Category Archives: Government Oppression

Head of UW-Madison student gov. leaves in a huff; blames racism, oppression

The outgoing chair of the University of Wisconsin-Madison student government ripped her college upon departure, saying it lacks the capacity, courage, and integrity to protect communities of color.

The Daily Cardinal reports that in a letter addressed to the entire UW-Madison community, Carmen Gosy wrote I was operating in a white position as a person of color [] Now I see the University was not designed for the success of minority communities; it was designed for white students to learn about my oppression while not having to participate in dismantling it.

She added all white people are racist and that her chairmanship of the Associated Students of Madison made her a token for white supremacists.

From Gosys letter (via The Daily Wire):

As I move on from the role as Chair of Student Council, I believe it is necessary to leave honestly. The University is on stolen, Ho-Chunk land, yet does little to recognize its historic significance. For the University to truly recognize this sacred land and its inhabitants it would have to acknowledge the resentment and oppression that people of color face every day. This institution perpetuates and suppresses the voices that are the most vulnerable. As Chair, I used to be hopeful. I used to be proud. I am no longer content with the Universitys action and active silencing of students of color on this campus. I ask people of color to reconsider your place at this institution. I ask parents of color to rethink sending your children to this institution.

Racism is an institutionalized structure which is embedded in ASM and the University. Racism is a system designed to disadvantage people of color and create inequalities in each pocket os society. All white people are racist. Not only by upholding a system of disadvantage but being born into a conditioned environment where you are many steps ahead. Being a racist is not an option, it is a condition. However, being an anti-racist is a choice. A choice that white people will have to make which boils down to what they are willing to do toactivelyparticipate in deconstructing racism.

Gosy signs off Your woke, ratchet23rdASM Chair CarmenGosy. (Wait isnt ratchet racist??)

Two First Wave UW-Madison students support Gosys statement, according to The Daily Cardinal. One of them, Cortez de la Cruz II (who helped to organize protests against Ben Shapiro and Steve Forbes), said the universitys slow response time to racist incidents is an example of it not protecting minority students.

He added: [Gosy] as well as POC bend over backwards to even just fight for the basic human rights that we should have on this campus.

MORE: Student gov. forced to recognize libertarian student group it called dangerous

MORE: Universitys student gov. restricts who can use the schools inclusion pledge

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

IMAGE: Shutterstock

More:

Head of UW-Madison student gov. leaves in a huff; blames racism, oppression - The College Fix

The situation in Zimbabwe need people to unite and take action, there should be a change or reshuffle in the Governance. Besides changing the President, some ministers must be changed too. Not changing politicians is the same as not changing a baby with a diaper full of shit, this will ruin the nation. Young Zimbabweans have lost hope in the situation, some even gave up in pursuing theirdreams.

Theyno longer dream because its pointless. Some people can not even afford proper breakfast, proper lunch, proper dinner while ministers and officials with top positions are having it in excess. Their dogs are even fat because of the leftovers. Imagine people going for 24 hours on only one meal. I am not in Zimbabwe now for some reasons and one of the reasons is the situation in Zimbabwe. I feel for my family and friends back home.

Getting a Degree, PHD or Doctorate is no longer a thing to have pride in because out of all the people who graduate, 99% are going to be street vendors and hustlers and only a percent is going to be employed. University students who are on attachment do not even get paid.

What they can only get is transport allowance and some do not even earn a dime and the University which is owned by the Government expects them to pay fees while they are also in need of transport money, lunch money, pocket money etc while they are on attachment. Is this not day light robbery? Most people in Zimbabwe are only surviving by the Grace of God. You cannot be employed if you do not have a connection even though you have the required qualifications.

Some people got jobs with no degrees simply because they are well connected while someone who have got a first class degree is busy selling airtime, stocking goods in foreign lands to resell as a way of survival. People spend days and nights travelling to Botswana, Mozambique, Zambia and South Africa to buy things they can sell so that they can survive. At the borders and on the roads, they are made to pay revenues and taxes for silly and unnecessary things and this money goes back to the Government which is greedy andmerciless.TheGovernment has failed to secure jobs and create jobs for its people. Once people try to earn money through their own hustles, the Government robs them again through declaration duties, taxes, revenues etc.

People should just wake up and smell the coffee. Some people even failed to further their studies simply because they do not have enough money to pay for varsity, instead of the Government to pay for those people's fees so that at the end they get employed and help develop the nation. Those scholarships, bursaries etc are given to people who can afford, people who are from the rich families, people who are well connected.

For the middle and lower class individuals to get these financial aids, they will have to pay huge amounts of money by means of corruption for them to get Scholarships, Bursaries, Financial aids etc. The Government and its officials have got no heart for the general populace. I have noticed many boys become thieves, some girls become commercial sex workers or end up dating blessers and we judge them wrongly but let us get to know their story first.

Everyone now is just trying by all means to find ways of surviving. I remember one friend of mine got an attachment place in Gweru and her home is in Harare, she was forced to rent a room in Gweru. The rent was $40 and she was being paid $80. While on attachment, she had to pay fees, rent, transport, lunch and other expenses, so was that going to be enough? She ended up dating a married man and when i asked her why, she explained her situation and i understood her decision although it was in some kind of way a bad decision but the Government of Zimbabwe is the one to be blamed for this. If it can not give Scholarships, Free education and Bursaries then at least, those on attachment should not pay fees and tuition for that attachment year. People sleep in long queues at banks and suffer to get the money that belongs to them. Farmers were attacked with teargas by the Zimbabwe Republic Police in Harare simply because they were demanding their money. Was that necessary? There has been a lot of looting, corruption, mass killing, torture etc but enough is enough. A person can spend days, wasting transport money going to the bank to get money but in vain and at the end, when they get this money, it will not even be enough to make the family survive for a week because each day has got its own expenses.

