05 November 20
It's Live on the HomePage Now:
Reader Supported News
RSN: Stephen Eric Bronner | Requiem for a Teacher
Stephen Eric Bronner, Reader Supported News
Bronner writes: "No one should be allowed to scream fire in a crowded theater; respect for all beliefs is required in a multicultural universe, and so is empathy for the subaltern. Freedom of speech has its psychological and social - bordering on the political - limits."
n the 19th of October 2020, a young French high school teacher named Samuel Paty was decapitated. An apparently devout 21-year-old Muslim had become furious that caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad were being shown in class. Demonstrations all over France greeted news of this senseless tragedy. A slain high school teacher instantly turned into a symbol of republican secularism, or what the French call läicité. Police raids were launched against Muslim associations, and there was talk in official circles of deporting hundreds. Mr. Paty’s death has sparked a new wave of Islamophobia and, while Marine La Pen’s neo-fascist National Front is having a field day, President Emmanuel Macron is covering his right flank in preparation for the 2022 election.
Such is the context of a religious “honor killing” that is nothing more than a fanatical act of egoism and revenge. The progressive response is not very difficult to articulate: make clear who is the victim, seek prosecution of the alleged killer and all accomplices, oppose ideological exploitation of the incident, reject arbitrary deportation of Muslims, and affirm the principle of free speech and academic freedom. But it would be a mistake to consider this self-evident. This “post-truth” society of hyper-sensitized “woke” and “cancel” culture too often turns abdication of responsibility into an ethical principle.
From reporting in The New York Times (October 20, 2020) and personal conversations with acquaintances, “explanations” abound that tend to mitigate or even disqualify outright condemnations of what took place. They highlight Mr. Paty’s supposed lack of sensitivity; he should have known that using religious caricatures in class could only cause conflict and hatred. If this teacher’s murderer clearly took matters too far, he still supposedly represents the oppressed, and he was thus justified in feeling insulted. Satirizing someone’s religion is “hurtful.” Whatever Mr. Paty’s intentions, he should have anticipated a controversy that might provide grist for the mill of anti-immigrant reactionaries. In short, he should have been more careful and circumspect.
Little wonder that civil liberties are imperiled. Is pandering to prejudice the criterion for responsible pedagogy? No better objective apology for anti-immigrant sentiments exists than this fanatic’s reaction to a set of cartoons: “devotion” of this sort is nothing but a way of avoiding social responsibility and the dictates of reason. Mr. Paty might have expected criticism and controversy, but not what occurred. Teaching something volatile in a class is not the same as screaming fire in a crowded building: Mr. Paty’s actions occurred in a class where free discourse should be taken for granted. As for empathizing with the marginalized: the murder of this teacher was a decision based on the arrogant and self-righteous assumption that this youth’s feelings somehow expressed the interests of Islam. Not only the act, but this whole line of thinking, is inexcusable. Enough important Muslim leaders in France, such as the imams Hassan Chalgoumi and Hocine Drouiche, whom I am proud to count as friends, make no such excuses and offer no qualifications for such barbaric behavior.
Academic freedom exists to protect the teacher intent on saying something that might provoke controversy; not pandering to parochialism. Mr. Paty apparently did not endorse the blasphemous cartoons but, even if he did, showing them might have rested on little more than the desire to discuss them. Lack of empathy, or the like, should itself have become a topic of debate. There is nothing racist about this pedagogue having his students see the cartoons. In this same vein, the first pages of my book on the notorious Protocols of Zion – A Rumor about the Jews – were devoted to a reprint of this fabricated anti-Semitic pamphlet about a Jewish conspiracy to rule the world. I felt that reading what has been called a ”warrant for genocide” would give students a jolt; it did.
