Category Archives: Abolition Of Work

(Pixabay/Cristian Ibarra)

During his historic visit to Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 2019, Pope Francis declared that "the use of atomic energy for purposes of war is immoral, just as the possessing of nuclear weapons is immoral."

The pontiff said the world "must never grow weary of working to support the principal international legal instruments of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, including the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons."

Francis' pronouncement was clear: The very possession of nuclear weapons is immoral! Therefore, if it is wrong for followers of Jesus to possess nuclear weapons, then it is equally wrong to build and modernize them, let alone use them.

The Biden administration is requesting $43 billion for nuclear weapons in its budget for fiscal year 2022. During this Aug. 6-9 period commemorating the 76th anniversary of the U.S. nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, should not all Catholics, including President Joe Biden and all other Catholic politicians, be following the lead of Francis in advocating for total nuclear disarmament?

Instead of advocating for this exorbitant nuclear expenditure a continuation of the last two presidents' projected $1.7 trillion upgrade of the U.S. nuclear arsenal that will span several decades Biden should provide bold leadership to bring about total nuclear abolition and redirect all nuclear and other military expenditures to meet urgent human needs.

In his 1976 World Day of Peace Message, Pope Paul VI described the atomic bombings of Japan as "a butchery of untold magnitude." During the ceremony that awarded the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize to the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), Setsuko Thurlow, Hiroshima survivor and ICAN member, spoke these words in her acceptance speech:

I speak as a member of the family of hibakusha those of us who, by some miraculous chance, survived the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. For more than seven decades, we have worked for the total abolition of nuclear weapons. ... We were not content to be victims. We refused to wait for an immediate fiery end or the slow poisoning of our world. We refused to sit idly in terror as the so-called great powers took us past nuclear dusk and brought us recklessly close to nuclear midnight. We rose up. We shared our stories of survival. We said: humanity and nuclear weapons cannot coexist.

Today, I want you to feel in this hall the presence of all those who perished in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I want you to feel, above and around us, a great cloud of a quarter-million. ...souls. Each person had a name. Each person was loved by someone. Let us ensure that their deaths were not in vain. ... The development of nuclear weapons signifies not a country's elevation to greatness, but its descent to the darkest depths of depravity. These weapons are not a necessary evil; they are the ultimate evil.

Pope Francis participates in a moment of silence at the Hiroshima Peace Memorial in Japan in 2019. "The use of atomic energy for purposes of war is immoral, just as the possessing of nuclear weapons is immoral," the pope said during that visit. (CNS/Paul Haring)

In the U.S., a nation that has legally sanctioned the use of nuclear weapons and relies on them for its ultimate security, what would Jesus have us do? Clearly, Jesus teaches that we must place our trust in God, not in the nuclear idol, for our true security. He calls us to disarm our hearts of fear, hate, racism and greed. He instructs us to forever put away the sword, love unconditionally and renounce all killing.

Due to the existential threats posed by both nuclear weapons and the climate crisis, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has now turned its Doomsday Clock to 100 seconds before midnight. The U.S. possesses nearly 5,500 nuclear weapons, many of which are on hair-trigger alert. The U.S. refuses to adopt a no-first use policy.

With the very future of human survival and our planet's existence at stake, how can we avert global catastrophe and make disarmament a reality for our time? First and foremost, we must have the faith, courage, and will to believe that total nuclear disarmament can occur. If we are to take seriously the magnitude of the nuclear threat and the admonitions of Francis and the hibakusha, we must risk taking action that is commensurate with the colossal threat we face.

Can followers of Jesus be employed in nuclear weapons-related work? Christians who work to produce and upgrade nuclear weapons, or who are otherwise involved in their potential use today face a serious faith and moral dilemma. The following insights from Catholic peacemakers serve to counsel us on this matter.

Jesuit Fr. Richard McSorley stated: "It's a sin to build a nuclear weapon. We cannot seriously imagine Jesus pushing the button to launch a nuclear bomb, or registering for the draft, or wearing the uniform of any national state, or paying taxes for nuclear weapons, or working in a plant that manufactures weapons of death."

The late Bishop Leroy Matthiesen of Amarillo, Texas, told the Catholics in his diocese who worked at the nearby Pantex nuclear weapons plant: "In the name of the God of peace, quit your jobs." In making this appeal, he said he would offer financial assistance to any defense workers who would quit their jobs.

And the late Seattle Archbishop Raymond Hunthausen asserted: "I say with deep sorrow that our nuclear war preparations are the global crucifixion of Jesus. Our nuclear weapons are the final crucifixion of Jesus, in the extermination of the human family with whom he is one. We have to refuse to give incense in our day, tax dollars to our nuclear idol."

Seven Catholics were convicted for participating in the 2018 Kings Bay Plowshares action at the Naval Submarine Base in Kings Bay, Georgia, to protest nuclear weapons. It was among about 100 disarmament actions since 1980 in which activists have symbolically beaten swords into plowshares. (CNS/courtesy Kings Bay Plowshares)

The nuclear challenge before us is great but not insurmountable, for with God, and people acting on their faith convictions, all things are possible. History bears out this truth. Drawing on the rich biblical tradition of nonviolence and the many examples of nonviolent resistance in human history, Plowshares activists have been inspired to carry out over 100 disarmament actions since 1980, whereby the nuclear swords of our time have symbolically been beaten into plowshares (Isaiah 2:4 and Micah 4:3).

The most recent action, the Kings Bay Plowshares 7, took place on April 4, 2018, the 50th anniversary of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., at the Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay in St. Marys, Georgia. They declaredin their action statement: "Nuclear weapons eviscerate the rule of law, enforce white supremacy, perpetuate endless war and environmental destruction, and ensure impunity for all manner of crimes against humanity."

In October 2019, the activistswere tried and convictedby a jury in U.S. District Court in Brunswick, Georgia. All seven have served or are serving prison terms ranging from 8 months to 3 years.

The nuclear challenge before us is great but not insurmountable, for with God, and people acting on their faith convictions, all things are possible.

As one who has participated in two Plowshares actions and other peace actions, I, along with many others, believe that if people have the faith to believe that disarmament is possible, and act on that faith, the abolition of nuclear weapons can occur.

The U.S. bishops and all churches have a crucial role to play in following Francis' lead in bringing about nuclear abolition.

What if the bishops called for the conversion of arms industries to nonmilitary production, while advocating for full and just protection of workers' rights during the transition process? What if the church provided material resources for those who quit their jobs for reasons of conscience?

What if leadership in all Christian denominations called on believers in the nuclear chain of command to refuse orders to use nuclear weapons, and for all Christians to publicly support those who do so? What if the churches demanded, too, that the U.S. government ratify the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, which now makes nuclear weapons illegal under international law?

These efforts would go a long way to help create the climate necessary to bring about real disarmament.

Hiroshima-Nagasaki commemoration actions worldwide Aug. 6-9 will call for nuclear abolition. "In the Presence of All Who Perished: Remembrance in the Age of the Ban Treaty" is the theme for actions coordinated by the U.S. Days of Action Working Group.

The purpose is twofold: to note that the U.N. treaty has shifted the conversation about nuclear weapons from military and policy considerations to the humanitarian and environmental impacts of nuclear weapons; and to elevate the voices of those who have witnessed the destructive power of nuclear weapons.

Now is the time to join together and act with people worldwide working for nonviolent social transformation, peace and justice.

As Dr. King famously said in his 1967 speech on Vietnam: "Our only hope today lies in our ability to recapture the revolutionary spirit and go out into a sometimes hostile world declaring eternal hostility to poverty, racism, and militarism."