The ballot has failed to change things, pakutoda zvehondo, pakutoda zvechisimba, "this calls for a war". Most members of Parliament and Senators can not even give a point which makes sense, they are old and tired, they are out of ideas but they remain in office while they can no longer perform their duties efficiently why?

Some people are dying but even the media is now censored not to publish or broadcast the negative things happening because of this old and tired government but is there anything to hide?

Everything has become clear now. I was born and grew up knowing some people as ministers, that is some twenty one years ago. For example people like Chombo, Sekeramayi, Parirenyatwa and so forth had been ministers ever since, and up to now, they are still in the ministry.

Why can we not have fresh ministers with fresh new ideas and fresh minds? Road accidents are happening in Zimbabwe not because people are failing to drive although at times mistakes can happen, but look at the roads in Zimbabwe.

The roads have got a series of potholes which the Government has failed to fix. If the Government has failed to fix the potholes, it is better they remove that remaining piece of tar and officially announce that we no longer have tarred roads in Zimbabwe.

This means drivers will be more conscious and will drive knowing that they are in dust roads. Besides the issue of potholes, the road signs are in a mess now.

You can only see a hump or curve when you have reached at it. You have to cram where there are humps, curves and other things because the roads do not even have road signs.

People can just use their assumptions to drive. Everyday people pay on tollgates and other irrelevant charges to the traffic police but where is that money going? Who is spending that money? What does that money do in as much as the development and renovating of roads is concerned? It looks like the General Populace is now taking care of the first class through paying these unnecessary fees on the roads and borders. Instead of the Government taking care of its people, the people are now actually taking care of the Government.

People no longer have the freedom to air their views because they fear for their lives Zimbabwe is not for one person, political leaders or ministers or Members of Parliament but it us for every Zimbabwean, it is for the people. There should be Democracy and Freedom in Zimbabwe. I salute South African Government in as much as Social Grants, Freedom, Democracy, Students Financial Aids, Free Education , Free housing, Feeding schemes, Roads, Employment, Job creations etc, the Government has never failed its people although it can not be perfect but it is way much better.

Many people in Zimbabwe have become blind folded by this Government and its officials. A Minister's son or child does not even have a qualification but he/she can be found working in one of the best top paying companies, driving beautiful cars, living a luxurious life showing off and bragging. When people try to bring this to light, they are tortured and die for the truthwhy? The same people remain as Ministers and just circulate and change ministries, does this mean the Government is failing to find people fit and fresh enough to replace those old and tired people? A normal person should not remain in support of this Government unless if they are a part of those benefitting.

It is someone who received a free farm, free house, free car or free generator who will never see the negative side of this rotten Governmnet. I used to love this Government a lot, i was born and grew up in a Police Camp up until i was 18 because my father was a Police man. This was a free house where we had to pay for nothing, no paying of rent, no paying of water or electricity charges but once the person dies or the job ends, all these good benefits vanish. Many are being blinded by these free poor services. What is free accommodation, free electricity or free water when one is not getting enough salary.

Does free accommodation, water or electricity pay school fees, buy clothes, buy food and so forth? People should just wake up. Zimbabwe has reached its boiling point and it is now time to revolt, the time is now. Vendors try to survive by selling but at times, the police are send by the Municipality and Government to take away their things, they are being chased away from their selling places in a very rude way but i still do not blame the police because there is no freedom. They are forced to ill treat their fellow general populace members. They are made to chase people away from their ways of trying to make ends meet.

I do not blame the traffic police for robbing people but they are also trying to survive, they have no choice. Out of all the civil servants, i feel pity for the Police who are made to abuse people. Before judging, finding the root of the problem is the best thing that can be done. Once the main root which i think is Government is dealt with, then changes will start to develop. Just like how we treat and handle our plants, the old shoots should be pruned out so that the tree or plant grows well and in good health.

If the Government officials are not changed for a longer time, they ruin the whole system. Just like trimming and pruning trees, the Government of Zimbabwe as a whole needs the same. I used to be a good supporter of the Zimbabwean Goernment and Zanu PF party but i got fed up, i got tired. People should be very careful, towards elections, they campaign trying to gain the people's support, people's trust and people's votes and do whatever it takes to make citizens happy but once they win the people votes, they turn their backs against them, the same people that gave them the power.

I am not for any political party but i stand with anyone who is ready to change the situation in Zimbabwe. Even if Zimbabweans living and working abroad send money to their friends and relatives in Zimbabwe, it will not help in any way because people have to suffer in order to get their money from banks due to day limits, long queues and banks failing to provide enough money.

How is this going to end? Last month, Zimbabwe celebrated 37 years of Independence but are Zimbabweans really independent enough? Are Zimbabweans happy?

Read more:

The height of political oppression in Zimbabwe - Bulawayo24 News (press release) (blog)

Jehovahs Witnesses in Russia are still reeling from a decision by the countrys Supreme Court last month to ban all activity of the Christian denomination under an anti-extremism law. But, while that decision has garnered much attention and condemnation around the world, Russia is far from the only country guilty of oppressing the U.S.-founded religion.

Related: After ban, Jehovahs Witnesses in Russia harassed by police during religious services

Jehovah's Witnesses began in Pennsylvania toward the end of the 19th century and now count 8.3 million members around the globe. The groupheadquartered in upstate New Yorkis perhaps best known for going door-to-door to spread their message. as well as refusing military service and blood transfusions. Their stance on blood transfusions was cited by Russia's justice ministry as evidence that they constituted an extremist organization. However. their position has also been credited with encouraging doctors to come up with less risky alternatives to using blood.