Education should make students uncomfortable. In fact, Theodor Adorno once said that great works should “hurt.” He was right. Critique is predicated on questioning the assumptions underpinning any idea that is taken on faith alone, and unsettling individuals is the most basic purpose of “critical thinking,” no matter what the subject. No intolerant or absolutist interpretation of religion or any body of knowledge that is insulated from criticism can demand respect. Authentic believers have enough confidence in their convictions to extend the rights they exercise to those who worship differently – or do not worship at all. It is those outside the mainstream, the heretics and the free-thinkers, who most rely on the right to free speech. It is for their benefit, not those in power, that this right must be understood as universal.
Immanuel Kant was initially a supporter of the French Revolution; that is, until censorship was imposed and the right to free speech was suppressed. He realized that it underpins all other rights, which is what renders Samuel Paty’s murder doubly senseless. Without free speech, the liberal rule of law and due process cannot function. There can be no freedom of assembly, no right to protest, no meaningful education – and no freedom of religion – without free speech. Through the attack on free speech and academic freedom, indeed, the dogmatists and fanatics are simply taking another step in destroying the very system that enables them to exercise their faith.
R.I.P. SAMUEL PATY
Stephen Eric Bronner is Board of Governors Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Political Science at Rutgers University and Co-Director of the International Council for Diplomacy and Dialogue. His most recent book is The Sovereign (Routledge).
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.
Protesters hold letters that spell Count Every Vote as they cross an overpass while marching in Portland, Oregon, November 4, 2020. (photo: Marcio Jose Sanchez/AP)
Donald Trump Is Trying to Steal the 2020 Election. America Is Ignoring Him.
Alex Ward, Vox
Ward writes: "President Donald Trump is actively trying to stop votes from being counted in the 2020 presidential election and making false claims that Democrats are stealing a win from him. It would all be so damn terrifying if we weren't all, well, used to it."
Something noteworthy — and oddly hopeful — about the 2020 election: People are ignoring Trump’s antics.
Let’s be clear about what’s happening: As his opponent Joe Biden edges closer to victory, Trump is launching tweet after tweet after tweet in an attempt to delegitimize the election. He’s filed lawsuits to stop the vote count in Pennsylvania and Michigan without evidence of wrongdoing. And he gave an early Wednesday address in which he prematurely claimed victory even though there were millions of votes to be counted in battleground states.
Seeing a leader aim to subvert the electoral process in an attempt to maintain power is the kind of behavior the US government would condemn if it were happening in any other nation. But it’s not. It’s happening here.
While Trump’s behavior is troubling — and make no mistake, it’s deeply troubling — what’s most noteworthy is how almost everyone is ignoring it.
States are continuing to count votes, as they are legally bound to do, despite the president’s wishes. Trump-friendly networks like Fox News are denouncing Trump’s proclamation of an election win as “extremely inflammatory.” Basically, everyone is carrying on with the election even as Trump openly wars against it.
Perhaps it’s not so surprising. Trump has spent the last five years claiming elections have been rigged against him, that the press is the enemy of the people, and that a “deep state” conspires against him. He has had no problem sending militarized law enforcement around the country to dole out punishment to those ideologically opposed to him.
That Trump would say and act in such a way isn’t a bug, it’s a feature. In that sense, one would think the US would be in crisis, inching toward a democratic finish line it may not reach, all because Trump keeps pushing it back or erasing it altogether.
But it’s not. It’s moving forward with an election that, as of Wednesday evening, looks likely to have former Vice President Joe Biden legitimately replace Trump. The only people Trump has successfully rallied to his cause are those in his very immediate orbit, not the broader public and not even most of his allies.
Directly following Trump’s claim that he won on Wednesday morning, Vice President Mike Pence hedged with a simple, “We are on the road to victory,” and said that the campaign was confident Trump would win reelection after all votes were counted. The usual process, then, not Trump’s heavy-handed method.
The oddly hopeful message of the 2020 election so far may therefore be the abject failure of Trump’s authoritarian machinations to keep the country stuck where it is. If anything, it looks like the country is swiftly moving along despite him.
