Category Archives: Political Correctness

Dreaming of freedom in his prison cell in Chateau dIf, Edmond Dantes the hero of Alexandre Dumas 1844 novel The Count of Montecristo dreams of the nearby port of Marseilles as a haven of peace and freedom. Two centuries later, Dantes might have revised his dream as Frances second largest city and biggest port is depicted as a European version of Chicago in the Prohibition times with gang warfare, shootings, protest strikes by police, and tension among communities routine features of daily life.

The usually tame French media describe the situation as a challenge to law and order while Frances ebullient Interior Minister and thus supreme chief of the police Gerard Darmanin talks of widespread incivility. President Emmanuel Macron goes further by warning about a loss of authority which he intends to correct by as yet unknown measures.

Loss of authority isnt limited to Marseilles gangs engaged in war over a bigger share of the drug market with Nigerian Yardies, North African fraternities and cabals from the Balkans trying to acquire, defend or expand their respective turfs. Authority is also under constant challenge in Paris itself where one could see numerous shop windows shattered by protesters in the recent riots against a two-year increase in the legal minimum retirement age. Even once sleepy cities such as Nimes and Limoges have been affected by loss of authority.

It is, therefore, no surprise that President Macron has chosen restoring the authority of the state as the main theme of his post-holidays political performance. In a press interview last week he mentioned the word authority 15 times, following that with an invitation to political parties and trade unions to attend meetings at the Elysees Palace to probe ways of restoring the seemingly lost authority of the state.

However, Macrons first moves and the ideas his entourage are circulating look more like dancing around the issue rather than addressing its root causes.

The first move has come in the shape of imposing a ban on the wearing of a North African folkloric dress, called abayeh, in public schools. The new Minister of Education Gabriel Attal presents the move as an urgent measure to protect the nations secular (laicitie in French) values.

This despite the fact that the French Council of Islamic Cult, a group funded by the government, has ruled that abayeh isnt an Islamic symbol.

Where does authority come from?

The classical answer is that it comes from the two key tools of persuasion and coercion that a properly constituted government has for imposing its decisions. Beyond that, however, one may argue that authority emanates from continuity of rules and mores, the accumulation of a cultural, including religious, heritage that transcends here-and-now considerations.

Seen in that light one might claim that France lost the concept of authority with its first Great Revolution in the 18th century.

The triple moto of that revolution- liberty, fraternity and equality- contradict the concept of authority which necessitates a hierarchy of social and thus political status. Liberty, not defined within legal limits, could encourage hyper-individualism if not anarchy. Fraternity would efface social, cultural, and religious distinctions and, ultimately responsibilities in the service of the state while equality represents a challenge to authority which is built on a hierarchy.

President Macron tries to address that problem by talking of duties as opposed to rights, something that contradicts the core values of the French Revolution. In the French Revolutions world view, citizens, regardless of whether they do their duties or not, have inalienable rights. In Macrons redefinition a citizens rights may look like rewards for duties performed.

But who fixes those rights and duties?

The answer offered is the shopworn clich of democracy which, in its naked form could mean the tyranny of a majority, in other words the worst kind of tyranny.

Could one talk of duties in the service of an autocratic regime that one hasnt chosen? Things become even worse when you form a government without a majority, as is the case in France and, in different forms, in many other Western democracies today.

That could lead to an odd situation in which you may be in office but not in power or, even if you manage to simulate being in power, you are not in authority. In the latter case coercion may appear as a substitute for authority, hence the widening and increasingly violent use of police to restore law and order.

Political correctness and the cult of the victim complicate the matter further.

If you talk of authority, such as the current governments in Hungary and Poland do, you are labeled authoritarian if not autocratic. And anyone claiming some kind of victimhood, historic, racial, religious, cultural, sex-based, or class-based could demand to be absolved from respecting any authority outside his or her own circle.

In the politically correct lexicon one talks not of obeying the law but of respecting it when one deems it worthy of respect. PC propagators also use consent as a substitute for obedience in a system based on law.

Thus, manufacturing ersatz consent becomes a business that, in the United States at least, is developed into an art if not a full-blown science.

Macrons device for manufacturing ersatz consent is the holding of referendums on key issues affecting the lives of citizens. He plans to amend the constitution to allow the governments to organize referendums on a wider range of issues. This, of course, is a means of downscaling the authority of representative democracy and a sign of political laziness. Complex social; economic and cultural issues cannot be decided with a yes or no by a public that is bound to lack the necessary information and probing skills even if, unlike all referendums held in France so far, a majority of those eligible to vote do go to the polls.

Kant cited three sources for authority: power, wealth and esteem. But that was when Europe had an authoritarian system in which monarchy, the wealthy aristocracy, and the church represented Kants triplets of authority.

Every system is corrupted by exaggerating its core value which, in this context, means that too much democracy corrupts the democratic system in which the pendulum moves either towards authoritarianism or governability.

In most western democracies today the pendulum is moving dangerously close to ungovernability often in the form of governments posturing to govern on a day-by-day basis. The challenge for Macron and others is to gingerly nudge the pendulum in the opposite direction. But dont hold your breath.

Originally posted here:

Democracy and the Crisis of Authority - Asharq Al-awsat - English

Work is such a huge part of our lives that more often than not, we feel consumed by the weight of it. Yet the hijinks and drama that occurs begging closed office doors is rarely discussed on the silver screen. Weve seen epic sci-fi thrillers and immersive mafia movies, romantic comedies that sweep us off our feet and slice-of-life dramas that are highly relatable. Its time workplace movies also deserve their due. These films provide an inside glimpse at, lets say, the most unpredictable moments that make a 9-to-5 slightly bearable.

The best workplace movies of the 2010s took the tried-and-true formula from the previous decades and gave it a fresh spin. In this era, there werent stuffy offices populated by buttoned-up workers. But instead, the movies portrayed diverse personalities, uptight and laidback colleagues, and the rising tensions between the two. The results are pure gold, with scenes we can relate to all too well.

In downtown Chicago, Calvins barbershop has always been the heart of the neighborhood. Guys come and cut up while getting a trim and earning some laid back time away from the everyday hustle. However, the economy is shifting and in order to survive the time, Calvin decides to merge his barbershop with Angies salon. Eddie is one of Calvins customers who often visits with his crew, and the screeching, high-pitched fever from Angies side of the salon is ruining their vibe, leading to a battle of the sexes. But what is worse is the gun violence that is erupting too close to home. Leaving their personal differences aside, these longtime friends come together to take a stand and save their neighborhood.

Barbershop: The Next Cut is a hilarious film that has its moments of seriousness. Above all, it portrays bonds that run deeper than family.

Spiraling beyond the era of Mad Men work culture, this biographical black comedy tells the story of Jordan Belfort. The movie creates a frenzied portrait of Wall Street excess with the help of its lead protagonist, who may be new to the fast-paced life of stockbroking, but it doesnt take him long to rise to the ranks and let the madness consume him. With the help of Donnie Azoff, Belfort cheats his way and earns fame and wealth, but on the way he loses his morality and every relationship he ever had.

Related: 10 Things You May Not Know About The Wolf of Wall Street

Director Martin Scorsese has created an atmosphere where his protagonist believes that the real American Dream was profit without a limit or repercussions. The Wolf of Wall Streetalso radiates technical flair only a Scorsese film can contain. A warning light for people who consider money as the ultimate goal, the film has the audacity to prove otherwise.

When their careers are derailed without mercy, two salesmen Billy and Nick realize that sitting behind a desk wasnt for them anyway. Hoping to land a gig in the digital era and prove just how competent they are in the modern world, they sign up for an internship at Google. However, Billy and Nick are two old-school salesmen who believe in the power of a personalized pitch. Which doesnt work as a charm on young computer whiz interns.

