finished chapter 4 of dangan ronpa v3 by the way. i wanted to mention that i think both case 3 and 4 are real solid, very good line of reasoning and satisfaction of like. going through the logic. i *am* suspicious of the two new rules that they've set up through both of these chapters though. They really need a mass murder to happen. may happen next chapter i suppose.

“Bossypants” by Tina Fey: A pre-view

Luigina Cecchina-Tarquina

Assoc. Lifestyle Contributor

When I picked up Tina Fey’s book, I knew little more of her reputation than as a female comedian. I expected a chuckle and some depiction of a woman’s take on the world of hollywood success — I would not have expected to come across a racist book that struggles to relay a single joke while recounting the life of a southern woman’s bygone teenage years, but then, what would one expect from a cast member of “saturday night live”.

For those who are even aware of Saturday Night: Live (SNL), it is common knowledge that Tina Fey, and saturday night live for that matter, are controversial figures in american media. It seems to be a split right down american society: people who find Tina Fey “L-O-L” funny, and people who find her humour unsufferable; people who tolerate the blatant racism of snl and 30rock as “satire,” and those who have had enough of the denigration, minstrels, slurs, and tropes for cheap comedic effect.

I know Tina Fey is a comedian — a clown — and sets out to prick peoples ears and widen people’s eyes. To quote another comedy critic, I do not seek to come off as someone wilfully misunderstanding humour and repeatedly not getting the joke.

Yet the illusion of that decision is for those who do not remember that Bill Murray had a sketch on snl, where he dreamed about “turning from ‘brown’ to ‘white’”, and the more recent habit of snl writers hiring minorities as comedians to attack themselves on the show with slurs, because it would look less objectionable than if the writers denigrated those actors or people themselves. In Tina Fey’s book, she states that “As a Greek,” she would “only date a ‘white’ man, such as a redneck” inexplicably fond of camouflage.

But to quote that same critic again, humour has a goal; It has an audience. When engineered to subvert expectations and play to the common denominator, jokes have a base which they are founded upon. If that baseline for the comedian or writer, like Fey, is a bedrock of deep-seated racism, which the comedian exploits rather than lampoons, it is no longer a humorous observation, but a cheap, racist ploy servicing an already receptive racist base.

Tina Fey saying she would only date in a certain imaginarily-defined group is racist. Full stop.

Fey going on to say she would date even the lowest, “redneck,” in that category, before anyone else in the world is not less racist — as Fey probably expected her statement to be received (by deprecating people of European-descent with ethnic slurs like “redneck” or “hillbilly” or “honche”, rather than solely praising their racist memes) — but it is more racist, as Fey is simultaneously using racism to make fun of her suitors, and again using racism to elevate even them above anyone and everyone else.

Not to “belabour the point,” as Fey would appreciate, or focus on one bad joke: but Fey’s joke is playing to long-festered notions of racism, colonialism, and rogue supremacism, which Fey buys into rather than challenges, where Fey herself puts (1) any “Aryans” above (2) rich Europeans, (3) Greeks above poor Europeans, and (4) poor Europeans above (5) the rest of the living world. It is inane — and stupid — but a strongly held delusion among groups (1) through (5), and probably strongest among groups (2) to (4).

Fey happily plays with this unholy flame of racism, undergirded by genocide in her native South, fuelled by the segregation in Fey’s own high school, and leaving embers of anti-marriage laws across the American East.

That is not to say racism, colonialism, genocide, holocaust, mob rule, political repression, et alia, are not to be joked about — they are the most popular comedic material in the United States (even if only in the United States). But these topics are deadly serious, and not as distant and abstract as we would like them to be.

There is a real possibility, given their frequency and recency, that anyone who read the first edition of Fey’s book, or attended same secondary school, committed a hate crime, using the exact same rhetoric Fey employs as a “joke.” Not only that, Fey never says it is a joke — there is no punchline.

The only reason I give Tina Fey the benefit-of-the-doubt and assume she was not serious about what she said is because the statements where so outrageous and absurd that someone would have to be insane to print them in sincerity, and equally as ungracious to print them even in jest.

Nonetheless, it was never expected to have to wrestle with these issues, which Fey has ill-managed, in a comedy memoir. Maybe if it had to do with Fey’s experiences or personal identity (as “German–Greek”?) it would have a more natural place. That is, if Fey had been the victim of racism, and condemned it, even through humour, that would be expected, cool, and fine. Fey calls herself “Greek,” but only tongue-in-cheek, and it’s apparent she doesn’t speak Greek. Fey calls herself “German,” but only in relation to being American, and it’s apparent she doesn’t speak German.

What we learn is not how Tina Fey suffered racism, but her experience in adopting racism itself. It offends the senses, and anchors the book.

While hardly intended to win over the intellectual crowd, some of Fey’s items over the years cannot be ignored. Conventional culture, and Fey herself, would seem to agree, after the firing of certain snl comedians and the pulling of certain 30rock episodes, that just went too damn far.

This puts Fey in the precarious position of defending her legacy of racist and baiting comedy, and that of her colleagues, as now she has been outed as admitting herself that she has crossed the line on several, several occasions. But does that mean that Fey is accommodated now that she has made a partial apology? Or is that the mere beginning of scrutiny now that critics have gotten their first concrete admission of her failure?

Fey, and many of her cultivation, say such racist things in order to just have meaningless fun, or in order to make fun of the racist. While Fey and the others may consider this to be in good fun, and an inclusive way to overcome racism, at the end of the day you have subtly racist comedians repeating the words of violently racist hate-mongers for the entertainment of an audience often apathetic to the realities of racism. That is to say, with such willingness to commonly, repeatedly, and recklessly embrace such a serious topic, they can miss the mark.

The impulse may be that racism is so at the heart of American culture and popular life that it is expected that a pop culture figure embrace it (similar to why comedians talk so much of ornery subjects such as politics), and that they should not be taken seriously as comedic plays on the feelings of the populace.

However, comedy is nothing if it does not play to the sentiments of the crowd, and the cover of the clown mask is a poor excuse for crude thinking. In Fey’s apology for racist comedy sketches on her show 30rock, she echoed a previous comedians apology, David Letterman, when she said that intent is less important than perception when that perception causes innocent people pain. In Letterman’s statement (on a different subject), Letterman also says it is not about intent but perception that forced his apology and goes so far to say that if you must explain a joke, it wasn’t that funny anyway, so there is no sense in defending it.

Elizabeth Xenakes Fey, or Tina, has been a supporter of progressive movements in the country, but it should not be overstated to what extent, nor should the virtue of this support be overstated. Fey’s famous endorsements of Barack Obama versus John McCain, and of Hilary Clinton versus Donald Trump, and moreover her critical statements of Sarah Palin’s alliance to both McCain and Trump, have been definitive to her identity as a good liberal and progressive person who supports women’s advancements.

Yet, so too did the majority or Americans. It is not a controversial stance to support the candidate that won the popular vote of a national election — and, sadly, many racist people, both aware and unwitting, also vote for so-called “progressive” candidates for different reasons, despite their problematic stances. That is to say, being a Democrat is not exculpatory of anything. It should also be noted that Fey endorsed Clinton over Obama in the primary, and refused to endorse Bernie Sanders (or Clinton) in the next primary, and Fey describes herself and her works as “neutral,” rather than progressive.

Fey’s most famous work in comedy, the impersonation of Sarah Palin wasn’t as scathing as one might expect of a true critic, but was in many cases humanising, and even flattering. Fey was not kind in undermining the Tea Party spokesperson, but Palin was made out to be an odd yet loveable figure, rather than a contemptible one: she was written off. As Fey’s alter ego said herself, ‘it would be egotistical for saturday night live (or anyone else) to believe that a couple of jokes swung the 2008 election.’

Tina Fey has many hard questions to answer for racist depictions in her sketches, television series, and book — and it is not so easy a dodge to say that she once ‘made fun of Sarah Palin.’ Another reviewer stated, “I don’t think Fey comes off as a bad person, I just don’t think she’s funny.” Tina Fey doesn’t come off as a good person, or a bad person, but just presents as an ordinary person, and whether you find Tina Fey (or mor importantly, any of her jokes) funny is a personal and indeterminable matter.

I watched a few of Fey’s “world-famous” skits for this review, and I admit I did mistake Sarah Palin for Fey in their cross-over cameo skit; And the moment I laughed the hardest (in fact the only moment I laughed through the skits) was during the VP Debate Sketch with her fellow southerner, Jason Sudeikis, where “Biden” repeatedly attacked Scranton, Pennsylvania as “the worst place on Earth” — so again, people react to comedy in an unpredictable way, as a basis of personal experience. I don’t think all of Fey’s jokes make it, yet no one can singularly define anything as “funny,” or not, but I do see her as a professional on screen. I don’t give a pass however on bad interest jokes, especially on the mere basis of not liking Donald Trump (who, remember, is also a television celebrity who has worked in comedy, and made jokes that were blatantly racist — and sexist).

Entering Fey’s book, “Bossypants”, with this pre-review (re-preview?) in mind, it introduces to me that this memoir may turn to places unexpected, and that just because it is a celebrity-text does not mean it will be a simple, casual, or homey, ride.

What Foreigners Really Think of The U.S. Right Now

The other night, after the kiddos went to bed, we decided to watch the second Borat movie that just came out (have you seen it?). It was insane and hilarious all at the same time, but it got me wondering: what do folks who don’t live in the U.S. think of The United States of America right now? What is their perception of us?

So I decided to pose this question on Instagram and wow. Y’all did not hold back. I want to thank everyone who submitted for your candidness and honesty, even if some of these were hard to swallow. It’s important to note that just because these are their opinions of America, it doesn’t mean it is all necessarily true. Regardless, it was interesting to read everyone’s thoughts and get an outsider’s perspective.

We received hundreds of submissions and couldn’t post them all, but below, people from all over the world share what they really think of the United States at the moment.

Leadership is out of touch with reality and messing things up real bad, not just for the U.S. but also for the world. What’s worse is that half the country is being misled successfully. It just shows poorly on the country all over. -Annonymous

Your president is a disaster when it comes to foreign politics and corona. No class, no knowledge. A joke. Very scary to watch. But half of the voters are happy with it. And that is even more scary. Very difficult to understand the hate and ignorance in your society right now. -Mikkel

It’s just weird. Everything basically. I totally understand now why the U.S. is described as '“flawed democracy” in the democracy index. It’s just a crazy system which is not providing equality among people- regarding the vote especially. This system leads to the fact of the two big parties (similar in the UK basically). But democracy is about diversity in opinions and options. Not just two. -Max

The US is more divided than ever. The two parties cannot work together nor do they appear to want to. The government is no longer run by reason, facts, and policy aiming for the betterment of the entire country and or world in the long or medium run; rather it’s instant gratification for the few who benefit from nepotism. Lies and misinformation are used to build a dictatorship hiding in the form of “patriotism”. And those who could act as a check or balance focus on their own personal gain, putting their needs above those of the persons they should be representing. -Joel

I personally don’t think there is a very good atmosphere in the USA, especially right now, Trump’s administration does not protect the American people or the economy. He only cares about himself and his male-white supremacy. The worst of all is that lots of Americans think Trump is actually a good leader (idk why, honestly). But thank God that people are starting to wake up and fight about what they believe. We can see it through BLM protests, feminist movements, and so on, and the whole world is proud about those people fighting for their rights. America was once the land of dreams, but nowadays (with all that is happening) it is even scary to go there. Lots of things have to change and those changes have to start, voting and defending your rights and your beliefs are the first step. Greetings from Spain. -Antonio

The main reasons I can think of are vote suppression/gerrymandering, expensive health care wealth inequality, racism, lack of fun control… -Brian

Definitely find the hypocrisy of the Republicans so annoying, Trump still being in office, the fact that there has been no police reform or justice for Breonna Taylor, the gun laws, and the COVID numbers just to name a few. -Brian

Here in the UK it seems like CARNAGE over there..don’t get me wrong, it’s wild here too but Trump is insane and it’s really odd seeing so many Americans supporting him. -Dan

Really worried about the fact that you might go for 4 more years with Trump and the fact that he’ll for sure contest the results if he loses. Add to this, all the racial violence and in particular the way some policemen act without being condemned by any judge. And finally the pandemic which seems to be even more out of control than in other countries. This is coming from someone who lives in France where we’re going to be under lockdown for the second time since the beginning of the pandemic (2nd lockdown starting tomorrow evening and will last at least until December 1st 😢). -Estelle

To put a long story short, let’s just hope Cheeto doesn’t get reelected otherwise our UK trade deal will be a disaster and we don’t need any more negative influences in the UK around gender and sexual equality.-Christian

I think with this administration, the US has demonstrated how to shipwreck a whole nation economically, ideologically, socially, and politically within a really short period of time. After just 4 years, we’ve come to associate the US with widespread narrow-mindedness, a lack of respect and courtesy to other nations (and minorities in its own country for that matter), short sightedness when it comes to global phenomena like environmentalism or migration patterns, and a celebration (by some at least) of almost barbaric notions of violence, oppression, and backward thinking, all under the camouflage of its constitution and socio-historic heritage. We’ve really admired the Obama administration over here in Europe, which-despite its flaws and shortcomings- has opened up the US to international partnerships and has established an ongoing discourse shaped by mutual respect and politeness…the contrast couldn’t be more pronounced these day…-Sebastian

I look at our Prime Minister and government and then see Trump and think we really could have it so much worse! Vote!! -Ant

As an American living in London, I can tell you that the news coverage here makes the US look like an absolute joke. Mainly due to 45, his lies, his bigotry, and his insane desire to make covid seem as though it’s a falsehood “created by the left” while hundreds of thousands of Americans have ben victimized by this pandemic. What was once seen as a country of opportunity and freedom, is sadly no longer held to that level of greatness in comparison to its neighboring countries. It saddens me because I had plans to move back home within the next year or so, but if the US continues on its path, I can see myself in London for the unforeseeable future. I can’t live in a country where I am seen or believed to be lesser than another because of my sexual preference. I can only hope and pray that this election brings the change we need to be that country of greatness once again. -Rob

Very poor to be honest. And I’m not necessarily [talking about Trump]- I think the immediate reaction is to blame him. Though, he is pretty awful. There was obviously a huge level of social and other problems in the US, and the current administration has exploited them to the breaking point. Whereas more “skilled” past administrations had the ability to leverage those issues for their benefit, but not let it boil over. I actually thought Trump would be a positive for the US and world- in that his incompetence would force other world leaders to step up. Meaning more equity in how disputes etc. are assessed and the US wouldn’t bully smaller nations. I think the US has hit the point in its journey with capitalism that the USSR hit with socialism in the late 80’s that led to its collapse. Does that mean collapse for the US, I don’t know but the system isn’t providing equity and equality for all as it stands. -Paul

Worried but also hopeful for you guys because I don’t think all citizens in America reflect the current administration. It’s been really great to see people voting early and making their voice heard. No matter what happens just know you did what you could in this moment in time. Even though the current administration provides a scary outlook for the future. As long as the current and future generations lead with love, there will hopefully be a brighter future. Love from Canada. -Ajetha

I've been subscribing to all of the US News since the Black Lives Matter Movement commenced and honestly, it made me scared as a Filipino Asian to step foot in the States ever since. I have big dreams of flying over there and probably working there as an immigrant after I finished college. However, when I found out about the racial injustice that is currently ongoing in the country, I became hesistant of still wanting to live there. Although, I'm positive that there are still people like you two that will be open about working immigrants, I really hope that racism, sexism, homophobia and transphobia will end for good among every human beings in the US and also around the world. I do wish and pray that the 2020 US election will make certain amends to the current situation y'all are experiencing because it's getting pretty scary out there. -Harvey I’m an American living overseas working for the US government. I’m trying my hardest to stay overseas so my family and I don’t have to come back to the mess that is the US right now. From politics to COVID, it’s not a good time. While the virus may be surging again in Europe, at least the people comply with the government rules. Sometimes I believe Americans take freedom and liberty a bit too far, especially when it comes to the greater good. -Anonymous