President Donald Trump. (photo: Jabin Botsford/Getty)
Judith Butler | Is the Show Finally Over for Donald Trump?
Judith Butler, Guardian UK
Butler writes: "We know that Trump will try to do anything to stay in power, to avoid that ultimate catastrophe in life - becoming 'a loser.'"
READ MORE
People gather at a memorial for George Floyd outside Cup Foods in Minneapolis. (photo: AP)
Police Officers Accused of Killing George Floyd to Be Tried Together, in Minneapolis
Holly Bailey, The Washington Post
Bailey writes: "The former police officers charged with killing George Floyd will be tried together in March in a downtown Minneapolis courthouse, though the judge overseeing the criminal case said he would reconsider a change of venue motion if security or other issues arise."
READ MORE
Poll workers review voter ballots at the Denver Elections Division headquarters in Denver, Colorado, Nov. 3, 2020. (photo: Jason Connolly/AFP)
Colorado Passes Resolution to Award Electoral Votes to Whoever Wins the Popular Vote
Joseph Choi, The Hill
Choi writes: "Colorado has passed Proposition 113, joining the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which is an agreement to give all of a state's electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote. Colorado currently controls nine electoral votes."
olorado has passed Proposition 113, joining the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which is an agreement to give all of a state’s electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote. Colorado currently controls nine electoral votes.
The ballot measure passed with 52 percent of the vote, The Denver Post reports, with 88 percent of votes reported statewide.
Colorado first enacted the proposition into law in 2019, but the decision had to be confirmed by vote cast by Nov. 3. The Centennial State joins 14 other states and the District of Columbia in enacting the proposition into law. Other states that have joined the compact include California, Connecticut and Maryland.
As the nonprofit group National Popular Vote reports, the jurisdictions that have enacted Proposition 113 into law account for 196 electoral votes. The proposition would go into effect when states that have a total number of 270 electoral votes pass such a measure.
Colorado state Sen. Michael Foote (D), a proponent of the bill, said on Wednesday, “The national popular vote is a very straightforward concept. One person should always equal one vote, and the presidential candidate who gets the most votes should win the election.”
Critics of the proposition claim that it will cause presidential candidates to only go to where major sources of votes can be found, such as heavily populated cities in California and New York. Supporters counter that states like Colorado are already ignored under the current Electoral College voting system.
“Coloradoʼs votes should be decided by Coloradans,” said former Colorado House Speaker Frank McNulty (R), a critic of the measure. “This is going to reduce Coloradoʼs clout, and itʼs going to reduce our influence on issues like transportation, water, health care and funding for our military bases.”
The push for a popular voting system first began when former President George W. Bush defeated Democratic candidate Al Gore in 2000, despite Gore winning the popular vote. As the Post reported, Maryland was the first state to join the proposal 13 years ago.
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman Al Saud (L) meets U.S. president Donald Trump at the White House in Washington, U.S., 14 March 2017. (photo: AP)
Some Middle East Leaders Have a Big Stake in US Election
Umar A Farooq, Middle East Eye
Excerpt: "While the world is closely watching the US election, the leaders of some Middle East countries have a lot riding on who wins the race for the White House."
While the majority of people in the Middle East favour a Biden victory, strongmen across the region are hoping for a Trump re-election
Across the region, surveys have shown that the majority of people are dissatisfied with US foreign policy and would favour a Joe Biden victory over President Donald Trump.
Michael Robbins, the director of research at the Arab Barometer research institute, said Trump's actions in the region had not aligned with the interests of ordinary people and a change in the Oval Office could help Washington's standing moving forward.
"They [the people] don't agree with the way their leaders have made the deals with Washington for their own interests," Robbins said during a zoom call on Monday arranged by the Brookings Institution.
"If Biden wins, he has a huge task if he wants to go and shape ordinary citizens' opinions of the United States differently."
