Monthly Archives: January 2022

On Wednesday, India commemorated its 72nd annual Republic Day, a national holiday similar to Americas Fourth of July that celebrates Indias values of democracy, equality and secularism.

Chicago City Council had the chance in 2021 to pass a resolution in support of these values and in solidarity with the citys Indian American community. Instead, the council shamefully failed.

Developments in India last month including violent Hindu extremists attacking Christianity on Christmas and explicitly calling for a genocide of the countrys over 200 million Muslims reveal that in its failure to stand up for democracy, the council has chosen to stand with Indias dictatorial Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his oppressive BJP government.

Prime Minister Modis government is so flagrantly oppressive towards its Christian community 30 million strong that it attacked St. Mother Teresas legacy, on Christmas Day no less, by blocking overseas funding for her organization Missionaries of Charity, one of the most recognizable Christian charities in the world. This attack on the Nobel Prize-winning St. Mother Teresa was accompanied by wide-ranging intimidation of the Christian community, including vigilantes vandalizing statues of Jesus Christ and gangs interfering with Christmas services.

The day after Christmas, a politician in Modis BJP party explicitly called for the conversion of Christians and other minorities to Hinduism, suggesting that Hindu temples set goals for numbers of individuals converted. These actions wholly contradict Indias founding values of a secular nation where all faiths are equal. While today Modis extremist policies target Mother Teresas organization, Modis political and ideological allies have shockingly erected statues and temples celebrating the man who assassinated Mahatma Gandhi in 1948.

Modi and his allies vision reveres violence, not only in the individual assassination of Gandhi but also on a national scale, explicitly calling for genocide against religious minorities. From Dec. 17-19, 2021 in the Hindu pilgrimage town of Haridwar, Indias politicians from Modis party joined Hindu religious leaders for a purported religious convening where leaders explicitly called for a genocide against Indias Muslim community.

A violent extremist religious leader stated that If 100 of us are ready to kill two million of them, then we will win and make India a Hindu nation Be ready to kill and go to jail. At a Jan. 12 U.S. congressional briefing co-sponsored by a group of 17 human rights and interfaith organizations about the gathering in Hardiwar, Gregory Stanton, president of Genocide Watch, stated that the event was exactly aimed at inciting the genocide of Muslims and that As the leader of India [Prime Minister Modi] has an obligation to denounce this genocidal speech... Yet, Narendra Modi has not spoken against it.

Sunita Viswanath, executive director of U.S.-based Hindus for Human Rights, stated that The speeches made in Haridwar are an explicit call for genocide against Muslims by religious leaders who are close to the ruling party, the government. The Indian governments participation in such alarming events demonstrates just how dire the situation in India is.

The renowned South African Archbishop and activist, the late Desmond Tutu, said that If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. In voting down the 2020 resolution honoring Indias Republic Day, some council members cited a flawed argument propagated by pro-Modi supporters that the resolution was divisive. Pro-Modi supporters proudly gang up to target minority communities in India (as described above), but would be outraged and demand justice if their own minority faith faced this same oppression here in the U.S.

The City Council also broke ranks with a movement in over 10 other cities that passed resolutions in support of Indias democratic values, including in Seattle; San Francisco; Albany, New York; Cambridge, Massachusetts; St. Paul, Minnesota; and within Illinois, including Riverdale and Harvey).

Change in India is possible, as demonstrated by the recent repeal of controversial agricultural laws after global protests including in Chicago at Daley Plaza.

This year, elected officials in Chicago and Illinois must right their wrongs. They must act to uphold the values of Indias Republic Day democracy, equality and secularism. That action is necessary to send a clear message to Prime Minister Modi that Chicago and the U.S. will not stand by as Hindu extremists force the conversion of Christians and perpetrate an announced genocide against Muslims.

Pushkar Sharma and Cyrus Rab are members of the Chicago Coalition for Human Rights in India.

Sharma has worked for the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and for the United Nations in Kosovo, the Gaza Strip, Colombia, Myanmar, and Iraq. Rab is a human rights and education activist based in Chicago.

Send letters to letters@suntimes.com

Read more here:

Now is the time for City Council to finally denounce religious discrimination in India - Chicago Sun-Times

A group working to promote democratic freedoms for Tibetans urged the NBC, the broadcaster of the Beijing Winter Olympics, to "go beyond the business" as they also have an ethical responsibility as a defender of freedom especially that of expression. The International Campaign for Tibet called on NBC to take in China's coercion in Tibet in their coverage of the games, reported Tibet Press.

"With just weeks to go before the 2022 Winter Olympics, we trust you plan to roll out the usual coverage. But these will be no ordinary Games. The severe oppression, including of freedom of expression, that the Chinese government inflicts on Tibetans and others under its rule demands equal attention," said the letter by the International Campaign for Tibet. In the letter, the democratic and freedom group added that by airing these Olympics, NBC is giving the Chinese authoritarian regime a podium to spread its propaganda. That's why, it is only they who can provide the victims of Chinese oppression the equal time more than to be side-lined for the sake of profit and their interest, reported Tibet Press.

The advocacy group called the Chinese government as one of the most brutal human rights abusers the world has seen in decades, reported Tibet Press. They also said that China has promised to improve the situation of human rights in the last Beijing Olympics 2008, but it has cracked down ruthlessly on Tibet, which is why Tibet is considered to be the second least free nation in the world after Syria as per freedom House.