Allthough on social policy the US is no real example for us (I think there is more social ‘security’, more justice, high standards in education for all in most of the EU countries), they always have been a ‘safe haven’ in big international politics. It now feels like ‘they have our back’ doesn’t imply anymore. -Jasper

Well personally I think the country seems in total disarray, instead of focusing on the real issues in the streets both house of the capitol are focused on bashing each other during the election campaign which is a circus due to the sitting POTUS. The obsession with the right to bare arms and the gun culture bewilders most other countries, you have teenagers walking into schools with Assault weapons and yet people still want guns to be available, worst still you ban one type of assault rifle but another just as powerful is kept on sale, it’s plain weird. -Philip

Neither candidate represents their party well. As an outsider looking in, it just baffles me that either of these men could potentially be the leader of the free world...It genuinely feels like worrying times are ahead for the US. -Marc I'm from India and living in Germany at the moment. The race problem in the US is as bad as the class/caste problem in India. Even if I don't have money I can go to a government health center in India. I just had an operation and stayed at the hospital for 18 days here in Germany, I had to pay only 180 Euros, everything else ( the operation and the many tests and scans that followed) was covered by the insurance. When my friends at the US heard about it they were shocked about low the hospital bill. There are really great labs (I'm a researcher) that I would like to work but I have no intentions of working/living in the US for a longer period of time. -Maithy

I think the US has become a joke to the rest of the developed world. Neither candidates running for president are fit to run such a powerful country. I can't help but feel after the election if Trump wins the left will riot and if Biden wins the right will riot. The country might just rip itself apart. American politics has zero empathy and zero morals. Honestly its terrifying. -Andrew

The US has always been a bit confusing to me - the two party system, the focus on religion, the divide in income and possibilities- as well as being the beacon of light in the fight for human rights, the strong personal pride in creating caring societets, the blending of and openeses for ethnicities and cultures... But for a while politics have become not at all about politics, religious beliefs are taking charge in policy work, the wealthier part shows little companion towards the less wealthy, the public spending is way above budget year after year while health care seems to be crazy expensive and not for all. The intrusion of US interest in politics in other countries are blunt to say the least, creating conflict where human lives have no value if they’re not US lives... School shootings that seems to be acted upon as that is part of normal lives, and schools to expensive for even middle class kids to study at... This is a shift in trust and soft power that affects all of us. -Olof

To be honest, I couldn’t come to the US right now, it scares me. The leadership, the gun laws, the violence and the divide of the nation. It sucks, because I love America and have been there 7 times in the last two years from Australia for work... but not anymore. I’m not coming back now until peace wins. -Anonymous

The fact that such a hate filled government is presiding over what is one the greatest countries in the world is scary. And it is seriously mind blowing that out of such a powerful country filled with some of the greatest minds in the world it’s these two men are the best you can do to be your next president. Unbelievable. Seriously unbelievable. -Rachel

I think the orange dude in office is making you guys look bad. But also, good (?). Seeing the black lives matter movement and so many of you stand up to the problems your country faces has been inspiring. One thing our countries have in common is how we are divided into very distinctive opposites sides. I mean, where do all these racists, bigots, utterly, madly conservites people came from? I few like a few years ago things did not seem so much as a boiling pan about to explode. Or maybe they were all hiding and when a lunatic like them rose to power (how that happened still boggles my mind) they all showed their true colors. It’s scary. I hope Trump doesn’t get reelected. Brazilians loooove to imitate americans🙄, so if he gets reelected it makes that much probable that our lunatic will also be in office for four more years. P.S. have you guys watched the show Years and Years from HBO? A really good watch is this election times! ☺️ -Taty

Re. The US atm. Unfortunately your president has made your country a laughing stock around the world and he's destroyed relationships with allies. It's gonna take time to rebuild all of that. He's also moved an entire branch of your government to the far right, even though the majority of the country if left/centr of left. So you've a supreme court that doesn't represent you and it's looking like they're going to try and take away rights from people. You have a healthcare system that doesn't look out for its people and there's this bizarre fear of universal healthcare that seems insane to every other 1st world country. If if Biden wins (and I really hope he does for everyone's sake), there's going to be a lot of work in undoing the damage Trump has done before he can even get into what he wants to do. All the while you've an ultra conservative highest court. There's also the massive political division and the systemic racism. It's a lot. It's not impossible, but it's going to take so much time and people who want it to change. -Ciara

I’ve been sitting here for an hour thinking about your question and there are many different outlooks I could raise so I’ll keep it generic. I’ll start with the elephant in the room known as Covid. Each day, our morning news informs us of what your leaders are doing and daily case numbers in the US. We sit here completely shocked at how your government has let it reach this point. You may have heard that Melbourne has just come out of one of the strictest and longest lock downs in the world. I wouldn’t wish that upon anyone to have to do, but I will say, I feel much more comfortable to be able to go to the shops knowing the numbers are at about 2-3 a day instead of in the thousands. I do think that your government does need to address this now, could even be making it compulsory mask wearing. It’s hard for me to comment about your economy as we don’t here much about it, but I will say Trump ‘says’ make America great again, let’s get more jobs, they are pro life, yet how is someone who is prolife not doing anything to stop a virus that is killing people? Isn’t your unemployment rate worse (pre-covid) than what it was when Obama was president? I think as a generic outlook, if change isn’t made in the election, the outlook from a Australian does not look like it would be something you’d want to be apart of. I love America. Have visited a couple of times, even thought about moving there, but at the moment, I’ve never been more thankful to not be there. -Ben

Why You Should be Voting Democrat: The Republicans are Hypocrites Against God.

This is an essay I now have to give to a person living in this house with me. Some context, they pinned a piece of Republican propaganda they received in the mail to the community posterboard with the words “why I vote Republican” written on it. I have interpreted this as an invitation to challenge their beliefs. And my response is in the essay below.

Sincerely, By Everyone in This House

Pro-life vs Pro-Choice

This argument is a messy one to argue, this is something our country is literally divided over this and each argument is so twisted it's hard for either side to understand one another. For this to be the hill you've chosen to fight on I'm going to have to assume two things—1: you believe abortions are murder, and 2: You believe abortions are a common occurrence made by lazy people who want to get rid of the consequences of their bad actions.

Both of these are common arguments made by the Republican party to defund Planned Parenthood. So it may surprise you that not a single person on the Left is trying to disprove your fighting points.

That's because this isn't about abortions at all. It's about women's rights. Abortions only play into this because it was the item that forced the issue before the courts and the public.

In 1973, Roe v. Wade was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Constitution of the United States protects a pregnant woman's liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government restriction. This decision effectively guaranteed that a woman had the right to treat her body as her own property, meaning she could choose what she eats, who she has sex with, and, yes, whether or not to carry a pregnancy to term.

The decision ruled that the US Government has no right to decide the moral outcome of a single person's choices. Nor do they have the right to force a person to live in what they currently believe to be an ethical lifestyle.

This is the one and ONLY law in our country that explicitly gives women the same rights to life, responsibility, and authority that a man has. It also the only law that ensures a woman has the ultimate right to refuse to have sex with a man.

Republicans want to overturn Roe v. Wade and defund Planned Parenthood (not end abortions). They often cite the evils of abortions as the reasons why they want to overturn it. However, this is not their real motivation. Planned Parenthood has a multitude of other services for women and men besides abortions. They help people conceive children, provide safe-sex alternatives to reckless teens, provide both erectile stimulants and contraception, and even hormone therapy for trans people transitioning genders. They also provide pregnancy care for women just like any other hospital.

And as we've discussed Roe v. Wade is about a woman's rights to her body.

Republicans are trying to keep women from having equal rights. This much has been stated by Republicans in the 1970s and that mentality continues to today. It's blatant hypocrisy from a group of people who've only read the Bible enough to make real Christians like yourself believe they're doing God's work. And they are not shy about signaling how religious they are. God even has a Bible verse for them specifically:

 “Therefore, when you do a charitable deed, do not sound a trumpet before you as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory from men. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their reward.” Matthew 6:2. (NKJV)

Government Spending

This one's actually a very easy argument to refute. Republicans are always talking about making tax cuts and spending less money. In truth, all the money they save goes straight into the military budget which increases by BILLIONS of dollars each year. We're currently spending $934 billion a year on our military budget. According to the last Discretionary Spending Audit under Obama, more than half of that goes back into the politicians in both the House and the Senat across both sides of the aisles. That's also why this issue is one many Democrats actively support; the military is giving them a kickback.

The tax cuts you experience is not the government saving an extra twenty cents by cutting out beef from their cafeteria and passing the savings to you. It's the Republican party throwing the US into more debt to artificially give you a tax break so you'll continue to vote for them, and force the Democrats to be the ones to have to put that back to normal so they look like the bad guys.

Long story short, if you want the government to save money, vote Democrat, pay higher taxes and demand a drastic decrease in military spending.

Fun Fact: If we succeed in cutting the military budget by one-hundredth of a percent, the excess funds would pay to empower EVERY SOCIAL SERVICE the democrats suggest (from healthcare all the way to free electricity.) for the next ten years.

Education (Really? This one's so backward you should know better without me explaining.)

Republicans have been so far on the wrong side of this debate I'm surprised I have to tell it to you. For decades they've cut school budget both in the public and private sectors. They happily cut millions of dollars a year from the federal grants that are supposed to help kids afford college, while also artificially inflating the price of school, school supplies, and class prices.

This is not some secret thing you'll have to search hard for. They brag about it on tv every other episode of Fox News. 

The document you gave me lists education but provides no real proposals or examples of problems they hope to change, it is preying on your ignorance in this situation to make themselves look good. (What follows was not any part of the document they left, but are bullet points I thought they should be thinking about when they go to vote.)

Gay Rights

People who are gay, or otherwise not cishet WASPS should have the right to live a life of their own choosing without persecution or judgment from us. Jesus says everyone has that right amongst man. We're supposed to leave all that to God, so leave it for God.

Racism

I direct you to the current protests as proof that Racism is a thing that still exists, and has only gotten more unmanageable as time has moved on. Also, every Black Lives Matter protest since Martin Luther King Jr.

Socialism

Roads, parks, schools, and social security are all social programs funded by the government for the people. We on the Left wish to expand these capacities to healthcare, electricity, internet, higher education, and phone services, while also insisting that the government provide the minimum funding needed for people to live. (This in a time when the cost of living keeps rising higher due to unchecked capitalism.) We demand the government provide for the homeless, and regulate the supply chain of food. (because over 70% of all food in the garbage across this country is thrown away while it's still fresh.)

We have the ability to end starvation, and homelessness in this country. We argue this means we have the responsibility to do so as well.

Gun Reform

Democrats believe no civilian needs access to weapons of war. It's too easy to exploit these weapons and it results in mass killings of innocents. There are far better and more effective ways to defend yourself and your family than buying a bunch of guns and shooting anything that makes a noise in the night.

Police Reform

This is the current agenda. Police have gone unpunished for their crimes against civilians, (especially civilians of color,) and our current system 1: Encourages police to kill first, ask questions never, 2: Forces cops to take on roles they are untrained for, and 3: Gives them too much power without any reliable method of accountability. We demand all three of these things be addressed and changed in a meaningful way.

All of this without even mentioning Trump, the man actively trying to be a dictator.