Here's a look at some world leaders who have a personal stake in the race, with their fortunes depending heavily on the success - or failure - of President Trump.
Israel
Perhaps none has more riding on a Trump victory than Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The Israeli leader, who's had a rocky relationship with President Barack Obama, has praised Trump as "the greatest friend" Israel ever had.
Since Trump was elected to office, he has made numerous concessions to Israel, including recognising Jerusalem as Israel's capital, withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal and offering a Middle East plan that heavily favours Israel over the Palestinians.
The White House also brokered the establishment of diplomatic ties between Israel and the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.
But Netanyahu's close relationship with Trump, and more broadly the Republican Party and its evangelical Christian base, has come with a price.
It's undercut Israel's traditional bipartisan support in Washington and alienated many Democrats, especially the rising progressive wing and the largely liberal Jewish-American community.
While Biden, who served as vice president under Barack Obama from 2008 to 2016, has said he's a "stalwart support of Israel", the presidential candidate has also said he would rejoin the nuclear deal if Iran returns to compliance.
Sidelined and humiliated by Trump, the Palestinians have made no secret about their hopes for a Biden victory.
"If we are going to live another four years with President Trump, God help us," Palestinian Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh said last month.
Gulf rulers
Saudi Arabia's King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed, the de facto ruler of the United Arab Emirates, were no big fans of the Obama administration.
Their countries welcomed Trump's withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal and the imposition of sanctions that have sent Iran's economy into a freefall.
Trump also stood by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) in the face of sharp criticism after the killing of Middle East Eye columnist Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi agents in late 2018.
Trump vetoed a Senate resolution that would have ended US support for the Saudi and UAE-led war in Yemen which has created the world's most devastating humanitarian crisis.
The Gulf monarchs fear that a Biden presidency could be an extension of the Obama era, with renewed engagement with Iran and greater concern for human rights.
The former vice president has previously said he plans to "reassess" Washington's ties with Riyadh, and end US support for the war in Yemen.
Jean-François Seznec, a Middle East expert at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies in Washington, told Middle East Eye that some of the Democratic wrath against Riyadh may have been a "cudgel" against Trump, rather than a push to reposition America's stance in the region.
"I think there will be negotiations because neither party, whether the Democrats or Republicans, can afford to ever break with Saudi Arabia, especially when Iran is still and will still be the main enemy of the United States," Seznec said.
Iran
Iran's supreme leader has suffered the equivalent of a diplomatic whiplash between the Obama and Trump administrations.
People crowded the streets to praise the 2015 nuclear deal with world powers, hoping for normalised ties with the West and an ultimate end to international sanctions that had strained the country's finances.
Then, just three years later, Trump's unilateral withdrawal from the deal subsequently led to Iran resuming nuclear activities and a resumption of hard-hitting sanctions.
Tensions ratcheted up in a series of incidents culminating with an Iranian missile attack on US forces in Iraq after an American drone strike killed a top Iranian general.
Biden has said that he's willing to sit back down with Iran if it honors the limits of the nuclear deal. Another Trump term could see tensions again return to a boil.
However, Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has insisted that the result of the election "will not affect" Tehran's policy towards Washington.
"Our policy... is clearly defined. It does not change with the movement of individuals," he said on Tuesday.
"It does not matter to us who comes and goes."
Egypt
For Egypt, Trump's ascension to the presidency meant Cairo once again had a powerful supporter in the White House.
Under Barack Obama, the US suspended direct military aid in the wake of the Egyptian coup in 2013, including blocking the delivery of Apache attack helicopters, F-16 fighter jets and more than $250m.
That was a major blow for one of the biggest recipients of economic and military aid from Washington.
Trump has instead moved to boost direct aid to Egypt, including seeking $1.4bn for "bilateral assistance" in 2021, much of it for military and security assistance at a time when Egyptian security services are routinely targeting activists and dissidents.