In 2020, US government has chosen China's oppression of the Uyghurs as genocide. Including US, a lot of other government has called on diplomatic boycott of the Olympic in response to China not abiding by the international norms. After considering all these, the group called the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to have the ethical fibre to claim the Chinese government to follow to internationally maintained values of freedom and human rights to deserve the games, reported Tibet Press.

With regards to Beijing Winter Olympic next month, over 250 right groups have called out UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres for accepting the official invitation for the opening of the ceremony. The appeal letter condemned Secretary General's decision as highly inappropriate and said that it grossly undermined the UN'S Commitment to human rights. The coalition includes global civil society groups representing Tibetan, Uyghur, Hong Konger, Chinese, Southern Mongolian, and Taiwanese communities, reported Tibet Press.

In the letter, it was mentioned that the Secretary-General's participation would challenge the United Nation's efforts to hold China responsible and go in contradiction of the core principles enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They also added that his acceptance of the invitation would give confidence to China's disregard for international human rights laws and will serve as an encouragement for the actions of the Chinese authorities.

The groups requested the UN chief to reconsider his choice to attend the Genocide Games since major nations have announced the diplomatic boycott in the last few months. China is now the subject of an Olympic boycott movement, said Tibet Press. (ANI)

(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

Link:

Tibet advocacy group calls on Beijing games broadcaster NBC to 'go beyond business' - Devdiscourse

Shankar Vedantam, host of the Hidden Brain podcast and former NPR science desk correspondent, spoke in the Jan. 25 BYU forum address. He emphasized the stories of Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. and how their tactics can be used to fight oppression without violence. (Melissa Collado)

National correspondent Shankar Vedantam told a BYU audience how non-violent protests can be successful in bringing awareness to injustice caused by the government. His Jan. 25 forum address focused on the tactics used by both Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. during their peaceful protests.

They were great proponents of non-violence, Vedantamsaid.

Vedantam is a former NPR science desk correspondent and the 2009-2010 Nieman Fellow at Harvard University. He has won numerous journalism awards and is the host of the award-winning podcast The Hidden Brain.

Vedantam said Gandhis Salt March was meant to connect issues within the daily lives of Indians to a larger political law problem. This peaceful protest was made to put the government in a position where it had to make a tough decision.

During the civil rights movement, King kept his head up and loved his enemies despite the violence he faced, Vedantam said. King and others were fighting the oppression they were facing.

The goal was not just to win, not just to change the law but was to get the people who are part of the group that is oppressing us to change, Vedantam said. Systems of oppression harm not only the victims, but they also harm the oppressors.

He asked the audience to ponder if Gandhi and King were just outliers or lucky in the success of their individual conflicts. Do non-violent or violent actions work more often? Vedantam asked. Most people would predict that violent actions are far more likely to succeed.

But non-violent movements were more than twice as likely to succeed as violent movements, Vedantam said, noting that these types of peaceful protests allow one to see their enemies as human beings and try to understand them.

Vedantam concluded his address by emphasizing the core idea he has taken away from analyzing these movements by Gandhi and King:

The central importance of the beloved community is not love and not kindness, but courage, Vedantam said. With the absence of courage, it is impossible to build the beloved community.

Visit link:

National correspondent speaks on the genius of non-violent protests in BYU forum - The Daily Universe - Universe.byu.edu

THIS month we celebrate the 13th anniversary of the Plurinational State of Bolivia.

After more than 500 years, with Evo Morales, the first indigenous president and symbol of our emancipation, empowered, we were able to break the chains of oppression and recover our dignity and sovereignty.

Thus, on January 22 2009, during his first period in government a new constitution was approved, refounding the country as the Plurinational State of Bolivia and for the first time in our history, 36 native nations were fully recognised.

Gone was the colonial republic where the supremacist ruling class, mostly of European descent, treated our country as their private estate, plundering our riches while the true owners of this land, the native people, lived exploited, excluded, discriminated against and racially abused in their own country.

Until then, neoliberal governments shared the power, some only with 19 per cent of votes, like Jaime Paz Zamora of the MIR party (Movement of the Revolutionary Left), who crossed rivers of blood to become president in alliance with his own henchman, the 1971 army dictator Hugo Banzer.

For the first time in the history of Bolivia, a great cultural, political, social and economic transformation was achieved with Morales of the Movement Towards Socialism (MAS-IPSP).

He never hesitated to nationalise our natural resources which benefited the nation with more public investment, redistribution of wealth, bonuses, wage increases, more construction works and reduction of extreme poverty.

But in November 2019 we suffered a fascist coup supported by various far-right regimes in the region and others, including the US, Britain and EU.

In 11 months, Jeanine Anezs gang of mass murderers, arsonists and thieves brought pain and mourning and bankrupted the country.

Then the people united waving Wiphalas the multicoloured indigenous peoples flag stood firm in resistance and recovered democracy.

Confidence is back now with President Luis Arce and Vice-President David Choquehuanca in power.

There is economic stability, the health of the nation is being looked after, education restored and there are great plans to industrialise our lithium and many other industries to benefit Bolivians.