Under the guidance of a program manager who herself is determined to be the best in her field, all the interns work fiercely while facing several challenges. The Internship is an interesting film because it uses comedy to make observations on the ever-evolving workplace. Despite belonging to a different era, our protagonists, played by Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson, possess skills that make them shine.

The Early 2000s recession was a time when cracks in the economy were starting to show. And yet few office workers were willing to believe that the US housing market could never collapse. Enter some renegade financiers who smelled blood in the water and made huge (read: risky) bets against fraudulent subprime loans. The Big Short is the biographical crime comedy-drama that covers these events in the most creative ways.

Led by Steve Carell and anchored by charismatic stars like Brad Pitt, Ryan Gosling, and Christian Bale, the movie shows how these outsiders spent years laughing in the face of skeptics only to find flaws in the system. Through crazy antics and cameo appearances from the likes of Margot Robbie and Selena Gomez, who break the fourth wall to get into some technicalities so that the puzzle falls into place, this compelling film portrays the greed that gave rise to the greatest financial crisis of all time.

As one of the most underrated workplace movies of the 2010s, In a World... takes pride in being modest and funny. Set in a male-dominated realm where all the movie trailers have one voice reigning for generations, the movie tries to defy gender norms by throwing in an up-and-coming vocal coach named Carol Solomon who possesses the kind of talent that could shake up the whole game but is unsuccessful and unrecognized.

Being called in to work with a major Hollywood production could just be her big break if only her father and protg werent being so competitive. With humor and heart, Lake Bells direction shines through in an industry that is rife with ego and sexism. The cast of quirky characters also drives the film into charming and authentic places, ultimately delivering plenty of laughs.

Directed by Steven Soderbergh, The Laundromat is based on the true story of the Panama Papers scandal that exposed rich scammers. The movie begins with Ellen Martin, an ordinary woman going on her dream vacation. But when things take a dangerously dark turn, she finds herself stuck in an astonishing fraud case concerned with two cunning lawyers in Panama. In order to get to the bottom of things, Ellen goes to great lengths, only to find that the death of her husband is actually associated with a shady offshore law firm under the name of Mossack Fonseca.

The movie also has two other stories and they both lead to the same global conspiracy. While portraying a dizzying maze of money laundering and shell companies, Soderbergh makes sure to insert some much-needed humor here and there to keep the premise light. Sharp and surprisingly fun, the film offers an insight into the world of the wealthy.

Weve all had a nightmare boss at some point in our careers. Whether theyre calling you in on the weekends or being on your nerves during office hours, these bosses have a sour vibe to them that just makes them unbearable. But for Nick, Kurt and Dale, the nightmare extends to real life. Fed up with years of micro-manages, workplace harassment, and downright ridiculous demands, this trio hatches a full-proof plan to rid them of their bosses once and for all. Of course, this plan was formulated when they were drunk, so the permanent solution wasnt without its flaws. Horrible Bosses sees these antics go hilariously out of control.

Led by Jason Bateman, Charlie Day and Jason Sudeikis, the movie acts as a momentary relief to all those who conspire with their co-workers during the after hours. Being a comic genius, the film also finds that sweet spot where you realize that it's all fun and games.

At 70 years, Ben Whittaker is still young and looking for a new chapter after losing his wife. But who would hire a returned grandfather just now understanding how the modern world operates? The Intern follows Jules Ostin, the founder and heartbeat of her online fashion site. Though reluctant at first, Jules agrees to let Ben try out their new internship program as a senior intern, never once expecting his style-oblivious personality to be an ideal candidate for the role.

Related: These Are the Best Movies to Watch When You're Feeling Stressed

However, Ben not only dazzles the office with his determined and infectiously optimistic spirit and wisdom, but he also breathes fresh life into the boss daily grind. Robert De Niro and Anne Hathaway are surprisingly perfect on screen as an intergenerational duo. The movie proves to be quite hilarious and inspiring overall.

The 70s used to be groovy, but for San Diego's former top-rated newsreader, the times are changing. After finding himself a man out of time in his previous office, Roy Burgundy has returned to take control of the business. Lucky for him, New York's first 24-hour news channel hires him as the main face and now, Burgundy and his ragtag team will have to step up their game to survive this cycle. Despite having to learn new tricks, Burgundy stays at the top by using his old antics and catchphrases.

Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues is a lovely sequel that tries to rival (even one-up) its predecessor by pushing the limits of political correctness. Will Ferrell reprises his role as the anchor and ultimately the film shines just as bright as the original.

Glen Powell and Zoey Deutch star in this refreshing genre-defying rom-com that is perfect for when you want a simple, cozy night in. Set It Up follows Harper and Charlie, two overworked assistants working in the same building. Knowing just how much their bosses put them through, it is impossible not to vent. And all that unwinding leads to the duo coming up with a plan to get their overbearing bosses off their backs trick them into falling in love. But in their quest to set their bosses up together, they start to develop feelings for one another.

Filled with witty banter and that familiar NYC charm, the movie showcases a winning chemistry between the leads. As matchmakers, their love was always around the corner. But it was just a matter of time before they saw it.

Link:

10 Best Workplace Movies of the 2010s - MovieWeb

International sports competitions like the Olympics and the World Cup help bring human rights issues to the forefront of the news cycle, whether it be through heightened media coverage or cases of athlete activism. Throughout history, the governing bodies of the International Olympic Committee and the Fdration Internationale de Football Association have faced pressure from the public and human rights defenders to rectify human rights violations exacerbated by their sporting events. Hosting rights for recent tournaments, like the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar and the Beijing Winter Olympics, have been awarded to nations with long track records of abusive and discriminatory behavior. These decisions by the IOC and FIFA to select such nations as hosts have placed the host nation selection process under scrutiny and called into question how hosts should be held accountable if they commit human rights crimes.

For the first time, the IOC and FIFA have updated their hosting and bidding contracts to reflect their obligation to protect human rights. Specifically, the IOC has promised to, protect and respect human rights, while FIFA has newly required member associations to respect Internationally Recognised Human Rights.

To condemn human rights violations on the global stage, transnational sporting organizations should wield these contractual agreements to bind host nations to this humane and responsible approach. By imposing obligations on host countries to protect human rights, monitoring host countries, and offering remedies for violations, a transnational private organization like the IOC can pursue real legal recourse against public and private actors in line with domestic and international laws. While current contracts remain imperfect, they represent steps toward ending a cycle of inaction and creating more sustainable, long-lasting change.

A History of Mistakes

The 1936 Berlin Olympics helped bring Germany back to the international community after World War I. However, when the Nazis excluded Jewish athletes from the German Olympic team, an international outcry ensued, alongside accusations that Germany was violating the Olympic code of equality and fair play. Despite this, the IOC remained steadfast in allowing Germany to host the games.

The IOC was not the only perpetrator of injustice, though. Even the US Amateur Athletic Union voted against a boycott of the games, with American Olympic Committee President Avery Brundage leading the movement to compete in Berlin. Critics accused Americans of discrimination when two Jewish American athletes were replaced by African American ones, in an attempt to avoid upsetting the strongly anti-semitic Nazi government. Clearly, both the international community and the IOC did not do enough, appearing to be complicit in allowing the Nazis to use the Games as a platform to showcase the German master race. Shortly after, the Nazis committed a mass genocide of Jewish people in the Holocaust.

Having learned their lesson, the IOC did not underestimate the gravity of apartheid, instead opposing the racial segregation policy that discriminated against non-white South Africans and prevented them from competing in the Olympics. When the South African government imprisoned anti-apartheid revolutionary Nelson Mandela in 1962, the United Nations formally condemned apartheid, and the IOC barred South Africa from the Tokyo 1964 Games.