Still, while a Biden presidency may be more vocal about issues of human rights in the country, there may not be much change in the US's approach to Egypt under President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, as the former vice president will have other areas in foreign policy - such as dealing with China's growing influence - on his agenda.
"I would get the sense that the Egypt-US relationship is sort of on autopilot, and it's no longer the priority used to be for both sides," Adel Abdel Ghafar, a senior fellow with Brookings, said during Monday's virtual call.
"And even from the Egyptian side, looking towards deeper relationships with Russia and China and so on."
Voter drops off their ballots. (photo: Ricardo Arduengo/Getty)
In Swing States, Biden Voters Have Climate Anxiety. Trump Voters Don't.
Emily Pontecorvo, Grist
Pontecorvo writes: "Countless surveys have found that a majority of American voters are concerned about climate change. But in key swing states, 11th-hour polling from the New York Times and Siena College found that the climate-related issues that hit closest to home remain deeply polarizing."
In Arizona, for example, voters were asked how worried they were about rising temperatures from global warming affecting their lives. Home to some of the fastest-warming cities in the United States, average temperatures in Arizona have risen by 3 degrees F since 1970. In Maricopa County, which includes Phoenix, heat-related illnesses and deaths have been trending upward for at least a decade.
But the poll found that these statistics haven’t freaked everyone out to the same degree. While 90 percent of Biden supporters responded that they were at least “somewhat worried” about extreme heat, with 62 percent reporting that they were “very worried,” only 22 percent of Trump voters reported being at least “somewhat worried.” An Arizona Trump supporter interviewed by the Times recognized that it was a hot place to live, but said “that’s why we have air-conditioners.” To the contrary, heat-related illnesses and deaths disproportionately impact poor communities that lack access to, or can’t afford, adequate cooling.
A similar trend was documented in Florida, where likely voters were asked how worried they were about sea-level rise having a significant impact on their lives. Biden, who has made climate change a centerpiece of his campaign strategy in the last few weeks, is banking on voters caring about the issue in Florida. He recently made an appeal to Florida voters with a new ad that focuses on the state’s struggles with rising water.
In it, two residents of Jacksonville talk about increased flooding in their city, from the horrors of Hurricane Irma to regularly dealing with water pooling in their neighborhoods, rising to their front doors. “We need help out here,” says 22-year-old Amirah Jackson.
But based on the Times/Siena poll, it’s unclear whether that message will resonate with voters who aren’t already all-in for Biden. While 84 percent of Biden supporters were at least somewhat concerned, again only 22 percent of Trump supporters reported some concern. Florida may be one of the first of the swing states to report preliminary results on Tuesday, since counties were able to begin processing early and mail-in ballots weeks in advance, and the race between the candidates is tight. The poll found Biden leading Trump by 3 points; however, that lead was within the margin of error of 3.2 percentage points.
In Pennsylvania, the most prominent climate-related issue isn’t the physical effects of a warming planet, but the implications for a significant economic driver in the state: fracking. And it’s clear that Pennsylvania voters’ feelings about the practice of drilling for oil and gas using hydraulic fracturing techniques are more varied and nebulous, particularly on the left.
In response to the Times/Siena poll, only 27 percent of voters said they opposed fracking entirely, as compared to the 52 percent majority reported in an August poll conducted by CBS News. Among Trump supporters in Pennsylvania, 86 percent were pro-fracking, but those in Biden’s camp were more mixed, with 25 percent pro-fracking and 47 percent opposed to it. That means nearly a third of Biden-supporting respondents said they did not know or declined to answer.
Trump and Vice President Mike Pence have repeatedly lied on the campaign trail about Biden’s position on fracking to win over voters, arguing that the former vice president would ban the practice, despite Biden’s insistence that he would not, and the fact that as president he wouldn’t even have the power to do so. We’ll soon find out whether the issue is as central to the Pennsylvania vote as Trump thinks it is.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.