The opposition continues in its quest to destabilise the government and fails miserably.

But there is more to be done and that is to win justice for the victims of the massacres and to clear the remains of the coup regime structure that are still present the opposite would be to sleep with the enemy.

We need to keep united and vigilant and reaffirm our commitment to continue defending the historic process of change.

Let us not forget that the hegemonic empire and its lackeys continue in their attempt to destabilise our governments now Latin America is turning to the left.

And the latest discovery of arms and munitions from the US confirms their dark intentions against our democracies.

United we will overcome! Long live the process of change! Long live the Plurinational Estate of Bolivia!

Miriam Amancay Colque is a longstanding Aymara activist and Bartolina Sisa Resistance spokesperson in Britain (twitter.com/BartolinaLives).

Excerpt from:

Reaffirming our commitment to Bolivia's path of progress - Morning Star Online

The White House seeks public input on a bill of rights for an automated society.

We live our lives enmeshed in applications of artificial intelligence (AI): virtual assistants such as Siri or Alexa listen to us, search bars finish our thoughts for us, and social media sites curate the information we consume. Decisionmakers may also use AI when determining who to hire, who receives loans and medical support, or even who to hold without bail.

Scholars, activists, government leaders, and members of the public worry that these technologies threaten constitutional rights, further discrimination, and could be used for oppression.

In October 2021, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) responded to these worries by announcing plans for a digital bill of rights that would clarify the rights and freedoms we expect data-driven technologies to respect. In an opinion piece first published in WIRED, Eric Lander, director of the OSTP, and Alondra Nelson, OSTP Deputy Director for Science and Society, noted that the creation of a new bill of rights for an automated age is only a first stepgovernment agencies must also decide how those rights are to be enforced.

The original Bill of Rights was meant to protect Americans against the possibility of government encroachment on individual liberties, but as NPR reported as early as 2013, these protections often cannot hold up against the powers of new technology, whether used by government or private industries. It is not clear what, if any, binding legal effect the digital bill of rights planned by the White House would have.

For people looking to understand how AI has affected the legal landscape, the OSTP hosted six different virtual panel discussions on AIs impact on consumer rights and protections, the criminal justice system, civil law, democratic values, social welfare, and the health care system. Each session featured representatives from industry, academia, members of the public, and other advocacy groups, who came together to discuss both the promises and pitfalls of artificial intelligence.

Panelists addressed concerns that AI tools may perpetuate the biases implicit in their creation, noting, however, that AI has the potential to be more equitable than the systems it may replace.

CEO of the AI-driven recruiting platform pymetrics Frida Polli explained that standardized tools and testing have been used in many of these contexts for decades, often leaving out marginalized groups. According to Polli, algorithmic tools could lead to more equitable hiring practices because they could provide a more individualized and nuanced view of a candidate than could be achieved through a screening exam.

Similarly, Sean Malinowsky, a former chief of detectives at the Los Angeles Police Department, argued that if people were worried about police bias and corruption, automated systems could be more equitable because they limit officer discretion.

Some panelists expressed concerns about focusing on a technology-oriented bill of rights to regulate data at all.

In one session, the director of the Fourth Amendment Center at the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Jumana Musa, argued that discussions of what kinds of technology can be used, and how, are not going to ever address the underlying issues of the criminal justice system and that racial justice could better be served by decriminalizing mental health issues, addiction, and poverty. She suggested that instead of asking what guardrails should be placed on technology, policymakers should consider whether technology is even a viable solution to the underlying problem.

In another session, Fabian Rogers, a community advocate in New York City, emphasized that policymakers should not get caught up in regulating the technology but instead should attempt to fix the underlying systems that technology is meant to support.

Other panelists worried that systemic change, although necessary, would take time, and they suggested that a digital bill of rights would be necessary to safeguard civil liberties during the transition period.

Panelists generally agreed that public input, at all stages of development, is critical to ensuring that technology is used fairly. Rogers suggested that governments create oversight boards made up of multiple community stakeholders who can make decisions about which technologies are implemented, and how they are used. One panelist emphasized that community members who chose to engage in these discussions should be compensated because otherwise only those who could afford to take off time from work and participate would have their voices heard.

The OSTP also solicitedinformation about AI-enabled biometricstechnologies that use facial recognition, physical movements, heart rate, and other physical indicators to identify people and infer information about them. The OSTP hosted two listening sessions on public and private uses of biometric technologies, and the office requestedinput from anyone who has ever been affected by these technologies.

Members of the public may email comments to the OSTP at ai-equity@ostp.eop.gov.

Original post:

Algorithmic Safeguards For the People and By the People - The Regulatory Review

For crypto diehards, the idea of Bitcoin collapsing is unthinkable. But what if, for whatever reason, the Bitcoin network fails? Max Gagliardi, the co-founder of Ancova Energy, a US Bitcoin mining and consulting firm, exposed the potential outcomes should such a situation materialize.

If Bitcoin fails, privacy fails, Gagliardi outlined in a lengthy Twitter thread on Jan.23. The ability of individuals to send and receive peer-to-peer value without government and banking interference will be lost. Bitcoin (BTC) allows for a future in which anyone can have private access to their money .