However, it was not until almost 30 years later, in 1989, when a combination of internal protest, the risk of a civil war, and international pressure forced South African president FW de Klerk to release political prisoners and repeal Apartheid laws. While the IOC did augment the pressure for change that was applied by the greater international community, South Africa only reversed its policies after much internal strife. Thus, the following questions arise: Are sports tournament restrictions and punishments only a symbolic gesture? Or, do they make a true difference and hold the potential to alter the path of history?

Recent Tournaments

This problem is not confined to the history books. In recent years, documented abuses manifested in Olympic tournaments like Beijing 2008, Sochi 2014, Rio de Janeiro 2016, Beijing 2022, as well as Qatars 2022 World Cup. Large-scale forced evictions, the arrests of rights defenders and protesters, and the censorship of political views and media reports marred these events. Sochi was tainted by migrant worker abuses, media crackdowns, forced evictions, and discrimination against the LGBTQ community. In Rio, wealth inequality spurred police brutality and the mass removal of homeless people from the city. Qatars 2022 World Cup saw FIFA face criticism for ignoring the abuse of stadium workers and the suppression of critics and journalists. Weak labor protection and a poor government track record prompted Amnesty International to call FIFAs choice of host nation irresponsible.

During the 2022 Beijing Games, the Chinese government ratcheted up censorship to suppress coverage of any negative news. A Dutch reporter was dragged away from the camera during a live report and a Finnish cross-country skier had to delete photos she took of flooding in the Olympic Village. A comment made by American freestyle skier Eileen Gu on Instagram was also taken down, and tennis star Peng Shuai was seemingly forced to retract her sexual assault allegations against a former top Chinese official in strange public meetings with the IOC. China worsened its already poor human rights record by continuing the censorship of free media and mass arrest of activists protesting Chinese interference in Hong Kong under the 2020 National Security Law. Moreover, China has subjected the Uyghurs in Xinjiang to forced labor, detention camps, and mass sterilization. Given that China has gone to great lengths to hide the internment of Uyghurs, the international community must demand greater transparency from hosting countries to expose such violations.

Unsuccessful Interventions

How can the world use hosting countries temporary publicity to draw attention to their often hidden violations? Historically, rights activists and journalists have tried to bring about change by increasing the pressure on the host nations of mega-sporting events. However, history demonstrates that intensifying the international media coverage of host nation mistreatments can worsen the situation.

During the Cold War, the U.S. boycotted the 1980 Moscow Olympics after Russia invaded Afghanistan. However, instead of pressuring Russia into leaving Afghanistan, the boycott pushed Russia to double down in its efforts in order to further defy the West. With the international spotlight on Moscow, Russia did not want to seem subservient to the Wests foreign policy.

Years later, in June 2013 Russia passed an anti-gay law criminalizing anyone who promoted nontraditional sexual relationships to minors. International condemnation followed and spilled into the 2014 Sochi Olympics. Although the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the anti-gay law violated the Olympic Charter and the right to family of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, further international scrutiny and criticism only toughened the Russian governments stance on this issue. Russian authorities silenced pro-LGBTQ activists through imprisonment and reinforced their attacks on free speech for years after the 2014 games.

Change Starts at the Top

Many human rights defenders and athletes believe that change needs to come from the leaders of the sports organizations who have awarded their tournaments to countries engaging in human rights atrocities. In an interview with the HPR, Rmi Drolet, a cross-country skier who attended the 2022 Beijing Olympics, argued that there must be a better screening process when selecting host countries, especially since we knew that China did not have the best human rights record. Indeed, not only did the IOC accept Chinas bid, but the organization never used its committees considerable leverage to push for transparency or change from the Chinese government. Human Rights Watch member Yaqiu Wang accused the IOC of being complicit in Chinas violations due to its silence on these issues. IOC spokesman Mark Adams responded and told the press that Xinjiang discussions were not particularly relevant to the IOC. In fact, IOC president Thomas Bach repeatedly defended his organizations host city choice, noting that the IOC did not represent a political body that could mandate changes to sovereign states laws. He also criticized the dark clouds of the growing politicization of sport on the horizon.

Yet, this complaint against political correctness wrongly attempts to excuse the IOC from its moral obligations to the rest of the world. The reality is that leadership and messaging matter to the global human rights community. A prime example of the importance of broad messaging was when the human rights group Equidem reported on the discrimination toward and abuses of the workers who built the stadiums for Qatars 2022 World Cup. On the eve of the tournament opening, FIFA President Gianni Infantino blasted the West for their hypocrisy in criticizing the host nations human rights record. He noted his European roots and alluded to how European imperialism has also led to human rights abuses for the last 3000 years. Infantinos leadership on the world stage mattered he disappointed rights activists who felt that he sent the wrong message in attempting to defend Qatar via a misplaced moral lesson.

Contractual Protection and Legal Solutions

Complexities exist when it comes to holding countries, companies, or individuals accountable within the structure of tournaments like the Olympics. Public and private sector entities and national and international organizations take part in these Games. Instead of viewing potential disputes and claims through the lens of either domestic or international law, scholars point to a transnational private legal order controlled by governing bodies like the IOC. In an interview with the HPR, Daniela Heerdt of the Centre for Sport and Human Rights explained that organizations like the IOC or FIFA are regulated by the Swiss Civil Code as associations, a categorization that enables them to generate their own rules and escape state regulation. Given this independent jurisdiction, they themselves can strengthen human rights policies via their contracts with various partners.

In 2017, the IOC revised its Host City Contract and bidding regulations to include human rights principles. It listened to a coalition of human rights organizations, athletic groups, and trade unions in referencing the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Host cities will now have to comply with international human rights standards and laws applicable in the Host Country. These contracts will have concrete and measurable human rights impact indicators, in hopes of protecting the rights of expression and assembly as well as the right to housing. In sum, hosts will be obliged to respect human rights, prohibit any discrimination, and establish a reporting mechanism to monitor these issues. The new HCC will first apply to the 2024 Paris Olympics, and the first iteration of the bidding requirements awarded the 2026 Winter Olympics to Milano Cortina.

Contracts with tighter regulations will require accountability and enforcement mechanisms to be effective, though. For instance, while rising labor abuses in Qatar prompted FIFA to institute its own human rights policy in 2017, FIFA did not include any enforcement channels. The IOC also needs to clarify its process by defining thresholds for violations, reporting logistics, and how host cities can remedy any infractions. And even if the IOC does take legal steps against perpetrators, the victims of human rights abuses do not benefit at all. Any financial or procedural penalties would be between the violators and the IOC. Human rights victims would not receive any compensation. Furthermore, the SCC allows for arbitration through the Court of Arbitration for Sport rather than litigation, which enables the involved parties to decide on the applicable procedure and applicable law. Thus, in its current form, IOC rights policies may not successfully hold host cities legally responsible, and rights holders will continue to suffer.

Reining in the Private Sector

In recent Games, like the 2022 Beijing Olympics, the IOC has not taken adequate steps to ensure that private companies sponsoring the games respect human rights as it relates to the supply and production of their products. According to Human Rights Watch, IOC officials never thoroughly examined uniforms and other products or screened for links to rights violations in Xinjiang. When the IOC released statements about their investigations right before the start of the Games, gaps existed in their supply chain analysis. In addition, the 13 top Olympic Partners remained silent about these issues.

Extending human rights-based contracts to the private sector can reinforce the IOCs human rights standards. The IOC can shore up their clothing contracts for official sponsors by tying economic incentives and penalties to human rights. Obtaining legal consequences for contract breaches will take effort, but this approach could open up the possibility for other entities to follow suit. For example, International Rights Advocates have previously sued U.S. giants like Tesla, Apple, and Google for their complicity in supporting human rights violations.

