now moot: Last weekend, the White House imposed a similar mandate, which means that, even if Ottawa reversed itself, the 15 per cent of Canadian truckers who arent vaccinated are still stuck on this side of the border.

And in any case, the convoy has devolved into a promotional vehicle for all manner of anti-vaxxers, take-back-my-country types and conspiracy hucksters, including such luminaries as Donald Trump Jr.

Those in the convoy are of course within their rights to protest peacefully. But they, along with the Conservative MPs supporting them, are completely out of touch with the vast majority of Canadians.

As of this week, 91 per cent of Canadian adults have had at least one shot, and more than 88 per cent are double-dosed.

Mr. Trudeau, the guy who imposed federal vaccine mandates because he knew they would be popular has twice the support of Mr. OToole in recent polls.

And who are Canadas two most prominent conservative politicians, both of whom appear to be cruising to re-election? That would be Premier Doug Ford of Ontario, who has gone so far as to eject four MPPs from his caucus for opposing public-health measures or refusing to get vaccinated; and Franois Legault in Quebec, the countrys most enthusiastic imposer of mandates to get people vaccinated.

Mr. Legaults latest idea, a tax on the unvaccinated, is surprisingly popular. A recent Nanos Research Poll found that 60 per cent of Canadians support or somewhat support the idea, including 72 per cent of people over 55 the age group most likely to lean Conservative.

So why are some Conservative MPs loudly supporting a small group of denialists in big rigs? Why are they buying into an anarchic, anti-social distortion of freedom thats imported from the U.S.?

Conservatives are supposed to be the people who believe in law and order, common sense and protecting your community. Mr. OToole needs to stand up for the silent majority of Canadians the overwhelming majority, including among his own voters who understand that the past two years have been a real public-health crisis, not a hoax. He would be doing himself, his country and his party a favour.

Keep your Opinions sharp and informed. Get the Opinion newsletter. Sign up today.

See the original post here:

Globe editorial: Erin O'Toole has to unhitch Conservatives from the 'Freedom Convoy,' or get run over - The Globe and Mail

It's starting to sounds like a Canadian version of the assault in Washington on Jan.6,2021. Former NHL'er Theo Fleury went on Fox News to describe himself as a patriot fighting for his freedoms in this revolution called the freedom convoy.

I'm afraid the reaction to this movement is feeding it. What happens when they don't get their way?

Sheldon MacLeod has been a broadcast professional for close to 30 years. Eyewitness to the transition from 45s and magnetic tape to CDs, MP3s, computers, websites, blogs and the worldwide web. And through all of the technology one thing remains constant: the satisfaction of sharing compelling stories with other humans. The responsibility of knowing better, is doing better. Sheldon is based in Halifax, N.S.Reach out to Sheldon at[emailprotected].

SaltWire Network welcomes letters on matters of public interest for publication. All letters must be accompanied by the authors name, address and telephone number so that they can be verified. Letters may be subject to editing. The views expressed in letters to the editor in this publication and on SaltWire.com are those of the authors, and do not reflect the opinions or views of SaltWire Network or its Publisher. SaltWire Network will not publish letters that are defamatory, or that denigrate individuals or groups based on race, creed, colour or sexual orientation. Anonymous, pen-named, third-party or open letters will not be published.

Link:

MY TAKE WITH SHELDON MacLEOD: Drums of war and the freedom convoy - SaltWire Network