If the human family and earth, our common home, are to survive, if our children are to have a future, we need to recapture the hope and revolutionary spirit that Dr. King spoke of. Moreover, we need to commit our lives to the commandment of gospel nonviolence as we join with others seeking to create the Beloved Community, thereby making God's reign of love, peace, and justice a reality for our world.

Enter your email address to receive free newsletters from NCR.

Originally posted here:

Catholics must act on Francis' mandate to abolish nuclear weapons - National Catholic Reporter

A new report details allegations of nationwide retaliation by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and now immigrant advocacy groups and organizers are calling on the Biden administration to act.

The report, prepared by the University of Washington School of Law Immigration Clinic, and nationwide organizers found that federal officials are regularly engaged in a sustained campaign of ICE surveillance and repression against advocacy groups and activists.

It cited a compilation of interviews, court filings and documents obtained via Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, and documents a myriad of allegations of instances of retaliation and surveillance across the country, where immigrant rights activists say they experienced intimidation, targeting, and in some cases, deportation for their prevalence in advocacy circles.

In these cases, ICE agents followed, photographed, and monitored the social media activity of activists who engaged in protests or other public advocacy, sometimes in violation of state law.

ICE agents launched immigration raids, explicitly targeting these individuals. Agents placed individuals into deportation proceedings, and in one instance, arrested 20 members of an immigrant rights organization following the organizations attempts to sever the ties between local police and ICE.

The findings of the report are troubling, not only for immigrant rights groups but also for the people they are advocating for. ICEs actions suggest that the federal government is openly using its power to retaliate against these communities.

It raises serious concerns that ICE is punishing individuals for First Amendment-protected activities.

The report documents retaliation committed against individuals associated with five immigrant rights groups: Grassroots Leadership, Organized Communities Against Deportations, Comunidad Colectiva, La Resistencia, and Migrant Justice.

"This pattern of retaliation is not about a few ICE agents scattered across the country," Jacinta Gonzalez, senior campaign organizer at Mijente told AL DA. It makes a mockery of our First Amendment if activists can be surveilled, jailed, and deported for nothing more than protesting abuse carried out by the government.

She added that the Biden administration should ban this sort of retaliation within its upcoming enforcement memo for ICE.

It is imperative that the Secretary of Homeland Security do so and issue guidelines forbidding this targeted harassment of activists.

Despite the danger of organizing against ICE, especially for those who are undocumented, advocacy groups have made it clear they are not going to stop.

Our work is to make public all the brutality of the immigration detention system, Maru Mora Villalpando of La Resistencia said in a statement. ICE retaliation only made us stronger and more committed to continue our work to end all detentions and deportations.

While DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has said that retaliation by ICE is unacceptable in the past, activists say there still continues to be substantial reason for concern of retaliation and surveillance.

Its why theyre calling on the Biden administration to intervene.

"These cases show that retaliation is systemic, so the administration must take immediate action to stop it. Following people to meetings, scouring their social media accounts, arresting their friends and family this is harassment and abuse, actions totally unacceptable for a government agency, Gnzalez said.

With the upcoming enforcement memo for ICE, the administration has the opportunity to institute and advocate for a range of policy interventions to protect advocates, and address the harmful effects of ICEs tactics. But will it? Those tactics include exercising prosecutorial discretion in favor of civil, labor, and human rights organizers and activists.

The reports authors also offer several policy recommendations for the administration to consider, from bringing home immigrant activists and organizers who have been targeted and deported because of their affiliation with advocacy work, to ending

mass surveillance of immigration activists, organizers and protests in general.

DHS has used intrusive modern technological tools and boots on the ground to engage in widespread surveillance of immigrant activists, immigrant-led organizations, and protests across the country, the report reads.

The complete list of recommendations listed in the report can be found here.

The goal, the report says, is to re-envision the immigration system in its current form, away from treating it as an extension of the criminal justice system.

To abolish the immigration enforcement agencies, in other words, ICE, is the long-term goal for these groups, and they maintain that the pattern of surveillance and retaliation detailed in the report merits the call for abolition.

View original post here:

New report says ICE is targeting immigrant advocacy groups with retaliation and surveillance - AL DIA News

GCSE results this week will include all of the usual highs and lows, with students exceeding, meeting and some sadly missing their expectations and ambitions.

The work they have put in and the teaching and support they have received should be celebrated particularly in this most disrupted year. At the Association of Colleges (AOC) well certainly be working hard to acknowledge the work done and the achievements of hundreds of thousands of college students.

But alongside all of that is an underlying discontent from many commentators about GCSEs as a qualification, with some calling for their abolition. The main argument is a simple one: the GCSE was established as an end-point qualification for compulsory education when 16 was the school leaving age. With young people now required to stay in education or training until 18, that purpose is undermined and its use for adults is stretching things too far.

For colleges, there are other concerns about GCSEs and particularly about the obsession the government seems to have with GCSE English and maths. The Department for Education English and maths GCSE resits policy requires every 16 year old who has failed to achieve at least a grade 4 to re-take the GCSE or equivalent until they have. That means over a third of young people having to resit and for those on free school meals it is more than half, showing how unequal education outcomes are.

This week the GCSE results will once again show that the majority of those resitting will fail to improve their grade. Thats hardly a surprise given the norm-referenced nature of the grading which literally means that it is impossible for everyone to achieve the required grade 4.

Its an odd world we live in that the government implores young people to achieve a grade 4 knowing that around a third will not, and even after resits, around 25% will still not achieve it. If being competently numerate and literate are requirements for all of us, why not have a test more like the driving test which is criterion-referenced and everyone can pass at least theoretically?

This matters because the GCSE policy is one of the sharp cliff-edges which face young people throughout their education. Research by Machin, McNally and Valenzuela Entry through the narrow door: The costs of just failing high stakes exams (2020) showed that students on the wrong side of the grade 4 boundary, even by one single point, are more likely to drop out of education early and less likely to achieve a good upper secondary education because the available opportunities are insufficient. The reason for that is how the GCSE English and maths is used as a gateway or a barrier to progression in learning as well as access to jobs.

Take the approach to the new T Levels where the government has, wrongly in my view, made achievement of English and maths at grade 4 or better a requirement for all students to achieve a T Level. The laudable aim is to show how rigorous and high quality the new T Level qualification is, but it means many young people will not be able to achieve it. Weirdly, the same requirement does not exist for A Levels and degrees, and every year some people achieve those without the GCSE English and maths.

For adults the GCSE is also problematic, with only set points in the year when it can be taken, and the high-stakes end-point assessment creating a barrier for many who are returning to learning and need their confidence boosted. In prisons, a GCSE in English or maths is often impossible to achieve in the time available, so learning is often not translated into concrete achievement.

So whats to be done? We can all agree that children, young people and adults need strong literacy, numeracy and digital skills. We can also agree that too many young people leave school without those abilities and many adults are held back without them. The current system, it is fair to say, is not working to meet the aims we all agree on and, even if teaching and learning improved substantially and very quickly, too many people would still not be well-served.

A modular GCSE would help, allowing the banking of achievements at all ages and stages in school, college, community or workplace so that positive progress can be built upon. It would help children struggling at key stage 4 by giving them some achievements to take with them into their next stage rather than being haunted by the failure of a low GCSE grade. It would mean no more resits, which are mentally taxing as well. It would mean prisoners able to bank an achievement during a short sentence and able to top-up after prison. It would allow adults to dip their toes back into learning and build the confidence to progress.

The other change needed is for English and maths, as well as digital skills, to be properly funded. We have called repeatedly for specific funding to be used to support this government priority, but it remains poorly supported. For 16 to 18 year olds, the number of hours of teaching and support they receive is around 15 hours per week, lagging the 25+ hours in other OECD countries. Its no wonder that young people struggle, given the lack of investment made in their learning.