Subscribe to Newsweek from $1 per week

Still, their beliefs remain controversial in many parts of the world. The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) released its annual report last monthdetailing various abuses committed against almost all religions all over the globe. Numerous abuses involve Jehovahs Witnesses:

The plight of Jehovahs Witnesses is particularly serious in Eritrea. The African country officially recognizes just four religious groupsthe Coptic Orthodox Church of Eritrea, Sunni Islam, the Roman Catholic Church and the Evangelical Church of Eritreaall other groups must register. Many minority faith groups are persecuted, including Jehovahs Witnesses. A decree from the then- and current-President Isaias Afwerki in 1994 revoked Jehovahs Witnesses citizenship due to their refusal to take part in national service or participate politically. Three Jehovahs Witnesses remain imprisoned from that time, as part of a total of 54 Jehovahs Witnesses currently imprisoned without trial.

A decade before Russias ban on Jehovahs Witnesses, the Central Asian country of Tajikistan did the same thing. With, at the time, a congregation of just 600 in the country of around 8.5 million, Tajikistans Culture Ministry in 2007 decreed the groups activity illegal and, again largely citing their refusal to partake in military service, issued a nationwide ban.

Also deemed a Country of Particular Concern by USCIRF, Turkmenistan, has what Human Rights Watch has called an atrocious record when it comes to human rights. Jehovahs Witnesses have been singled out for some of the worst treatment. Members of the group have been fired from their jobs and even evicted from their homes, according to human rights organization Forum 18. Jehovahs Witnesses have also reported being imprisoned without charge and tortured.

In unquestionably the most bizarre form of oppression carried out against Jehovahs Witnesses, a mother and daughter spent 31 months under house arrest, until their release in October 2015, for alleged witchcraft. Their precise crime was said to be conjuring snakes from eggs and stealing a womans life savings, according to Forum 18. Jehovahs Witnesses allege that the punishment was retribution for their failed applications to register their faith with the state.

Central Asias most populous country regularly disrupts Jehovahs Witnesses meetings and, as with those of other religious groups in the country, particularly Muslims, often punishes those in attendance for possessing religious literature.

In Azerbaijan, where all religious groups must register with the government, Jehovahs Witnesses have been subject to raids, arrests, fines and having religious texts confiscated. In 2015, two Jehovahs Witnesses were jailed for almost a year for sharing the Bibles message with their neighbors. Jehovahs Witnesses have also been jailed for refusing to perform military service.

Neighboring Russia, constitutionally secular Kazakhstan has repeatedly fined Jehovahs Witnesses for sharing their faith with others, either verbally or through religious texts, and even inviting people to meetings. Just this week, a Jehovah's Witness was sentenced to five years in prison, accused of propagating ideas that "disrupt interreligious and interethnic concord."

Jehovahs Witnesses in thisformer Soviet country have been threatened with liquidation for holding religious meetings without permission and distributing religious texts. Last year, a Jehovahs Witness was fined for refusing to perform military service, even though he offered to perform civilian service.

Despite there being an estimated 1,500 in the country, Jehovahs Witnesses, along with the Bahfaith, has been banned in Egypt since 1960. Members of the religious group remain prohibited from having places of worship, even if in recent years they have been permitted to meet with fewer than 30 people in private homes, according to the USCIRF report.

Read the original here:

Russia's Jehovah's Witnesses Ban Is Far From the Only Oppression the Group Faces Around the World - Newsweek

Interestingly, I don't see religious diversity in any of the pictures. On the 4th of July, America takes a day to celebrate independence from, among other things; the state sponsored Church of England. The National Day of Prayer is a state sponsored Christian religious event invented by Christian groups and approved by the U.S. Congress who ratified into law back in 1952. What would our founders say? The founders were well aware of the dangers of church-state union. They had studied and even seen first-hand the difficulties that church-state partnerships spawned in Europe. During the American colonial period, alliances between religion and government produced oppression and tyranny on our own shores. When Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, for example, he spoke of "unalienable rights endowed by our Creator." He used generic religious language that all religious groups would respond to, not narrowly Christian language traditionally employed by nations with state churches. George Washington's administration even negotiated a treaty with the Muslim rulers of North Africa that stated explicitly that the United States was not founded on Christianity. And we all know ole George could not tell a lie! The pact, known as the Treaty with Tripoli, was approved unanimously by the Senate in 1797, under the administration of John Adams. Article 11 of the treaty states, "The government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.". The United States was not founded to be an officially Christian nation or to espouse any official religion. Our government is to be neutral on religious matters, leaving such decisions to individuals. Is the National Day of Prayer conducted as a Christian event, recognizing the Christian god and Jesus or as an event encompassing all of the diverse religions of the US population? If it is the former, the question is where else do national leaders call out from the halls of power for citizens to unite in a singular religious endeavor? Iran perhaps? Funny also that it will be held on the steps of the taxpayer owned local government courthouse. Apparently in 2017 our courthouse is not that far from the old Church of England!

More here:

Photos: National Day of Prayer - Carlisle Sentinel

There is an emerging belief that people who hold conservative views are being persecuted in a way akin to how oppressed groups have historicallybeen. Complaints include an inability to voice opinions without being censored, discrimination based on conservative beliefs, and a fear of being labelled as ignorant.

Breitbarts bible on the alt-right movement talks extensively about oppressive hectoring of the progressive Left. Bill OReilly, a voice for the conservative movement, has gone so far as to say that the white male has been oppressed and marginalized. In a popular op-ed calling for liberals to check their privilege, Ryan Quinn, a college student at Fordham, argues that Conservatives have been silenced. Pop culture makes a mockery of conservatism. Academia pushes liberalism. We are embarrassed, not by our views, but by how our views will be interpreted. We are attacked and shamed for our views, so we grow silent. Because of our silence we think we are alone. Our silence leads to silence from other conservatives.

So, the following question arises: Are conservatives being oppressed?

There is one key fact that prevents a comparison between the oppression of minorities and the supposed suppression of conservative thought: To be conservative is a choice. To be African American isnt. To be a woman isnt. But still, lets humor the idea that those who voice conservative opinions within liberal majorities are oppressed.

Oppression is defined by Merriam Webster as unjust or cruel exercise of authority or power.