It is All about Race, Awful Hypocrisy Hypocrisy to Say it’s Not! While I am following closely various discussions on Western mass media and social media, simultaneously engaging in several direct exchanges, one overwhelming leitmotif that I see is clearly emerging: “What is happening in the United States (and the UK, France and other parts of Western Empire) is not really about the race. Let us protest peacefully, let us not allow ‘rioting’ to continue, and above all, please let us not single out the white race, Western culture as a sole villain. Let us have peace, love each other… Then things will miraculously improve; terrible occurrences will soon go away.” I have worked and lived on all continents, from far away island nations of South Pacific (Oceania), to Africa, the Middle East, Latin America, and Asia. Of course, I lived in Europe and North America, too. Colonialism, neo-colonialism, imperialism – these are all my topics. Seriously! I have been studying them, investigating them; I wrote and made various documentary films about them. On several occasions I came very close to losing my life, confronting them. My conclusion after all that I saw and experienced and survived? You can probably guess it: “To claim that the race is not what has been, for centuries, dividing our Planet, is outrageous hypocrisy. Or deranged wishful thinking. Or something much worse: it is calculated blindness that serves only the ruling, white group of people.” To make it blunt: Our Planet has been reduced to only two races: White and “the other”! On top of it, the color of one’s skin is not always identical to what the West, in general, perceives as the Caucasian/white race. To be “white” is the state of mind. It means: belonging to the culture which perceives itself as “superior”. The culture which sees itself as ‘exceptional’, and somehow ‘chosen’ to judge and advice the entire humanity. It also means ‘a state of indoctrination and obedience, as well as lack of intellectual courage’. All this, in exchange for the privileges; fabulous privileges! “Plunder the world, and live well above your means; live grotesquely plush life! And while you are living it, do not forget to whine, demand more, and keep repeating that ‘you are also exploited and, actually, a very poor victim’”. Denying the privileges is part of racism, too, as it demonstrates unexpectable spite for the real victims! Or, perhaps, self-imposed blindness. Citizens of some countries, such as Russia, Cuba, and Turkey, may look mainly ‘white’, but they are actually not. They are not invited to the ‘club’, because their mindset is different because they are not submissive because they think on their own. *** Such conclusions may not be popular in New York, London, Paris, or Berlin. Especially not now, when the United States and the entire West are in turmoil. The culture which was built on blood, bones, rape, and theft, ‘culture’ shaped by more than 500 years of colonialist terror, is now turning, twisting, and trying to justify itself. It tries to survive while staying in a driving seat. Countless editorials penned by both ‘conservative’ and so-called ‘liberal’ scribes are carpet-bombing the pages of newspapers at both sides of the Atlantic Ocean. Fear of perhaps mortally injured beast – Western regime and its citizens – is delectable by its repulsive stench, and it stinks for miles. Suddenly, most of the so-called ‘progressive’ publications do not want to hear from those writers and thinkers who are shooting powerful projectiles in the form of highly uncomfortable truth. Actually, in the West, there are hardly any true “left-wing” sites or magazines left, of course with some shining exceptions. What is really progressive these days? I don’t want to name the sites or publications here, but you are most likely aware of which ones I am talking about: they almost exclusively carry the stuff written by the Western/white men, for other white men’s consumption! They never cross the line: their criticism of the Western white-dominated world is half-hearted, “peaceful”; in short cowardly. A white man is an individual who has been brought up and indoctrinated in a certain way, who thinks, speaks, and writes in a manner that is expected from him or her by the Western regime. And all these ‘non-whites’, all over the world, including the minorities in the Western countries, are expected to sit on their asses, shut up and listen to him or her, but mostly him. And of course, to obey. Or else! Or else: they will be verbally attacked and humiliated, eventually, they will get sanctioned, their governments were overthrown, countries invaded. There will be corpses all over, the stench of burning flesh, overflowing mass graves. And ‘at home’, in the West? Bullets shot at their eyes, or necks squashed by military or police boots. So, what actually happened a few weeks ago to Mr. George Floyd, has been constantly happening to non-white people all over the world, to the entire communities and countries. Then, suddenly, people, all over the world, had enough! Almost everywhere, not just in China, Russia, Venezuela, Cuba, Iran, Libya, Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Enough of being treated as some lower, subservient races. Enough of being treated like a scum; brutalized, killed like Mr. Floyd! *** Now, in the West, both liberal and conservative media is making noises, claiming that Mr. Floyd was “not a saint”, that he used to serve some time in prison. What can I say? People, in general, are not saints. People and countries. Very often, circumstances make them behave in a very nasty matter. But if you are raised as a second-class citizen, if you are beaten, day and night, by your own regime, are you expected to turn out to be a romantic poet? Get real! Our countries, non-Western ones, are not always behaving like saints, either. But they are still better, much better, than those that have been murdering hundreds of millions in their colonies! Don’t they understand, in Washington, London, and Paris, why those millions of people, from Tokyo to Buenos Aires, from Africa to Asia, are now marching in support for the African-American people? It is because all of us, outside Europe, North America, Australia, and New Zealand, are somehow related to Mr. Floyd! Yes, we read those phony essays. We observe those cynical little smiles on the faces of the people who are denying racial and racist division of the world. Individuals who are defending the status quo, the rule of that tiny minority over the planet, so they could maintain their advantages. Some defenders of status quo are now going as far as claiming that the rebellion against the white rulers is actually some sort of dark conspiracy theatre, triggered by the well-concealed business elites, or that it is connected to COVID-19; but above all, that it is not spontaneous at all. It is clear, where they really stand and what they want to achieve. It is never “them”. It is always somebody else. They keep pointing fingers at some invisible bankers, or the minorities in their own countries. You know precisely what I mean. As long as it is not them! But it is all much simpler: most of Europe and North America are constructed on white racism. And so is imperialism, colonialism. Citizens in the West are voting right-wing scum, voluntarily, and consistently. Can you imagine a genuine North American or European “internationalist”? Maybe a few. Perhaps 1%. Not more! So, the proverbial gold keeps flowing in. And billions of non-whites are rotting alive, in all corners of the globe. My friends, my comrades, all over the world, are now opening their eyes, realizing what is happening in the United States and its colonialist daddy: Europe. Many of them, of course, already knew. At least they knew something. But those who did not, are now wide awake, getting well aware of the brutality of the Western regime, as well as of the racist nature of the “global arrangement”. Those who were, for centuries, manufacturing consent, justifying and glorifying colonialism, imperialism, racial discrimination, as well as Western supremacy, can suddenly do nothing to stop the avalanche of awareness. This may be the beginning of the end of segregation, of global apartheid. Just the beginning of the true struggle for equality. A knee of a beefy white racist cop in Minneapolis, which had cut the supply of air, killing an African-American person, somehow managed to trigger that avalanche. Nobody wants to live like this. Oppressed nations do not want to be threatened this way by those white Western cynics and nihilists: like Clinton and Trump, Navarro, Pompeo, and others. What a hellish troop of third-rate violent people! Oppressed minorities inside the empire, be they of African descent, Hispanics or Chinese, are sick of the vicious and repulsive racism. Mostly, they are frightened to speak. But now, day by day, they are gaining courage. *** The United States of America has been built on the genocide of the non-white people. The great majority of native folks had been slaughtered so the small number of the first and brutal European settlers could thrive. This is “to some extend” known fact, but learning in-depth what really happened to the original inhabitants of ‘America’ has been thoroughly discouraged. Word ‘genocide’ is hardly ever uttered, in connection with the first chapters of U.S. history. Actually, it is taboo. Slavery has been turned into folklore. Millions, tens of millions of broken, methodically destroyed human lives, is hardly ever presented in its real, nightmarish authenticity. People in Africa were hunted down like animals, tortured, raped, killed, and shipped like cattle to the so-called ‘free’ and ‘democratic’ “New World”. Does a country constructed on such macabre foundations have really any moral right to call itself ‘free’? Can it be allowed to police the world? It is as if you would allow that murder cob who killed Mr. Floyd, to run a nation! And those states which are now forming Europe? Their citizens are the descendants of those who were hunting down millions of human beings. Offspring of those who perpetrated and then got rich on such mass-slaughters as those of the Namibians, or people who used to inhabit what is now known as Congo. When dragged to the broad daylight, it is all very, very uncomfortable, isn’t it? Better to sweep the truth under the carpet, and talk about “love”, “goodwill”. And then keep robbing and murdering as before, far away from the cameras! This way, nothing would ever change. Repeating over and over again: “race does not matter; it is actually all about class”, could make those who are in control of the world feel good about themselves, even sometimes sorry for themselves, which is actually their favorite state of mind. But it is a terribly hypocritical and deceptive position. And it has to be unveiled if there is ever to be justice! *** On 3 June 2020, UN News, published an essay condemning the situation in the United States: “Voices calling for an end to “the endemic and structural racism that blights US society” must be heard and understood, for the country to move past its “tragic history of racism and violence”, the UN Human Rights chief said on Wednesday. “The voices calling for an end to the killings of unarmed African Americans need to be heard”, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet said in a statement. “The voices calling for an end to police violence need to be heard”.” Ms. Bachelet, a Chilean, knows precisely what she is talking about! She knows what it is to have someone’s knee choking your aorta. Her father, an army General during the socialist era of President Salvador Allende, was murdered after the US-sponsored coup led by Augusto Pinochet. Ms. Bachelet herself was kidnapped and tortured. She looked ‘white’, but obviously not ‘white enough’ for Washington and its local assassins. What is truly significant is that even the United Nations (usually subservient to the US) is now unwilling to remain silent. *** Race ‘issues’ have to be addressed. Racism, inside the national boundaries, as well as on the global scale, has to be fought against, by all means. The depressing state of our planet is a result of racism. Look at the map of the world at the beginning of the 20th century, and you will see: a great majority of the nations were colonized by the West. Colonialism is one of the most evident forms of racism. It humiliates victims, it robs them of everything: of culture, dignity, land. To a great extent, most of the world is still being colonized. Even right now, as this is being written. Almost the entire Planet is brutally controlled by the racist West-centric education system, and by the mass media which is controlled by the White boy’s Western narrative. Things have been arranged, so that the people in non-Western countries have been ‘learning’ and ‘getting informed’ about themselves from the Western curriculums and the fraudulent sources disseminated by the US and British media outlets. That is grotesquely racist, isn’t it? Close to 10 million people have died in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), in just a quarter of a century. It is because they have coltan, uranium, and other essential raw materials, desired by the West. But also, because to the West, their black lives matter close to nothing. My film, “Rwanda Gambit”, is clearly addressing the issue. But who cares? In the West, they rather watch porn, instead of learning the greatest genocide of the 20th Century, which they helped to trigger! And who cares about the West Papuans, who are murdered with almost the same intensity by the Indonesians, on behalf of their Western masters? After all, the West Papuans are blacks, therefore matter nothing. On those millions, mountains of corpses, huge companies, and even entire countries are thriving, prosper. While their CEOs and Presidents are talking rubbish about some ‘corporate responsibility’ and love for democracy. And most of the white Europeans, Canadians, Australians, have to sacrifice very little, in order to live their obnoxiously luxurious lives. Isn’t this racist? The entire arrangement of the world is! Soon, it will be impossible to hide behind all those lies. I work at the frontlines. Where human bodies are crushed by all that “love” of the white colonialism and racism, directly but also indirectly. Racist violence is the most repulsive and the creepiest thing on Earth. I want it to end; once and for all. I don’t care if some shops get looted or trashed in the process. Peaceniks who are crying over them are mostly sitting in their plush living rooms, watching censored news. They do not see those tens of millions of victims of racism rotting in tropical heat, floating on the surfaces of polluted rivers, thousands of kilometers away! Images of Mr. Floyd being murdered, slowly and sadistically, is as close as they ever got to reality. For centuries, they did all they could in order not to see. Now they are running out of excuses. Not to see, not to fight against the endemic global racism is a terrible crime. A crime that has been taking place for more than 500 years. The crime against humanity.

A meditation on Exodus and the United States

Tl; dr: The world’s richest failed state is increasingly making its failure official, an inevitable result of its criminal roots. It’s not just the U.S., though, we all have to start thinking of alternatives.

The news coming out of the U.S. in recent years is sad and sickening. With the retirement of Justice Kennedy and his inevitable replacement by a far-right Justice, the damage to American institutions will persist for decades at least and is likely to be permanent.

It may seem strange, but on hearing this last piece of news--which was just a matter of time really, you can only plug the dam with a finger for so long--my mind went to Exodus. I have heard that when Jewish people celebrate their ancestors’ emancipation from slavery in Egypt they also mourn the innocents who suffered in the Ten Plagues that God brought on Egypt. Many Jewish people have also questioned why the plagues were necessary at all, an admirable example of both critical thought and compassion. I can also see why God spent half his time being annoyed with y’all he freed you from slavery and here you are nitpicking his methods

I personally think, though, that it wasn't God's choice to bring the plagues. If we read God as a personification of universal forces, and that’s how I understand these stories as an atheist, the plagues were just the inevitable results of slavery and genocide. God no more brought the plagues than “Mother Earth” is “avenging herself” against humanity with global warming and the depletion of natural resources. These are symbolic ways to describe physical forces at work, except with Exodus we are talking about moral physics, or karma as they say in Buddhism.

In this view, God hardened the Pharaoh’s heart and brought the plagues similarly to how thermodynamics are warming the planet: The rules are simply there, unbreakable and unnegotiable, and the cause is the actions of humanity.

Take the precipitating cause of the plagues, the hardening of the Pharaoh’s heart against letting the enslaved Hebrew people go. Such refusal is a nearly inevitable reaction to institutionalized and profitable slavery, both because freeing the slaves will cause catastrophic economic loss and because an enormous amount of justification and dehumanization are required to make slavery socially and psychologically tolerable.

From the Pharaoh’s stubbornness, itself a consequence of slavery, came the other disasters, the frogs, the locusts and the rest, culminating in a direct callback to the Egyptians’ own crimes of infanticide against the Hebrews--the deaths of their firstborn, from which the Hebrew people were given the ability to save themselves. The story of Exodus has a happy-ish ending with the enslaved people leaving their captivity and setting out for the Promised Land, though the subsequent events are much more complicated. I like how these books don’t stint on the brutality that entailed the fairy-tale promise of the land of milk and honey; the Hebrews were not saved because they were inherently good, rather they were a people like any other just as capable of cruelty and hypocrisy once they had enough power. But that is a discussion for another time.

So what does this have to do with the United States? It’s essentially the same story as the Plagues because you can’t grow a just and well-functioning state from the roots of slavery and genocide any more than you can get wholesome fruit from a poisoned tree.

What’s more, unlike the link between the enslavement of Hebrews and, say, a swarm of locusts, there are direct and observable links between America’s policy of genocide and enslavement and its  failures as a country. The vast tracts of land stolen for Native Americans required an equally vast workforce to make profitable, and slavery was allowed to fill that gap. The accommodation of the slave-owning states with its large numbers of enslaved Africans is the root of much of the distortions in U.S. politics today, including the shameful vestiges of slavery in the text of the U.S. Constitution and, more saliently, the electoral college, which is how Donald Trump could be President of the United States and why conservative rural states have a disproportionate effect in national elections.

This is to say nothing of the gross social and economic injustices that persist long after legal chattel slavery is gone, the white supremacy that split the working class along racial lines and weakened them as a political force, the fact that states with large Black populations are  more reluctant to extend the benefits of health insurance to the population, the crisis of mass incarceration that drains the nation of its human and public resources for the bottom line of private prisons, the war on drugs that has pitted police against the communities they are pledged to protect, the changing of the electoral map in response to the passage of the Civil Rights Act, blatant gerrymandering to corral and limit the political effectiveness disfavored populations, voter suppression against targeted communities, the wholesale abduction of children from their parents, the list goes on.

The brutality, the enslavement, the genocide never stopped. They have come back to become plagues on the general American public, and they have been hurting and will continue to hurt the already exploited and wronged populations the worst. Even God, should he exist and should he wish to, cannot stop an unjust system from crumbling in on itself and taking the guilty and innocent alike with it. Voting for one party over another may slow the decline but cannot shore up a rotten foundation.

I have focused on the United States but the system of exploitation backed by state violence is a global one, and no one alive is free of it. We are paying and will continue to pay in the form of a degrading environment, more unequal societies, and the increasing inability to correct these ills through nonviolent electoral politics.

Physical removal of exploited minorities cannot be a solution this time, even a “voluntary” departure as when the Hebrews left Egypt in Exodus. And just how voluntary is it to leave when your alternatives are slavery and death? The ending of Exodus was bittersweet at best, and the sequels were increasingly violent with the Hebrews, ethnically cleansed out of Egypt, slaughtering and displacing other groups in order to survive.

No, we must all walk away together from the rotting empire or not at all. We must imagine different ways of life and live them. No one serious can pretend this will be an easy process. Our lives will change, our most deeply-held values may have to change, and many of us will die in the process. Chances are we will not muster the necessary willpower until the plagues have run their devastating course--and perhaps not even then. I don’t know if there is a way out or if the cure will be worse than the disease, as in the case of Soviet-style Communism. But we do have to look and look hard, because the state of affairs in the United States should be a warning to the world.

Strict adherence to all provisions of Svalbard Treaty to guarantee good-neighborly relations

Russian and foreign experts are increasingly paying attention to the situation around the Svalbard archipelago, which international legal status is enshrined in the treaty of February 9, 1920, and note the non-compliance with a number of provisions of this document designed to protect the legitimate interests of all states parties to the agreement.

In their opinion, while claiming “full and absolute sovereignty” over Svalbard, Norway ignores such important provisions as the guarantees of “equal liberty of access and entry” to the archipelago and the possibility of conducting commercial and economic operations there “on a footing of absolute equality.”

Thus, the signatory states are concerned about the decision of Oslo to extend the national continental legislation of the country to Svalbard. The law on environmental protection in the archipelago, adopted in 2001, essentially establishes a permissive procedure for economic activity, and in a significant part of its territory it is completely prohibited. The Russian side fears that an even greater expansion of environmental legislation in the future may affect the work of the Arktikugol company, which ensures the operation of the thermal power plant in Barentsburg, without which the inhabitants of the settlement would have to be evacuated due to the harsh climate.

In addition, Norway considers the 200-mile zone, shelf and seabed surrounding Svalbard to be an area not covered by the 1920 treaty, and sets its own rules there, in particular by distributing concession areas to interested oil companies located within the so-called “ Spitsbergen square.” Apart from Russia, other parties to the agreement, including Great Britain, Iceland and Spain, do not agree with this state of affairs.

The most acute problem is caused by the Norwegian ban on the use of helicopters. Oslo’s position is that this kind of transport can only be used for tasks related to the coal industry. Thus, the country’s authorities artificially created a transport monopoly on Svalbard, forcing Russia to use the services of Norwegian carriers to deliver scientists or tourists to the archipelago.

In addition, in accordance with the treaty, the archipelago should not be used for military purposes, however, experts do not rule out that Oslo will attempt to revise the demilitarized status of the archipelago. Various events held in Longyearbyen with the participation of NATO representatives cannot but cause concern for the parties concerned.

Commenting on the details of the centenary agreement, Christopher Rossi, Adjunct faculty member, University of Iowa College of Law, reminded that Norway’s sovereignty is secured by a treaty in return for a number of important conditions.

“The Svalbard Treaty is an unusual document as it accords Norway sovereignty over the archipelago in exchange for equal use by other signatories to the treaty. This quid pro quo is predicated on non-militarization, which on occasion gets called into question by certain weather and safety devices that appear to Russia to have dual use capability,” the expert told PenzaNews.

He also drew attention to the unusual natural conditions of this area.

“The Arctic is a rapidly changing geospace, given climate change and a rapidly receding polar ice cap. Mineral and living resources previously entombed by the ice cap are becoming increasingly available for purposes of extraction. To prevent a coming competition over these resources, and over the waters and undersea shelf adjacent to Svalbard’s territorial sea, states will need to maintain good neighborly relations,” Christopher Rossi explained.