Finally, we need an adult literacy, numeracy, digital skills and language strategy. We had that in the early 2000s and it made an impact, but there is nothing now. Developing a strategy would concentrate minds, galvanise actions and generate interest, and with the right funding could make a big impact.

So, yes, lets review GCSEs, but more importantly, lets think about the English, maths, digital and language skills we want everyone to have as well.

Originally posted here:

Comments on: It's time to rethink how we teach our children - Politics.co.uk

Don't look now, but it seems that there actually will be some kind of bipartisan infrastructure deal. Enough Senate Republicans have agreed to a roughly $1 trillion dollar package including money for roads, bridges, broadband, and Amtrak, among other things that it is expected to be passed sometime Tuesday.

It raises the question: Are Democrats about to get played by Republicans once again? The answer is that it is entirely up to them. Now is the time for House Democrats to stand firm and demand that Senate Democrats pass the party's own prioritiesbefore they accept the bipartisan compromise.

Now, I have to admit that I was apparently too skeptical of the chances of a bipartisan bill getting through. Under President Obama, Republicans' signature move was to hold out the promise of bipartisan compromise, dragging out negotiations for months and squandering precious congressional calendar time, only to pull back at the last second. In 2009-10, dimwitted and/or corrupt moderate Democrats fell for this clumsy trick over and over and over, and I thought it would probably work again, but I was mistaken.

However, it is still absolutely certain that Republicans are operating in bad faith here. If they are advancing this bipartisan bill, it is because they perceive that to be their best chance at blowing up the rest of the Biden agenda and thereby damaging the Democrats' political prospects. The old goal of wasting tons of floor time has indeed succeeded. Now the GOP is almost certainly hoping that by agreeing to this bill, moderate Democrats like Sens. Krysten Sinema (Ariz.)and Joe Manchin (W. Va.) will get cold feet about the rest of Biden's policy program, and that will be the end of major policymaking for the rest of his presidency.

It is worth noting again that both in terms of policy and in terms of the political objectives of the Democratic Party, the bipartisan bill is completely pointless. As Alex Pareene writes at The New York Times, the sole objective is to assuage a neurotic desire from a handful of Senate moderates like Manchin and Sinema to demonstrate that the Senate still functions: "The Senate (with the White House's support) wasted months cajoling and rehabilitating a handful of key Republicans, only to pass a smaller version of something Democrats could theoretically have passed entirely on their own." The whole process proved beyond any doubt that the Senate is a worthless obstacle to human flourishing.

If and when the deal does pass, the Democrats' explicit intention is to pass another much larger budget bill that can sidestep the filibuster through the reconciliation process tacking on manyof the party's objectives that weren't included in the bipartisan bill.(Republicans appear to have calculated that if they didn't do something bipartisan, Manchin and Sinema would be forced to go along with the rest of their party, so they are trying to give them an escape hatch to start running away from liberal priorities.) Senate Democrats released an outline of what that second bill couldlook like Monday morning.

However, one small but important thing is missing from that proposedreconciliation bill an increase in the debt limit. The government is going to run out of legal borrowing authority in mid-September, and Democrats are reportedly going to try to force Republicans to vote for a separateincrease rather than just doing it themselves.

This is almost unbelievably stupid, even for long-time students of Democratic blundering. Republicans have already taken the debt limit hostage more than once, and their desire to inflict harm on the country to damagethe Bidenadministration is right out in the open. Right now, in the midst of a resurgent pandemic that is again stuffing hospitals full to bursting, Republican elites are spreading anti-vaccine propaganda and instructing their followers to ignore pandemic containment guidelines. Republican senators are publicly sayingthey will not vote for a debt ceiling increase without massive austerity measures that would wound the economy and therefore Biden. "I don't think there are going to be any Republican votes to increase the debt limit without some structural reforms," Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) told Politico.

Furthermore, the debt ceiling is a pointless anachronism that does not exist in any other country (except Denmark, where they have effectively abolished it) and is arguably unconstitutional. In any sane country, when the legislature votes to spend and tax, it has thereby voted to borrow the balance of revenue needed. It is irresponsible politics to play chicken with the worst major political party in the developed world, and it is irresponsiblepolicy not to clean up this poisonous legal idiocy while Democrats have the chance.

All this means that right now is an excellent time for progressives in the House by which I mean not just the "Squad" but anyone who is in favor of Biden's agenda and wants to see him succeed as president to hold the line and force Senate Democrats to behave. If the Housepockets the bipartisan bill and refuses to move on it until they also havethe reconciliation bill in hand from the Senate, including an abolition of the debt limit (or at least a large increase), they can likely force through the whole thing. Make it clear to Sinema and Manchin that it's an all-or-nothing deal. Otherwise Biden's entire presidency could run aground in a month.

Read more:

Democrats make governing much harder than it needs to be - The Week Magazine

Activists canvass for the Voting Rights Restoration Initiative in Florida in November 2017. (Florida Rights Restoration Coalition / Facebook)

EDITORS NOTE: This article originally appeared at TomDispatch.com. To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up to receive the latest updates from TomDispatch.com.

Thank you for signing up forThe Nations weekly newsletter.

My father, Athan G. Theoharis, passed away on July 3. A leading expert on the FBI, he was responsible for exposing the bureaus widespread abuses of power. He was a loyal husband, dedicated father, scholar, civil libertarian, and voting rights advocate with an indefatigable commitment to defending democracy. He schooled his children (and anyone who would listen, including scholars, journalists, and activists from a striking variety of political perspectives) to understand one thing above all: how hard the powers-that-be will work to maintain that power and how willing they are to subvert democracy in the process. His life is a reminder that much of American politics in 2021 is, in so many ways, nothing new.

He grew up poor in Milwaukee, the son of an undocumented Greek immigrant who ran a diner out of the first floor of his home. He returned to his hometown in 1969 as a professor of American history at Marquette University. There, he would take part in political campaigns and local democratic efforts and, of course, raise my siblings and me. After he retired as a professorcommitted as he was to opening up space for new scholars and researchershe remained involved with the Wisconsin ACLU and its campaigns to protect democracy and civil liberties. He became the chair of the board and (how appropriate given this moment of voter-suppression laws) worked to oppose the 2011 Wisconsin voter ID law, while aiding the recall campaign against then-Governor Scott Walker.

Although it seems long ago, in many ways that battle over democracy in Americas Dairyland set the scene for the Trump years and the national crisis unfolding around us now. In 2010, Wisconsin Republicans, fueled in part by a rising Tea Party movement and having gained control of the state legislature and governorship, immediately passed a host of antidemocratic laws, while instituting regressive economic policies. This in a state that had once been a beacon of American democratic experimentation.

As anyone who visited our family would have learned on a driving tour my parents loved to offer, Milwaukee had a first-class park system because of its (rare) history of socialist mayors. Although Wisconsin was also home to that notorious anti-communist of the 1950s Senator Joseph McCarthy, and also the John Birch Society, it had strikingly progressive roots. However, in 2011, at a hearing on the state Senates version of that voter ID law, one political-science expert testified that this version of the bill is more restrictive than any bill weve had in the past. Indeed, if this bill passes, it would be the most restrictive in the United States.

That same year, a major campaign to recall Governor Walker began, partially in response to an austerity budget aimed at poor Wisconsinites. It would slash pensions and health benefits for public-sector workers and impose new statewide restrictions on unions collective bargaining. When that budget was first introduced, Democratic legislatorsand this should sound familiar, given recent events in Texasfled the state to stave off a vote in its Senate, while thousands of protesters besieged the capitol building in Madison. For a moment, Wisconsin commanded the attention of the nation.