Conservative viewpoints inherently aim to hold up the existing power structures. These existing power structures are harmful to large segments of our population namely anyone who isnt a heterosexual, rich,white male. Social and even fiscal conservatism in the government often directly contributes to creating an imbalance of power against ethnic minority groups and women.

For example, when conservatives like Rick Santorum, Michele Bachmann, or Ryan Anderson express a view to uphold traditional marriage, they are directly invalidating homosexuality and asking for a government regulation that would take away legal recognition from gay couples. When conservatives make an argument against safe, legal abortion, they are directly harming the health of hundreds, if not thousands, of women who might end up choosing an unsafe, illegal route for terminating a pregnancy.

How could people who support existing, unequal power structures claim that they are being oppressed for not being able to express their views?

Yet, on a large scale, conservatives feel as though they are being discriminated against when they have to pay for birth control under the Affordable Care Act or if they have to share a bathroom with a transgender individual or if their religion is not represented by corporate America (the alleged War on Christmas). They feel their right to free speech is being violated when their racist, misogynistic, and often ignorant views are labelled as hate speech.

The so-called alt-right, an offshoot of conservatism mixing racism, white nationalism, and populism, often makes the claim that they are merely rallying to end their oppression the oppression of the white man by black and feminist identity politics. They are an extreme example of the persecution complex; they rally against the persecution of the existing rights of white men. The catch is that theseexisting rights are actually part of a system that allows white men (especially heterosexual, rich, white men) more power than any other group. To evaluate the existing system of power, The New York Times evaluated 503 of the most powerful people in American culture, government, education and business, and found that just 44 are minorities. Women, African-Americans, Asians, homosexuals, and other minority groups suffer systemic oppression through harmful legislation, outright discrimination, and historical suppression that white males do not ever experience.

However, the alt-right ignores that,while clamoring for its right to exist as a white nationalist group. They feel persecuted when a majority of good human beings protest against the figureheads of the white-supremacist movement.

On a slightly less terrifying scale, this persecution complex can also be seen when our very own Anscombe Society jumps to the social minority argument when talking about campus culture. Members feel as though opposition to their events is censorshipof free speech, which is made especially harrowing by the fact that a vocal majority of campus is socially liberal. Just read the chain of emails on WilsonWire as a response to the Traditional Marriage event that the Anscombe Society hosted. People cited quotes on open discourse and pointed out a purported hypocrisyto call the opinions of other's trash. Yet, they do not consider that the backlash is present because their events are negatively affecting members of our Princeton community.

This very newspaper is host to many views by conservative-leaning individuals who feel as though their views are suppressed by the liberal majority. Columnist Jessica Nyquist goes as far as saying that she feels a fear of being classified as ethically and intellectually wrong objectively immoral and ignorant should she voice a conservative opinion.

The conservative-liberal divide is artificial a construction of our political machine. However, should we be discussing sexist viewpoints? Sure. Should you fear backlash if you voice a sexist opinion? Definitely. Its not about being conservative or liberal its about doing your homework on historical oppression. That involves a conversation where both sides of the argument are heard but where racism is labelled as racism.

Conservative viewpoints are hardly censored. One can be as racist or sexist as he pleases. The U.S.president is proof of that. But when there is backlash from the people being directly harmed by such sentiments, are those people the liberals oppressing you?

Bhaamati Borkhetaria is a sophomore from Jersey City, NJ. She can be reached at bhaamati@princeton.edu.

Original post:

The conservative persecution complex - The Daily Princetonian

Oppression is the prolonged, unjust treatment or control of people by others. In the past, the definition of oppression was limited to tyranny by a ruling group, but overtime it has transformed because governments are not the only people who oppress. Today, oppression could also mean denying people language, education, and other opportunities that might make them become fully human in both mind and body."[1] This is seen throughout history through the actions of Hitler and Mussolini in Europe, and today by observing the actions of people such as Kim Jong-un in North Korea and Bashar al-Assad in Syria. Although these leaders are separated by nearly fifty years, both are "governmental regimes that deprive people of at least some of their human rights.[2]

Today, oppression can be seen in the social, institutionalized, and economic spheres across the world. Social oppression can be observed in the form of gendered, class, racial, and sexual oppression. The relationship of social oppression is one of dominance and subordination, in which one party has the ability to maintain its advantage relative over another party.[3] Institutionalized oppression is when "established laws, customs, and practices systematically reflect and produce inequities based on ones membership in targeted social identity groups."[4]

Social oppression is the socially supported mistreatment and exploitation of a group of individuals.[5] Social oppression is based on power dynamics and an individual's social location in society. Social location, as defined by Lynn Weber, is "an individual's or a group's social 'place' in the race, class, gender and sexuality hierarchies, as well as in other critical social hierarchies such as age, ethnicity, and nation."[6][pageneeded] An individual's social location determines how one will be perceived by others in the whole of society. It maintains three faces of power: the power to design or manipulate the rules, to win the game through force or competition, and the ability to write history.[7]

To delve into the first social hierarchy, racial oppression is burdening a specific race with unjust or cruel restraints or impositions. Racial oppression may be social, systematic, institutionalized, or internalized. Social forms of racial oppression include exploitation and mistreatment that is socially supported.[8] United States history consists of five primary forms of racial oppression including genocide and geographical displacement, slavery, second-class citizenship, non-citizen labor, and diffuse racial discrimination.[9] The first primary form of racial oppressiongenocide and geographical displacementrefers to 19th century Western European settlers coming to North America and wanting the indigenous populations land. Many indigenous people, commonly known today as Native Americans, were relocated to Indian Reservations and killed during wars fought over land. The second form of racial oppression, slavery, refers to Africans being the property of white Americans. Racial oppression throughout North America, particularly in the south, was not something that was part of the social environment in which they lived; it was a significant part of daily life and routines. The third primary form of racial oppression, second-class citizenship, refers to some categories of citizens having fewer rights than others. Second-class citizenship became a pivotal form of racial oppression in the United States following the Civil War. The fourth form of racial oppression in American history refers to the linkage of race and legal citizenship status. During the middle of the 19th century, some categories of immigrants, such as Mexicans and Chinese, were denied legal access to citizenship status. The last primary form of racial oppression in American history is diffuse discrimination. This form of racial oppression refers to discriminatory actions that are not directly backed by the legal powers of the state. This can include employers not hiring or promoting someone on the basis of race, landlords only renting to people of certain racial groups and salespeople treating customers differently based on race. Even after the civil rights legislation abolishing segregation, racial discrimination is still a reality in the United States. According to Robert Blauner, author of Racial Oppression in America, Blauner states, Fundamental to my perspective is the notion that racial groups and racial oppression are central features of the American social dynamic.[9]

