RSN: Robert Reich | Profiles in Cowardice
24 November 20
It's Live on the HomePage Now:
Reader Supported News
TIME TO THINK ABOUT WHAT RSN MEANS - Time is short, it’s the 24th day of the month and only 430 Readers have donated so far. Those are some of the worst numbers we have ever seen. You come here for a reason. Is it to be entertained or to be a part of something? What brings you to Reader Supported News? What is that worth to you? What will you do? / Marc Ash, Founder Reader Supported News
Sure, I'll make a donation!
Robert Reich | Profiles in Cowardice
Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog
Reich writes: "Financial regulators subject banks to stress tests to see if they have enough capital to withstand sharp downturns."
Now America is being subject to a stress test to see if it has enough strength to withstand Trump’s treacherous campaign to discredit the 2020 presidential election.
Trump will lose because there’s no evidence of fraud. But the integrity of thousands of people responsible for maintaining American democracy is being tested as never before.
Tragically, most elected Republicans in Washington are failing the test by refusing to stand up to Trump. Their cowardice is one of the worst betrayals of public trust in the history of our republic.
The only dissenting notes are coming from Republicans who are retiring at the end of the year or don’t have to face voters for several years, such as Senators Mitt Romney of Utah and Ben Sasse of Nebraska.
Silent Republicans worry that speaking out could invite a primary challenge. But democracy depends on moral courage. These Republicans are profiles in cowardice.
But I’ve got some good news. The vast majority of lower-level Republican office-holders are passing the stress test, many with distinction.
Take for example Chris Krebs, who led the Department of Homeland Security’s cybersecurity agency and last Tuesday refuted Trump’s claims of election fraud – saying the claims “have been unsubstantiated or are technically incoherent.”
Trump fired Krebs that afternoon. Krebs’s response: “Honored to serve. We did it right.”
Or Brad Raffensperger – Georgia’s Republican secretary of state who oversaw the election there and describes himself as “a Republican through and through and never voted for a Democrat.” Raffensperger is defending Georgia’s vote for Biden, rejecting Trump’s accusations of fraud. On Friday he certified that Biden won the state’s presidential vote.
Raffensperger spurned overtures from Trump quisling Lindsey Graham, who asked if Raffensperger could toss out all mail-in votes from counties with high rates of questionable signatures. And Raffensperger dismissed demands from Georgia’s two incumbent Republican senators, Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue (both facing tougher-than-anticipated runoffs) that he resign.
“This office runs on integrity,” Raffensperger says, “and that’s what voters want to know, that this person’s going to do his job.”
Raffensperger has received death threats from Republican voters inflamed by Trump’s allegations. He’s not the only one. Election officials in Nevada, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Arizona are also reporting threats. But they’re not giving in to them.
While we’re at it, let’s not forget all the other public officials in the Trump administration who have been stress-tested and passed honorably.
I’m referring to public health officials unwilling to lie about Covid-19, military leaders unwilling to back Trump’s attacks on Black Lives Matter protesters, inspectors general unwilling to cover up Trump corruption, U.S. foreign service officers unwilling to lie about Trump’s overtures to Ukraine, intelligence officials unwilling to bend their reports to suit Trump, and Justice Department attorneys refusing to participate in Trump’s obstructions of justice.
If you think it easy to do what they did, think again. Some of them lost their jobs. Many were demoted. A few have been threatened with violence. They’ve risked all this to do what’s morally right in an America poisoned by Trump, who has no idea what it means to do what’s morally right.
That’s ultimately what the Trump stress test is all about. It’s a test of moral integrity.
Even though House and Senate Republicans are failing that test, American democracy will survive because enough public officials are passing it.
But the fact that Trump’s attempted coup won’t succeed doesn’t make it any less damaging and dangerous. A new poll from Monmouth University finds 77 percent of Trump supporters believe Biden’s win was due to fraud – a claim, I should emphasize again, backed by zero evidence.