“This prospect could be challenging given Norway’s assertion of sovereignty over these adjacent resources and competing claims by the European Union, Russia, and other states. The Arctic is fast becoming of global interest – beyond the specific interest of the circumpolar states,” he added.

In turn, Pal Steigan, Norwegian politician, publisher, writer, independent entrepreneur in the field of culture and information technology, reminded that the Svalbard treaty was directly influenced by the First World War.

“Even the big powers wanted to limit military activity in the Arctic, so as a neutral country under the world war and a peaceful, democratic country Norway was given sovereignty, but under the condition of seeing to it that the archipelago remained demilitarized. This was a good idea then, and it remains a good idea now. It is very important that Norway remain loyal to the provisions, or else it would open a Pandora’s box of bad events,” the expert said.

According to him, the peaceful and equal presence of states in the archipelago is the only correct way of interaction.

“Potentially the Arctic could become a war zone with direct influence on three continents. This is dangerous indeed. There are rich natural resources in the high north and a rush for them without fetters could drive more conflict and war. So cooperation is the only alternative,” Pal Steigan said.

In his opinion, it is very destructive that the current Norwegian government has let US set up bases on its soil.

“It brings Norway into the crosshairs in a possible war and it damages the trust built in generations. Norway and Russia have never been enemies; neither should they be in the future,” the analyst stressed.

Meanwhile, Clive Williams from the Australian National University also called the desire of the parties to the 1920 treaty to keep the archipelago as a demilitarized territory reasonable.

“The main activities there are said to be coal mining, tourism, and academic research. The Norwegian subsidized coal mining can no longer be justified for environmental reasons, let alone economic reasons, so tourism and research seem to be the most promising sources of income for the less than 3,000 inhabitants,” he suggested.

At the same time, in his opinion, in the current conditions, it is time for the countries to start working to update the provisions of the existing treaty in the field of the peaceful development of the archipelago.

“The best outcome for both the residents and the planet would be a new international treaty that provides better protection of the area from further exploitation, including banning fishing and hunting, and the area’s preservation for future international eco-tourism,” Clive Williams said.

Rachael Johnstone, Professor of Law at University of Akureyri, stressed that all international treaties must be fully respected and upheld.

“To do otherwise is to threaten the very structure of international law and the international security that it brings,” the expert explained.

However, in her opinion, there is no immediate threat to the Svalbard Treaty as all parties are committed to its long-term success – in fact, it has endured for an entire century without significant modification.

“There are different views on how it should be interpreted and applied in the maritime areas around the archipelago – in light of changes in the law of the sea in the past century – but these are managed peacefully. Furthermore, there is no challenge to the Svalbard Treaty from non-parties – in other words, there are no third states objecting to the principles of the treaty or challenging Norwegian sovereignty,” Rachael Johnstone added.

She also reminded that the treaty prohibits the building of naval bases or fortifications and use of the archipelago for “warlike purposes” but this does not preclude any “dual use” technology as long as it is not used for “warlike purposes.”

“The Svalbard Treaty is only one part of a complex web of cooperation in the Arctic. The considerations of good-neighbourliness and [hostile] language – let alone actions- that can be interpreted as “aggressive” apply to all international cooperation. Military posturing by governments is often aimed at a domestic audience in order to win support but can have negative impacts on international cooperation. Sometimes, politicians do not think it through; but at other times, it is a calculated strategy. They will risk international trust in order to win votes at home,” the professor noted.

According to her, there is a strong will amongst the Arctic States and Arctic Peoples to keep the lines of communication open, even when there are deep disagreements on other issues.

“The Svalbard Treaty is a great example of this – something that has withstood a World War and a Cold War and now includes parties as deeply opposed on global, political and security issues as the US and North Korea,” the expert concluded.

Source: https://penzanews.ru/en/analysis/67096-2021

Photo: Hannes Grobe, Wikipedia.org

Empathy, pt.1

Fun Fact #1: The Italian name for Easter, “Pasqua”, is derived from the Hebrew name for Passover, “Pesach”.

Fun Fact #2: The Italian name for Passover is “Pasqua ebraica”, which translates to “Jewish Easter”.

Truthfully, neither of those facts is especially fun, but they do illustrate beautifully the way we use language to place those with whom we share our world as others, as outside the land in which they live and the legal system that should protect them as equals.

In this case, which goes back to when the Roman Empire ruled all of the Mediterranean - “the center of the world” - early Christians sought to separate themselves from their religion’s Jewish roots by separating Jews from their own holiday. The Roman Christians married the Jewish celebration of survival and rebirth to their own celebration of the new year - what we now call “April Fool’s Day” - and the rest is actual history.

We do this kind of thing all the time. It isn’t just taking things from other cultures and making them our own, it is divorcing those people from our culture in order to deny them credit for their creations. It is a way to deny accountability to them. If they remain outside of us, we may value them and their contributions less.

Which, sadly, brings us to the trial of Derek Chauvin for the murder of George Floyd. This past Passover week, Chauvin’s defense attorney, Eric Nelson, put on a full, despicable show, attempting not only to blame the victim for his own murder but the witnesses, too.

It’s how Nelson chose to portray the traumatized witnesses, two of them in particular, that reveals an unpleasant truth about how we continue to choose to separate certain people from us and how he hopes the jury will, too.

Genevieve Hansen is an EMT, someone not only trained to save lives but inclined to do so, as her choice of career should attest. Not only was she an eyewitness to a helpless man being suffocated on a city street, she attempted to help him and, arguably, the police officers harming him.

Hansen, however, is a woman, something Nelson sought to weaponize against her. He portrayed her not as a concerned citizen with training and expertise attempting to help, but as a nosy, pushy, busy-body forcing herself into a situation and interfering, exactly the kind of stereotype often used to attack many women’s credibility.

In using this attack, Nelson not only sought to separate Hansen from her skills, experience, and value as a medical professional, and with those her credibility as a witness, he sought to place blame on her for antagonizing the police into inaction.

Think about that. Nelson’s suggestion, his defense of his client, was that because Hansen was so insistent that they should stop, they instead became less likely to stop. If only she had kept her mouth shut…

This “double-down” defense isn’t something new. Small children use it all the time. And politicians. Remember when the Republicans in Congress complained about “hurt feelings” to justify not voting for President Biden’s cabinet pick despite, well, all of Trump’s presidency? And how Biden failing to come to them on his Covid-19 was used to justify voting against that? This was it in a courtroom.

What Nelson attempted to do to Donald Williams, who testified before Hansen, was even worse.

Williams is professional Mixed Martial Arts fighter seen in multiple videos of the murder trying to reason with the police officers to get them to stop. He could be seen in those videos growing more and more frustrated the longer Chauvin continued pressing his knee on Floyd’s neck, but notably he never lost his temper, and, just as important, only once, early on, did he even step off the sidewalk. He was never not aware of the limits of what he could do. He never not aware of what would be done to him should he defy those limits. He was, in more than one sense, restrained.

Nelson, however, sought to portray Williams as an angry, aggressive Black man, a loud mouthed, taunting troublemaker, a stereotype meant to remove all empathy we might have for him and anything he might have to say. He, too, was blamed for making the officers afraid and thus reinforcing their decision not to stop suffocating Floyd.

With each witness, Nelson’s hope was that his passive-aggressive questioning could draw out an aggressive response, because that could offer justification for a jury member to choose to side with his client. He failed completely with Williams, whose composure may well have been helped by his fight training, but who, like Hansen, also very likely came to his profession because of the value he had already placed on that discipline in his life.

Hansen, on the other hand, fell into a trap, first attempting to complete a sentence and then insisting, when told to stop talking by the judge, that that was all she was attempting to do. The judge seemingly fell into the same trap, speaking to her not as an inexperienced witness who spoke a few too many words attempting to clarify her response but as someone who was aggressively picking a fight, which she wasn’t. The video of their exchange shows as much.

The videos of both Hansen and Williams at the time of the murder likewise shows two visibly non-threatening people trying to draw police officers’ attention to the threat posed to a human life. Were they frustrated? Of course, they were. Were they increasingly agitated? Shouldn’t they have been given what was at stake? Were they angry at the end of it? Again, having attempted to save a life and having repeatedly been kept from doing that, shouldn’t they have been?

To ask those questions is to seek to remove empathy from their decision making. Those seen witnessing George Floyd’s murder clearly saw him as a man, someone with a right to life. To ask eyewitnesses in that situation to divorce themselves from that value should be impossible. At least, it should be if we want to have the society we keep telling ourselves we want to have.

For the Eric Nelsons of this world, it’s all a game. You do what you must to get your client to an acquittal or at least a hung jury. You blame the victim. You blame the witnesses. You prey on bigotry and seek to focus attention on what makes them different, what makes them others, and what makes them, sadly, disposable.

That, they would gladly tell you, is the way the game is played. That it is seen that way is yet another attempt to remove empathy from decision making and with it accountability.

The continued attempts to portray the officers merely as servants to a higher authority are no different. When they claim that there were rules that they had to follow and obey, they seek to separate themselves from accountability for what they did. They also seek to portray those challenging those actions as disrespecting the law and a threat regardless of their empathic intentions and lack of aggression.

That portrayal, of course, is a lie. The trial’s first witness, Jena Scurry, is a 911 dispatcher. She saw the murder through a live security camera feed, one the jury will have seen, and she was horrified. Nelson could not and would not attack her credibility. He wouldn’t dare. That he then went on to use racist and sexist stereotypes to attack Williams and Hansen is all the more offensive for it.

That Scurry, Chauvin’s former supervisor, and the Minneapolis Chief of Police, all working within a culture that actively casts anyone not in uniform as an “other”, will have testified against Chauvin to deny that portrayal says more than we could have believed just ten months ago.

Even more than that, it establishes a precedent, one that should be applied to departments everywhere. The idea that the police may be fallible and must be held to the highest standard of accountability for their behavior must be encouraged to take root and must be nurtured so that it may grow and flourish.

We hear the word “empathy” and think it means something soft and weak, that to be empathic is to be soft and weak. What those denigrating it and fighting against it want us to reject is not weakness but accountability, because without empathy there is no accountability. We cannot have one without the other.

Whatever our views on religion and the concept of a higher power or authority in our lives, when we look at holidays such as Passover and Easter, we should ask ourselves about what our ancestors, whether they observed one or the other or neither, thought about coming out of a cold, difficult winter. What values did they embrace and why?

These holidays tell us that they valued coming together and staying together and being able to rely on each other. They brought food to a common table and shared it. They reminded themselves to be grateful for what little they had as they shared it and because they shared it.

They made sure to recognize each other as equals, with an equal voice and an equal right to safety and shelter. They even left an extra place at the table, just in case.

The only ones who who rejected, if any were rejected at all, were those who sought to place others outside, those who sought to keep more for themselves, and those who sought to exploit others for their own profit. 

The spring is a time of building something new. As we struggle to remember and to hold onto these values, let us ask ourselves what kind of world we want to live in. Is it one in which we make a game of denying others a voice? Is it one in which we justify racism or sexism as a means to an end? Or is it one in which we hold ourselves accountable to others because that is what we ask of them in return?

- Daniel Ward

Infamous Quotes of African Autocrats and Their Cohorts

Sekou Toure, the late and former president of Guinea (1958-1984):

 "We prefer to live in poverty in liberty to riches in slavery." In 1958.

 “Before independence, there were 12 political parties in Guinea. Now there is only one: Le Parti Democratique de Guinea (PDG). Anyone who says I am a dictator because we have only one party and no opposition doesn't understand what we are trying to accomplish. The party is not a goal, but a method to achieve the goal of human freedom. Our constitution permits complete freedom for the existence of Opposition parties. However, in the last election, 91 percent of the people voted for the PDG. The Opposition received only five or six percent of the votes, and decided to join our party. This meant reconciliation, and two of their leaders received responsible posts. Actually, the Opposition's point of view can be expressed much better within the party than from outside it (Italiaander, Rolf, The New Leaders of Africa. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice‑Hall: 1961; p.146.

****************************

 Mengistu Haile Mariam, former PM of Ethiopia (1974-1991):

 “We are now on the threshold of the formation of the People's Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. The constitution was drafted by representatives of the people themselves. It has been submitted to all Ethiopian citizens including those living abroad, and it will be promulgated after it is put to a referendum. Such democratic participation is unparalleled in the history of Ethiopia. Once the constitution assumes its final shape, Ethiopia will never again be ruled by the personal absolutism of any one individual or a handful of individuals. The victory of socialism is inevitable!" (Time, Aug 4, 1986; p. 34).

 ****************************

 Flight Lt. Jerry Rawlings, former president of Ghana (1981-2000):

 On handing over power and returning Ghana to democratic rule in 1988:

 “Hand over power to who?”

 On the performance of his own military regime, eight years after seizing power:

 “Despite probes, Committees of Enquiry, dismissals and prosecutions of wrongdoers, despite restructuring exercises, new management, the provision of new equipment and capital, many of our organizations, state enterprises and corporations continue to swallow public money and fail to provide the services and goods which we expect of them, and also fail to pay their tax obligations, dividends and other expected revenues . .

 Too many people in these outfits, from management to workforce, still steal, embezzle and cheat . . . They still do not care about waste, carelessness, inefficiency and lack of maintenance . . . There are innumerable abuses including the misuse of fuel, vehicles and even office stationery. In some public institutions and organizations, managements have developed a tendency to spend resources carelessly on frivolous and luxury office and residential furnishing” (People's Graphic, Jan 6, 1990).

 ****************************

 General Yakubu Gowon, former president of Nigeria (1966-1974)

 in a lecture at the Oxford and Cambridge Club entitled "Charting Nigeria's Path to Democracy in this Decade and Beyond."

 “Nigeria's problems started shortly after independence because the army allowed itself to be polluted and politicised, hence the incessant coups and countercoups. The military intervention in politics in 1966 started a chain of reaction whose deleterious effects are still relevant in our national life even today, so many years after the ill-advised putsch . . .

 The military should not get itself involved in politics. The sooner they leave the stage the better, or else the people may rise up against them (West Africa, June 11-17, 1990; p. 993).

 ****************************

 Major General Joseph Momoh, former president of Sierra Leone (1985-1992)

 In his own admission in public, Maj. Gen. Joseph Momoh stated that after 5 years in office, he had achieved nothing. This confession is particularly correct. Under his leadership, Sierra Leone deteriorated immeasurably, but Momoh amassed considerable wealth in real [estate] property and cash, both locally and overseas. This ugly truth about Momoh equally applies to his political acolytes--ministers, party functionaries, heads of parastatals, his close political advisers, some high commissioners and ambassadors, and others too numerous to mention. Knowingly and shamelessly, Momoh headed a corrupt regime and, morally weak, was unable to take appropriate action against any of his ministers for corruption (West Africa, May 18-24, 1992; p. 840).

 ****************************

 Hastings Banda, the late and former President of Malawi (1961-1994):

 “One party, one leader, one government and no nonsense about it” (The Washington Post, June 16, 1999; A24).

 "I want to be blunt. As long as I am here and you say I must be your president, you have to do what I want, what I like, and not what you like and what you want. Kamuzu is in charge...That is my way" (The Washington Post, Sept 9, 1991; p. A20).

 He insisted that any reference to him must employ the full title: His Excellency the Life President Ngwazi Dr. H. Kamuzu Banda. He warned opposition exiles that should they dare return to Malawi, they would become meat for his crocodiles. And no nonsense about that!

 Banda "told dissidents in exile that they would become `meat for crocodiles' if they came home" (The Economist, March 21, 1992; p. 46). Indeed, “suspected opponents were imprisoned by the tens of thousands and, from time to time, fed to crocodiles. The bullet-riddled bodies of ministers accused of disloyalty were found in `mysterious car accidents’” (The Washington Post, June 16, 1999; A24).