Laws requiring businesses to ethically source materials can aid rights activists in their fight against host countries in violation of ethical practices. In an interview with the HPR, a Harvard Uyghur student who is quoted anonymously for fear of retaliation from the Chinese government cited the efficacy of the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, which bans the entry of Chinese goods produced by enslaved Uyghurs, in making a lot of companies more conscious of how they source their materials. The student pointed out that taking a more punitive stance on a companys complicity in these human rights violations also creates a culture shift about how we think about sourcing goods. Applying this type of ban to sporting event sponsors can more effectively send a message of support for human rights everywhere. Thus, these legal avenues can punish violator host countries both symbolically and financially.

Contracts and Beyond

International sports institutions have finally begun to recognize their role in protecting human rights, as the IOC formally sanctioned limited athlete protests for the first time in 2021. With the advent of civil liberty-protecting contracts for Olympic hosts and regulations for their bids, there is hope that freedoms surrounding international sports venues will improve. Incorporating the same contract strategy within the private sector can further demonstrate the IOCs commitment to defending human rights. These agreements solidify the social contract between human rights and nations, but their success will depend on the unified support and alignment of IOC leaders, rights activists, and legal advisers as they seek to achieve common goals. Only time will tell if steadfast coordination and collaboration by all involved parties will make a positive impact on the trajectory of human rights.

Below you will find a list of Harvard student organizations that address human rights issues mentioned in the article, listed in no particular order:

Originally posted here:

The Social Contract Between Human Rights and International ... - Harvard Political Review

Today the idea that the cultivation of manners should be an essential part of ones education has been lost almost entirely. Proof of the demise of manners is all around us, and thus one of the main pillars of civilization is crumbling before us.

On April 9, 1865, General Robert E. Lee met General Ulysses S. Grant at the McLean House in Appomattox, Virginia, for the purpose of surrendering the Army of Northern Virginia. Lee had asked for the meeting and had prepared by putting on his finest uniform: a new, long dress coat with a high collar buttoned to the top, a bejeweled long sword at his side, a pair of high-topped boots with spurs. Grant appeared in his typical attire, the simple uniform of a common soldier: a short coat and plain, spur-less boots, both much spattered with mud. One of his coat buttons was put through the wrong hole.

The contrast in attire matched the contrast in the men themselves: Lee was tall, straight in his bearing and solemn in his manner; the silvery-white hair and beard that ringed his visage befitted a king. The younger Grant was four inches shorter, somewhat stoop-shouldered, with a close-cropped brown beard. He was clearly ill at ease in the presence of Lee, nervously attempting some small talk before Lee turned the meeting to the matter at hand.

This climactic scene of the American Civil War has often been cited as emblematic of a watershed moment in history, the allegorical surrender of the Old World with its regal personalities, chivalric bonds, and inherited wealth to the New World embodied by Grant, a man of humble origins who had failed repeatedly in business and who finally made himself by making war (albeit with overwhelming advantages of men and material on his side).Here was the real rough-and-tumble American of the frontier, the true democrat, whose worth was to be found in his inner fortitude, his stick-to-it-tiveness, and not in the superficiality of his dress, the foppish concerns of an effete and decaying era.

The triumph of this new, democratic world, represented by the surrender of Lee, the embodiment of the Old South, at Appomattox, brought with it a long defeat for the era of good manners.

As a student, the young George Washington once performed a copy exercise, titled Rules of Civility & Decent Behaviour in Company and Conversation, based on a sixteenth-century Jesuit text. At the top of this list of 110 rules was this guiding admonition: Every Action done in Company, ought to be with Some Sign of Respect, to those that are Present. This maxim had presided over Western culture since the Middle Ages, and it was exemplified in the courtly manners of the upper classes everywhere and at all times, from the knights of the Frankish kingdom to the nobles of the Elizabethan Age to the American Southern aristocratic class represented by Washington and Lee. Where the upper classes led, the lower classes followed. Manners trickled down, so that even the common laborer of nineteenth-century London attempted, when wearing his Sunday best, to emulate the attire of his betters. His top hat and waistcoat may have been worn and of inferior quality, but he wore them proudly nonetheless.

Today the idea that the cultivation of manners should be an essential part of ones education has been lost almost entirely. It seems to have followed in death its greatest modern advocate, Emily Post. Manner is personality, Post wrote, the outward manifestation of ones innate character and attitude toward life. Proof of the demise of manners is all around us: the open use of foul language on the public street, not simply by unkempt, uneducated youths but by middle-age, well-groomed businessmen; the in-your-ear blaring of something incorrectly deemed to be music by its devotees out car windows; the making of turns or changing of lanes by drivers without the courtesy of a turn signal; the routine violation of ones personal space by passersby without the least expression of apology; and most obvious and appalling, the horrific decline in standards of dress everywhere. Indeed, T-shirts, jeans and sneakers have become standard attire for adults on casual Friday in the business world and, even more distressingly, at Sunday Mass. People venture out of their houses into public wearing their pajamas as they perform Saturday-morning errands. Today it is the lowest class of society that sets the standards of attire for everyone else; young people have adopted an exaggerated version of prison uniforms as their everyday attire, particularly excessively baggy pants, often worn so low that underpants and even ones derriere is exposed for all to see.

The mannered society began its death throes in America in the 1960s. It was dealt its first lethal blow by the radical cultural and political Left, who preached that business suits, proper manners, and personal grooming were symbols of the oppression of the bourgeois middle class, of The Man. Sporting instead tie-dyed shirts, ripped-up jeans, flip-flops and scraggly, unkempt hair upon the head and face, the Left taught, was the way to bring about the egalitarian revolution that would right societys injustices.

What was started by the Left of the political spectrum five decades ago was exacerbated by the Right years later. Largely in response to the chilling forms of what came to be called political correctness that were imposed by radicals on college campuses, right-wing libertarians beginning in the 1990s adopted the mantra that no one has a right not to be offended. In a decisive transformation of the old libertarian adage that ones right to swing ones fist stops only at someone elses nose, these new libertarians claimed that their right to free speech was completely unrestricted by anyones religious sensibilities or sense of proper decorum. Thus pornography, outrageous satire of religious belief, and foul language were acceptable in the public square. If one was offended by such things, these libertarians preached, that was the problem of the offended person, not the offender. In effect, libertarians claimed that their right to spew forth whatever they wanted through the written and spoken word was not limited by anothers eye or ear. They said to the offended: Get over it!

Thus the enemies of manners on both Left and Right together constituted modern-day Jacobins, determined not simply to bring down an unjust system of government but to obliterate the very fabric of society by destroying all standards of decorum. This parallel with the French Revolution brings us to the thinking of the great Anglo-Irish statesmen Edmund Burke, who believed that the Jacobins of France were, above all else, launching an assault on manners. Now by manners, Burke meant something broader than what we mean today, something akin to custom. To Burke, custom was nearly synonymous with civilization itself. Manners are of more importance than laws, Burke wrote. Manners are what vex or soothe, corrupt or purify, exalt or debase, barbarize or refine us, by a constant, steady, uniform, insensible operation, like that of the air we breathe.

Manners and civilization itself, Burke held, depended on two things: religion and the spirit of a gentleman. Robert E. Lee believed this also. As president of Washington College in the years after Appomattox he had reduced the rules of the school to one sentence: Every student must be a gentleman. To Lee and Burke, a gentleman was one who displayed Christian virtue as embodied in the medieval code of chivalry, an elaborate system of proper behavior towards othersmanners in the narrower sense of the word.