He spoke as cryptocurrency markets plummeted over the past week, led by bitcoin, an asset liquidated by some investors and economists as a speculative bubble. BTC plunged 20% in the two days from January 19 to a six-month low of around $ 33,400 as fear reached fever pitch. Bitcoin then reduced some of these losses, but remains 45% from its all-time high of $ 69,000 on November 10.

Drawing on the core principles of Bitcoin, Gagliardi argued that Bitcoins failure means the victory of government oppression, censorship and corruption. On the contrary, if the top digital asset is successful, freedom, transparency and truth triumph.

We are in an era of unprecedented censorship. Bitcoin is the safest network that has ever been built. Resistant, anti-frail and without permits. Open to anyone in the world. There is nothing else like it. Bitcoin cannot be censored, he said, adding:

The government can lose hundreds of billions a year but they want us to report every time we spend more than $ 600. There is no government accountability or transparency in our system. Without Bitcoin we lose the only counterweight to that system .

Gagliardi continued: Unelected bureaucrats decide the value of your work and your time. Money is how we store the value of our time on this earth. Nobody should have the power to inflate the value of your time away from you. The supply of 21 million Bitcoins solves this problem .

Revered by the public, Bitcoin is highly hated by governments due to its decentralized nature, which frowns on central control while thriving on privacy. It has been the target of attacks for its use by some people in transactions considered by governments as illegal, the volatility of prices and its carbon footprint.

Thus, there have been direct efforts by the governments of the world to stifle the growth of bitcoin by introducing tough legislation. In the case of China, a complete ban seemed appropriate. There is also the risk that dishonest actors could hijack the network through what is known as a 51% attack and collapse the ecosystem.

However, in the race for profit and gain, the ethics of BTC as a tool for individual and social freedom seems to be lost by many in the cryptocurrency sphere. In this regard, Gagliardi stressed that BTC was too important to fail. He described Bitcoin, and the technology behind it known as the blockchain, as objects of truth and free speech. If crypto fails, they both fail. He said:

Bitcoin is a code. Letters and numbers. A private key is all it takes to be able to store, transport and transact value. Never in the history of mankind have speech and language been so powerful. Freedom to speak is the most basic of human rights .

Gagliardi, also the host of a podcast on energy and bitcoin mining, said that BTC cannot be allowed to fail because that would result in the failure of capitalism as a concept, and the transition into energy. He said that we need Bitcoin, the first and last resort energy buyer, to move to a new energy future.

Bitcoin monetizes waste of energy and incentivizes new and efficient energy resources, Gagliardi detailed, adding that the Bitcoin network represents the spirit of capitalism entangled in the code [perch] He earned [il suo] value organically from the bottom up .

In the event that Bitcoin collapses, people wont own anything, he says. We have nothing of value. The property and money are settled and held with the custodians. You dont have it, you only have a right. With Bitcoin, your lifes work value can be stored in a nutshell. Free to take it with you anywhere .

Gagliardi concluded that BTC is too important. We cannot let it fail . Not everyone agreed with this line of thinking, though. Allen Drewe criticized the use of Bitcoin as a conduit for criminal activity.

Imagine thinking that Bitcoin is about truth and transparency. Its about money laundering and dark web shit before anything else, he said.

Gagliardi replied: The US dollar is the most widely used currency for crime, drugs and terrorism. What I mean by truth / transparency is the immutable nature of the network ledger. There is no cheating. Once proof of work is complete, it becomes an objective record forever. No ambiguity .

Click to rate this article!

Read this article:

Bitcoin mining proponent ponders a world where BTC fails - D1SoftballNews.com

At the end of 2020, Destiny Herndon-De La Rosa was on her knees next to the border wall cutting graffiti stencils decrying U.S. immigration policy. Migrant children have heartbeats, too, the stencils said.

Last week in Washington, D.C., she brought the same message to the March for Life. Members of her organization, New Wave Feminists, which bills itself as a pro-life feminist organization, carried black and pink signs emblazoned with the words.

Although the slogan remained the same, the two scenes were quite different. The March for Life is dominated by political conservatives. Pro-immigration protests, on the other hand, are generally led by liberals.

Herndon-De La Rosas presence at both events shows that she isnt a typical anti-abortion activist. Rather, her anti-abortion stance is based on the idea that every human being should live a life free from violence, from the womb to the tomb, as her groups website says, leading her to not only fight against abortion but to also to dedicate herself to migrants rights an issue many right-leaning anti-abortion activists wont touch.

Herndon-De La Rosa said that her holistic approach to being pro-life leaves her politically homeless.

In her early days as an anti-abortion activist, Herndon-De La Rosa explained, she felt that she had to vote Republican. But her strict allegiance to the party ended when she realized that most Republican politicians didnt want to fund services that pregnant women need.

Most of the services we were offering (pregnant women) were government services and (I was) being asked to turn around and vote for politicians who dont support those same things, she said.

But if Roe v. Wade is overturned by the Supreme Court later this year, Republicans might be forced to rethink their opposition to the social safety net especially if the party wants to keep some of its anti-abortion constituents. That the pro-life movement is currently at a crossroads was the subject of a recent webinar hosted by Georgetown Universitys Initiative on Catholic Social Thought and Public Life.

Herndon-De La Rosa and other anti-abortion activists like her believe that our countrys policies need to better reflect a holistic approach toward supporting life and that both the left and right are currently falling short.