That recall campaign unfolded over 18 long, bitter months, with Walker eventually holding on to his governorship. Mitt Romney, then on the presidential campaign trail, lauded him for his sound fiscal policies and swore that his victory over the recall would echo beyond the borders of Wisconsin. And he was right.

More than just a win for a beleaguered politician, the Wisconsin experience signaled a growing antidemocratic strain within the Republican Party and American politics coupled with an extreme economic ideology that benefited the rich and powerful. Even thenin the years when Donald Trump was no more than a businessman and TV show hostthat ideology was already masquerading as populism. And in doing so, it echoed the development of so-called welfare reform more than a decade earlier, when former Governor Tommy Thompsons Wisconsin model laid the basis for ending welfare as Americans knew it.Current Issue

Subscribe today and Save up to $129.

My father watched the fallout from these events with grave concern. For more than 50 years, he had researched and exposed how the FBIs surveillance programs threatened civil liberties and weakened democratic expression. He knew what was possible when the levers of government power were in the wrong hands and he recognized the emergence of the attack on democracy earlier than most. He taught us that wherever you were was ground zero when it came to voting rights and, sadly enough, the truth of this has only become clearer since his passing. Indeed, right now, amid a wave of voter suppression laws such as have been unseen since Reconstruction and the continued obstructionism in Congress, the fight for democracy is everywhere and, whether we like it or not, were all on the front lines now.

American history is punctuated by eras of dramatic democratic expansion but also of backlash, especially in response to any encouragement of a multiracial electorate coming together to lift society from the bottom up. In the wake of the Civil War, Reconstruction was a first great elaboration of American democracy. To this day, it remains the most radical experiment in popular government since the founding of the republic. After 250 years of slavery, the share of Black men eligible to vote across the South jumped from 0.5 percent in 1866 to 80.5 percent just two years later. In many of the former Confederate states, this, in turn, at least briefly inaugurated a sea change in political representation. In 1868, for instance, 33 Black state legislators were elected in Georgia.

Alongside those newly emancipated and enfranchised voters were many poor white sharecroppers and tenant farmers who, in the rubble of the slavocracy, were ready to exercise real political power for the first time. In a number of state legislatures, fusion coalitions of Blacks and poor whites advanced visionary new policies from the expansion of labor and health care rights to education reform. The development of public education was particularly significant for the 4 million Blacks just then emerging from slavery, as well as for poor whites who had been all but barred from school by the former white ruling elite.

If Reconstruction could be called a second American revolution, the Southern aristocracy and the Democratic Party of that era would soon enough set off a vicious counterrevolution, bloody in both word and deed. A violent divide-and-conquer campaign led by informally state-sanctioned paramilitary groups, especially the newly created Ku Klux Klan (headed by a former Confederate general) terrorized Blacks and whites. Meanwhile, those fusion state governments were broken up and, even though the 15th Amendment couldnt be repealed, new voter suppression laws were implemented, including poll taxes, lengthened residency requirements, and literacy tests.

Readers like you make our independent journalism possible.

Whats often left out of this story is that many of those tactics had first been perfected in the North in response to waves of immigrants from Europe and beyond. Between the Civil War and World War I, 25 million people emigrated to this country. In many Northern states, this rising population of foreign-born, urban poor seemed to threaten the political status quo. As a result, nativist and anti-poor voter suppression laws, including new registration requirements, property stipulations, and voter-roll purges spread widely across the North. For years, white Southern reactionaries studied and borrowed from such antidemocratic trailblazing in states like Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Rhode Island.

Reflecting on this record, historian Gregory Downs has written that when Americans treat voter disfranchisement as a regional, racial exception, they sustain their faith that the true national story is one of progressive expansion of voter rights. But turn-of-the-20th-century disfranchisement was not a regional or a racial story; it was a national one. Then as now, it was about protecting the power of a class of wealthy, white Americans in the face of an urge from below for a multiracial democracy.

Echoes from that era could be heard half a century later in the reaction of Republicans and Southern Democrats to the civil rights movement. In the South, since Jim Crow voter suppression had disenfranchised entire generations of Blacks, disproportionately living in poverty, civil rights reforms threatened what some saw as a natural social order. Elsewhere across the country, fears arose that legislation like the Voting Rights Act of 1965 would empower poor people across the board. Two Republican congressmen from Michigan and Indiana, for instance, introduced a sham alternative to it that would have allowed states to use literacy tests in election season, a time-honored proxy for restricting the votes of the poor.

Such extremist politicians typicallyand it should still sound all too familiar todaycouched their opposition to the Voting Rights Act in terms of ensuring voter integrity and preventing voter fraud. Beneath such rhetoric, of course, lay an underlying fear of what broad democratic participation could mean for their political and economic interests. During his governorship of California in the late 1960s, Ronald Reagan first began connecting mass enfranchisement and welfare with the specter of poor people destroying American democracy. His future staffer Pat Buchanan highlighted a growing consensus in the Republican Party when he said, The saving grace of the GOP in national elections has been the political apathy, the lethargy, of the welfare class. It simply does not bother to register to vote.

President Reagans hyper-racialized caricature of the welfare queen has endured all these decades later, cementing the lie that the poor dont care about democracy and stoking fears of a changing multiracial electorate. And while it may be true that a sizable portion of eligible poor and low-income voters dont vote, its not because of indifference. Indeed, a recent report from the Poor Peoples Campaign, which I co-chair, shows that typical reasons for lower voter participation among the poor are illness, disability, time and transportation issues, and a basic belief that too few politicians speak to their needs, ensuring that their votes simply dont matter. This last point is especially important because, as the voter suppression tactics of the previous century have evolved into present-day full-scale attacks on voting rights, their concerns have proven anything but unfounded.

In 2013, in Shelby v. Holder, the Supreme Court struck down the Section 5 preclearance requirement of the Voting Rights Act. That section had placed certain districts with histories of racist voter suppression under federal jurisdiction, requiring them to submit to the Department of Justice any planned changes in their voting laws. Since then, theres been a deluge of voter-suppression laws across the country.

After a multiracial coalition of voters elected Americas first Black president, 2011 stood as the modern watershed for voter suppression with 19 restrictive laws passed in 14 states. (Barack Obama would nevertheless be reelected the next year.) Today, were at a new low point. Six months into 2021, a total of nearly 400 laws meant to obstruct the right to vote have been introduced across the country. So far, 18 states, ranging from Alabama and Arkansas to Texas, Utah, and Wyoming, have passed 30 of them, including an omnibus bill signed into law in Georgia in March. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, it targets Black voters with uncanny accuracy.

At this very moment, one major front in the battle over voting rights is still unfolding in Texas. There, the state Senate recently passed a massive voter integrity bill that would, among other things, ban 24-hour and drive-through voting, add new ID requirements, and criminalize election workers who dont follow the onerous new rules. The bill would also grant new powers to partisan poll watchers, raising the possibility of far-right militia groups legally monitoring polling stations. Texas House Democrats fled the state before a vote could be introduced and now remain in Washington, D.C., in exile, awaiting the end of the special session called by Republican Governor Greg Abbott and possible federal action.

Those state legislators arrived in D.C. the same day President Joe Biden gave a national address in Philadelphia on voting rights. His rhetoric was certainly impassioned, and he has since affirmed his support for both the For the People Act and for restoring the full power of the Voting Rights Act, which would indeed expand access to the ballot, while placing more political power in the hands of people of color and the poor. And yet he has offered little when it comes to developing an actual strategy for getting that done. Instead, he continues to insist that he is not in favor of ending the filibuster in the Senate, even though its the chief impediment to federal action on the subject. He argues instead that such a move would only throw Congress into chaos.