The quality of Christian humility lay at the root of chivalry. A chivalrous knight (the term chivalry comes from the old French word,chevalier, meaning horseman) humbled himself to all others in society. Thus he was bound by duties not only to his lord, his superior, but to those weaker than himself, particularly women, whose innocent virtue he was tasked to protect, and the poor, whose pathetic condition he was obliged to alleviate. One thinks of St. Martin of Tours, who famously cut off half of his military cloak to provide a naked man with clothing. To adopt a philosophy of individualism in which one rejected concern for others would have been unimaginable to the Christian knight.

One must keep in mind how unique this Christian notion of humility, and its related idea of chivalry, have been in world history. In the ancient pagan world for example, humility was considered a sign of weakness. Too, in many non-Christian modern societies, superiors are expected to be rude to inferiors, a way of keeping everyone in his proper place in society. The mighty in most places and times have boldly asserted their power as a way to maintain the status quo.

But Christian chivalry, Burke believed, made power gentle and served to beautify and soften private society. It harmonized human relations. Without it, society could only be held together by brute force and cold reason. Gone would be the warmth of considerate human relations, corrupted would be the morals of men, and all would be reduced to slaves.

It is, of course, impossible to pinpoint the exact moment when the decline of chivalry and manners in the West began. Burke certainly saw the process well underway in Europe by the time of the French Revolution. The age of chivalry is gone, Burke wrote in hisReflections on the Revolution in France. That of sophisters, economists, and calculators, has succeeded, and the glory of Europe is extinguished forever. Perhaps in America the precipitous decline of manners began somewhat later, in a humble home in south-central Virginia, when the Last Cavalier of the Old World laid down his sword in defeat, giving way to the New World Order of centralized government, crony capitalism, and the narcissistic New Man, whose main concern was to be profit and personal happiness, not piety and humble concern for others.

This essay was first published here in October 2013, and was first published, in slightly different form, in Crisis Magazine(May 2012).

The Imaginative Conservativeapplies the principle of appreciation to the discussion of culture and politicswe approach dialogue with magnanimity rather than with mere civility. Will you help us remain a refreshing oasis in the increasingly contentious arena of modern discourse? Please considerdonating now.

The featured image is by Arturo Ricci (1854-1919), and is in the public domain, courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

Link:

A Requiem for Manners - The Imaginative Conservative

In reference to the writer of the letter God is a problem, not an answer (July 29, TribLIVE): Im sure thousands of local Christians are praying for you. You obviously dont understand the God of the Old Testament that punished us for disobedience and the God of the New Testament that sent his son to die for our sins.

The 10 Commandments are rules to live by. We do have free will. One-third of the angels and then Eve demonstrated that. Does my knowing youre misinformed take away from your free will? Jesus said, We will go to a new earth in new bodies.

Ive never seen gravity, but Im sure its there. Instead of asking, What would Jesus do, ask, Was that done by Satans influence?

Your view of no God is what communism is. My advice is to ask these questions of a theologian. We must guard against public opinion being dictated by the government media.

Here is my timeline of why you think the way you do:

Creation and catastrophic changes were taught until the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial.

1963, Bibles removed from schools.

1969, start of LGBT movement in NYC.

1973, legalized abortion.

1980, removed 10 Commandments from public schools.

1987, Supreme Court ruled against Creation 7-2.

Political correctness, identity politics, cancel culture and pagan beliefs have resulted in the slow public acceptance of what you never would have accepted a few years earlier. The goal is a step-by-step dismantling of Christianity and Western civilization which are the basis of America.

John Ventre

Hempfield

Read more here:

Letter to the editor: Understanding God | TribLIVE.com - TribLIVE

Hardly any other topic is discussed as emotionally as the home office, in employee staff meetings as well as in private circles, Karin Klossek writes in an article on finews.first.

England, with an average of 1.5 days of home office per week, leads the way in Europe. (Europe 0.9). Up to 40 percent of all employees work from home. At the same time, England is the country with the longest working hours within a European comparison. In addition to these figures, The Guardian cites a recent study that found 25 percent of respondents said they would quit if they were to return to working exclusively for the company.

Tim Cook, Apple's CEO, usually very clear in his announcements, spoke carefully of a pilot when he ordered that Apple's male and female employees are expected back in the office three days a week: Tuesday and Thursday, plus a third day that the team can decide for upon itself. The outcry was too intense following the first memo on mandatory attendance after COVID.

Zoom, too, wants to see employees who live up to 50 miles from the company's headquarters back in the corporate office at least twice a week and is meeting fierce resistance.

The discussion usually misses the real reasons

The big banks in the U.S. have been going down this path for a long time, and many expect employees to be present at the bank five days a week. This can be sweetened, for example, by the office of the future, such as the one J.P. Morgan Chase is currently having built by Foster + Partners at 270 Park Avenue. The 60-story building exceeds all previous sustainability standards, has a sophisticated fresh air concept, allows maximum flexibility of office walls, and experts such as Deepak Chopra were hired for all wellness aspects so that rooms for yoga, Pilates, meditation, or rooms of silence are a matter of course.

The familiar arguments: traffic jams on the freeway or crowded commuter trains that tend to break down are no fun, costing time, money, nerves and CO2. In a digitized world, many tasks can be performed almost anywhere. A doctor's appointment can be scheduled more discreetly from the home office. It's easier to fight a nagging cold from home with tried-and-tested home remedies. However, the discussion usually misses the real reasons.

Good managers were already flexible when the terms home office did not yet exist

Even if he or she is equipped with the perfect gender-speak and all other political correctness, an incompetent manager ad personam is hard to bear. Any storage room back home appears more attractive as a home office. The anthropologist and professor at the London School of Economics David Graeber, who died at an early age, called them bullshit jobs: work that no one actually needs and that even those who are paid for it feel are superfluous.

If the supervisor and the human resources department are not worth their salt and there are no opportunities for development, then the work would rather be done at the kitchen table at home, even if the light, chair and table are ergonomically completely unsuitable for it.

Good managers are and were already flexible when the terms home office and workcation did not yet exist. They value their employees and allow flexibility when it is desired and possible. They trust their employees and know that performance (and loyalty) is even higher thanks to experienced individual flexibility.

Not everyone likes to wear headphones for hours on end

Of course, not everyone can work in a building that was perfectly designed by Foster + Partners. Ambitiously but unprofessionally designed workspaces often don't allow for concentrated work. Not everyone likes to wear headphones for hours on end. Many old-school workspaces may not be suitable as lounges, but do allow for concentrated work at the company's headquarters,

Without any motivation to work in an organization, it's simply hopeless as long as labor is scarce. Here, the desire for maximum home office flexibility is nothing more than leisure time optimization.

For highly motivated employees, on the other hand, as a number of recent studies indicate, more home office time means even more working hours. No wonder, in an actually well-equipped home office it is more pleasant to work into the night without having to rush to a dark parking deck or to a nocturnal suburban train station. If you'd like to delve deeper into the topic, a management expert and a philosopher demystify many a pretended trend such as agile working and dispel illusions in the video discussion: Schne neue Arbeitswelt to be found in the SRF Kultur Mediathek (German only).

A company or other organizations we work for offer a great opportunity to meet people we would otherwise never encounter. We all discover new perspectives and develop ourselves in the process but only if we actually interact in person. Electronic chats are no substitute there we exchange ideas with those who are similar to us anyway. Official meetings are mostly well-staged theater plays. The really important information between the lines is exchanged over a cup of coffee

The supposedly comfortable home office can become very uncomfortable in the medium term

An outstanding corporate culture can only be experienced in everyday life. It leaves its mark in a positive sense and both sides benefit from it: the company in its balance sheet and P&L, and the employees in the quality of the many days, weeks and months they spend at work.