Which means the stress test won’t be over when Joe Biden is sworn in as president January 20. In the years ahead we’ll continue to depend on the integrity of thousands of unsung heroes to do their duty in the face of threats to their livelihoods and perhaps their lives.
Meanwhile, American democracy will continue to be endangered by House and Senate Republicans who lack the moral courage to do what’s right.
READ MORE
President-elect Joe Biden speaks Monday in Wilmington, Delaware, during a virtual meeting with the U.S. Conference of Mayors. (photo: Mark Makela/Getty Images)
ALSO SEE: Trump Relents After Steady Drumbeat of Fellow Republicans
Urge Start of Biden Transition
President-Elect Biden to Begin Formal Transition Process After Agency OK
Brian Naylor and Alana Wise, NPR
Excerpt: "Joe Biden's administration can formally begin its transition to power after a previously little-known federal agency on Monday ascertained Biden as the apparent winner of the election more than two weeks after the Democrat became president-elect."
READ MORE
Senator Dianne Feinstein. (photo: POLITICO)
Feinstein Will Not Seek Judiciary Chairmanship
Sahil Kapur, NBC News
Kapur writes: "Sen. Dianne Feinstein said Monday she will step down as top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee in the new session of Congress beginning early 2021, marking a victory for progressives who pressured her to step aside."
READ MORE
Pending regulatory approval for the first vaccine means the first Americans could be vaccinated outside of clinical trial by mid-December. (photo: Getty Images)
US Vaccine Expert Predicts Life Could Be Back to Normal Around May
Joanna Walters, Guardian UK
Walters writes: "As the number of Covid-19 cases in the United States passed 12 million, the Trump administration's vaccine program adviser predicted that life in America could be back to normal around May of 2021 as immunization is set to begin."
READ MORE
Dr. Anthony Fauci. (photo: Susan Walsh/AP)
Trust in Science Becomes a Political Issue. How Did That Happen?
Anna Stjernquist, The Christian Science Monitor
Stjernquist writes: "Science has become a politically polarizing issue. A global report found Americans are three times more likely to trust scientists if they identify as left-wing, a political divide that makes the United States an outlier internationally."
A Pew survey found that people mainly trust scientists to do what is in the public interest. But that attitude varies with political ideology.
cience has become a politically polarizing issue. A global report found Americans are three times more likely to trust scientists if they identify as left-wing, a political divide that makes the United States an outlier internationally.
The survey by the Pew Research Center found that global publics mainly trust scientists to do what is in the public's best interest. But attitudes vary with political ideology, according to results compiled just before the COVID-19 outbreak.
This sparks questions about the role of science now and following the pandemic.
The questionnaire study asked people across the globe to share their views on science relating to big public policy issues such as climate change and artificial intelligence. Interviews were held by phone or face-to-face.
“We saw an increase in confidence in scientists but that increase only came from Democrats and not Republicans,” says Cary Funk, director of science and society research at the Pew Research Center.
Recent presidential campaign events bear out these findings. At his rally in Carson City, Nevada, on Oct. 18., President Donald Trump mocked Joe Biden for listening to scientists on the COVID-19 pandemic. Meanwhile Mr. Biden slammed Mr. Trump for ignoring it.
Studying public support for scientists and their work is a timely issue, Dr. Funk adds.
“It’s of interest because it’s been widely discussed, especially in Western Europe, how much people trust expert advice. It was a good moment to think about how different publics value the place of science,” she says.
Expert advice has been heavily discussed, not least by far-right movements who sometimes label the scientific community as elite. One argument is that institutions and universities provide “leftist indoctrination,” which has resulted in several counter-initiatives aimed at restoring balance.
That discussion could be reflected in this study where distrust of scientists shows ties to far-right populism.
What makes science polarized?
Almost two-thirds of Americans who identified as left-wing said they place a lot of trust in scientists to do what is best for them. Among those who identified as right-wing that number was only 22%.