 ****************************

 Kwame Nkrumah, the Late President of Ghana (1957-1966:

 “We must achieve in a decade what it took others a century” in 1957 [Comment: Ghana is still at it]

“The independence of Ghana is meaningless unless linked up with the total liberation of Africa” in 1958.  [Comment: Ghana’s independence is still meaningless. At independence, we traded one set of masters (white colonialists) for another set (black neo-colonialists) and the oppression and exploitation of the African people continued unabated]

 “Industry rather than agriculture is the means by which rapid improvement in Africa's living standards is possible” in 1957. [Comment: Africa’s industrialization spree failed; state-owned enterprises were sold off in the 1980s, Agriculture was neglected, leading to huge expenditures – about $25 billion annually – on food imports. Africa used to feed itself in the 1960s]

 “We would be hampering our advance of socialism if we were to encourage the growth of Ghanaian private capitalism in our midst” in 1964. Socialism is an alien economic ideology and failed miserably in every African country which experimented with it – from Benin, Ethiopia, Mali to Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe]

 “The Convention People’s Party (C[[\\PP) is the state and the state is the party. Socialism is the objective of social, industrial and economic programs” in 1973 [Comment: The state does not belong to any one particular individual or political party]

 ****************************

 The Late President Felix Houphouet-Boigny of Ivory Coast (1960-1993):

 “Colonialism was good for Africa. Thanks to it, we have one united Ivorian nation, not 60 tribes who know nothing about each other” in 1983.

 “There is no number 1, 2, 3 or 4. In Cote d'Ivoire there is only a number one: that's me and I don't share my decisions,” in 1988

 "I do have assets abroad. But they are not assets belonging to Cote d'Ivoire. What sensible man does not keep his assets in Switzerland, the whole world's bank? I would be crazy to sacrifice my children's future in this crazy country without thinking of their future" (La Croix, Paris, March 13, 1990).

 ****************************

 The Late President Mobutu Sese Seko of Zaire (now Congo DR) (1965-1997):

 "European businessmen were the ones who said, 'I sell you this thing for $1,000, but $200 will be for your (Swiss bank) account” in 1988

 "Yes, I have a fair amount of money. However, I would estimate it to total less than $50 million. What is that after 22 years as head of state of such a big country?" (World Development Forum, No. 9, 1988; p. 3

 If you steal, do not steal too much at a time. You may be arrested. Steal cleverly (yiba na mayele), little by little” in and address to party regulars in 1991.

 ****************************

Kenneth Kaunda, former President of Zambia (1964-1991):

 "Why should anyone in public life impose himself on the people? The decisions must be made by the `people. In my case, it was a call for change. The tide was for change in the country. I respected it. Look at me now. You are watching a relaxed old man. I'm very happy with what I'm doing.” (The New York Times, Jan 31, 2002; p.A4).

 Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe (1980 – Still in power):

 “In Zimbabwe, socialism means what is mine is mine but what is yours we share until it all becomes mine” -- A minister in Robert Mugabe's cabinet in the 1990s.

 "We now have to admit that we are reaping the bitter fruits of our unwholesome and negative behavior. Our image as leaders of the party has been tarnished. The people are crying for our blood and certainly are entitled to do so after watching our actions" (New African, Dec 1989; p. 20).

 ****************************

 President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda (1986 – Still in power):

 “No African head of state should be in power for more than 10 years” in 1986.

 “We should not practice dictatorship under the guise of independence, because independence does not mean dictatorship. Without democracy, there can be no development. Democracy is the sine qua non for the effective administration of a modern state” in July 1990.

 "There is no way you can develop the economy without democracy" in a speech before the OAU in Addis Ababa (New York Times, July 10, 1990; p. A3).

 “Without democracy, there is no way you can bring about development because people cannot speak freely, they cannot criticize wrong programs, they cannot criticize corruption, and without criticism things are bound to rot” in a speech at Makerere University on June 8, 1991.

"I'm not ready to hand over power to people or groups of people who have no ability to manage a nation" during the presidential elections in March 2001 (The New York Times, March 11, 2001; p.A6).

 "I will punish areas that failed to support me in the March election by reducing government services there" (The Washington Post, Sept 2, 2001; p.A20).

 "The Movement (NRM) shall rule for more than 60 years. Apart from British colonialists who ruled Uganda for 60 years, no other regime has been successful in holding onto power like the Movement. We are going to break the British record. If Besigye (opposition leader) tried subversion he would be dealt with” Museveni’s Defense Minister, Amama Mbabazi,(The Monitor, Feb 1, 2002).

 “All the poor should be arrested because they hinder us from performing our development duties. It is hard to lead the poor, and the poor cannot lead the rich. They should be eliminated."

 n  Uganda’s Agriculture Minister, the late Kibirige Ssebunya, (New Vision, Kampala, Dec 15, 2004). He advised local leaders to arrest poor people in their areas of jurisdiction.

 ****************************

 Laurent Gbagbo, former president of Ivory Coast, (2000 – 2011 and now on trial at The Hague):

 "We are the country with the most millionaires, which means we have the most thieves. The more Houphouet ages, the more his collaborators sense an end to the regime, and the more they steal" (West Africa, April 3-9, 1989).

 "I was arrested on April 11, 2011 under the French bombs . . . It's the French army that did the work," describing how he was arrested at his first appearance before the ICC at The Hague.

 ***************************

 General Ibrahim Babangida, former President of Nigeria (1985-1993):

 “Ever since the majority of our countries became independent in the 1960s we have conducted our lives as if the world owes us a living" in 1990.

 “Every military regime is a fraud. Anybody who heads a military regime subverts the wishes of the people.” in The African Observer, Jan 18-31, 1999, 6).

 "Two decades ago, the central challenge of the Nigerian society and economy that we grappled with, was the big, inefficient State that had a stranglehold on the society, occupied the commanding heights of the economy; and behaved like a general business enterprise, producing and selling myriads of commodities running airlines; managing commercial banks and owning cement factories. Naturally, it ended up as a colossal failure in this regard, since it neither had the bottom-line sense of a business enterprise nor the residual claimant motivation to ensure proper and efficient management of the societal resources under its care.

Today, however, Nigeria faces a qualitatively different challenge. The reality in our country is that of an abysmal lack of governance. The State has virtually become overwhelmed by multi-dimensional crisis constraining its ability to minister to the needs of the people.” (The Vanguard, Lagos, Sept 16, 2010).

 ****************************

 Daniel arap Moi, former President of Kenya (1978-202):

 "I call on all ministers, assistant ministers and every other person to sing like parrots. You ought to sing the song I sing. If I put a full stop, you should put a full stop. This is how the country will move forward,” in 1990

 To move forward in the fight against AIDS,  President Moi "pleaded with Kenyans to refrain from sex even for only two years, saying that was the best way to check the epidemic" (Reuters, July 13, 2001).

 "You [women] can achieve more, can get more but because of your little minds, you cannot get what you are expected to get!" said President Moi as he opened a regional women's seminar in Nairobi on March 6, 2001 (BBC News On Line, March 12, 2001). Perhaps, senility had set in.

 ****************************

 Lt/General Omar al-Bashir of Sudan (1989 – Still in power):

“Under Shari’a Law, theft is punishable by amputation of the right hand or, if there are more than three people or weapons involved, cross amputation: right hand, left foot. My junta will destroy anyone who stands in the way. . .and amputate [the limbs of] those who betray the nation" in 1990.

****************************

 Julius Nyerere, the late and former president of Tanzania in 1997: “Africa will have to rely upon Africa. If African Governments do Africa will develop; if they don't Africa will be doomed.”

 “In my view, three factors militate against economic and social growth in Africa. The first of these is corruption. This is a widespread cancer in Africa. The second factor which makes business reluctant to invest in Africa is political instability. But even if African countries were to become paragons of good governance and political stability, despite the corruptive and disruptive nature of poverty itself, foreign investors would not be coming rushing to Africa. Most African countries still lack the necessary physical infrastructure and the education and training in skills needed for rapid economic and social development. This, in my view, is the third and the most important factor militating against significant flows of foreign direct investment to Africa.” (PanAfrican News, September 1998).

 ****************************

 Joseph Kabila, the President of Congo DR in 2001:

 “There is a government. I am the president of this country, and we are in charge of whatever is going in the country. Is it surprising? Since I came into office I've never taken orders from anybody, nobody whatsoever." (The New York Times, April 15, 2001; p.3)

 ****************************

 Olusegun Obasanjo, former President of Nigeria in 2002 (1999 – 2007):

 “Corrupt African leaders have stolen at least $140 billion (£95 billion) from their people in the decades since independence.”

****************************

Colonel Muammar Khaddafi, the late President of Libya (1969 – 2011):

 “The administration has failed and the state economy has failed, enough is enough” in 2008 (The New York Times, March 19, 2009; p.A7).

 ******************************

Moussa Traore, the late and former president of Mali: Asked to resign on March 25, 1991, he retorted: "I will not resign, my government will not resign, because I was elected not by the opposition but by all the people of Mali!!!!

 But two days later when he tried to flee the country, he was grabbed by his own security agents and sent to jail. From there, he lamented: "My fate is now in God's hands."

 ******************************

 Levy Mwanawasa, the late and former president of Zambia (2002 – 2008):

 I failed Zambia, says president. President Mwanawasa has said he is "tired" of his office Zambia's president has apologised to his country for failing to tackle poverty, but insisted he will stay in office until elections are due in 2006.

 "It has not been possible to reduce poverty and I feel sad about it," Levy Mwanawasa said, describing the issue as "one of my failures. . . Unfortunately, if Zambians made a mistake to elect me as president, they are stuck with me." (news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4163475.stm)

 ******************************

 Meles Zenawi the Late and former PM of Ethiopia (1991 – 2012)

 “Democracy should not be a toy for the elite to play with. It should involve even the so-called "ignorant peasant." Because only when you involve the bulk of the people can you have a real check to central authority” in October 1991..

 In an Interview:

"Good day.  My name is Gobano Madnamaraso." "When our leaders are young - most of our African leaders - they are visionaries.  They have wonderful visions for our continent.  They are admirable.  The speak good, they do good.  But something happens to them once they are seated in those chairs of power.  My question is:  We want to see our continent change, but we are afraid of this power that corrupts even some of the best, most admirable leaders on our continent, and what is this poison that happens in these chairs of power and how can we prevent it? " Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi pointed to greedy foreign corporations as a main driver of corruption. "What is the poison that leaders face when you go to national palaces, and transforms people with vision sometimes into ordinary thieves?  Let's start with the total amount of loot in Africa, and what our role as leaders in that loot[ing] is," said Meles. "The vast majority of the loot[ing] is done by properly organized companies through all sorts of accounting gimmicks." Meles said African leaders are forced to be facilitators for foreign companies who demand favors in return for their investment that might means jobs for their people. "It's a difficult thing to manage because our bargaining cards are very limited," he said. "We need these companies to create jobs, in order for them to come to Africa.  The image is very negative, so the risk is artificially spiked.  And if the risk is artificially spiked, the return has to be commensurate with the risk.  And so it's difficult to attract them without extraordinary returns." The Ethiopian leader said that sometimes leaders give in to temptation. "Sometimes we facilitate without being paid," he said. "At other times we say, 'Okay, if your family's farm is being looted, why not join in?'  I think that is the most insidious form of corruption.  It affects everybody, including those whose hands are not in the till."VOA, May 10, 2012

http://www.voanews.com/english/news/africa/-Ethiopias-Meles-Blames-African-Corruption-on-Foreign-Investors-151033585.html

 ******************************

President Isaiah Afewerki of Eritrea (1993 -- Still in power):

 "What is free press? There is no free press anywhere. It's not in England; it's not in the United States. We'd like to know what free press is in the first place." (BBC, Sept 11, 2004). He closed all the independent newspapers and arrested most private journalists. The rest fled the country.

2020

saturday night

Biden up by 7% in iowa - says one new poll of 800 people. 48% to 41%. is this poll right and all others wrong? is this fake news pushed by the right?

it makes PA the tie-breaker. and PA is very close. So are Georgia, Arizona, Texas, Michigan, Nevada, Wisconsin, Florida. All these states will most likely break the same way - decisively victory for one of them. Is it more likely that the right takes over or the left?

If history is any guide - the right will take over. The left only wins decisively once in a while. The left's cultural victories are decisive but political victories, not so much. Every once in a while, the left does win - like the continent. But, most of the time, the right wins - in all the continents - not just in Europe. It feels like a very self-centered world in which the time i live through is one of those rare times when the left wins decisively. More likely, this will be like all those other times when the right wins yet another war and extracts a harrowing price. Perhaps, IA is a harbinger.

There is genuine energy in the 30% that the right does not identify with. They will show up in much higher numbers. There is also genuine energy in the right wing. They will show up in force - equally so. The moderates on both sides are very energized. They may not protest, but they will show up. And, whom are they voting for? Maybe enough of them do not identify with the right and show up in much bigger numbers. We will know when the wave breaks.

One of the many outcomes of this Schrodinger’s cat is that the left wins decisively. That could mean so many good things without pissing off the business too much. Techies love the left but are scared of the right. The right does not have the edge in tech. And business is techie these days. So, a decisive victory could mean a lot of awesome, perfectly constitutional legislative remedies to historical injustices. 

But, the more likely scenario is that things have to get worse before they get better. So, the right will win all 3 branches and proceed to enforce its will on the rest of the world. They have the $ and the guns. Trump could very well end up being the father of the American Empire. The first emperor. The supreme court will be packed with 13 justices - 10 repubilcans and 3 democrats. All the right lands will be gerrymandered. Elections can become a farce within 4 years.

Who will stop it from getting worse? There is no other nation with the power to stop them. Hitler had the USA. There is no USA that can out-USA USA now. A hundred years ago - there were multiple peer powers. Today, there is only one power.

The only thing that can stop this runaway right wing train with the American Empire as the engine - is nature.

---

sunday night

It seems highly possible that all the wavering states break the same way. Their behavior could turn out to be very correlated. The people who stay at home may be the same kind in all states. Breaking left is highly possible - biden, congress, and the senate. It would likely affect state elections too - continuing the tide of competitive improvement in state legislatures.

A complete control of the left over the law-making machinery is entirely plausible. And there is much old ground that can be reclaimed through laws. Cannabis, Civil rights, Abortion. Title IX, Immigration, Election infrastructure, regulations, etc. 

If two branches gang up on a third branch - it is not an even battle. If the congress and the president decide to pack the court, there is nothing that the SC can do to stop it. Notice that Biden has not ruled it out and he had promised to clarify his position before election day. I wonder if he will play his cards close or go big to get the base.

On the other hand, breaking right is highly possible too. Trump and the Senate stay republican. This would empower the right to no end. The project of American Empire would go full steam ahead. The right wing of today is not isolationist in the same way as the Nazi-era right of US. Those guys wanted to stay aloof from peers - these guys want to stay in splendid isolation - imposing their will on the whole world and exploiting resources like it is a race against the clock. The old practices of separate will come back; social injustice will get much worse. The British Empire with today’s tech.

It feels oddly calm even as I feel the wave is breaking big - one way or the other. The uncertainty makes it hard to feel happy about the prospects of Biden victory. The uncertainty makes it easy to feel scared about the prospects of Trump factory. The odd calm is perhaps the onset of the numbness needed to withstand the wave of fear and loathing that will wash over in case of Trump victory. After the numbing will no doubt come the regrouping. The right has risen. We are in for the long haul.