The second social hierarchy, class oppression, also referred to as classism, can be defined as prejudice and discrimination based on social class.[10] Class is a social ranking based on income, wealth, education, status, and power. A class is a large group of people who share similar economic or social positions based on their income, wealth, property ownership, job status, education, skills, and power in the economic and political sphere. The most commonly used class identities include: upper class, middle class, working class, and poor class. Most people in the United States 80% to 90% in some surveys identify as middle class. Class is also experienced differently depending on race, gender, and ethnic backgrounds. Class oppression of the poor and working class can lead to deprivation of basic needs and a feeling of inferiority to higher-class people and shame towards ones traditional class or ethnic heritage. In the United States, class has become racialized leaving the greater percentage of people of color living in poverty.[11] Since class oppression is universal among the majority class in American society, it at times can seem invisible, however, it is a relevant issue that many suffer from.

Social oppression permeates much deeper than an imbalance in power. It is attributed to the injustice that occurs when one social group is subordinated while another is privileged, and oppression is maintained by a variety of different mechanisms including social norms, stereotypes, and institutional rules.[12] As an outcome of these societal views, social oppression exists and thrives through social groups.These ideologies surrounding the dominant group have a direct negative effect on oppressed races, classes, genders, and sexualities that dont identify with the dominate group.

Many political theorists, including Weber, argue that oppression persists because most individuals fail to recognize it; that is, discrimination is often not visible to those who are not in the midst of it. These inequalities further perpetuate themselves because those oppressed rarely have access to resources that would allow them to escape their maltreatment. This can lead to internalized oppression, in which subordinate groups essentially give up the fight to access equality and accept their fate as a non-dominant group.[13]

Delving further into social oppression on both a macro and micro level, Black feminist Patricia Hill Collins discusses her "matrix of domination".[14] The matrix of domination discusses the interrelated nature of four domains of power, including the structural, disciplinary, hegemonic, and interpersonal domains. Each of these spheres work to sustain current inequalities that are faced by minority groups. The structural, disciplinary and hegemonic domains all operate on a macro level, and deal with issues of social oppression such as education, the judicial/criminal justice system, and elements of power and control, respectively. The interpersonal domain is guided by perceptions due to the spheres in the matrix of domination, and therefore plays out in everyday life.

The interpersonal domain is situated within the perspective of standpoint theory. Standpoint theory deals with an individual's social location in that each person will have a very different perspective based on where they are positioned in society. For instance, a White male, living in America will have a very different take on an issue such as abortion than that of a Black female, living in Africa. Each will have different knowledge claims and experiences that will have shaped how they perceive abortion. From an oppression viewpoint, standpoint theory proves to be quite pertinent. Oftentimes certain aspects of society, and the knowledge that they hold, are kept suppressed because they are viewed as inferior points of view. Gendered oppression is born through gender norms that have been adopted by society. Throughout history, the majority of cultures believe that the gender norms constitute masculinity as being the dominant gender while femininity being the oppressed. The gendered power differences allow specific groups to thrive in society at the expense of others. Many have argued that cultural practices concerning gender norms of child care, housework, appearance, and career impose an unfair burden on women and as such are oppressive.[15] According to feminists Barbara Cattunar, women have always been subjected to many forms of oppression, backed up by religious texts which insist upon womens inferiority and subjugation.[16] Femininity has always been looked down upon perpetuated by socially constructed stereotypes, which has affected womens societal status and opportunity. In current society sources like the media further, impose gendered oppression as they shape societal views and ideals on each gender. Female roles in pop- culture are being objectified and sexualized, which as a result, degrades the female gender. The development of feminism is the outcome of gendered oppression and has brought a lot of awareness to the issue. Along with females other groups that do not identify with the dominant masculine, male gender are also subjected to oppression. These groups include the transgender community and gender-nonconformists.

The dominant societal views surrounding masculinity have formed a sexuality hierarchy oppressing individuals who do not comply with the social phenomenon of heteronormity. Heteronormity suggests that anyone who does not identify with the heterosexual status is painted as different or abnormal by society. The patriarchal hierarchies are fundamental to the analysis of sexuality.[17] The dominant group oppresses those who identify with the non-hetero sexuality status that is prevalent in the current patriarchal system. The oppression faced by the lesbian, gay, and bisexual community comes out of the societal views points attributed to the nuclear family in a capitalist society. Social actions by the oppressed groups like the 1970s Gay Liberation movement have come about in order to evoke change for the oppressed groups. While progress has been made there is still a lot of discrimination and inequality faced by the oppressed groups.