Canada had a 39% difference between right- and left-wing respondents. In Australia that difference was 29% and in the United Kingdom it was 27%.
Americans have the most polarized views in the world when it comes to science. But the global trend is clear: Polarization is all over the world, and most prevalent in wealthy democracies.
Tom Carothers, senior vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, says it boils down to trust. He says that distrusting science has very little to do with political ideology and everything to do with distrust in government. “Science is just another form of authority, and if people have decided that authority is evil then science is evil, too.”
An age of distrust
There are a couple of reasons we have been in an age of distrust for the past 20 or 30 years, says Mr. Carothers. Long economic stagnation in the West and concentration of power in elites likely play a role. But migration and rapid change brought on by technology are also key, he says.
“People feel things are moving too fast. They want things to slow down and they want things to stay the same. Therefore they distrust the government that is leading the change,” he says.
Mr. Carothers points out that distrust of government is more common in wealthier countries, where freedom of speech is sacred. “Wealthy democracies have a lot of freedom of expression and not a single source of information. Therefore if you are distrustful you can find your own community of people.”
He argues social media’s only real role in creating divisions is connecting people who are already dissatisfied.
The COVID-19 stress test
Distrust in authority and polarized views could be accentuated by the COVID-19 pandemic, which Mr. Carothers refers to as a government stress test.
“A lot of countries are suffering and they are questioning the experts. They seem to have all the scientific expertise but it doesn’t work … it doesn’t make you very confident in scientific expertise,” he says.
On the other hand, former New Jersey Gov. Christine Todd Whitman says the pandemic could have unexpected positive outcomes. “People are seeing the mishandling of COVID-19. It’s really the No. 1 issue in the [presidential] campaign ... which tells you that people are saying that we should have listened to the scientists.”
She mentions polls show people trust Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, more than Mr. Trump on the coronavirus pandemic.
Ms. Whitman says the Trump administration has contributed to a distrust in scientists among Republicans during the pandemic. “It’s never reached the peak that it has now and that’s because we have a president who just does not want to hear about science. And unfortunately we are seeing the negative impact of disregarding science with the COVID response.”
READ MORE
Stark changes have been observed at the main mosque in Yinchuan, capital of Ningxia province. (photo: Telegraph)
China Destroys Domes of Famous Mosques as Cultural Whitewash Continues
Sophia Yan, The Telegraph
Yan writes: "China's campaign to suppress Islam is accelerating as authorities remove Arab-style onion domes and decorative elements from mosques across the country."
Stark changes have been observed at the main mosque in Yinchuan, capital of Ningxia province, where most of China’s Hui ethnic Muslim minority live.
The bright green onion-shaped domes and golden minarets that used to soar into the sky atop Nanguan Mosque have all been pulled down. Golden Islamic-style filigree, decorative arches, and Arabic script that before adorned the mosque have also been stripped away.
What remains is unrecognisable – a drab, gray, rectangular facility with “Nanguan Mosque” written in Chinese, as shown in photos posted online by Christina Scott, the UK’s deputy head of mission in China, on a recent trip.
“TripAdvisor suggested the Nanguan Mosque in Yinchuan well worth a visit,” Ms Scott wrote on Twitter, along with ‘before and after’ photos. “Only this is what it looks now, after ‘renovations.’ Domes, minarets, all gone. No visitors allowed either, of course. So depressing.”
The UK foreign office said: “We are deeply concerned about restrictions on Islam and other religions in China. We call on China to respect Freedom of Religion or Belief, in line with its Constitution and its international obligations.”
Islamic-style onion domes and decorative elements are also being axed from mosques in neighbouring Gansu province, home to Linxia, a city nicknamed “Little Mecca” for its history as a centre for Islamic faith and culture in China.
Erasing Islamic decorative elements from mosques is yet another step Chinese authorities are taking under Communist Party leader Xi Jinping, who has vowed to ‘Sinicise’ religion.