There will be recriminations in hindsight. But, I will need to put it behind me. I will need to put the loathing behind me too. There will be many people who will go to the right, once it rises. We will need to live with them. I will need to bring back my old values about how to be friends with right-leaning people while still being true to myself.

There will be temptations to go extreme. I do not have to be as cautious as I have been all my life. I can be vocal. I can become the thorn in people’s sides. But, I have to avoid these urges to signal virtue. Nothing is to be gained by feeling virtuous. Better to be in human company also, rather than only in my own head.

I feel that I have reached the end of imagination. I do not expect the right to hold back in any way. And, they have so many weapons they have never used. I do not expect them to exercise restraint. They are firm adherents of scorched earth tactics. Overwhelming power. Shock and Awe. SDI. They will not hesitate to bomb China or iran to bits. I do not think the US Military can stop them. There are enough in the US Military who support the right. Expect a major purge of the top level command in the military.

I feel that I have reached the end of imagination I do not expect the right to hold back in any way on the domestic front either. They will enact Christianity as the first among equals religion. Ten commandments, prayer, abortion. They will vent their fury on people like Brij - trans - who have not yet reached the level of LGB in mainstream, They will vent their fury on immigrants. They will push wages down - but unequally. While men’s wages will go down less; the rest will go down more. They will go to any lengths to ensure congress victory in 2022 - gerrymander after 2020 census, suppress vote,...

But, when it comes to the left winning - I do not feel at the end of imagination at all. Stories and novels and sagas remain to be written about how a more just society can be made with more just laws. It is a fascinating human endeavor. What are the just laws I want?

But, right now - it seems untimely to dwell on that.

-------------------------------------

Thursday night.

There is a lightness in my step. A lifting of a cloud in the head. There is a feeling of a return to a good place. Mere certainty of Trump’s loss has brought clarity back to the mind.

It is a relief that I can ignore Trump again. He is so infectiously negative. I marvel at how his 3 old kids have turned out so positive. He stirs up everyone’s negative nerves - whether sad or mad. Never glad.

Trump and Perdue are pegged - thankfully in GA, sadly in other places like KA, NC, MT, IA. The center left wins the presidency and now - the left left has to win the Senate by winning GA again. And, Biden has to get out the base in GA.

GA January may have an even bigger turnout than this time around. It will be an epic battle between the left and the right. A totally different test than this election, Trump will be dousing GA with the flames for two months. Churches could get burnt. Muslims could get rounded up as terrorists. Professors may get fired. All these attacks on civil society could juice up his base to an even higher participation. The backlash to Kamala's win and Trump’s loss could impose a whole new test on GA.

The left has the blacks. They will turn out 100%. They have been working the system. They know the importance of now. John Lewis will be brought up again and again. Biden will talk about LBJ. He will have to turn left. He cannot sit on his haunches and solve just Covid. He will have to spend political capital, perhaps burn some Republican bridges. He will bring out the base.

The left has minorities. Kamala could reach out to Indians - if she can convince more of them to forego their prejudices and economic thinking - maybe the Indians could be a help. These two segments, in spite of their turnout and strengths are no match for the white right.

It all comes down to the left-right split in the whites. GA 2021 is yet another civil war battle. And fittingly, GA is the location of the battle. The white left will turn out big. The youth vote will skyrocket. The senior turnout will get even higher. But, will enough white lefties show up in the fight against the 100% turnout in the white right? I think Biden can do it.

We cannot claim to know what this test will reveal. Such an honest test of the left-right split has never been conducted in any society. No one can predict what happens if there is a 100% turnout. The next few months will be full of drama. There is no return to normalcy. Trump will do atrocities that will shake me up. The Right is not going to suddenly give up. There is no permanent win in my lifetime. GA 2021 will provide an amazingly honest look at the left-right split in the whites.  I cannot know whether I will like the test results. No point in thinking about that.

It is still untimely to think of what kind of just laws I want. First, get clarity on what the next two months will bring. Pendulum of emotions. Trump will stir up bad stuff and that is actually very good for the cause. Biden will have to spend political capital on the base, instead of winning the center, like he did in 2020 elections. Seeing a prez do that will be very satisfying. A further step towards an old sjw’s dream. But, the good and the bad will be happening at the same time.

It’s time to take a Biden landslide seriously

Trump may recover but he could be overwhelmed

Donald Trump has always treated his presidency as a game show; one where success is measured in ratings and dollars. Controversy is to be welcomed: it keeps attention on him and his fans love it. As politics, it’s been relatively successful – enough so to win him the presidency, even if his approval figures have never been much to write home about and the mid-terms were a serious set-back.

Events, however, have a habit of sorting the serious politicians from those in it for the applause. The presidency is a wonderful stage but it’s also an exposed summit – and when a crisis hits, there are few places to hide. Which may be why Trump has found these last few months so difficult: his pantomime CEO Apprentice schtick is of neither practical nor political use against a pandemic. The public expects, and needs a leader to govern. In Trump, the US does not have one.

All of which may go to explain why the incumbent is trailing badly in the polls. The RCP average puts Joe Biden 9.5% ahead, close to double the lead a month ago. Trump’s job approval rating is down at -13.5, the lowest all year. Polls released this week have him trailing in Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Arizona, N Carolina, Pennsylvania, Florida, Georgia – and Texas. Trump won all nine of those state in 2016, which between them account for a mighty 171 Electoral College Votes: well over half his entire total.

True, the numbers in Texas and Georgia were tight (1 and 2 per cent respectively), and Trump led in one of the four polls from N Carolina this week (by 3%, he trailed by 2, 9 and 2 in the others), but however you cut it, if the election was tomorrow, Biden would win by a landslide.

Which begs the question, is there value to be had betting on that – to which the answer is: quite possibly. Both Betfair (fixed odds) and Paddy Power are offering 6/1 that Trump will win between 101-150 Electoral College votes, which is exactly where he’d end up if he lost the above nine states.

Polls, of course, are snapshots, not predictions. Is it realistic to think that there won’t be a Trump revival between now and the beginning of November? Or more accurately: how likely is it that there’ll be a Trump revival? After all, while it’d be nice for the bet to come in, 6/1 bets don’t have to land every time to make a profit.

Until recently, I’ve always rated Trump as a highly effective negative campaigner, and Biden as a candidate with enough weaknesses to exploit that the race ought again to be close and given a fair wind (and procedural chicanery in legal but discreditable voter suppression methods), Trump might win a second term.

However, while that might still come about, I’m beginning to doubt it. For one thing, the negative campaign against Biden is all over the place. While it is a legitimate tactic to throw a lot of mud and see what sticks, that conclusion should have been drawn by now. Trump and the Republicans keep returning half-heartedly to Biden’s age (4 years more than Trump’s) and his mental lapses. But unless Biden provides the evidence to make that attack stick, it’s not likely to be very effective.

Questioning Biden’s mental ability also sets public expectations of the Democrat low for the debates. In truth, Biden handled himself more than adequately through the latter part of the primaries, when there were only a few candidates remaining. We shouldn’t take too much store from a couple of bad early debates when the front-runner inevitably gets a lot of incoming and because of time constraints, has disproportionately little time to respond. Trump, by contrast, has not engaged in a debate on equal terms for almost four years.

It’s a decent rule-of-thumb that in most elections, a candidate or party with a substantial lead will see it decline by election day. Those with a lead rarely extend them further to peak on polling day. But we don’t know that Biden has peaked yet. While political gravity may pull Biden down, the point and time from which he falls is yet far from clear.

And then there are events. One of the striking current figures is that Trump’s rating on the economy (again using the RCP average) is +4.4 – well above his general rating and even more above his rating on handling the coronavirus pandemic. It was the economy that Trump, probably rightly, saw at the start of the year as his ticket to re-election but that prospect has taken a massive hit with the Covid-19 crisis.

We might well ask why Trump is polling so well (relatively) on the economy. One part of it might well be that the extremely generous (or costly, if you prefer) support package has no doubt significantly cushioned the blow to many Americans, those who’ve not lost their jobs. As in other countries, despite the intensity of the recession, it doesn’t yet feel like one. Yet.

Except that whereas other countries are re-opening having significantly reduced their number of Covid-19 cases, numbers in the US barely declined at all: the focus just shifted from one part of the country to another – and in those places, the epidemic is now rapidly intensifying.

Yesterday saw the highest daily number of new cases in the US yet: more than 47,000 – an increase of more than 7,000 on the day before (which was itself a new record). Some thirteen states have set records this week for their 7-day average of new cases, including Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, and Texas. That’s four of the key swing states we mentioned earlier, plus the largest in the country. Florida alone recorded more cases yesterday than the UK has recorded on any single day of the outbreak – and Florida’s population is less than a third that of the UK. Note that Jacksonville, Florida is due to host most of the Republican convention in two months’ time.

It’s hard to see any outcome here other than more prolonged shut-downs, leading to a great deal more economic damage, particularly given that many of the states suffering most have large tourist sectors and we’re just entering the peak summer season; or such a surge in Covid-19 cases that local healthcare systems are overwhelmed (already an acknowledged risk in places like Austin, Texas). Given Trump’s championing of early re-opening, it should not be a hard task for the Democrats to pin blame on him for both the additional deaths and the job losses and bankruptcies that will follow a new round of restrictions.

There’s also the serious risk of a lot more violence over the summer, as multiple issues converge, which could play to Trump’s advantage if he can show himself to be getting on top of the situation rather than inflaming it and grandstanding.

Given all that, plus what we already know about the nature of Trump’s administration and character, it seems much better than a 1-in-7 chance that the polls get worse for him over the next four months, although not yet an evens one. The 6/1 on the 101-150 range looks good value in an extremely unpredictable year, though more cautious punters might prefer to invest on the broader ‘under 200’ band (9/4, SkyBet).

Trump has defied both expectations and the normal rules of politics for five years now but he’s now in a situation he can’t control; can’t insult, brag or spectacle his way out of; and which is making a massive impact on average Americans. Against a less polarising opponent than Hillary Clinton, there is a real risk that a Blue Tide could sweep away all those big states he won narrowly last time.

David Herdson

from politicalbetting.com https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/06/27/its-time-to-take-a-biden-landslide-seriously/ https://dangky.ric.win/

Makin manjadi2 dengan pemandu mabuk..

Makin manjadi2 dengan pemandu mabuk...

Dalam kejadian jam 1.30 pagi itu, mangsa dikenali sebagai Mohamed Zaili Mohamed berusia 44 tahun disahkan meninggal dunia di lokasi kejadian akibat cedera parah di kepala. Ketua Jabatan Siasatan dan Penguatkuasaan Trafik (JSPT) Kuala Lumpur, Asisten Komisioner Zulkefly Yahya, berkata kemalangan dipercayai berlaku apabila motosikal jenis Honda EX5 ditunggang mangsa dirempuh Nissan Grand Livina dipandu suspek berusia 21 tahun dari arah belakang. Katanya, ketika itu, mangsa dalam perjalanan pulang ke rumahnya di Bukit Antarabangsa, dekat Ampang selepas menghantar makanan yang dijual isterinya. "Akibat rempuhan itu, mangsa tercampak ke sebelah kiri bahu jalan, manakala motosikalnya diseret sejauh kira-kira dua kilometer dari lokasi kejadian. "Suspek memberhentikan kenderaannya di bawah jejantas Stesen Transit Aliran Ringan (LRT) Titiwangsa dekat kawasan itu setelah ditahan orang awam. "Suspek kemudian dibawa ke Balai Trafik Jalan Tun H S Lee dan keputusan saringan ujian mendapati kandungan positif alkohol dalam pernafasan lelaki berkenaan," katanya dalam satu kenyataan, hari ini. Habis2 sangat suspek akan kena denda dan dijailkan 2 - 3 tahun,lepaih tu dia akan buat benda yang sama. Setakat cakap nak ubah undang2 itu dan ini hanya retorik saja,,,apakah tidak dari zaman regim BN...PH dan PN hanya berkokok berdrai2 tapi juboq penuh tahi... Bagi aku biaq nyawa di bayaq dengan nyawa...mungkin pemandu mabuk ini akan sedaq sikit. Setakat denda 2-3 ribu,lokap 2-3 tahun tak jadi apa2!!!

Sikap....

1. Rupa-rupanya ramai juga orang Malaysia yang sanggup menerima pemimpin yang telah curi berbillion duit Kerajaan. 2. Di antara mereka ialah pemimpin dan ahli Parti Bersatu yang dahulu menyertai Bersatu konon kerana berhasrat menjatuhkan Perdana Menteri yang curi berbillion duit Kerajaan. 3. Mereka bekerjasama dengan parti pembangkang dahulu yang mempunyai tujuan yang sama. Dan rakyat pun beri kemenangan kepada mereka kerana percaya keikhlasan janji parti-parti ini sertai pemimpin mereka. 4. Apabila menang Presiden Parti Bersatu rancang bersama parti yang kalah untuk keluar dari Kerajaan Pakatan Harapan supaya jatuhlah Kerajaan Pakatan Harapan. 5. Dengan sokongan pemimpin pencuri, Presiden Bersatu menjadi Perdana Menteri gabungan bersama parti yang kalah yang diberi nama Perikatan Nasional. 6. Apa kata pemimpin lain dalam Bersatu. Apakah mereka sanggup menerima pencuri sebagai pemimpin. 7. Okaylah – asal dapat nikmat.

8. Apa jadi kepada ikrar dahulu untuk lawan dan jatuhkan pemimpin kleptokrat? 9. Oh. Itu ikrar sahaja untuk dapat sokongan pengundi. Sekarang sudah dapat lupakan sahaja. 10. Dengan ini Bersatu akan hancur!! Dengan itu perjuangan untuk selamatkan orang Melayu dari pemimpin kleptokrat jadi apa? 11. Itu masalah Bersatulah. Asalkan kita dapat nikmat okaylah. 12. Di masa hadapan orang tidak lagi akan percaya kita – tak apakah? 13. Itu masa depan. 14. Demikian sikap beberapa pemimpin dan ahli Bersatu. - chedet

The case for the third force...

The purging of Dr Mahathir Mohamad, his son and their key followers by Bersatu is a positive political development for this country. Whether they intend to form another party or to fight back from within the Bersatu structure, that should not be our business with which to bother. Dr Mahathir’s power base is shrinking and to get back into the game he needs allies. For PH, this is the time to shut the door on him for good. Regardless of the circumstances or scenario, Mahathir and Bersatu should not be allowed back. There is simply too much venomous and filthy Umno DNA in them that could potentially further contaminate the coalition. The recent collapse of the PH government was a blessing in disguise. The traitors and double dealers have been identified. To ordinary people, we have learnt a great deal about the extent of greed of our political leaders have for power, their hypocrisy and their incompetence. Take note of these party hopping personalities and remember: never ever trust and vote for them again. Never. While the character, agenda and the incompetency of the PN government are well known to us, it is good to remember that PH was also not a trustworthy and credible government either. In certain areas, they were also following the same guileful paths taken by the previous BN government. The promised reforms were not forthcoming. Except during the initial period of their administration when we were elated by a few false starts, the reform agenda appeared to have been thrown by the wayside.  Dr Mahathir’s failure to ratify the Icerd and the Rome Statute, his willingness to sit on the same stage and sing the same song with Umno and PAS; and the racially biased and incompetent decisions made by Bersatu cabinet ministers, which could have been copied straight from the Umno playbook, demonstrated well enough that Umno DNA runs deep within Bersatu. Not to mention of the now dust-gathering IRC report that failed to see the light of the day, of the no longer heard of Parliamentary Committee for the selection of top public service positions, the IPCMC and the RCI for the Judiciary; to name a few. How about the failure to move ahead with the investigations of the mess created by the BN government in dealing with some controversial issues that hint of their abuse of power?