They say that Democrats support for abortion rights amounts to a sort of structural violence that actually helps conceal womens unequal status in the United States and that access to abortion is not true liberation for women.

Abortion upholds systems of oppression, said Gloria Purvis, a womens rights advocate who hosts The Gloria Purvis Podcast. Purvis added that the Democratic Partys stance on abortion allows corporate America to shirk its duty to come up with policies that truly support working mothers and families.

Its a smokescreen for women to say, Hey, youre liberated to be like men. Instead we need to build an economy, a society ... that is conducive to women as we are not to us being faux male but female, she said.

But Purvis, Herndon-De La Rosa and others are critical of the political right, too. They believe that conservatives support for life begins at conception but ends at birth.

If Republicans truly respected life, they would take a holistic approach that includes tackling the topic of racial injustice, Purvis said.

I think the mistake really that weve made in talking about pro-life is that its detached from the core issue which is really human dignity from the moment of conception until natural death, she said.

Dignity for the unborn can and should be addressed, said Purvis, while also at the same time understanding we have an obligation to uphold the dignity of everyone else outside the womb, particularly in the realm of race.

In the wake of George Floyds death, Purvis added, the silence from those who claim to be pro-life was indicative of the (political) problem that plagues the anti-abortion movement.

The Republican Party, Purvis continued, publicly lauds marriage and family but at the same time penalizes women who have made these difficult decisions, portraying those who need state benefits to survive as freeloaders.

One of the best things that could ever happen would be the Democratic Party making space for us, said Herndon-De La Rosa, who is now a registered Independent. Similarly, she added, The infant mortality rate among women of color that should 100% be a Republican pro-life issue.

According to Daniel Williams, author of Defenders of the Unborn: The Pro-Life Movement before Roe v. Wade, such a shift would actually return the anti-abortion movement to its roots, which lie on the left, not the right.

Although opposition to abortion is closely associated with the Republican Party today, the movement owes its conception to Catholic social teachings, 20th century liberalism and the emphasis on human rights that emerged in the wake of World War II, he said.

Some of the first calls against abortion came from Catholic doctors who were responding to abortion law liberalization. They felt that killing one person to save another didnt square with human rights, said Williams, is also a history professor at the University of West Georgia.

But to most Catholics at the time and many like Purvis still today respecting human rights required a holistic approach that included embracing liberal values like the right to education and support for various social programs.

In the 1960s, anti-abortion activists were Catholic Democrats who also opposed the Vietnam War. As late as the 1970s, there still wasnt a clear partisan divide on the issue, Williams said. But, later, Ronald Reagan who, as governor of California, had signed a liberal abortion law helped detach the anti-abortion movement from its left-wing roots, firmly entrenching the most vocal opposition to the procedure on the right. And as the right became focused on creating legal protections that had been undone by Roe v. Wade ... it made it difficult to see Democratic politicians as potential allies, said Williams, introducing some of the polarization we see today as well as the myopic focus on the courts.

This anti-abortion movement also brought together two groups of people with different ideas about the role the state should play in our lives: Catholics a group that historically had a very positive view of the state most catholics believed the state had obligations to families and citizens, said Williams with Protestants from the South, a group that was largely mistrustful of the state and state intervention on a variety of issues and had been for 200 years, Williams said.

If Roe v. Wade is overturned, which has been the overarching goal of these disparate groups, Williams added, it will be interesting to see if those differences in the pro-life movement will become more apparent.

However the Supreme Court rules in its abortion case, Herndon-De La Rosa who feels that abortion has been needlessly politicized hopes to see Americans working on womb-to-tomb issues together regardless of their political backgrounds.

The best thing that could happen to this nation is that everyone wakes up tomorrow and everyone is an independent and we focus on the issues rather than the political parties, she said.

See the rest here:

Will Roe v. Wade be overturned? Whats next for anti-abortion activists? - Deseret News

The buzz on gardens

Rex Nelson's column of last Sunday, "Arkansas' new era," together with Richard Mason's goal of planting 100,000 new trees, in Perspective on the same day, have stirred up a bee that has been in my bonnet since moving to Little Rock 15 years ago: We need a state botanical garden.

Is there a happier place to blend the beauty of the arts (and sciences) with outdoor recreational opportunities than a well-designed and maintained botanical garden? Visitors to El Dorado's splendid South Arkansas Arboretum or Hot Springs' Garvan Gardens, with their mix of native forest and ornamental gardens--I want to roll them up and bring them to Little Rock--have no doubt wondered why Arkansas does not have such a garden in the capital city. (Our Arkansas Arboretum near Pinnacle Mountain is a delightful woodland, but not a showcase exhibition of beauty and education.)

We're fortunate that we have the perfect place for such a garden right here in the middle of Little Rock on the site of the former golf course at War Memorial Park. And the timing is also perfect: The site is in transition to ...

I would also predict that there are hundreds of Little Rockers in groups like Master Gardeners and Master Naturalists ready to volunteer their time to support such a project. Well, the bee is out of my bonnet--and looking for a buzz?