A good corporate culture creates a natural network that lasts for decades, even if everyone already works in other companies. Sometimes friendships develop that last a lifetime. The supposedly comfortable home office can become very uncomfortable in the medium term: more household chores instead of a career, because making a name for yourself from Webex, Teams or Zoom tile succeeds for very few and often not for the most capable.

Karin M. Klossek has worked in Frankfurt, Auckland, Sydney, and London in fashion, financial services and health industries with an emphasis on branding and marketing. She has launched GloriousMe.Net, a lifestyle website, together with Maike Siever. She also co-partners brand consultancy Glorious Brands in Frankfurt.

Previous contributions:Rudi Bogni,Peter Kurer,Rolf Banz,Dieter Ruloff,Werner Vogt,Walter Wittmann,Alfred Mettler,Robert Holzach,Craig Murray,David Zollinger,Arthur Bolliger,Beat Kappeler,Chris Rowe,Stefan Gerlach,Marc Lussy,Nuno Fernandes,Richard Egger,Maurice Pedergnana,Marco Bargel,Steve Hanke,Urs Schoettli,Ursula Finsterwald,Stefan Kreuzkamp,Oliver Bussmann,Michael Benz,Albert Steck,Martin Dahinden,Thomas Fedier,Alfred Mettler,Brigitte Strebel,Mirjam Staub-Bisang,Nicolas Roth,Thorsten Polleit,Kim Iskyan,Stephen Dover,Denise Kenyon-Rouvinez,Christian Dreyer,Kinan Khadam-Al-Jame,Robert Hemmi,Anton Affentranger,Yves Mirabaud,Katharina Bart,Frdric Papp,Hans-Martin Kraus,Gerard Guerdat,MarioBassi,Stephen Thariyan,Dan Steinbock,Rino Borini,Bert Flossbach,Michael Hasenstab,Guido Schilling,Werner E. Rutsch,Dorte Bech Vizard,Adriano B. Lucatelli,Katharina Bart,Maya Bhandari,Jean Tirole,Hans Jakob Roth,Marco Martinelli,Thomas Sutter,Tom King,Werner Peyer,Thomas Kupfer,Peter Kurer,Arturo Bris,Frederic Papp,James Syme,DennisLarsen,Bernd Kramer,Armin Jans,Nicolas Roth,Hans Ulrich Jost,Patrick Hunger,Fabrizio Quirighetti,Claire Shaw,Peter Fanconi,Alex Wolf,Dan Steinbock,Patrick Scheurle,Sandro Occhilupo,Will Ballard,Nicholas Yeo,Claude-Alain Margelisch,Jean-Franois Hirschel,Jens Pongratz,Samuel Gerber,Philipp Weckherlin,Anne Richards,Antoni Trenchev,Benoit Barbereau,Pascal R. Bersier,Shaul Lifshitz,Klaus Breiner,Ana Botn,Martin Gilbert,Jesper Koll,Ingo Rauser,Carlo Capaul,Markus Winkler, Thomas Steinemann,Christina Boeck,Guillaume Compeyron,Miro Zivkovic,Alexander F. Wagner,Eric Heymann,Christoph Sax,Felix Brem,Jochen Moebert,Jacques-Aurlien Marcireau,Ursula Finsterwald,Michel Longhini,Stefan Blum,Zsolt Kohalmi,Nicolas Ramelet,Sren Bjnness,Gilles Prince,Salman Ahmed,Peter van der Welle,Ken Orchard,Christian Gast,Jeffrey Bohn,Juergen Braunstein,Jeff Voegeli,Fiona Frick,Stefan Schneider,Matthias Hunn,Andreas Vetsch,Fabiana Fedeli,Kim Fournais,Carole Millet,Swetha Ramachandran,Thomas Stucki,Neil Shearing,Tom Naratil,Oliver Berger,Robert Sharps,Tobias Mueller,Florian Wicki,Jean Keller,Niels Lan Doky,Karin M. Klossek,Johnny El Hachem,Judith Basad,Katharina Bart,Thorsten Polleit, Peter Schmid,Karam Hinduja,Zsolt Kohalmi,Raphal Surber,Santosh Brivio,Mark Urquhart,Olivier Kessler,Bruno Capone,Peter Hody, Michael Bornhaeusser,Agnieszka Walorska,Thomas Mueller,Ebrahim Attarzadeh,Marcel Hostettler,Hui Zhang,Michael Bornhaeusser,Reto Jauch,Angela Agostini,Guy de Blonay,Tatjana Greil Castro,Jean-Baptiste Berthon,Marc Saint John Webb,Dietrich Goenemeyer,Mobeen Tahir,Didier Saint-Georges,Serge Tabachnik,Vega Ibanez,David Folkerts-Landau,Andreas Ita,Michael Welti,Mihkel Vitsur,Fabrizio Pagani,Roman Balzan,Todd Saligman,Christian Kaelin,Stuart Dunbar,Carina Schaurte,Birte Orth-Freese,Gun Woo,Lamara von Albertini, Ramon Vogt,Andrea Hoffmann,Niccol Garzelli,Darren Williams,Benjamin Bhner,Mike Judith,Jared Cook,Henk Grootveld,Roman Gaus,Nicolas Faller,Anna Stnzi,Thomas Hhne-Sparborth,Fabrizio Pagani,Guy de Blonay,Jan Boudewijns, Sean Hagerty,Alina Donets,Sbastien Galy,Roman von Ah,Fernando Fernndez,Georg von Wyss,Stefan Bannwart,Andreas Britt,Frdric Leroux,Nick Platjouw,Rolando Grandi,Philipp Kaupke,Grard Piasko,Brad Slingerlend,Dieter Wermuth,Grgoire Bordier,Thomas Signer,Brigitte Kaps,Gianluca Gerosa,Christine Houston,Manuel Romera Robles,Fabian Kslin,Claudia Kraaz,Marco Huwiler,Lukas Zihlmann,Nadge Lesueur-Pne,Sherif Mamdouh,Harald Preissler,Taimur Hyat,Philipp Cottier,Andreas Herrmann,Camille Vial,Marcus Httinger,Ralph Ebert,Serge Beck,Alannah Beer,Stphane Monier,Ashley Simmons,Lars Jaeger, Shanna Strauss-Frank, Bertrand Binggeli,Marionna Wegenstein,George Muzinich,Jian Shi Cortesi,Razan Nasser,Nicolas Forest, Joerg Ruetschi, Reto Jauch, Bernardo Brunschwiler, Charles-Henry Monchau, Philip Adler, Brigitte Kaps, Ha Duong, Teodoro Cocca, Beat Wittmann, Jan Brzezek, Florin Baeriswyl, Nicolas Mousset, Beat Weiss, Pascal Mischler, Andrew Isbester, Konrad Hummler, Jan Beckers, Martin Velten, Katharine Neiss, Claude Baumann, Daniel Roarty, Kubilay Yalcin, and Robert Almeida.

The rest is here:

Karin Klossek: No More Home Office Freedom? Then I Quit! - finews.com

When it comes to the Republican primaries, attacks on wokeness may be losing their punch.

For Republican candidates, no word has hijacked political discourse quite like woke, a term few can define but many have used to capture what they see as left-wing views on race, gender and sexuality that have strayed far beyond the norms of American society.

Gov. Ron DeSantis last year used the word five times in 19 seconds, substituting woke for Nazis as he cribbed from Winston Churchills famous vow to battle a threatened German invasion in 1940. Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor, speaks of a woke self-loathing that has swept the nation. Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina found himself backpedaling furiously after declaring that woke supremacy is as bad as white supremacy.

The term has become a quick way for candidates to flash their conservative credentials, but battling woke may have less political potency than they think. Though conservative voters might be irked at modern liberalism, successive New York Times/Siena College polls of Republican voters nationally and then in Iowa found that candidates were unlikely to win votes by narrowly focusing on rooting out left-wing ideology in schools, media, culture and business.