Get unlimited access: $9.50 for six months.

Reverend William Barber, my cochair in the Poor Peoples Campaign, recently laid out the hypocrisy of the presidents support for voting rights, even as he justifies inaction on the filibuster:

President Biden, I have no doubt you care and desire to do right, but, as a clergy person, let me say pastorally, when you say ending the filibuster will create chaos that obscures the fact that the filibuster is facilitating chaos. The filibuster caused chaos with anti-slavery legislation, labor rights, womens rights, civil rights, voting rights, and it once again is causing policy chaos by allowing a minority to obstruct justice. The filibuster has already been used to stop your goal of $15/hr. living wage. We believe the filibuster should end. But, at the very least, no one should ever say the filibuster is preventing chaos.

As Barber notes, the filibuster is also obstructing urgent policy struggles around better wages and health care, immigration reform, and the large-scale infrastructure plan that the Biden administration has worked so hard to create. Action on these issues would dramatically improve the lives of millions of poor and low-income Americans and is precisely what a majority of voters support and extremists are so eager to block through voter suppression. Thats why theres been a recent upsurge of grassroots actions meant to connect the fight for democracy, including voting rights, with economic justice and the abolition of the filibuster. This includes a season of nonviolent moral direct action, including a March for Democracy and a Rally in Texas organized by the Poor Peoples Campaign, because its members understand that whats really underway in this country is a struggle between democracy and potential autocracy or, as Martin Luther King once put it, between community and chaos.

Our own choice is the sort of community where everyone has an equal voice in our democracy and, honestly, in that I believe I am simply following in my fathers footsteps.

Visit link:

Thwarting the Republican Backlash Against Democracy - The Nation

By Express News Service

BENGALURU: Taking serious note of the use of child labour in railway work, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR), New Delhi, has asked the General Manager of South Western Railway Zone to submit a detailed report within a week. It has also ordered the Ramanagara Deputy Commissioner to investigate into the incident and submit an inquiry report on the action taken.

On August 2, TNIE had published a report (Contractor held for child labour) regarding a railway contractor employing child labour to carry out hazardous work of placing stones on the railway tracks near Settihalli railway station in Bengaluru railway division. According to a reliable source, the notice was issued by the NCPCR on August 3. The Commission stated that it has taken suo motu cognizance of the report which highlighted seven children three girls and four boys performing a hazardous and risky job.

Signed by Anu Chaudhary, Registrar, NCPCR, the letter to the SWR General Manager says, You are requested to send detailed report of this case within seven days of issue of this letter along with policies/guidelines framed by the Railway authorities to prevent such type of cases pertaining to child labour.

In another communication to the Ramanagara DC, the Commission has asked him to investigate and submit an action-taken report within three days. Among other aspects, it has asked the DC to take action as per the Juvenile Justice Act 2015, The Child and Adolescent Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, and the Bonded Labour Abolition Act, 1976.

Read the original:

TNIE impact: Rights body notice to Railway official over child labour - The New Indian Express

Mr. Roger Wadada Musaalo, a Lawyer, human rights activist, researcher, and politician (PHOTO/Courtesy).

MBALE For about three months, I have been following the debate on the mailo land tenure and almost kept my view private until my brother Ofwono Opondo came out with a dossier in his Sunday column that I believe was uncalled for.

With a very harsh headline titled- Kabaka Ronald Mutebi, Ugandans need no favours from you- Im still wondering whether these were Opondos personal sentiments or that of Government or the President.

A deeper analysis of Opondos article goes beyond the subject of the mailo system and makes personal attacks on the Kabaka and his throne. True the Kabaka raised his voice but what do you expect of a man whose Kingdom is under attack; you dont expect him to smile in the face of such an eminent threat.

Frankly, this subject has been long overdue and I think it is time to face it head on. The dictates of colonialism have kept Uganda lagging behind because of the fear to undo some of the unfair historical mistakes they left us in.

For instance, the British entered into agreements forcing Uganda to provide electricity to Kenya at a cheap price. They also signed agreements with Buganda, Ankole, Bunyoro, Toro and they ensured that these agreements remain in force forever.

Whereas other agreements are never heard of, the 1900 Buganda agreement has remained a thorn in the neck and the government believes now is the time to act.

As the debate of I-will-dismantle-you-will-not-dismantle the mailo system rages on, the Kabaka needs to be reminded that the 1900 Buganda agreement was signed between Buganda and the Queen on behalf of Uganda. The agreement is not like the religious books that are not subject to amendment.

Now if it is the same Uganda that wants to verify, modify and amend some provisions of the 1900 Buganda agreement, then so be it.Uganda cannot continue being held by unfair and draconian terms that no longer serve their purpose in the new age. I am not a Muganda and frankly I dont care whether the mailo system was abolished and replaced with something else but what I know is that to destroy the mailo system is an indirect way of destroying Buganda as a Kingdom, for land is the very foundation of their survival and the continued call for ebyaffe. Ebyaffe is land.

When Museveni went to war in the jungles, he invited some Baganda to help him with a promise that he would restore the Kingdom and all its belongings. He has since returned some of the properties but the Baganda have not stopped demanding for the rest which must have agitated him to reconsiderhis promise. Every coronation anniversary has been an opportunity to call upon the central government to honour its promise; the government must have been tired of this call hence setting up a commission of inquiry into land matters and I believe it was a plot to use their recommendation to launch a plan to abolish the mailo land system.

Ugandans should be reminded that on December 8, 2016, the President appointed a Commission of Inquiry into the Effectiveness of the Law, Policies and Processes of Land Acquisition, Land Administration, Land Management and Land Registration in Uganda, (the Commission) headed by Justice Catherine Bamugemereire and a panel of other 6 members.

This debate gained momentum during Heroes Day celebrations on 9th June, 2021 when President Museveni expressed dismay at the century long mailo land system saying it is really very bad and not fair but some people support it. Of course some people meant the Baganda under the leadership of His Royal Highness Ronald Muwenda Mutebi. The President said that land owners should be entitled to full ownership of their land like elsewhere in Uganda and gave an example of Ankole where you cannot mess with somebodys land.

On the other hand, Buganda Kingdom has insisted that the cause of land conflicts is not the Mailo tenure system, but failure by government agencies to respond to the wrangles appropriately. While addressing the Buganda Lukiiko, the Katikkiro Charles Peter Mayiga, said those pushing for the scrapping of the system are off the point, and instead outlined a seven-point strategy government must adopt to streamline land issues.

It is now on record that President Museveni has promised to dismantle the old and barbaric land laws that for long have hard-pressed Ugandans through rampant illegal evictions. With those remarks, it is apparent that any time soon, there will be serious amendments to the constitution and the land laws to implement the Justice Catherine Bamugemereire report on land matters in order to cure both current and historical land injustices in the country. He cited the Mailo Land tenure that the British colonialists handed to Buganda chiefs and their collaborators.

However, somebody needs to move in very quickly to remind the President that the Justice Catherine Bamugemereire report and recommendation was quashed by the Constitutional Court where the judges condemned the commission as having acted illegally when it convened itself as a court of law in handling land disputes. In a unanimous decision of the court, the five judges of the panel ordered that all disputes relating to ownership, use and/or access to land emanating from the Land Act, the Registration of Titles Act or any other law where such a dispute is not resolved amicably or administratively can only be determined by a court of law.

In the Seven-member commission report to the President, Justice Bamugemereire had proposed that all land in the country be registered to minimize land disputes, enhance tenure security and create avenues for optimal land use. Justice Bamugemereire has since denied having been used as a conduit to abolish Mailo Land but instead backed creation of a single land tenure for Uganda.