ERIC SUNDELL

Little Rock

On account of religion

From a sermon preached by C.H. Spurgeon in 1886: "To each disciple of Jesus, the government may be satisfied that he is loyal. 'Thou shalt rule over him' is certainly true. Christians will cheerfully submit to all lawful rule and righteous authority. To them it is a matter of joy if they are enabled to lead peaceable lives because the magistrate is a terror to evildoers. They are a non-resistant, peaceable, quiet people, who have from the beginning of the world until now borne burdens and suffered, and been content to suffer, so that they might but be true to their master. They hate tyranny, but they love order; they protest against oppression, but they uphold law and justice. Why, then, should they be persecuted? They ask nothing from the state by way of pay or patronage; they only ask to be let alone, and to be subject to no disability on account of their religion. Let all who are in authority, whether as kings or petty magistrates, beware of wantonly molesting a people who cause them no trouble, lest they be found in this matter to be fighting against God."

B.E. SPURGEON

North Little Rock

Extremists' takeover

Longtime Republican columnist Rex Nelson wrote the truth about our Arkansas Legislature in his Jan. 26 column "Government by yahoo." For a Republican to write such truth about the decline of the quality of our state politicians is refreshing honesty.

Nelson wrote about the loss of experienced community leaders in political leadership, now replaced by fringe candidates who win due to low voter turnout and the appeal of these extremists who have taken over the Legislature with their no-holds-barred bullying. Using fear-based appeals to those who oppose abortion rights and those who demand open-carry, these Republican politicians in Arkansas now control our Arkansas Senate and House by a ratio of four to one. The moderate leaders have given up on controlling these fringe members.

We can expect the next session of our state Legislature to be more chaotic and dysfunctional than 2021. As long as that "R" next to any name on the ballot gets the vote, I believe we are doomed to partisan leadership from city to county to state offices. If we care about the future of our state, we will stop this extreme partisan divide and think about the quality of the person running for any office, not only their party affiliation. We will educate voters and register voters, then make sure that every person has the right to vote.

If we allow this takeover to control our next election, it will be too late to save our state from extremism.

SARA BARTLETT

Fayetteville

Sure do miss cartoon

Alice Witterman from Batesville asked you to bring back Lola. Here are the words in the cartoon from Jan. 27. Judge for yourself: "The sound is so sweet, like an angel's voice singing. For joy is upon us, when the microwave is dinging."

Bring back Lola!

GARY McCLURE

Pine Bluff

See the article here:

OPINION | LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: The buzz on gardens | On account of religion | Extremists' takeover - Arkansas Online

Aruna Roy is a social activist and founder of theMazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan(MKSS). Her work and leadership led to the enactment of theRight to Information (RTI) Act 2005a landmark act that empowers citizens to demand transparency and accountability from government institutions.

Over the last four decades, she has been at the forefront of several other people-led movements as well including the Right to Work campaign which led to the institution ofMGNREGA, and theRight to Foodmovement. In 2000, she received the Magsaysay Award for Community Leadership.

In this interview with IDR, Roy talks about building and sustaining participatory movements, the role of sangharsh (struggle) in driving change, and the power of the collective voice. She explains why the right to freedom of expression is critical for India, why civil society must fight to sustain it, and hopes for a free and open society where the young can function without fear within the boundaries of constitutional morality.

Could you tell us a little about your early years and early influences?

I was born a year before Independence. This placed me squarely alongside the journey of the new and nascent country that we call India, or Bharat. I grew up in DelhiIm aDilliwalias they say. My family was progressive and privileged by educationmy mother had studied mathematics and physics, my father had been to Shantiniketan when he was a young boy of 10, and my grandmother had done her senior Cambridge. Issues of equality were part of the daily routine. Regardless of their class, caste, or literacy levels, everyone who came home sat together and had tea from the same cups. I did not realise at that time that this was not normal. I grew up celebrating all festivals and listening to the stories of great human beings.

I was sent toKalakshetrain Chennai to learn classical dance and music, and to a range of schools after that. I studied English literature and completed my postgraduation from Indraprastha College, Delhi University, in 1967. I taught a year in my college and, in 1968, joined the civil service as part of the union territories cadre. I was posted in Pondicherry, and then in Delhi. I resigned in 1975 to come to Rajasthan to work with the rural poor.

There are several reasons I have worked all my life. My mother was an extremely intelligent and accomplished woman. She did not however participate in public life, which frustrated her, because she believed that women were not less capable than men. But in a mans world, women were always looked down upon as domestic accoutrements. This was extremely distressing for my mother, and it became deeply ingrained in me that a woman has to have a life beyond the domestic sphere.

It is one of the fundamental postulates on which I have built my lifea woman must have a place where she can express herself with freedom. You could say that my first politics was feminism. The second was caste politics. My father, grandparents, and great-granduncle had fought discrimination, particularly related to caste. Understanding caste, untouchability, and the rigidity and discrimination of the caste system were part of my growing years. And since I grew up in Delhi shortly after Partition, religious discrimination and violence, and the havoc they cause, were also part of my emotional memory.

I joined the civil service because I felt that it was possibly a place where one could actively work to reduce discrimination and inequality in society. When I left the civil service, I started working with a nonprofit called the Social Work and Research Center, orBarefoot College, in Tilonia, Rajasthan.