More recently, the coronavirus has given Chinese authorities convenient cover to keep many mosques closed – even as Beijing crows victory over the pandemic and a flurry of activity has picked up again.
China has for years waged a campaign against Islamic influence, removing decorative elements and Arabic script from buildings, signs and arches, and now, targeting mosques in Ningxia and other provinces.
In Xinjiang, things have taken an especially sinister turn with “re-education” camps that subject detainees to horrific physical torture, political indoctrination and forced labour. Growing a beard, fasting and reading the Koran have all been deemed suspicious behaviour by the government and reason enough to be interned in camps.
Former detainees have told the Telegraph of being electrocuted by cattle prods, made to pledge loyalty to the ruling Party, and of being forced to work in factories manufacturing gloves for little pay.
Schools that previously taught Arabic language and trained imams have also been forced to shutter, the Telegraph has reported. Instead, the government has set up special schools to train imams to have the “correct political stance,” according to Chinese state media.
Chinese authorities are “really worried about external religious influence and authority,” said Dru Gladney, an expert in China’s ethnic minority groups and a professor of anthropology at Pomona College.
Being religious “is a threat to the political authority to the state; you’re giving allegiance to a non-Chinese authority,” said Mr Gladney.
“Whether it’s the Dalai Lama or the Pope, or it’s the head of Falun Gong [a spiritual group], the state won’t tolerate it.”
Pictures of exiled Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama are banned, though photos of Mr Xi are allowed, and encouraged, as observed by foreign journalists on a recent government-arranged trip to Tibet.
“Xi is centralising authority and centralising power,” said David Stroup, a lecturer at the University of Manchester who has studied ethnic minority groups in China.
There’s an interest “to build a nation-state identity,” he said.
Indeed Mr Xi has talked of the “Chinese dream” – an effort to foster a shared identity, a move the Communist Party is betting will secure greater political stability in the long-run.
Experts, however, argue that the suppression campaign in the long-term will backfire.
“They’re creating more resentment among Muslim communities, and theyr’e going to push more of them into more radical solutions,” said Mr Gladney.
Officially, the ruling Party recognises five major religions – Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Catholicisim and Protestantism. But in practice, the government tightly controls and regulates the practise of these faiths.
China, for instance, has long insisted that it approve bishop appointments, clashing with absolute papal authority to select them. Even mentions of “God” and “Bible” have been censored from children’s classics, like Robinson Crusoe, translated for school curriculums instead as “good heaven” and “several books.”
The suppression is not “just targeted exclusively at Islam, but seems to be prosecuted most vigorously when it comes to Islam,” said Rian Thum, senior research fellow at the University of Nottingham.
That is because of broader Islamophobia in China given a misperception that terrorism is linked to Islam, he said.
Another reason is “the turn toward ethnonationalism as a legitimising narrative for why the Communist Party should be the organisation that runs China".
And that is why religions deemed to be foreign are being targeted, he said.
“This is an ethnonationalist purge of cultural material seen as foreign by virtue of not lining up with the Han ethnic majority.”
READ MORE
Wind turbines are seen in Palm Springs, California. (photo: Mint Images/Getty Images)
How Renewable Energy Could Power Your State
Tara Lohan, The Revelator
Excerpt: "How much of U.S. energy demand could be met by renewable sources? According to a new report from the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, the answer is an easy 100%."
The report looked at how much renewable energy potential each state had within its own borders and found that almost every state could deliver all its electricity needs from instate renewable sources.
And that's just a start: The report found that there's so much potential for renewable energy sourcing, some states could produce 10 times the electricity they need. Cost remains an issue, as does connecting all of this capacity to the grid, but prices have dropped significantly, and efficiency continues to improve. Clean energy is not only affordable but could be a big boost to the economy. Locally sourced renewables create jobs, reduce pollution, and make communities more climate resilient.