Instead, Republican voters are showing a hands off libertarian streak in economics, and a clear preference for messages about law and order in the nations cities and at its borders.

The findings hint why Mr. DeSantis, who has made his battles with woke schools and corporations central to his campaign, is struggling and again show off Mr. Trumps keen understanding of part of the Republican electorate. Campaigning in Iowa in June, Mr. Trump was blunt: I dont like the term woke, he said, adding, Its just a term they use half the people cant even define it, they dont know what it is.

It was clearly a jab at Mr. DeSantis, but the Timess polls suggest Mr. Trump may be right. Social issues like gay rights and once-obscure jargon like woke may not be having the effect many Republicans had hoped

Your idea of wokeism might be different from mine, explained Christopher Boyer, a 63-year-old Republican actor in Hagerstown, Md., who retired from a successful career in Hollywood where he said he saw his share of political correctness and liberal group think. Mr. Boyer said he didnt like holding his tongue about his views on transgender athletes, but, he added, he does not want politicians to intervene. I am a laissez-faire capitalist: Let the pocketbook decide, he said.

When presented with the choice between two hypothetical Republican candidates, only 24 percent of national Republican voters opted for a a candidate who focuses on defeating radical woke ideology in our schools, media and culture over a candidate who focuses on restoring law and order in our streets and at the border.

Around 65 percent said they would choose the law and order candidate.

Among those 65 and older, often the most likely age bracket to vote, only 17 percent signed on to the anti-woke crusade. Those numbers were nearly identical in Iowa, where the first ballots for the Republican nominee will be cast on Jan. 15.

Mr. DeSantiss famous fight against the Walt Disney Company over what he saw as the corporations liberal agenda exemplified the kind of economic warfare that seems to fare only modestly better. About 38 percent of Republican voters said they would back a candidate who promised to fight corporations that promote woke left ideology, versus the 52 percent who preferred a candidate who says that the government should stay out of deciding what corporations should support.

Christy Boyd, 55, in Ligonier, Pa., made it clear she was no fan of the culture of tolerance that she said pervaded her region around Pittsburgh. As the perfect distillation of woke ideology, she mentioned time blindness, a phrase she views as simply an excuse for perpetual tardiness.

But such aggravations do not drive her political desires.

If you dont like what Bud Light did, dont buy it, she added, referring to the brands hiring of a transgender influencer, which contributed to a sharp drop in sales. If you dont like what Disney is doing, dont go. Thats not the governments responsibility.

Indeed, some Republican voters seemed to feel pandered to by candidates like Mr. DeSantis and the entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, whose book Woke Inc.: Inside Corporate Americas Social Justice Scam, launched his political career.

Lynda Croft, 82, said she was watching a rise in murders in her hometown Winston-Salem, N.C., and that has her scared. Overly liberal policies in culture and schools will course-correct on their own, she said.

If anyone actually believes in woke ideology, they are not in tune with the rest of society, she said, and parents will step in to deal with that.

In an interview, Mr. Ramaswamy said the evolving views of the electorate were important, and he had adapted to them. Woke corporate governance and school systems are a symptom of what he calls a deeper void in a society that needs a religious and nationalist renewal. The stickers that read Stop Wokeism. Vote Vivek are gone from his campaign stops, he said, replaced by hats that read Truth.

At the time I came to be focused on this issue, no one knew what the word was, he said. Now that they have caught up, the puck has moved. Its in my rearview mirror as well.

Law and order and border security have become stand-ins for fortitude, he said, and that is clearly what Republican voters are craving.

(The day after the interview, the Ramaswamy campaign blasted out a fund-raising appeal entitled Wokeness killing the American Dream.)

DeSantis campaign officials emphasized that the governor in recent days had laid out policies on border security, the military and the economy. Foreign policy is coming, they say. But they also pointed to an interview on Fox News in which Mr. DeSantis did not back away from his social-policy focus.

Along with several other Republican-led states, Florida passed a string of laws restricting what G.O.P. lawmakers considered evidence of wokeness, such as gender transition care for minors and diversity initiatives. Mr. DeSantis handily won re-election in November.

I totally reject, being in Iowa, New Hampshire, that people dont think those are important, he said of his social policy fights. These families with children are thanking me for taking stands in Florida.

For candidates trying to break Mr. Trumps hold on a Republican electorate that sees the former president as the embodiment of strength, the problem may be broader than ditching the term woke.

As it turns out, social issues like gender, race and sexuality are politically complicated and may be less dominant than Mr. Trumps rivals thought. The fact that Mr. Trump has been indicted three times and found legally liable for sexual abuse has not hurt him. Only 37 percent of Republican voters nationally described Mr. Trump as more moral than Mr. DeSantis (45 percent sided with Mr. DeSantis on the personality trait), yet in a head-to-head matchup between the two candidates, national Republican voters backed Mr. Trump by 31 percentage points, 62 percent to 31 percent.

The Times/Siena poll did find real reluctance among Republican voters to accept transgender people. Only 30 percent said society should accept transgender people as the gender they identify with, compared with 58 percent who said society should not accept such identities.

But half of Republican voters still support the right of gay and lesbian people to marry, against the 41 percent who oppose same-sex marriage. Fifty-one percent of Republican voters said they would choose a candidate promising to protect individual freedom over one guarding traditional values. The traditional values candidate would be the choice of 40 percent of Republicans.

Steven Cheung, a spokesman for the Trump campaign, responded simply: Americans want to return to a prosperous nation, and theres only one person who can do that President Trump.

Mr. Boyer, who played Robert E. Lee in Steven Spielbergs Lincoln, bristled at having to make a choice: Its hardly an either-or: Why wouldnt I want someone to fight for law and order and against this corrupt infiltration in our school systems? he asked.

But given a choice, he said, the primary job of government is the protection of our country and theres a tangible failure of that at our border.

Read more here:

Republican Attacks on Woke Ideology Falling Flat With G.O.P. Voters - The New York Times

CHICAGO Nearly 16,000 librarians from public, school, prison and military-base libraries, along with publishers, authors and vendors, gathered here at the McCormick Place June 22-27 for the American Library Association conference. The gathering took place amid increased attacks on constitutional rights, rewrites of well-known authors whose views clash with todays politically correct inquisition, and bans on books from various political forces.

As part of the conference, volunteers staffed a large Pathfinder Press booth in the exhibit hall, featuring works in several languages by Socialist Workers Party leaders and other working-class revolutionaries worldwide. The booth was a nonstop center of discussion on an array of topics, including the need for unions, womens emancipation, racism, antisemitism and the example of the Cuban Revolution.

Many were interested in Spanish-language titles, saying they wanted to expand their libraries Spanish collections.

Volunteers introduced participants to Pathfinders newest title, The Low Point of Labor Resistance Is Behind Us: The Socialist Workers Party Looks Forward by SWP leaders Jack Barnes, Mary-Alice Waters and Steve Clark. Many participants pointed to the opening sentence on the stakes for the working class in defending and using constitutional freedoms, and discussed the dangers in the Democrats unrelenting drive to criminalize political disputes, targeting Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump along with his supporters. Others were drawn to the discussion in the book on the labor movement, saying they were union members or involved in unionization efforts at their libraries.

An important component of the ALA gathering was the organizations campaign against censorship of reading material and of library collections. There were many presentations on this issue, including in the opening session where the featured speaker was well-known childrens author Judy Blume. Her popular fiction, which addresses issues faced by adolescent girls, has been the target of censorship efforts for decades.

The ALA campaign focused almost entirely on titles challenged by forces aligned with former President Donald Trump and other Republican candidates. But the fact is, many working-class parents are genuinely concerned about what their children are being taught in the schools, which is increasingly saturated with woke political indoctrination and sexually explicit material, all the way down to kindergarten. They demand a say in their childrens education, which has less and less to do with learning to read, write, do mathematics and understand history and the physical world.