Also read: When the Political Elite Fails to Honour the Constitution in a Democracy

In those nine years I de-schooled myself. I learned about cross-cultural communication and about poverty, caste, and gender seen through the lens of those who suffer discrimination. I understood what prevents the poor from upward mobility. I learned from extremely intelligent working-class men and women.

I learned a lot from one woman in particularNaurti, who has stayed a friend for more than 40 years. She is Dalit, and a little younger than me. She was a wage worker when we first met. She chose to become literate, a labour leader who led the fight against unfair minimum wages, an acknowledged leader of womens rights, a computer operator, and a sarpanch. I was part of her campaign on minimum wages. I took the law to her through an awareness programme, and she organised the people. Finally, in 1983, the Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgement on minimum wagesSanjit Roy vs the Government of RajasthaninvokingArticle 14andArticle 23of the Constitution. Naurti has been a comrade and together we have fought against sati and rape, and for the RTI, MGNREGA, and other rights-based programmes. She is an extremely courageous woman, and we continue to be friends and equals.

At Tilonia, I learned about the need for an organisational structure for participatory management. It is critical to build democratic ways of functioning with equality. How do you facilitate participation and what are the non-negotiables? The first principle is that you have to listen, and you have to accept dissent. You must also accept that in order to reach a consensus, you have to give up something. This happens only if there is a structure to do so.

As I grew in my politics, I realised I didnt want to be adevelopment-wali. I wanted to be a participant in the struggles to access constitutional rights. I went to central Rajasthan to work with the workers and set up the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS), along with like-minded friendsShankar Singh and Nikhil Dey. MKSS is asangharsh(struggle) based organisation. It is located in a mud hut in Devdungri and doesnt take any institutional funds. It is where the demand for the RTI was crafted and began, as did other struggles. It has been a long journey. At this moment, we arestruggling for an accountability law, and are on a yatra to all the 33 districts in Rajasthan to ask the government to implement its electoral promise. I still work and struggle.

Youve shown the country how to build a movement that has outsized impact. How do you build a movement and sustain it when you dont have institutional funding?

A funded movement is limiting. Mahatma Gandhi said that when you fight your own people, you must not at any point open yourself to the criticism that the battle is funded by vested interests. Funding must come from people whose battle is represented, or from supporters of the movements and campaigns. A campaign for equality is not a project.

Participatory movements and campaigns are affected by many variablesthe government that can put people in jail, the mafia that can beat them up, the societal and feudal structure that one has to navigate. It is impossible to tell exactly when something will happen.You cannot therefore predict the outcome of a campaign.

When you work with people there are three kinds of work:seva, nirman,andsangharsh.Sevais welfare or serviceproviding food to those who are starving or caring for those who are ill.Nirmanis developmentrunning schools or a womens skill programme. MKSSs work falls squarely in the third area ofsangharsh, or struggle. It is almost always political work in its broadest definitionthat of asking for constitutional rights within the framework of democratic participation.

All three ways of working are necessary to build a healthy society. The rights-based work done by organisations such as MKSS and theNarmada Bachao Andolanneed not necessarily have a big budget. It can be sustained by what we now call crowdfunding.

MKSS and I believe all struggles for equality are rooted in a political understanding. It is political not in the sense of competing for state power, but for realising constitutional rights. I am constitutionally enabled and mandated to fight this battle by the chapters on fundamental rights and the directive principles of state policy. In the course of the battle, we are not against the judiciary, the legislature, or the executive. But we demand that they function for the people, specifically in reference to constitutional norms.

At MKSS we draw the minimum agricultural wage as an honorarium. We are a small group of peoplearound 20 of us, and we have continued like this for more than 31 years. We live like the people we represent so that we know their hardships. We welcome and invite people to contribute to our movement in both kind and cash. We believe in asking for money from the people we represent. Firstly, because there is humility in the act of askingwe dont exist without the people and their contribution brings them dignity and closer to owning the issue. Secondly, they evaluate us and hold us accountable. If we do not deliver, we will not be supported.

Also read: Hamid Ansari, a Man with Indefatigable Hope and Courage to Speak the Truth

But money is less important than peoples participation. The 40-day longdharna (a peaceful demonstration) in Beawar in 1996 was a landmark in the struggle for the RTI, and was a story of peoples participation.We walked through 400 villages asking for support. Every family gave us five kilos of grain and four to six days of their time by joining us at thedharna. It became a high point of life in the town. Everybody congregated at thedharna site because it was full of energy. We ate there, lived there, and had events therepoetry readings, celebrations of Babasaheb Ambedkars birthday, Labour Day, and more.

The movement started as a working-class demand for the RTI to fight corruption and arbitrary use of power, and slowly expanded into understanding how essential it is for democratic functioning and the fact that its a constitutional value. As a friend of mine, S R Sankaran, an IAS officer, said, It is a transformatory law, because through the RTI you can realise other rightshuman rights, economic rights, social rights, and more.

People realised that transparency is an important way to fight corruption and arbitrary power. But if thatdharnain Beawar hadnt been sustained and supported financially and politically by the local residents and the trade unions, it could not have happened. That is the power of the collective voiceits the coming together of people, where weown the issue, it becomes our own fight, and when this transition happens, people are with you to struggle till the end.

How can you get different stakeholders, each of whom may have different goals, to align with your mission?