"Institutional Oppression occurs when established laws, customs, and practices systemically reflect and produce inequities based on one's membership in targeted social identity groups. If oppressive consequences accrue to institutional laws, customs, or practices, the institution is oppressive whether or not the individuals maintaining those practices have oppressive intentions."[18]

Institutionalized oppression allows for government systems and its employees to systematically favor specific groups of people based upon group identity. Dating back to colonization, the United States implemented the institution of slavery where African Americans were brought to the United States to be a source of free labor to expand the cotton and tobacco industry.[19] Implementing these systems by the United States government was justified through religious grounding where servants [were] bought and established as inheritable property.[19]

Although the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth amendments freed African Americans, gave them citizenship, and provided them the right to vote, institutions such as police departments continue to instill oppressive systems against minorities. Police departments train their officers to profile individuals based upon their racial heritage and exert excess force in order to restrain them. Racial profiling and police brutality are employed to control a population thought to be undesirable, undeserving, and under punished by established law.[20] In both situations, police officers rely on legal authority to exonerate their extralegal use of force; both respond to perceived threats and fears aroused by out-groups, especially but not exclusively racial minorities.[20] For example, blacks are: approximately four times more likely to be targeted for police use of force than their white counterparts; arrested and convicted for drug-related criminal activities at higher rates than their overall representation in the U.S. population; and are more likely to fear unlawful and harsh treatment by law enforcement officials.[19] The International Association of Chiefs of Police collected data from police departments between the years 1995 and 2000 and found that 83% of incidents involving use-of-force against subjects of different races than the officer executing force involved a white officer and a black subject.[19]

Institutionalized oppression is not only experienced by people of racial minorities, but also affects those of the LGBT community. Oppression of the LGBT community in the United States dates back to President Eisenhowers presidency where he passed the Executive Order No. 10450 in April 1953 which permitted non-binary sexual behaviors to be investigated by federal security programs.[21] As a response to this order, More than 800 federal employees resigned or were terminated in the two years following because their files linked them in some way with homosexuality.[21]

Oppression of the LGBT community continues today through religious systems and their justifications of discrimination based upon their own religious freedom. States such as Arizona and Kansas passed laws in 2014 giving religious-based businesses the right to refuse service to LGBT customers.[22] The proposal of Employment Non-Discrimination Act (EDNA) offers full protection of LGBT workers from job discrimination; however, the act does not offer protection against religious-based corporations and businesses, ultimately allowing the LGBT community to be discriminated against in environments such as churches and religious-based hospitals.[22] The LGBT community is further oppressed by the United States government with the passage of the First-Amendment Defense Act which states, Protecting religious freedom from Government intrusion is a Government interest of the highest order.[23] This act essentially allows for institutions of any kindschools, businesses, hospitalsto deny service to people based upon their sexuality because it goes against a religious belief.

The term economic oppression changes in meaning and significance over time, depending on its contextual application. In todays context, economic oppression may take several forms, including but not limited to: the practice of bonded labour in some parts of India, serfdom, forced labour, low wages, denial of equal opportunity, practicing employment discrimination, and economic discrimination based on sex, nationality, race, and religion.[24]

Ann Cudd describes the main forces of economic oppression as oppressive economic systems and direct and indirect forces. Even though capitalism and socialism are not inherently oppressive, they lend themselves to oppression in characteristic ways."[25] She defines direct forces of economic oppression as restrictions on opportunities that are applied from the outside on the oppressed, including enslavement, segregation, employment discrimination, group-based harassment, opportunity inequality, neocolonialism, and governmental corruption. This allows for a dominant social group to maintain and maximize its wealth through the intentional exploitation of economically inferior subordinates. In indirect forces (also known as oppression by choice), the oppressed are co-opted into making individual choices that add to their own oppression. The oppressed are faced with the decision of choosing to go against their social good, and even against their own good. If they choose otherwise, they have to choose against their interests, which may lead to resentment.[25]

An example of direct forces of economic oppression is employment discrimination in the form of the gender pay gap. Restrictions on women's access to and participation in the workforce like the wage gap is an inequality most identified with industrialized nations with nominal equal opportunity laws; legal and cultural restrictions on access to education and jobs, inequities most identified with developing nations; and unequal access to capital, variable but identified as a difficulty in both industrialized and developing nations.[26] In the United States, the median weekly earnings for women were 82 percent of the median weekly earnings for men in 2016.[27] Some argue women are prevented from achieving complete gender equality in the workplace because of the ideal-worker norm, which defines the committed worker as someone who works full-time and full force for forty years straight, a situation designed for the male sex.[26] Women, in contrast, are still expected to fulfill the caretaker role and take time off for domestic needs such as pregnancy and ill family members, preventing them from conforming to the ideal-worker norm. With the current norm in place, women are forced to juggle full-time jobs and family care at home.[28] Others believe that this difference in wage earnings is likely due to the supply and demand for women in the market because of family obligations.[29] Eber and Weichselbaumer argue that over time, raw wage differentials worldwide have fallen substantially. Most of this decrease is due to better labor market endowments of females."[30]

Indirect economic oppression is exemplified when workers perform labor abroad to support their families. For outsourced employees, working abroad gives them little to no bargaining power with not only their employers but with immigration authorities. They could be forced to accept low wages and work in poor living conditions. And by working abroad, outsourced employees contribute to the industry of foreign countries instead of their own. Veltman and Piper describe the effects of outsourcing on female laborers abroad:

By deciding to work abroad, laborers are reinforcing the forces of economic oppression that presented them with such poor options."[25]

Resistance to oppression has been linked to a moral obligation, an act deemed necessary for the preservation of self and society.[32] Still, resistance to oppression has been largely overlooked in terms of the amount of research and number of studies completed on the topic, and therefore, is often largely misinterpreted as lawlessness, belligerence, envy, or laziness."[33] Over the last two centuries, resistance movements have risen that specifically aim to oppose, analyze, and counter various types of oppression, as well as to increase public awareness and support of groups who have been marginalized and disadvantaged by systematic oppression. Late 20th century resistance movements such as Liberation Theology and Anarchism set the stage for mass critiques of and resistance to forms of social and institutionalized oppression that have been subtly enforced and reinforced over time. Resistance movements of the 21st century have furthered the missions of activists across the world, and movements such as Liberalism, Black Lives Matter (related: Blue Lives Matter, All Lives Matter) and Feminism (related: Meninism) are some of the most prominent examples of resistance to oppression today.