Bersatu arguably was the main stumbling block and reason for PH reform failure. The breaking up of the PH coalition and the subsequent formation of Muhyuddin-led PN backdoor government was undoubtedly and primarily due to the duplicitous and power-hungry frogs that jumped with him and Mohamed Azmin Ali to the other side. However, Dr Mahathir and Anwar Ibrahim are to be blamed equally. It was their incessant power struggle that created a schism exploited by Umno and PAS to ingeniously rattle and break up the coalition. Muhyuddin and Azmin merely saw and grabbed the opportunity, to their advantage. With razor thin majority, propped up by disparate coalition partners that are ever ready to stab him in the back; and the need to consistently buy support to prop up his government, Muhyuddin is standing on a fragile platform. There is arguably no future for this coalition in the next general election. Unless Umno and PAS as two major partners are willing to play second fiddle to Muhyiddin’s Bersatu and continue to endorse him as PM. A highly unlikely scenario given the presence of cash flushed, power hungry, big wig Umno warlords waiting in the wings. It must be remembered that to some of these warlords, their party’s relative standing and their positions in the government are crucial factors that might determine where they would eventually go after the election. Given this scenario, the possible outcome of GE15 would most likely be uncertain. The election could narrowly go either way and a hung parliament would be a possibility. However, it will also present to the people the opportunity to press for real reform to be implemented. We can no longer afford another false start. In the election, PN or whatever coalition that would emerge would most likely be playing the usual 3R card to win the Malay votes, especially among Umno and PAS supporters. PH on the other hand would most likely stick to the reform agenda. A convenient theme that worked for them well in the past, despite the lack of specific pronunciation of what it is and how it is going to be achieved, or whether they have the intention to execute it at all. Both coalitions will be going into battle with heavy baggage on their backs. A post Covid-19 economic environment and how the economic downturn is handled by the PN government will considerably influence the voters voting preference.

For PN, the traditional handing out of goodies for votes and the nurturing of renter mentality may no longer be possible with empty coffers and lower oil prices. Potentially, the 3R card may be placed on the table as a desperate but dangerous option. For ordinary people in the streets who are seeking the reform agenda, we have no choice but to choose the lesser of the two devils. Fortunately our choice is much easier as both are the devils we know. However, a well-known ground rule is never to trust these devils. Having experienced and discovered for ourselves the level of integrity that most of our politicians possess, their propensity to jump at every possible opportunity to grab power and positions, their forked tongue promises and their chameleon like appearance, we have no choice but accept the fact that the future of this country is a serious issue that cannot be left to the politicians alone. This applies to politicians from both sides of the divide. In the last election, we made a colossal mistake of throwing our support behind a political coalition that eventually let us down. We had no leverage to fall back on and once they were in power, we were abandoned and they naturally set their own agenda to prevail. For the coming election, there has been plenty of talk of the possibility of establishing a non-political people-centric third force that will provide check and balance to the ruling government, with the leverage to tilt the political balance and most importantly, incorruptible and sincere to the reform agenda. In this regard, we cannot leave things to chance. The third force must be properly organised. With its grand strategy and detailed plan clearly outlined. The preparation must start now with involvement by the civil society groups and individuals that are concerned with the future of this country. Would the rakyat care to get onboard? – Lt Col Ahmad Ghazali Abu-Hassan,Malaysian Insight

cheers.

Sumber asal: Makin manjadi2 dengan pemandu mabuk.. Baca selebihnya di Makin manjadi2 dengan pemandu mabuk..

An Open Letter to My Fellow Citizens, entitled Our Money Should Say “We Disagree But Blend Together”

I am a human American who happens to have liberal political views. I believe that any non-criminal who desires to live in this country should be free to do so in the style of his or her choosing, that all citizens should be engaged in the political process and that the role of our government is to work in good faith on behalf of all types of Americans to facilitate our free, peaceful and productive coexistence.

The above is simply an introduction and not an attempt to get everyone to agree with my particular point of view on American values. I don’t believe we’d be living in America if we all agreed. But I do believe that, as citizens, we need to stop drawing the lines of R & D between us and stop judging one another using only our political affiliation. In my experience, most of us don’t fit neatly into those party boxes; and that is a good thing.

Disagreement is not the reason why America is so divided. Nor could it ever be. America exists because humans disagree. The Founders did not believe that one person or religion or way of life should rule free people. They declared independence because they believed it was self-evident that all Men are created equal. They wanted all Americans to be free to peacefully disagree as equals while pursuing whatever individual dreams, beliefs and lifestyles they could imagine.

Disagreement is why there are checks and balances built into our government. It is why the First Amendment exists. It is why slavery and the denial of slaves’ rights were not enshrined into the Constitution. Disagreement is the given, America is the attempt at a solution.

What is dividing us today is a bastardization of disagreement, based not in a respectful acknowledgement of differences, but in competition, mistrust and division. You know it as Blind Party Loyalty; aka Party First; aka Party Over Country; aka Believe only those who agree with you always.

Blind Party Loyalty (BPL) is toxic because it perpetuates the misguided idea that politics is a sport and that this country is made up of two distinct teams, who are mortal enemies. According to BPL, the political parties are not in place to check and balance each other, but to obstruct and defeat one another by any means necessary. BPL ignores that the parties could never be two distinct teams because they need to be two sides of one team, the offense and defense of Team USA; working together to blend rather than exploit our divergent cultures and needs. Check and balance ensures our democracy endures. Obstruct and defeat makes no such promise.

But BPL does not allow for bipartisan teamwork or balancing of any kind. BPL means that the other side’s ideas, agendas and candidates can never be acceptable. Nothing the other side says or does is reasonable or correct, in all instances regardless of context or circumstance or evidence, yet everything your side says or does is reasonable and correct, in all instances regardless of context or circumstance or evidence. BPL demands that you will fit neatly into that party box. It insists that it’s possible for America to succeed if one side is more concerned with crushing the other side than with governing both sides. In short, BPL guarantees Team USA failure and prevents unity.

There is only one way that I can think of to combat the Blind Party Loyalty epidemic. It may sound radical, but as private citizens we need to forget about the labels of Republican vs Democrat; Red vs Blue; Conservative vs Liberal; Us vs Them; Team vs Team; forget there are sides. Citizens who think of each other in only those terms do not serve this country in any positive way. Average Americans have no need to compete with each other on that level.

Let’s leave the sides & the party boxes to the elected officials. Private citizens don’t need to check and balance each other; our votes do that for us. But we do need to start thinking of ourselves as one united body. Not united in our political views, but united in our commitment to check and balance our public servants and our entire government. Not just when it comes to the rival “team”, but all the time with all the public servants.

We are meant to disagree, but blend together. To me, what makes America exceptional is that our Founding Documents implore us to accept all types of humans as equals and live peacefully beside them as neighbors. Acceptance of all and respect for all is the price we pay for our own true freedom. In the words of MLK, Jr., “No is free until we are all free.” If we are not always striving toward the self-evident truth of equality, what was the point of declaring it along with our independence?

We all have access to the same information. We have to be willing to look outside of our own worldview, gather different perspectives, engage respectfully with fellow citizens, accept each other’s differences and everyone’s right to have them, listen and understand and finally use all of that to form and evolve your own opinions. We have to be willing to have informed opinions.

idea that it’s taboo to speak publicly about politics is outdated and a large part of the reason we had the candidates we did in 2016. When we close ourselves off from any information that disagrees with our personal worldview, we disagree with American democracy. In a government of the people, by the people and for the people, it is the responsibility of all of the people to remain informed and engaged. We can’t just expect the government to run smoothly and benevolently without us, when the government is us.

Deteriorating academic honesty

https://www.itworldcanada.com/article/students-educators-and-parents-struggling-to-adapt-to-new-learning-dynamic/

Tom Li @itworldca , Published: May 20th, 2020 (extract)

“One of the professors just took out the exam entirely because he thought it was a joke to have a take-home exam,” says Stockwell. “Instead, we had a re-weighing of the syllabus that we could all vote on.”

Deteriorating academic honesty

Students and professors alike are battling to uphold academic integrity. Without proctors supervising the examinees, rampant cheating now dilutes the validity of test scores.

In one email obtained by IT World Canada, a general pathology professor at New York University candidly expressed his disappointment after catching a number of students cheating on a quiz.

“I cannot express how disappointed I am about the amount of cheating on the quiz this week,” wrote the professor who’s been anonymized by the source. “Apparently you seem to think we do not have ways of tracking cheating remotely.

“I am not going to pursue those involved in cheating on this quiz; but I assure you, I will have no hesitation to follow through – bringing any student who cheats on the last exam to the peer review board.”

A wide range of technologies exists to snub cheating. Certain schools use software that monitors background programs running on the students’ devices during exams, while others use locked browsers that prevent an examinee from opening other apps once tests begin. Some schools also complement these measures with remote ID verification, such as requiring the student to take a picture before and after the exam. Even more stringent anti-cheating software records the student on both video and audio throughout the test session.

But tighter rules only create better miscreants. Despite increased enforcement, exploitative students are still trying their luck with using external references during exams. Only the most rigorous anti-cheating software could prevent someone from peeking at paper notes and searching up information on a smartphone.

As professors clamp down on cheating, students are also worried that a dishonest culture would foster a propensity for otherwise honest students to stray in fear of being left behind.

“I know the material well enough that I was comfortable without [cheating],” says Morgan Stockwell, a student taking history courses at the University of Toronto. “But it’s uncomfortable for students to have no idea as to whether the entire class is going to use aids, and then if the class average shoots up to like an 88. If I didn’t use aid and I get a 60, how’s that fair?”

Given the hasty transition to online learning, the implementation of these various technologies swung widely between schools, curriculums, and professors. None of the students interviewed were subjected to strict monitoring rules during their final exams.

The threat of dishonesty has reshaped institutions’ grading policies. Last post-secondary semester saw professors omitting year-end exam scores from the final grade. Sources from George Brown College told the publication it has given students the option to replace their number grade with a simple pass or fail. The University of Toronto and other institutions have also amended their final grade calculations.

“One of the professors just took out the exam entirely because he thought it was a joke to have a take-home exam,” says Stockwell. “Instead, we had a re-weighing of the syllabus that we could all vote on.”

For courses that followed through with a final exam, professors derived the test questions based on their personalized lectures, which made it harder for someone who had not attended the courses to understand.

But certain exams had no supervision at all. According to Daniel Park, a mathematics instructor at the University of Toronto, his students were only required to send a picture of the completed paper exam to him for grading. There was no rigid enforcement of honesty besides a stern warning before the tests.

‘We cannot replace the human connection’

Regardless of how interactive online learning sessions can be, a virtual classroom is no substitute for in-person teaching.

Schools were given a few weeks from the start of mandatory social distancing orders to move their classrooms online. Whereas using learning management systems (LMS) such as D2L and Blackboard was optional before the pandemic, social isolation has rendered them a necessity.

A professor’s proactiveness to adopting them could greatly impact the quality of learning, especially when some educators are onboarding at a laggard pace. Several interviewees pointed out that their unfamiliarity with technology may be to blame.

Google Classroom is a popular way for educators in Canada to teach online. Image source: Google Classroom tutorial

“Most teachers are good with it [LMS], but some just don’t use it at all,” Baziw told IT World Canada that she’s had professors who consistently uploaded video lectures while others only bothered with assignments and reading materials.

“I think you can tell that professors are having trouble adjusting, some of them may not be the most familiar with the tech,” she says.

“We would often hear echo or feedback during sessions, and it would quickly become distracting,” says Nacy Demes, a student at the Université du Québec à Montréal. “Some professors have had more difficulty adapting to online teaching because they’ve never used videoconferencing apps like Zoom.”

The students’ frustrations revealed the problem with such a sudden change; there just wasn’t enough time for everyone to learn the new tools. Remote conferencing apps that once played an assistive role now supersede regular in-person teaching. The tectonic shift is affecting courses that require immediate feedback, like music, the most.

Joy Reeves is a rotary music teacher for the TDSB who now has to manage her music classes online. At times, her class size can grow up to 60 students. To carry out her classes without distracting noise, she requires her students to mute their microphones. Not only is engagement lowered, but it also reduces opportunities for her to correct her students, a critical component to promote information retention.

“We cannot replicate the human connection,” Reeves emphasized, noting the importance of having in-person classes. “When we speak to each other, when we see each other’s eyes when our bodies resonate with the actual vibrations of somebody’s voice, the natural acoustic sounds that are made face to face.”

Communication between teachers and students is key and equally important is communicating to parents their children’s progress. In Ontario, the Ministry of Education has established guidelines for K-12 educators to speak with parents about accessing course material. Teachers have also been collaborating with each other to consolidate information so they’re easily accessible.

“As we proceed into unprecedented territory, the importance of open lines of communication between parents and education staff is critical,” wrote the Ministry of Education in an email to IT World Canada. “We expect teachers, support workers, and board staff to remain in regular contact with parents during this period, as needed.”

“It varies a bit district by district, but this week we had individual phone calls from at least one teacher (one per child) to ask about technology availability etc., in addition to “wellness checks” (i.e. do you have food in the house, are you ok?),” responded Lorraine Baldwin, a mother from Vancouver, when asked recently about her thoughts on remote learning. “Each teacher will be sending out their direction next week (this is our first week back over spring break) but we’ve already been told it won’t be onerous.”

Two years ago, our niece got a new game for Christmas:  Harry Potter, Hogwarts Battle.  We usually spend New Years together, and it is a great 4 person game, so Kevin and I got to break into the game with our niece and her mother.  It is now fair to say that this is our favorite game, and the four us clocked A LOT of hours playing it.

Beyond the really fun Harry Potter connections, and the truly excellent game design, I think we all love it so much because it is a collaborative game.  The players are all working together towards a goal, so in the end either everyone wins or everyone loses.  Which also means that no one of us ends up as the winner while the rest of us have lost. Truthfully, I really like board games, and most of the ones I play have winners and losers, and I'm generally OK with that, but there is something really great about a collaborative game.  It is especially engaging because each choice we make impacts each other player, so we have to pay attention to what each person needs and what each person's strengths are, and how each person can make the best use of their strengths.

The game is hard, and we lose sometimes.  Really, we lose about half of the games we play, and we sometimes give up a game before playing just because the starting conditions are too difficult.  But the collaboration makes it interesting enough that even losing isn't THAT bad.  (Most of the time.)

I find it interesting that the collaborative game is so much fun.  When I was growing up our church had a copy “The Ungame” which was mean to be a fun game that was collaborative rather than competitive, and while I fully support the creators and their intentions it was the least fun game imaginable.  Yet, there is so much already in our capitalistic society that is inherently about winners and losers, and zero sum games, and competing against each other – and I'm really, really glad that there are now super fun games that don't buy into that model.

Collaborative games seem more like the model of working for the common good.  Maybe it is just because I was born and raised in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, but the moment when I finally actually noticed the word “commonwealth” and thought about what it meant was eye-opening for me.  I think of the common good and commonwealths as other ways of speaking about the kindom.  

Over the past 3+ years we've talked about Intersectional Justice and Intersectionality a lot, but just in case the ideas are still fuzzy for you, here is MFSA's definition of its “intersectional organizing principal.”

All experiences of marginalization and injustice are interconnected because the struggle for justice is tied to concepts of power and privilege.  Intersectional organizing recognizes that injustice works on multiple and simultaneous levels. Because experiences of injustice do not happen in a vacuum, it is imperative to: develop the most effective strategies to create space for understanding privilege; organize in an intersectional framework led by marginalized communities; and build effective systems of resistance and cooperation to take action for justice. Practical intersectional organizing always focuses on collaboration and relationship building.