And for sure these days it is hard to just rush off to buy land without verifying what you are getting yourself into. To most people, acquiring land in Uganda comes with very serious expenses and risks during and after acquiring property.Land tenure refers to the systems that govern the ownership of land together with the corresponding laws. This notion may seem unhelpful before we understand the principle that underlies real property law in Uganda until one encounters a multiplicity of threats from government and those who own the land in the background.

Mailo Land is a form of freehold predominant in Buganda and some parts of the eastern, with some peculiar historical characteristics. The constitution recognizes this type of land tenure and other forms of freehold available in Buganda and other parts of Uganda. However, the President says this land tenure system sits at the epicentre of the wrangles between the landlords and bibanja owners.

And to him as the head of state, in order to achieve the planned fusion of the parallel freehold systems in the country, it would be necessary for Cabinet and Parliament to address the contradictions caused by occupancy rights that frequently affect Mailo tenure. These contradictions according to him include separation of rights of ownership from occupancy that has led to difficulties in the smooth operation of the Mailo Tenure System.

Musevenis claim that the public will be given an opportunity to air their views on the proposed amendments before implementation means that we will have a referendum on the matter by all Ugandans and not the Baganda alone. That being the case, it is obvious that many Ugandans will vote against the mailo system even when many dont understand it. It is clear that the referendum will be intended for the public to rubber stamp Musevenis wishes and I see him succeeding. The President, who spoke after Justice Bamugemereire presented her paper on land conflicts, asked the MPs to help him find a permanent solution to the land question. Museveni told the lawmakers that the planned amendments to the Land Act would stabilise the situation.

Mengo says it made its stand clear when Katikkiro Charles Peter Mayiga appeared before the Bamugemereire Commission on April 25, 2018 maintaining that the current conflicts are not triggered by Mailo Land system but other factors. They insist that their views were derived from what Mr Mayiga called historical and contemporary context of land allocation, land tenure and management in Buganda before and after Ugandas Independence.

As far as Mengo is concerned, the planned abolition of the Mailo Land tenure and introduction of a new regime for the compulsory acquisition of land to suit the interests of some people within government is contrary to Article 26 and 237 of the Constitution in a manner that mostly de-enfranchises land owners in Buganda, which constitutes the most sought-after land for commercial and public interests because it lies at the heart of the countrys transport system, public administration, business and commerce.

In a recent cosmetic show of solidarity Kabaka Ronald Mutebi met President Yoweri Museveni at state Lodge Nakasero. It is claimed that they discussed matters of mutual interest for the development of Buganda and Uganda. However, what the Kabaka said while in Masaka that the Baganda were being hospitable and accommodative to allow other Ugandans to settle in Buganda, is what raised eye brows. Many concluded that the Kabakas remarks portrayed Ugandans as aliens or refugees in their own country.

Ofwono Opondos article which is clearly well researched but misplaced said Mengo is mistaken and will never bring the rest of Uganda to its knees through arrogance. He also implores the Kabaka and his subjects to realize that nobody is being favoured by being permitted to live, work or even own land or any other property in Buganda because this is an integral part of Uganda and the law permits any Ugandan to live where they want without fear of being evicted.

It is a fact that what is called Buganda today is a result of wars of subjugation and annexation which expanded the kingdom beyond its borders. True, by annexing these areas, its people, its wealth, resources and land were also given to Buganda as a gift by the colonialists. That explains why there are so many ethnic groups within Buganda who refused to be assimilated into the ways of life of the Baganda but were held in Buganda as a result of the 1900 Buganda agreement between Buganda and Uganda. By implication, Uganda wants the 1900 Buganda agreement to which it was a party amended to reflect the current wishes of the people using the land.

There is one ethnic group in this country that I fear for, that is the Baganda. They have always packaged themselves in such a way that they use them against each other, they are also used by those who want power and later dumped, an act that they have not learnt from. When Arabs first set foot in Uganda, their first collaboration was with Buganda. These were closely followed by the Protestant missionaries and later the catholic white fathers who also found reason to begin their dubious missions in Buganda and they were all welcomed with open arms.

Having studied the Buganda, the missionaries plotted a move which saw the deportation of Mwanga to Seychelles Island and replaced him with a small boy Dawudi Chwa. No one knows where Chwa came from and the last time I checked, the name Chwa does not belong to Baganda but that is a subject for another day.

After the missionaries had successfully used the Baganda to colonise Uganda in exchange for favours such as helping them fight off enemies and annexing other areas including their land that was later called mailo land to Buganda, they dumped them and moved on with life. The colonialists themselves were aware what it meant to deal with a Muganda, that is why when they were handing over power in 1962, they made sure that the then Prime Minister Obote had more powers than the President Edward Mutesa who was also the reigning Kabaka.

Obote himself had a good time manipulating the Baganda until they fell out with the deportation of the Kabaka. Where he stopped is where Amin Dada picked up. He brought back the remains of Mutesa and became a darling of the Buganda for some time. Infact all the subsequent Presidents before Museveni found it had to rule Uganda without the support of Buganda. When Museveni went to the bush, he again used the Baganda to push through his plans and eventually succeed. He has already forgotten the input of the Baganda and is now working tooth and nail to deprive them of their most important treasure, mailo land.

As the mailo land tenure debate rages on, at the forefront in Sam Mayanja- a Muganda for that matter the new minister of state for Lands whose boss is Nabakooba- also a Muganda. These two ministers have been used to do a dirty job and will be very instrumental in causing the abolition of the mailo land system. Whether they succeed or not, these two will never win a political seat in Buganda forever.

The author, Roger Wadada Musaalo is a Lawyer, human rights activist, researcher, and politician

Here is the original post:

ROGERS WADADA: Mailo Land tenure is a creation of the 1900 Buganda Agreement, is it ripe for abolition? - pmldaily.com

Opposition parties and the SNP are clashing over whether or not election promises for the first 100 days of government have been met.

The Conservatives say the SNP is miles off target on a number of promises, while the Liberal Democrats claim many pledges have fallen by the wayside.

Friday August 26 will officially mark 100 days since the government was formed.

But the opposition say a number of key promises such as publishing an NHS recovery plan, launching a Scottish Covid inquiry, producing a womens health plan and vaccinating all adults against coronavirus have not been met.

Annie Wells MSP, shadow cabinet secretary for health, said: Its clear the SNP are miles off target on meeting the pledges in their 100 days document.

Once again, theres an enormous gap between what the SNP say and what they do.

They can talk a good game but they just dont deliver.

This looks like another set of broken promises in the making.

Their failures will have damaging knock-on consequences for our NHS and people across the country.

The delay to publishing an NHS recovery plan is inexcusable.

That should have been one of the SNP governments top priorities.

Its apparent that most of the inaction and missed targets are down to Humza Yousafs lousy performance as health secretary.

So far his most notable action is misleading parents about Covid rates in children.

Instead of focusing on meeting these pledges, the SNP broke their promise to set indyref2 aside and prioritise Scotlands recovery.

Just this week, we heard they are shamelessly planning to ramp up their push for another referendum at their party conference.

Its more of the same from this distracted, divisive SNP government.

The Scottish Lib Dems are also criticising the SNPs performance in the first few weeks of government, adding they are too focused on separatism rather than peoples jobs, health and education.

Alistair Carmichael MP, interim leader of the Lib Dems, said: Nicola Sturgeon has one more week to deliver on her pledges for her first 100 days in power.

Most significantly we are still waiting on the NHS recovery plan to help our health service recover, not just from the pandemic, but from 14 years of her governments mismanagement.