Liberalism represents a relatively inclusive political philosophy and worldview, and a growing opposition to more conservative perspectives. Classical liberal ideologies consist of political decentralization, separation of church and state, freedom of immigration, cultural and religious tolerance, and the privatization of education systems.[34] Liberalisms main tenets are liberty, equality, and tolerance, which, in many ways, laid the foundation for movements against oppression. Now, Liberalism is much more than a political ideology; it is a personal outlook on life, encouraging the widespread progression toward social, political, and cultural equality before the law.

Black Lives Matter is a politically charged activist movement that has taken hold in many countries across the world. The Black Lives Matter movement is a later iteration of the black liberation movement, which can be largely traced back to the extensive beating of Rodney King, an African-American taxi driver, by the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) on March 3, 1991. This incident, videotaped by a conveniently located observer (George Holliday), resulted in the raised awareness of unjust police brutality against African American individuals, and began the era of modern surveillance by civilians, as well as the intersection of videotaping and resistance to police abuse.[35] The Black Lives Matter movement was formally reignited by the murder of Trayvon Martin in March 2012. After Martin was fatally shot by George Zimmerman, who was initially found to be innocent of manslaughter, activists took to the street in defense of Martins name, as well as in defense of African-Americans who have been systematically oppressed and abused by law enforcement. Today, the Black Lives Matter movement demands an end to the disproportionate killing of black people by law-enforcement...and seeks to root out white supremacy wherever it lives.[36] Efforts have been made in the form of protest, the seeking of updated local and state legislation, and even social media hashtags. As Black Lives Matter spread across the world, people reacted in one of two ways: they either met the movement with resistance, as exemplified by the origination of the Blue Lives Matter and All Lives Matter movements, or they acknowledged and recognized the movements goals and initiatives, as well as how the mistreatment of African-Americans permeated society in a number of ways. Due to the nature of oppression, resistance movements often incorporate intersectionality, and the Black Lives Matter movement in particular is no exception. Its widespread recognition and advancement has proved beneficial to the advancement of other social justice movements, namely Feminism, through the empowerment and activism of Black feminists.[37]

Although a relatively modern form of resistance, Feminisms origins can be traced back to the events leading up to the introduction of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) in 1923. While the ERA was created to address the need for equal protection under the law between men and women in the workplace, it spurred increased feminism that has come to represent the search for equal opportunity and respect for women in patriarchal societies, across all social, cultural, and political spheres.[38] Demonstrations and marches have been a popular medium of support, with the January 21, 2017 Womens Marchs replication in major cities across the world drawing tens of thousands of supporters.[39] Feminists main talking points consist of womens reproductive rights, the closing of the pay gap between men and women, the Glass Ceiling and workplace discrimination, and the intersectionality of Feminism with other major issues such as African-American rights, immigration freedoms, and gun violence. Another popular movement has arisen which initially undermined the efforts of feminist thinkers, known as Meninism. However, the Meninisms initial mockery of Feminism has become a channel through which to voice concerns about the equally unrealistic standards that men are held to in modern society.[40]

Continue reading here:

Oppression - Wikipedia

Hanover One of Canadas leading cyber sleuths told a Dartmouth audience on Monday that cyberattacks by authoritarian governments against their own citizens primarily civil society members such as human rights advocates, journalists, lawyers pose a growing threat globally.

I am alarmed by conditions ripe for an epidemic when democracy (around the world) is in retreat and authoritarianism is resurgent, said Ronald Deibert, professor of political science at the University of Toronto and director of the schools Citizen Lab.

Founded in 2001, Citizen Lab focuses on human rights violations and is home for a small, interdisciplinary group that studies how governments and corporations use technology to censor, hack and spy.

The capacity to connect (the world) has outpaced our ability to secure (internet) systems, Deibert said. There is a lack of basic, effective security policies, lots of misinformation low internet capability and insecure devices, especially in the developing world. ... We used to think the internet would empower us, but now we are seeing the opposite. And a culture of paranoia seems to be spreading.

Deibert, a slight, middle-aged man with a graying goatee, explained that we live in a world in which our choices and decisions are increasingly determined by algorithms buried in the applications (computers, smartphones) we use. What websites we visit, with whom we communicate, and what we say and do online are all increasingly determined by these code-based rules.

He said that the Citizen Lab is focusing research on two of Chinas largest social media applications, WeChat and Sina Weibo, which have almost a billion users a month, making them among the largest in the world. We are trying to understand how the censorship of discussions works about the so-called 709 Crackdown, Deibert said

This refers to the nationwide targeting by Chinese police of nearly 250 human rights lawyers, activists and others believed to have been associated with two prominent lawyers who disappeared on July 9, 2015, thus 709.

The 709 crackdown is considered one of the harshest repressions on civil society in China, Deibert explained. Our research shows that certain combinations of keywords, when sent together in a message, are censored. When sent alone, they are not. More information about this aspect of the Labs research can be found at Deiberts blog deibert.citizenlab.org

Deibert said his team also helped expose spyware on the phone of a human rights activist in the United Arab Emirates and a prominent Mexican journalist last August. The spyware was traced to an Israeli cyberarms dealer, NSO group, that sells digital spy tools to governments and has contacts with multiple agencies inside Mexico, according to company emails leaked to the New York Times. The spyware was being used to discredit two prominent Mexican activists who were vocal proponents of a 2014 soda tax to combat childhood obesity.

To combat the epidemic, Deibert suggested action on several fronts: More coordination by entities like Citizen Lab and others around the world to expose these abuses; stronger support from private industry as well as universities to help protect (internet) users; greater efforts to inform the public about the problem; and improved criminal and civil legislation.

Longer term, cyberspace needs to be rethought as a global commons with government support and regulation, he said.

Almost 100 people attended the talk in Filene Auditorium.