So where are the opportunities? Rooftop solar, the study found, could supply six states with at least half of their electricity needs. But wind had the greatest potential. For 35 states, onshore wind alone could supply 100% of their energy demand, and offshore wind could do the same in 21 states. (The numbers overlap a bit.)
The study follows a similar report conducted a decade ago and shows that the clean energy field has made substantial progress in that time.
The Revelator spoke with Maria McCoy, a research associate at the Institute and report co-author, about what's changed and how to turn all the potential into reality.
What's changed in the 10 years since you last looked at the potential for instate renewable energy?
There's definitely been technology improvements in all the energy sources, but especially solar. Obviously there's the same amount of sun, but the solar panels themselves have a higher percentage of solar photovoltaic efficiency. Most states, on average, had 16% more solar potential this time around than they did a decade ago.
And for the other technologies, it's a matter of either more space being available or the technologies themselves improving. Wind turbines now can generate a lot more energy with the same amount of wind.
Where do you see the most potential?
There's been a lot of development in offshore wind and I think it's on the cusp of really becoming a big player in the clean energy field. But regulations, including at the federal level, have blocked it from happening at scale in the United States. Whereas in Europe there's already some incredibly efficient offshore wind farms that are generating a lot of electricity. Those companies are just starting to move into the U.S. market.
But it's onshore wind that has the biggest potential. Our research found that some states could generate over 1,000% of their energy with onshore wind if they really took advantage of it.
Your report didn't consider the potential of large-scale solar. Why?
We looked at the potential of rooftop solar rather than large-scale solar because as an energy democracy organization, we're really focused on distributed and community-owned energy. But it's also because pretty much every state has enough capacity to completely be powered by large-scale solar. It just then becomes an issue of land-usage debates and other challenges.
Your research shows there's a ton of potential for renewables across the country. How do we realize that potential?
Continued support for renewable energy is a big one. There are a lot of credits that are phasing out and without renewing those, it will make it a little bit tougher for the market.
We were looking at just the technical ability to produce the energy and not necessarily the cost effectiveness, but we did recognize in the report that the costs have come down. The cost of solar PV, for example, has dropped 70%. So this is not really a pie-in-the-sky goal. It's definitely gotten a lot more feasible and many cities are already doing it or planning to in the near future.
I think the will is there and people want renewable energy, it's just a matter of fighting the status quo. A lot of these utilities have been using the same business model for decades and they're not really keeping up with where things are going and where the community wants things to go.
They're holding on to their fossil fuel infrastructure and their business model that profits off building more fossil gas plants when solar plus storage is already a cheaper energy source for customers. And wind is very cheap. If utility regulators and state and national policy could hold these utilities accountable to serving the public, which is their job as regulated monopolies, we could finally get to see some of this potential becoming a reality.
Having the ability to generate energy locally and store it and use it locally will create jobs and provide a lot of resilience to the grid and communities. And with climate change, I think that's becoming more and more important.
Was there anything that surprised you about your findings?
We definitely expected things to be better but I don't know if we expected them to be this much better in 10 years. Seeing all this potential and these ridiculously high percentages — I mean, being able to generate greater than 1,000% of the electricity we need with renewables in some states is just a sign of how abundant clean energy is.
And it's kind of sad, I guess, that some states aren't even able to get to 25% or 50% clean energy goals in their renewable portfolio standards. I would hope that the train starts rolling a little faster.
And I hope our research can inspire others who think maybe their state doesn't have a lot of renewable energy capacity in their area to realize that they do, and it could provide for all that they need and more.
Tara Lohan is deputy editor of The Revelator and has worked for more than a decade as a digital editor and environmental journalist focused on the intersections of energy, water and climate. Her work has been published by The Nation, American Prospect, High Country News, Grist, Pacific Standard and others. She is the editor of two books on the global water crisis.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.
READ MORE
Contribute to RSN
Update My Monthly Donation
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.