But there are other projects that seem to have already fallen by the wayside too.

After the mistakes made in handling care homes it is no surprise that the first minister is in no great hurry to set up an independent inquiry into her governments response to the coronavirus crisis.

The vaccination of all adults hasnt been completed.

Teachers are being hired on casual short-term contracts and there are still many more without work for August and whose talents will be missed by children.

Still she has found time to appoint Mike Russell to head up another independence push at SNP HQ.

It should be clear to the public that the SNPs priority will never be your job, your health and your childrens education, it will always be separatism.

However, the SNP says opposition politicians are ignoring the good work it has done in the past few weeks, such as giving NHS staff a pay rise and abolishing school music tuition fees.

A spokesman for Covid recovery secretary John Swinney said: It says it all about Scotlands unionist parties that they cant bring themselves to say a single positive thing about the fantastic achievements of the SNP government over the last few months whether thats agreeing a 4% pay rise for our hard-working NHS staff, announcing the abolition of chares for school music tuition or dental charges for 18-25 year olds, completed the transformational expansion of free childcare to 1,140 hours across Scotland or more.

We have always been clear that our plans were to be implemented 100 days from forming the new government not the date of the election, which would of course be nonsensical, given that at that time there was not even MSPs to vote in the new government to carry out its programme.

We are immensely proud of what we are delivering and are continuing to work to our timetable to implement our remaining important commitments.

As people would expect, some of the commitments such as the NHS recovery plan or the next steps on the Covid public inquiry have required extensive and careful consultation in order to ensure we get these important policies right.

View post:

Lousy performance: SNP and opposition parties clash over first 100 days election pledges - The Courier

In a race that he says may shape the fate of democracy and will almost certainly offer clues to the future of the Democratic Party Congressman Conor Lamb formally launched his bid to replace Pat Toomey in the U.S. Senate today.

I think that our democracy is really on the line in this race and in 2022, Lamb said in an interview with WESA prior to his formal campaign announcement Friday afternoon. We really are facing opponents who are willing to try to overturn an election, cancel out people's votes [and] really shake the foundation of this system that we inherited in order to get what they want. And I believe that we have to be more determined than they are.

And I think that the same people that will lie about your vote, lie about the election, will lie about your paycheck and lie about the things that affect you and your family, he added. All of it is on the line.

The Lamb campaign appears likely to turn on the melding of such pocketbook issues with concerns about the plight of American democracy in a hyper-polarized environment. His Friday campaign announcement took place at the IBEW Local #5 union hall in Pittsburghs South Side an anchor location for Democratic candidates and was attended by a number of supporters from both labor and the ranks of elected leaders.

The outcome of next years race to replace Toomey, a hardline fiscal conservative who announced his retirement last fall, may well determine control of the Senate, which is divided 50-50 but where Democrats have a functional majority. The state will be a national battleground a familiar backdrop for Lamb, who vaulted into the national spotlight in a 2018 special election to replace Republican Tim Murphy after Murphys resignation. In a race that was widely seen as an early test of Donald Trumps political might, Lamb campaigned as a Western Pennsylvania pro-union moderate whose first TV ad featured him firing an AR-15 and a pledge not to support Nancy Pelosi for House speaker.

Lamb has in fact emerged as a reliable Democratic vote on many issues, though he has bucked progressives priorities on some issues, like marijuana reform. In the interview, Lamb said he has tried to maintain a bipartisan approach but it hasnt been easy.

If you really want to make something better for someone that only earns $12 an hour and you think they should earn $15 ... if you really want to make things like that better, you need a lot of votes, he said. The relationships that you've built mean a lot about how you can persuade other people to try to come to your position and help your constituents.

Still, Lambs Jan. 6 denunciation of Republican efforts to overturn the election results nearly resulted in a physical confrontation between legislators on the House floor, and he says now that the way I've seen Republicans behave in Washington for these two years, obviously the way Trump conducted his reelection and most of all, January 6th, I think I am much more aware of and wise to the depth of obstruction, disinformation, willingness to condone violence and overall just willingness to lie that exists at the heart of the Republican Party.

HIs entrance into the race was decried Friday by Republicans who accused him of sprinting to the left, once elected to the House.

If Conor is good at anything, its completely abandoning his principles and positions to pander to an electorate, said Sean Parnell, a Republican Senate hopeful who Lamb bested in his re-election to the House last year. Parnell criticized Lamb for alleged hypocrisies such as accepting police union endorsements but marching with radicals who want to defund the police an apparent reference to Lambs participation in Black Lives Matter marches last summer.

Lamb cant expect to find the mood any lighter if he is elected to the Senate, where dysfunction also has been the order of the day. Lamb himself has called for the end of the filibuster a delaying tactic used by the minority party whose abolition is sought by many Democrats after Republicans stopped an effort to create a bipartisan commission to review the Jan. 6 attack.

Still, he said hes running because Things are so evenly divided in the Senate right now that that even one or two additional Democratic votes, I think, would mean a whole lot for our ability to get things done. . [T]here still is a coalition there that is really trying to get things done. And I would like to be part of that because at the end of the day, we have to work together to get things done, especially things for the people who need it the most.

Lamb will have to win the Democratic primary first, and that will mean besting a handful of already declared candidates led by fellow Allegheny County resident and state Lt. Gov. John Fetterman who have a head start.

Asked what separates him from that field, Lamb cited his experience in Washington and a proven ability to weather bruising campaigns.

I've been working in Washington on basically all these issues [and] Ive had the chance to work on them in Congress, build relationships across the whole spectrum of my party, across the aisle, in the administration, he said. We have to have serious legislators that know the history of this stuff and how to get things done.

And then on top of that, I just think that I have run a campaign a lot like what this one is going to be, he said. Trump has been here personally himself, calling out my name, giving me nicknames. They've spent. I don't even know how many tens of millions of dollars against me at this point. ...When I talk to at least Democrats, what they say is we really want someone who can win. And I think I can offer that.

Lamb, a former U.S. Marine Corps lawyer who went on to become a prosecutor in the U.S. Attorneys office, arguably has run the gantlet more in the past three years than some politicians face in a lifetime. His 2018 win over conservative firebrand Rick Saccone came in a strongly pro-Trump district, and with massive spending by Republican groups such as the Congressional Leadreship Fund. In 2020, he narrowly eked out the win over Parnell a Fox News fixture whose campaign was announced and backed by Trump in a year where many down-ballot Democrats fell to Republicans.

But next years race will offer challenging terrain long before November. At a time when the Democratic Party increasingly relies on a racially diverse electorate for its victories and as its progressive wing has been seeking to push it leftward Lamb is seeking to join incumbent Bob Casey as Pennsylvanias second male, Irish Catholic with a strong record on labor but moderate positions elsewhere. But Lamb, who has cautioned progressives against overreach, says Democrats should think broadly about the kind of movement that delivers wins.

If we really believe in getting things done, in assembling coalitions that can win elections and then get all the votes behind legislation that we need on these big topics, we really need a lot of people with us, he said. We can't only use the language that is popular in a college classroom but not in a union hall.

In the first eight months of this year, we have done the most productive and progressive legislating that I know of in my lifetime, he said, citing coronavirus aid and changes to a federal child tax credit that will deliver hundreds of dollars a month to low-income families. We did that because you elected Joe Biden president and you sent people like me back to Congress. I will put those results against the arguments and tweets and speeches of anyone else in this race because I've been part of getting those actual results. And to me, that's what progressive is: It's making actual progress in real life.