In an interview before the talk, Deibert, who comes from British Columbia, Canadas western-most province, said that the Citizen Lab does not accept government financing but is supported by private foundations, mostly in the United States, such as Ford and MacArthur. Most of his staff are also from the United States.

The lecture was sponsored by the Neukom Institute for Computational Science at Dartmouth.

Original post:

Expert Warns of Tech Aiding Oppression - Valley News

This will prevent students from being critical and analytical in the future, says PKR vice-president.

PETALING JAYA: PKR vice-president Nurul Izzah Anwar has slammed the Public Service Department (PSD) for its statement aimed at students who criticise the government.

Referring to the PSDs recent statement threatening to cut student scholarships, Nurul said this was a form of oppression, and was similar to the notorious Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 (AUKU) imposed on students.

She also said the decision to pull scholarships deprived students of the chance to be critical and analytical in their thinking.

JPAs decision to cut bursaries is only meant to intimidate students and deprive them of being critical and analytical in the future, Nurul said in a statement today.

She added that critical and analytical thinking should be cultivated by students from the beginning so they could develop into better future leaders.

Student activist Anis Syafiqah Mohd Yusof said students criticisms could be considered feedback for the government to perform better.

The government should be able to receive criticism as a form of check and balance in improving the state of administration, said Anis in a statement today.

She said such decisions to scrap the bursaries of students who were critical was against the National Transformation 2050 (TN50) government initiative, which itself was based on students opinions and aspirations.

It was reported earlier that JPA director-general Zainal Rahim Seman had announced that students could risk losing their federal sponsorships if they were found to have criticised the government or country on social media sites or blogs.

The views expressed in the contents are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of FMT.

See original here:

Nurul: PSD threat to cut bursaries a form of oppression - Free Malaysia Today

The joint opposition (JO) said today the massive crowd at its May Day rally was a strong message to the embassies of Western countries and the elite class in Colombo about its strength.

JO national organiser and MP, Dullas Alahapperuma said he hoped the government would read the message and realize as to which party was the real opposition in the country.

The number of people who were present at our May Day rally was three times as big as the number of people who attended the rallies organized by the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP), the United National Party (UNP) and the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP). The people joined us as a protest against the governments oppression of the people, he told a news conference.

The MP said the rally held at the Galle Face Green was a turning point and probably the largest ever May Day rally in the country's history.

Meanwhile, he said the government should hold local government elections without delay.

If the government continues to delay elections, the people who thronged Galle Face Green will surround the key institutions in the capital, the MP said.

Referring to a challenge thrown by Minister P. Harrison that he would shave his head if the JO filled the Galle Face Green with its supporters on May Day, the MP said the challenge had been met but requested the minister not to cut his hair. (Lahiru Pothmulla)

Read the rest here:

JO rally sends clear message to detractors: Dullas - Daily Mirror

Senator Cory Bernardi, the Liberal Party defector who founded the Australian Conservatives, has told a Trump-tinged political conference in Sydney that conservatives and libertarians are united in an ongoing moral battle against the federal government, which he said was the most pressing danger to the freedom of Australians.

Addressing the Friedman Liberty Conference, hosted by the Australian Libertarian Society, Senator Bernardi said Australians had a moral obligation to fight against the growth of government, taxation and regulation. This view was held by severalformer colleagues in the Liberal Party butparty discipline prevented them from saying so.

He said he believed the Australian Conservatives would become the umbrella party for a growing range of small right-wing political organisations, and grow to threaten the Liberal Party in a similar fashion to the Greens' impact onLabor. So far Kirralie Smith of the Australian Liberty Alliance as well as Family First, have joined the Australian Conservatives.

The keynote speaker at the conference is the American anti-tax campaigner Grover Norquist, famous for his argument that government should be shrunk until it was small enough to drown in a bath.

Mr Norquist gained notoriety in the United States in 2012 when he managed to convince all but 12 Republicans in Congress to sign a pledge to never pass any increase in any tax. Adherence to the pledge was a contributing factor to the subsequent shutdown of the American government.

Speaking with Fairfax Media he said he was pleased with the direction of the Trump administration, particularly with its plans to cut the corporate tax rate from 35 per cent to 15 per cent.

"We were once the country even dumber than Australia," he said. Mr Norquist believes once the Trump cuts are passed the rest of the world is going cut corporate rates to at least 20 per cent.

Mr Norquist also voiced support for the "radically free-market" views of senior Trump administration appointees, such as Betsy DeVos, the Secretary of Education who has long campaigned against the public education sector.

He said his speech to conference would focus on the importance of libertarians building coalitions. "People want liberty for different reasons. Some people want religious liberty, some people want to educate their own children, some people are interested in tax. You don't have to be interested in the same causes when you are fighting for liberty."

This was the fifth libertarian conference held in Sydney, and one of its organisers, Tim Andrews of the Australian Taxpayers Alliance, says interest in libertarianism in Australia is growing quickly.

Speakers included the freelance journalist Daisy Cousins, who spoke of the dangers of feminism, which she said was a front for Marxist oppression of women, and Senator David Leyonhjelm, who joined a panel entitled The Right to Shoot.

The overwhelmingly young and male audience included a handful who wore the distinctive red hats baring Donald Trump's campaign slogan, Make America Great Again.

Speaking with Fairfax Media, Senator Leyonhjelm said he did not believe Donald Trump's success was representative of a broader international surge for libertarianism. Rather, he said, voters were turning towards politicians who disrupted incumbent major parties.

Almost 30 per cent of Australians have voted in recent elections for non-mainstream parties, with many of them turning to Pauline Hanson's One Nation. But Senator Leyonhjelm believes these voter are not yet fixed and could still return to major parties or drift to other outlets for protest votes.

The speakers on Sunday include Mark Latham and Ross Cameron.

See original here:

Cory Bernardi warns against power of government at Friedman Liberty Conference - The Sydney Morning Herald