Little was said at the ALA event about liberal cancel culture, which seeks to ban books, authors and public speakers and others who do not bow to political correctness. Conference organizers set up a banned books display that included none of the works by William Shakespeare, Mark Twain, Joseph Conrad, J.K. Rowling, and others targeted as racist, offensive, or, as a recent bill before the California legislature put it, lacking inclusive and diverse perspectives. No objection was raised against increasing efforts to strip or rewrite books that some claim use upsetting words.

Along with Blume, the opening session of the conference featured Illinois Secretary of State Alexi Giannoulias, who campaigned for a law that would pull state funds from libraries that selectively remove books. Illinois Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker in signing the bill slandered its opponents as racists, claiming its purpose is to prevent white nationalism from determining whose histories are told.

As in years past, the ALA conference was an important forum for librarians involved with prisons and jails to discuss their work. Pathfinder volunteers Mark Severs and Jim Rogers participated in many of these meetings, showing prison librarians Pathfinder books. A Maryland librarian told one of the panels, I would like to thank our friends from Pathfinder for the work that they do. Some came to the Pathfinder booth, buying books and arranging to be contacted after the conference.

Among the hundreds of panels and other activities, some dealt with current political developments. Two panels addressed Russias war against Ukraine and Moscows attacks on libraries and culture. Also addressed were expanding library services to non-English speakers and people with visual impairments.

Pathfinder volunteers introduced Abram Leons The Jewish Question: A Marxist Interpretation to participants, including at a reception of the Association of Jewish Librarians. Six people bought copies, and others signed up to be contacted later.

Sales of Pathfinder books at the booth were significantly higher than at previous ALA conferences. A total of 129 books were sold, along with 19 subscriptions to the Militant. Top-sellers included The Low Point of Labor Resistance Is Behind Us; Womens Liberation and the African Freedom Struggle by Thomas Sankara; The Jewish Question; and Women in Cuba: The Making of a Revolution Within the Revolution by Cuban revolutionary leaders Vilma Espn, Asela de los Santos and Yolanda Ferrer. One person bought Farrell Dobbs four-volume series on the Teamsters union movement in the 1930s.

Pathfinder volunteers across the country have begun to call the over 100 people who signed up to be contacted. Two young women invited Pathfinder to a librarians conference in Indiana this fall. And as a librarian in the Bay Area told volunteer Jim Altenberg, I really appreciate you following up. I was very impressed by your collection.

Read the original here:

Discussions on unions, politics mark librarians' conference The ... - The Militant

To whom then will you liken God, or what likeness compare with him? It is he who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to dwell in; who brings princes to nothing, and makes the rulers of the earth as emptiness. Isaiah 40:18, Isaiah 40:22-23

What ought to be the Christians relationship to authority?

On the one hand, we ought not to despise human authority because we recognize that God is behind its establishment. We would have to remove large portions of Scripture to come close to the idea that the Bible is a revolutionary tract undermining rulers. Yet, on the other hand, we also understand that no human authority has ultimate or permanent authority. God ordains the rise of leaders and He also orchestrates their demise. No matter how powerful they seem in a moment, for a season, or even during a lifetime, within a relatively short time their power will be gone and in almost every case the world will remember them no more.

We must remember whom we ultimately servethe sovereign God to whom all other rulers are grasshoppers. Therefore, when the authority of man seeks to oppose the authority of God, we are to ask, along with the apostles, whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to [rulers] rather than to God (Acts 4:19)and we are to answer as they did.

In Acts 4, the apostles spend a night in prison after healing a lame man. When they are released, they gather with the other believers and regain true perspective by remembering that they serve the sovereign Lord, the Creator of the earth, sea, and everything in it (Acts 4:24-26). Applying this truth, they then recognize that though they are under subjugation by the Roman authorities and facing the persecution of the Jewish religious establishment, these leaders are only doing what Gods hand and plan had predestined to take place (v 28), while they have been commissioned to preach the good news to the ends of the earth by the ascended King, Jesus Himself. With that perspective, they continue to share the gospel boldly and openly.

Can the same be said of us in our age? Will we obey God and share Christ even if those who wield earthly power over us are commanding us to silence or compromise?

What is it that silences us? One answer is surely how quick we are to forget that God is sovereign and that the nations and rulers of the world are under His authority. Having forgotten that, we succumb to a political correctness which makes us increasingly fearful of telling anybody that Jesus Christ is the only Savior. So, have you lost sight of Jesus kingly rule and reign? Do those who are ultimately grasshoppers to your Lord loom too large in your view of who to listen to and how to live? Then join the early believers in remembering, recognizing, and proclaiming the truths that God is the incomparable Creator of everything and that ultimate authority belongs to Him.

Go here to see the original:

Serving the Sovereign - Magnolia Tribune

Texas A&M University will be paying Kathleen McElroy $1 million as part of legal settlement over the universitys botched efforts at trying to hire her, and then trying to not hire her.

The New York Times reports: Texas A&M University acknowledged on Thursday that top university officials, fearing criticism from conservatives, had made significant mistakes' in the process. See here and here for further details.

Among those top university officials was the then-interim dean of Texas A&Ms College of Arts and Sciences, philosopher Jos Luis Bermdez. He has since stepped down from that position.

Bermdez had been communicating with McElroy during the process, discussing with her the successively less attractive job offers the university extended to her and the political pushback over her hiring, owing to conservative political correctness. He appeared to be playing the role of ally to McElroy while serving as an agent of M. Katherine Banks, the university president at the time, who was trying to engineer ways for the university to back away from its offer to hire her.

In general, it isnt unusual for university employees or officials to occupy this kind of dual role during a hiring: keeping the candidate happy while pursuing the interests of the employer. But the specifics of this case have led to criticisms of the former dean and former president.

TheChronicle of Higher Educationyesterday reported on the communications between Bermdez and Banks, sharing the record of their text messages. Their exchanges are reposted below:

Obviously there is room for criticism here, but I think it is important to also note that this case illustrates, among other things, the difficult position public university administrators are put in when intense political pressures are brought to bear on their decisions, and when they must act under the heightened threat of interference from legislators and other political powers.

(Thanks to Joseph Shieber for the pointer to theCHEpiece.)

UPDATE (8/5/23): A new article atThe Chronicledetails some of the external pressures referred to in the last paragraph of the original post, above. For example:

On June 16, Jay Graham, a member of the Board of Regents, texted Banks and John Sharp, chancellor of the Texas A&M system.

He said hed seen the news about McElroys hiring and hoped it wasnt true. But since it is not April Fools Day, I assume it is, he wrote.

I thought the purpose of us starting a journalism department was to get high-quality Aggie journalist [sic] with conservative values into the market, he wrote. This wont happen with someone like this leading the department.

Michael V. Hernandez, another regent, put it bluntly in an email to Banks and Sharp a few days later: Granting tenure to somebody with this background is going to be a difficult sell for many on the BOR. Hernandez wrote that he saw the selection of McElroy, who had built her career in New York City and Austin, Tex., as exactly the opposite of what we had in mind for someone in that position.

As it turns out, McElroy wasnt just a tough sell for the board. Two outside alumni groups the Sul Ross Group and the Rudder Association, both of which have many conservative members were gunning for her too, Bermdez said in a July 8 text to Blanton.

They have no power of course, he wrote. But people who do have power listen to them.

Related: Texas A&M professor prepares to bike coast-to-coast to raise funds for Habitat for Humanity

Continue reading here:

A Philosophers Role in the Texas A&M Debacle (updated) - Daily Nous