There are a few non-negotiables. First, ones own transparency and accountability must be an important component of our public life. I come from a privileged class by virtue of my birth and education. I work with very underprivileged people. When one is in a position of privilege, conversations have to begin by stating our probity and integrity, and with transparency. For example, there was a daily account of donations on a board at thedharnain Beawar.

Second, you have tobeequal, not just talk about equality. Deep down we have to understand that everybody is an equal, that everybody has a right to think, to talk, to be. A dilemma arises when you talk to people who do not share the same basic principles. If I am in discussion with a person who believes in caste, I should have the ability to start a dialogue with them about how completely illogical caste is. But unless we enter into a dialogue we really do not have true engagement, friendship, participation, and growth.

The Dalits and the poor taught me that for them any expression of equality meansstruggle, and the courage to confront.

We are losing our right to protest, the right to dissent, the right to access public spaces. And what is democracy if you dont have the public ear and public space. All of us must ask for the right to dissent in a democracy, the right to be heard. The problem with Indian democracy is that despite the presence of millions of voters, the pool of decision makers get smaller and narrower at the top. The voice at the bottom ceases to be heard. Decisions that affect millions of people are taken by a few, not in Parliament, not even in the Cabinet. MKSS believes that the street is our Parliament and our policy room. Thats where we go to protest and converse. When youre on the street, you communicate with people who are not exactly part of your campaign or movement. Thats the kind of stimulation you need to have a civil society movement. We filed a PIL in the Supreme Court to regain access to the Jantar Mantar, and were successful in July 2018 in regaining the use of public space to protest.

My generation was very fortunatewe were not denied the right to freedom of expression. We could say what we liked. Today, we are beginning at the drawing board to get a system of governance that allows free expression and freedom of speech, which are fundamental to a democracy.

Engaging other stakeholders is equally critical. The RTI movement involved everyonethe media, academia, lawyers, and others. MGNREGA would not have happened without economists such as Jean Drze, Jayati Ghosh, Prabhat Patnaik, and others who used fiscal arguments to counter the governments constant refrain of no money. The RTI law was drafted by Justice P B Sawant, an ex-Supreme Court judge and chair of the Press Council of India.

If you want anything to succeed, youhaveto involve a range of people. And you have to convince them about your ideathis must happen through public communication. Civil society is a target today because it amplifies the voices of justice and equality. We also have to understand that civil society is a large umbrella; its not just activists. It includes practically the entire population of India, because except for the state and the market, everyone else is civil society. We have to fight to sustain what we have.

What is your message for young people in India? How do we make sure that we dont waste the legacy that you and your fellow travellers have bequeathed us?

The right to freedom of expression is fundamental to everyones well-being. Any system that tries to repress and suppress this right denies not only a democratic or constitutional right, but also a human right. It denies the right to life and liberty. Hence, for many of us today, the major preoccupation is Indias democracy, global democracy, and the attack on the right to freedom of expression, on account of which so many young people have suffered.

The most important right being corroded in the last seven years is free speech and expression with equality. It is such an important part of life and an important guarantee of real democracy. And today we must regain whatever weve lost, and sustain whatever we have for a better future. It doesnt matter whether youre involved insangharsh,seva, ornirman, whether youre a small or large organisation, whether you are a woman or a man. It doesnt matter where youre located. The right to free speech and expression is fundamental for freedom and liberty.

In this new, contemporary India, young people have a big struggle ahead to regain this right. The RTI is critical because it has brought a sense of reassurance to the nation and to the eight million users of that right that we are sovereign. The closest any campaign has come to set the discourse on public ethics is perhaps the RTI. The MGNREGA, by bringing in social audit, has spread the ideas of transparency and accountability across the board. These two big campaigns of which I am a part not only fostered participation, but also translated an ethical principle into implementable policy. And thats critical. Because if you cant convert those principles into an implementable, practical, pragmatic, tangible reality, they only exist on paper.

Young people must also understand that there is no such thing as my work and your work. Theres simply work to be done. The issue should be far more important than our individual selves. We are all instruments that bring an issue alive. We all want to be recognised and acknowledgedits a human condition. But at what cost? Understanding that ones personal good lies within the general good is important.

Do you have any concluding thoughts for all of us?

We see an increasing slew of attacks against religious minorities, Dalits, and other marginalised communities. Civil society, which speaks out against oppression and amplifies the voices of the marginalised, is also under attack. Violence, instead of discussion and debate, has become a common response for settling disagreements. But what makes all this worse is the states covert and overt support for perpetrators of violence.

We need to nurture a culture of non-violence. Non-violence is born of tolerance, courage and a respect for life. It is a great Indian heritage, which is being undermined. We need to build forums for exchange of ideas and dialogue, which is what a constitutional democracy is all about.

I wish for a free and open society in which the young can function and do whatever they want to do without fear within the four corners of constitutional morality.

Finally, I owe a huge debt of gratitude to the thousands of people who have contributed to my growth, reassuring me that there is goodness in humanity and that we all have roles to play as more equal, just people, and that we can bridge the gap between the privileged and the underprivileged. I hope that in the years I have to live, I never stop talking truth to power.

This article was originally published on India Development Review.

Read the original here:

Interview | 'We Are Losing Our Right to Protest': Aruna Roy - The Wire