To bring that a little bit more into reality, intersectionality means acknowledging that working on ONE issue and making as small as possible so you can make some gains really doesn't help that much. For example, it is said that 101 years ago women gained the right to vote in NY state, that misses that it only applied to white women. That came from a choice to empower white women at the expense of women of color and was NOT intersectional organizing.  There have been a LOT of times organizing has worked this way, most of the time it has worked this way, and it has done a lot of harm.

During an anti-white supremacy training, I was taught to think holistically about power.  That is, we all know what traits are most associated with power in our society: white, male, rich, straight, English speaking, cisgender, citizen, with a full range of ableness, educated, tall... etc, right?  In each case, there is an opposite to the description that is disempowered.  I'm expecting you are following thus far.  Well, because the people who have the traits connected to power control the resources, they use most of them!  And then, it turns out, the people who are DISCONNECTED from power end up fighting to get access to the scraps of resources that the powerful are willing to share.  There are two REALLY bad parts of this – first of all, to get access to those resources usually means playing by the rules of the ones who have power, and secondly, those without power are usually set up to fight AGAINST EACH OTHER for access to those scraps.  

That is, when white women decided to try to get the vote for themselves, and not seek voting rights for all women, they made a decision to play by the rules of how power already worked, and to distance themselves from people of color to try to get what they wanted and needed.  And, this happens time and time again.

Intersectionality is about seeing the wholeness of the power dynamics, and the complicated realities of people – who all have power in some ways and lack power in others – and holding the whole together while working for good.  It is really, really hard.

It is probably also why I teared up when reading Isaiah this week.  The passage quotes God as saying, “It is too light a thing that you should be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the survivors of Israel; I will give you as a light to the nations, that my salvation may reach to the end of the earth."  The way I heard that was, don't just work for the benefit of a few, even if they are the ones you identify with – work for the well being of ALL.  And all, in all places, including enemy nations!!

Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. is best known for his transformational work on racial justice, work that make our country noticeably better. Yet, at the end of his life, he had broadened his work, and was organizing around poverty.  As several of the past year's Intersectional Justice Book Club books have pointed out, the powers that exist in the United States have VERY INTENTIONALLY used race to divide people, in large part so that impoverished white people and impoverished people of color wouldn't start working together against their common oppressor.  Dr. King's Poor People's Campaign was designed to bring people together for their common good, and truly for every's good.   As King once said, “In your struggle for justice, let your oppressor know that you are not attempting to defeat or humiliate him, or even to pay him back for injustices that he has heaped upon you. Let him know that you are merely seeking justice for him as well as yourself.”  Because, truly, oppressing anyone harms both the oppressed AND inherently, the oppressor.

Today, other's have picked up Dr. King's mantle, and there is an active Poor People's Campaign underway.  While their “Fundamental Principals” are expansive – there are 12 – they are a coherent whole and I couldn't edit them down.  I want you hear, and be filled with hope, and maybe even be motivated to work with this campaign, so here they are:

We are rooted in a moral analysis based on our deepest religious and constitutional values that demand justice for all. Moral revival is necessary to save the heart and soul of our democracy.

We are committed to lifting up and deepening the leadership of those most affected by systemic racism, poverty, the war economy, and ecological devastation and to building unity across lines of division.

We believe in the dismantling of unjust criminalization systems that exploit poor communities and communities of color and the transformation of the “War Economy” into a “Peace Economy” that values all humanity.

We believe that equal protection under the law is non-negotiable.

We believe that people should not live in or die from poverty in the richest nation ever to exist. Blaming the poor and claiming that the United States does not have an abundance of resources to overcome poverty are false narratives used to perpetuate economic exploitation, exclusion, and deep inequality.

We recognize the centrality of systemic racism in maintaining economic oppression must be named, detailed and exposed empirically, morally and spiritually. Poverty and economic inequality cannot be understood apart from a society built on white supremacy.

We aim to shift the distorted moral narrative often promoted by religious extremists in the nation from issues like prayer in school, abortion, and gun rights to one that is concerned with how our society treats the poor, those on the margins, the least of these, women, LGBTQIA folks, workers, immigrants, the disabled and the sick; equality and representation under the law; and the desire for peace, love and harmony within and among nations.

We will build up the power of people and state-based movements to serve as a vehicle for a powerful moral movement in the country and to transform the political, economic and moral structures of our society.

We recognize the need to organize at the state and local level—many of the most regressive policies are being passed at the state level, and these policies will have long and lasting effect, past even executive orders. The movement is not from above but below.

We will do our work in a non-partisan way—no elected officials or candidates get the stage or serve on the State Organizing Committee of the Campaign. This is not about left and right, Democrat or Republican but about right and wrong.

We uphold the need to do a season of sustained moral direct action as a way to break through the tweets and shift the moral narrative. We are demonstrating the power of people coming together across issues and geography and putting our bodies on the line to the issues that are affecting us all.

The Campaign and all its Participants and Endorsers embrace nonviolence. Violent tactics or actions will not be tolerated.

This campaign is DEEPLY good news.  I encourage you to look them up, their demands are even better (but ever longer) and well worth the read. There are a lot of opportunities to volunteer with and support the Poor People's Campaign, and I'd be happy to connect to to those who are organizing – as would your Intersectional Justice chairs.  

Working towards justice for all is really, really hard work.  It can even be overwhelming, but as Isaiah says, God is out for the well-being of the whole world.  Before you get overwhelmed though, let me remind you that God has a LOT of partners in this work and no ONE of us is called to do all the work.  In fact, we're called to trust each other and each other's work, and to carefully discern what our work is to do. Love exists, its power can spread, justice is possible, and good people are at work.  We are meant to be a light to ALL the nations, and with God at our backs, we can and we will.  And it is possible because of collaboration.  Thanks be to God.  Amen

Rev. Sara E. Baron First United Methodist Church of Schenectady 603 State St. Schenectady, NY 12305 Pronouns: she/her/hers http://fumcschenectady.org/ 
https://www.facebook.com/FUMCSchenectady

January 19, 2019

Dickheads of the Month: August 2019

As it seems that there are people who say or do things that are remarkably dickheaded yet somehow people try to make excuses for them or pretend it never happened, here is a collection of some of the dickheaded actions we saw in the month of August 2019 to make sure that they are never forgotten. 

When there was the possibility of the parliamentary sovereignty that Leavers harp on about, off sprinted proven liar Boris Johnson to Balmoral to beg the Queen to suspend parliament in order to force through a No Deal Britait - but of course, everyone but him are the “traitors” in this sordid affair, even after Ben Wallace apparently forgot that cameras and microphones exist when blabbing about how Johnson did this due to fearing that his working majority of one wouldn't survive a No Confidence vote

It was so nice of Michael Coudrey to post a blatantly faked screenshot of El Paso shooter Patrick Crusias’ MyLife profile page to try and claim that Crusas was a left-wing extremist rather than, oh I don’t know, a white supremacist who happened to parrot several of Trump’s soundbites about Hispanics, let alone consider that maybe mass shootings are something that shouldn’t happen with alarming frequency

Meanwhile it was equally predictable that Paul Joseph Watson was jumping up and down yelling “See!  See!  A leftist went on a killing spree!” which not only made it obvious he was trying to divert attention from the El Paso shooter, but also drew attention to the fact that while the alt right were tripping over one another to make excuses for Patrick Crusas as he’s some poor innocent victim of society, as soon as it emerged that Connor Betts isn’t one of them the excuses evaporated

So naturally, peak twattery followed when Dmitriy Andreychenko walked into his local Missouri branch of Walmart toting a tactical rifle and handgun while wearing body armor, and when he was arrested for being such a monumental fuckwit he bleated something about testing to see if Walmart respected his Second Amendment rights

Yet somehow the UK couldn’t laugh at Americans trying to blame video games for mass shootings thanks to Priti Patel trying to create a direct link between stabbings and fried chicken

Of course Jo Swinson has taken it upon herself to say she and only she can stop Britait, which was obvious by her rejecting Jeremy Corbyn’s proposal of an interim government out of hand without any reason in spite of the fact that, as Leader of the Opposition, of a vote of no confidence in Boris Johnson does get through the Commons it will be Corbyn who is asked to put together an interim government - but Jo Swinson instead suggested the first tow backbenchers she could think of because she cannot countenance the idea of Labour stopping Britait, as at that point what is she other than somebody who lies about her voting record?

This month it was Arron Banks who wanted to sound triggered to a sociopathic degree by Greta Thunberg with his lovely response to her yachting across the Atlantic by tweeting that freak yachting accidents tend to happen at this time of year, while Julia Halfwit Hartley-Brewer posted some lame tweet gloating about she and her family would be flying across the Atlantic instead, meanwhile Roger Helmer resorted to calling her a “Swedish pixie” during one of the rare occasions he remained awake when in public and Paul Joseph Watson talked about how an autistic girl was being “exploited” - but because Arron Banks has to be Arron Banks, he had to have the most cuntish last word and said it was just a joke...like saying women wearing burqas look like letterboxes

As if proven liar Boris Johnson hadn’t used the NHS as a platform for his outright lies enough in the past three years, he pledged an increase in funding...that was actually funding that NHS providers had been saving up for the past three years, but had been unable to spend in that time as the Tory government banned them from spending it...until it became convenient enough to allow them to spend their own money

If only somebody suggested to Lou Dobbs that, if you see a group of protesters sat in the road outside the ICE facility that employs you, driving your truck just inches from their faces is guaranteed to piss them off - and then using that as an excuse to plow through the pissed off crowd is guaranteed to cost you your job and piss off everyone bar the weirdos who believe it’s not vehicular assault if you run into people with differing opinions to you

It clearly did not occur to Steve King when trying to find a logical reason to say abortions should be banned that saying the human race may not exist if not for cases of rape and incest tens of thousands of years ago doesn’t in any way defend his position, instead make it sound uncannily like he’s on the side of those who raped and pillaged

It didn’t take long before Boris Johnson started reading from the Bannon playbook, stating that he would not take interviews with the press as they’re all biased against him - yes, even the BBC, the Murdoch Empire, the Daily Mail and Daily Express, all of whom have been churning out unthinkingly slanted headlines in his favour

It was so nice that James Cleverly repeatedly wanted to talk about how the Tory MP  William Wilberforce fought to end slavery...even after it was pointed out to him the first time he made that statement that Wilberforce stood as an independent and not a Tory, no matter how many times Cleverly tries to rewrite history

Let’s see if I’ve got this straight: the Lib Dems state that they will do everything in their power to stop Britait...yet Jo Swinson has ruled out going into coalition with either Labour or the SNP, in spite the fact they both have far more MPs than the Lib Dems and just so happen to also be opposing Britait

Similarly, the best idea Caroline Lucas had for solving Britait was for an all-woman cabinet that just so happened to include her, Jo Swinson, Heidi Allen, Justine Greening, Yvette Cooper and Anna Soubry among others - and seemed confused when it was mentioned that not only did her dream cabinet exclude all men but it didn’t include a single non-white MP either, and appears to have forgotten that a woman spent between 2016-19 fucking the process up at every turn

In the latest Priti Patel brainfart, she suggested that migrants earning less than £36,000 a year are no longer welcome in the UK...clearly failing to comprehend that arbitrary figure is higher than the basic salary of any member of NHS staff, any teacher or any police officer - you know, something a Home Secretary should be able to understand...

Walking proof that nominative determinism isn't really a thing James Cleverley could only try and claim that the leaked Operation Yellowhammer dossier was “out of date” and was no remotely relevant to any discussion about what would happen if the UK leaves the EU without a deal...even though the dossier was dated 1st August 2019

There was something deeply sinister about how the BBC described Owen Jones as a “Labour activist” after he was assaulted, as opposed to...oh I don’t know?  A journalist?

With the Leave hardcore now lionising chlorinated chicken of all things, it;s not surprise that Darren Grimes tried to say there’s no issue because we also have chlorinated water...somehow spectacularly missing the point

I have no idea how the Entertainment Software Association managed to bungle so badly that they managed to release the personal information of thousands of people who attended this year’s E3, including games journalists and Youtubers/Twitch streamers, but they managed it nonetheless

In a quite remarkable turn of events there was a controversy regarding Borderlands 3 that didn’t involve Gearbox CEO Randy Pitchford, instead it was Take Two Interactive sending private investigators to the doorstep of Youtuber SupMatto to harass him into keeping quiet, and because he wasn’t keeping quiet they abused Youtube’s copyright system on an industrial scale with over 100 copyright strikes to force him off the platform because of reasons

For a documentarian Stacey Dooley makes an awful lot of factual blunders, the latest of which being a Panorama documentary where she described a Muslim prayer gesture as an “ISIS salute”, leading to the BBC removing the clip from the documentary...on the iPlayer, but leaving it in unchallenged for its initial broadcast

You would think that Microsoft wouldn’t be so dense as to release an update that cripples the computers of everyone using Windows 7 due to somebody typing a 2 instead of a 1 in one line of code, but that’s exactly what happened with the KB4512506 update that was coded by someone who assumed everyone has Windows 10

As it was time for Suzanne Moore to vomit another opinion piece into the pages of the Guardian, she took it upon herself to write a piece that managed to insinuate that Shilpa Shetty somehow deserved the racial abuse she received from Jade Goody, Jo O’Meara and Danielle Lloyd on Celebrity Big Brother back in 2007 because...hold on a minute...because Shetty had servants at home while the others didn’t which apparently makes it alright

The outraged howls from Manchester City fans and football pundits alike all because VAR rightly disallowed what would have been a last-minute winner for City was truly a sight to behold, because apparently VAR exists to make things easier for a small kabal of teams and everyone else can get fucked

...and demonstrated by Mike Dean using The Wenger Defence of “I didn’t see it guv” a week later to overrule VAR stating that Tottenham should have been awarded a penalty

...and yet the depths were truly plumbed when Ian Holloway blamed the EU for the fact he doesn’t understand the offside law, even though as a football pundit (and former manager) he’s literally paid to understand it

Ooblets developers Glumberland decided to double down on their dickheadishness which began with their smug and condescending blog post explaining why they decided to make their game an Epic Games Store exclusive, but they followed that up by acting like complete bellends on their Discord that culminated with them responding to somebody asking when they could buy the game with their own currency by telling them that nobody owed them the game

With both Bury and Bolton facing extinction, trust Sky Sports News to cover this by having a clock ticking down in the corner of the screen all day, as if the possibility (and, in Bury’s case, eventuality) of a club being kicked out of the league was the same thing as Deadline Day

Britain’s most triggered man Piers Moron Morgan was predictably irked by the Meghan Markle guest-editing Vogue because obviously somebody doing that is only after the publicity...a sentiment he neglected to express when Kate Middleton did the exact same thing a few years previously

The sensible thing that Bethesda should have done after the have done after the humiliation conga line that was Fallout 76 was try not to do anything that would irritate gamers further.  So instead they decided that, when releasing Doom - that’s the 1993 original, not the 2016 reboot - it would require players to use their Bethesda account to play the actual game 

I know it’s a cheapshot, but did UKIP really elect somebody named Dick Braine as their new leader?

How the hell did Apple develop a credit card that gets discoloured if it touches materials such as denim or leather, or to put it another way if it’s in somebody’s pocket or wallet?  What are they supposed to do?  Carry it around in their hand at maximum reach?

If you have a name like Michael Buerk it isn’t a good idea to make your name fair game, but that’s exactly what he did when he suggested that it’s potentially a good thing for obese people to die early as it would save the NHS money

And of course, it wouldn't be a month without Donald Trump being a colossal cockhead, and he certainly disappoint with his prioritising schmoozing with guests at Mar A Lago while people in Dayton and El Paso were experiencing the aftermath of their respective mass shootings, and when the Orange Overlord deigned to make a statement he not only demonstrated he couldn’t give a toss by talking about the mass shootings in Toledo and El Paso, but his response to it being plain for all to see that white nationalism was the catalyst for both was to blame video games for all of society’s ills