As for concerns about representing the partys own electorate, Lamb said that What I have found, talking to voters of all races men and women, jobs and classes and all the rest of it is that they mostly care about who can get results for them. Everywhere I've gone, every different type of community, people have been very open-minded toward me and willing to listen. And I've done a lot of listening to them. That has really paid off for me and a lot of very diverse set of communities. I think it will again.

*This story has been updated.

Read the rest here:

'All Of It Is On The Line': Conor Lamb Joins Race For Pennsylvania Senate Seat - 90.5 WESA

The behavior of Christians is often cited as a justification for rejecting Christianity. Whether it is the Churchs involvement in the Crusades, the Inquisitions, or the Salem witch trials, the fact is, such actions betray the very beliefs that Christians allegedly espouse.

Christians commonly respond to such accusations by attempting to divorce themselves from such events. After all,

Of course, one doesnt have to go to the Middle Ages to find such aberrant behavior conducted by the Church. The 20th century has more than its fair share of Christians behaving badly.

One could simply appeal to the fact that the German church almost universally supported Hitler and his campaign against the Jewish people.[1] Of course, that doesnt matter either because, had I been there, I would have been on Bonhoeffers side and resisted the Nazi efforts. It doesnt seem to matter that most Christians in the US remained silent even after Hitlers escapades had become well-known.

One could also cite the plethora of sexual abuse scandals that riddle the churchs recent history. Of course, that doesnt affect me either because sexual abuse is what the Catholics do. It doesnt seem to matter that sexual abuse scandals have rocked many of the major evangelical denominationsincluding the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), the US largest protestant denomination.[2] Nor, does it seem to matter that evangelicals and non-evangelicals have had more than their fair share of headlines in the last decade alone.

It is worth noting that the confidence with which many claim, I would have sided with Bonhoeffer or, I would have condemned the crusades is a bit arrogant and self-righteous. I certainly hope that I would have spoken out against Hitler, but I fear that I, too, would have swept it under the carpet or ignored it as just another thing that happens over there.

After all, isnt that what we do with the injustices that the Kurds have been suffering for years? Or what about the injustices against the Rohingyas[3] or the Uyghurs[4]? Do they not warrant a voice because they are over there or is it because they are Muslims?

History does not bode well for those who claim that I would have done differently. Though most Americans todayI wish I could say allconsider the American practice of chattel slavery[5] as unjust, ruthless, and inhumane, one simple look at American history confirms that far more pastors and churches supported slavery than spoke against it. And they used their Bibles to defend it!

Christians throughout the United States not only supported chattel slavery but they firmly resisted the abolition of it. In fact, they resisted it to the toll of a civil war! Christian moms and dads resisted the abolition of chattel slavery so fervently that they willingly sent their own sons to die in a war in order to maintain the unjust, ruthless, and inhumane system.

When it comes to the injustices against the people of color today and the question of systemic racism we must acknowledge, as I noted previously, that the racism that fueled the system of chattel slavery in America did not go away with abolition of slavery. It did not end because the racist views of those in power did not go away!

In fact, the injustices incurred against Blacks intensified in many ways. Hence, Douglas Blackmons scathing report on the tragic history of the treatment of Blacks after 1865, titled, Slavery by Another Name: The Re-Enslavement of Black Americans from the Civil War to World War II.

Unfortunately, the churchs continued complicity in racism and injustices towards people of color did not end with the Emancipation Proclamation. The injustices against Blacks in particular and all persons of color in general continued unabated into the 20th century. Certainly, there were Christians who opposed racismjust as there are many today who do so. But the fact is that many remained silent. Still othersand, unfortunately, they were plentifulacted, voted, and spoke passionately about maintaining an apartheid system of oppression against Blacks and people of color.

Tragically, during the 1960s and the era of civil rights legislation, many of the very same church buildings in the Southern states, which 100 years earlier were used to house meetings to decide if the members of the state wanted to succeed from the union, were now being used to house meetings to decide how they might resist desegregation.[6]

The fact is that the secular world doesnt look at it this way. And Im not sure the Bible does either.

Pauls theology of the unity of the church affirms that if one member suffers, we all suffer (1 Cor 12:26). We would do well to rcognize that when a large faction of Christians act, we all act. Thus, regardless of your denominational affiliation we are all guilty.

I say all of this for three reasons:

Whether or not you are personally a racist; Whether or not you would have voted to succeed from the Union; Whether or not you would have resisted the civil rights legislation; We must repent.

(Note: Daniel 9:1-19 is a great example of one person praying for the sins of the nation).

Many Protestant whites are responding to the challenges of racism today in a similar manner to the white Christians that suppressed Blacks and people of color over the last few centuries.

One of the means of accomplishing this is by denying their claims. Of course, many whites are tremendously ignorantthough this is routinely deniedof both the claims of racial injustice and their veracity.

This brings me to a third reason for saying all of this:

This will be the subject of the next several posts.

In closing, I would note that the thousands of Blacks that were lynched were often lynched without a trial, they were lynched by individuals and not the state or members of the criminal justice system, they were lynched for crimes that were often manufactured, they were lynched for crimes that were not worthy of death, they were lynched in order to foster fear among Black communities and, as such, they often included torture and barbarity that is hard to imagine,[7] and they were often lynched by conservative Protestant Christians.

What do we say to the critics who refuse to accept Christianity because of the behavior of Christians? Well, unless Christians repent and begin to advocate for justice more vociferously, I am not certain that it matters.

I recognize that some readers of this blog may not agree with the conviction to which I am clearly leadingnamely that systemic racism is alive and well in the US. I only hope that they continue to read and assume responsibility to not merely refuse to be racists themselves, but to oppose racism and racial injustices with vigor wherever they may be found.

That, of course, is my prayer for all the readers of this blog.

Good news: If you wish to view these posts on your smartphone, simply download the tithe.ly church app on your smartphone and insert determinetruth as the church name you wish to follow. Once it is loaded, simply click on the blog icon and they will automatically load.

If you have been blessed by this blog post and would like to see others benefit too, would you please consider giving a tax-deductible contribution to supportdeterminetruth ministries and make possible future posts like this? You can do so by following this link:https://tithe.ly/give?c=3648601

If you would like to have Rob speak at your church or organization in person or via zoom, please let us know by filling out the contact info on the Contact me tab on this site.

If you would like to share your story, or if you have questions that you would like addressed in future posts, you may submit them in the Contact me tab on this site.

[1] It is worth noting that in addition to the 6 million Jews who were slaughtered in the Holocaust Hitler systematically instituted programs against other groups including the mentally and physically handicapped.

[2] https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2019/february/southern-baptist-abuse-investigation-houston-chronicle-sbc.html

[3] See: https://www.hrw.org/tag/rohingya.

[4] See: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-22278037.

[5] I would like to define chattel slavery but I realize that the fact that I need to definebecause many whites do not know what it meansproves the point of white ignorance when it comes to the injustices that Blacks and all people of color have endured in this country. Those who do not know what chattel slavery means are encouraged to do their own google search.

[6] See: Russell J. Hawkins, The Bible Told Them So, 68.

[7] See: Most Horrible: Details of the Burning at the Stake of the Holberts, Vicksburg Evening Post, February 13, 1904. 34. Most Horrible, Vicksburg Evening Post. 35. Walter White, The Work of a Mob, The Crisis 16, no. 5 (September 1918): 221. 36. White, The Work of a Mob, 222. 37. Darlene Clark Hine, William C. Hine, and Stanley C. Harrold, African American Odyssey, vol. 1, 7th ed. (Boston: Pearson, 2016), 386. Tisby, Jemar. The Color of Compromise. Zondervan. Kindle Edition.

More here:

The Church's complicity in racial injustice: The Bible, injustice, and race#5; Justice#30 - Patheos