RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
FOCUS: The Reactionary Soul Print
Wednesday, 26 August 2015 11:21

Krugman writes: "Frank Bruni marvels at polls indicating that Donald Trump, with his multiple marriages and casinos, is the preferred candidate among Republican evangelicals. Others are shocked to see a crude mercantilist make so much headway in the alleged party of free markets. What happened to conservative principles?"

Paul Krugman. (photo: Bloomberg)
Paul Krugman. (photo: Bloomberg)


The Reactionary Soul

By Paul Krugman, The New York Times

26 August 15

 

rank Bruni marvels at polls indicating that Donald Trump, with his multiple marriages and casinos, is the preferred candidate among Republican evangelicals. Others are shocked to see a crude mercantilist make so much headway in the alleged party of free markets. What happened to conservative principles?

Actually, nothing — because those alleged principles were never real. Conservative religiosity, conservative faith in markets, were never about living a godly life or letting the invisible hand promote entrepreneurship. Instead, it was all as Corey Robin describes it: Conservatism is

a reactionary movement, a defense of power and privilege against democratic challenges from below, particularly in the private spheres of the family and the workplace.

READ MORE

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS: Defending Natalie Portman on Holocaust: Sometimes It Can Be Subverted to Fear-Mongering Print
Wednesday, 26 August 2015 10:39

Cole writes: "Actress Natalie Portman has kicked off a controversy with remarks about how remember the Nazi Holocaust against the Jews, in which the National Socialists murdered 6 million."

Actress Natalie Portman. (photo: Denis Makarenko/Shutterstock.com)
Actress Natalie Portman. (photo: Denis Makarenko/Shutterstock.com)


Defending Natalie Portman on Holocaust: Sometimes It Can Be Subverted to Fear-Mongering

By Juan Cole, Informed Comment

26 August 15

 

ctress Natalie Portman has kicked off a controversy with remarks about how remember the Nazi Holocaust against the Jews, in which the National Socialists murdered 6 million.

Her critics have run off on tangents and presented a lot of red herrings. Portman did not question the distinctiveness of the Holocaust, but rather outlined what she thinks should be taken away from it.

She made the remarks in an interview with The Independent:

““I think a really big question the Jewish community needs to ask itself, is how much at the forefront we put Holocaust education. Which is, of course, an important question to remember and to respect, but not over other things… We need to be reminded that hatred exists at all times and reminds us to be empathetic to other people that have experienced hatred also. Not used as a paranoid way of thinking that we are victims.”

She continues: “Sometimes it can be subverted to fear-mongering and like ‘Another Holocaust is going to happen’. We need to, of course, be aware that hatred exists, anti-Semitism exists against all sorts of people, not in the same way. I don’t mean to make false equivalences, we need it to serve as something that makes us empathetic to people rather than paranoid.”

She can pinpoint the moment that she came to this realisation – it was in 2007, on a trip to Rwanda to trek with gorillas. “We went to the museum there, and I was shocked that that [genocide] was going on while I was in school. We were learning only about the Holocaust and it was never mentioned and it was happening while I was in school. That is exactly the type of problem with the way it’s taught. I think it needs to be taught, and I can’t speak for everyone because this was my personal education.”

Her remarks did not imply that Rwanda was equivalent to the genocide of the Jews. She was saying that people who lived through a Holocaust should be extra sensitive to massacres of others, should highlight these further genocides– not because they are equivalent but because having been genocided should produce empathy.

She also warned against any fascist use of the Nazi genocide for the purposes of far-right nationalism, the nursing of grievances against others, the paranoid political discourse that sees every political challenge as 1938 and every oppositional movement as equivalent to Nazism.

She was talking not about history but about psychology, not about comparative statistics but about emotional maturity, not about past wrongs about about present-day moral compass.

We all know Likudniks who use the genocide as a get out of jail free card, who think they can do no wrong because, Holocaust. They are not unique. All massacres and genocides are available for both extreme nationalist and empathetic purposes. The difference does not lie in how many were tortured and killed. The difference lies in what we take away from it.

Look at Japan. The Japanese right wing, exemplified by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, has difficulty recognizing that Japan did anything wrong in the 1930s and 1940s.

But the majority of the Japanese public is pacifist despite having been nuked by the Truman administration. (Two-thirds of the Japanese public reject Abe’s legislation to allow the Japanese army to be deployed for warfare abroad). Whatever their resentments about Hiroshima and Nagasaki, most Japanese cite them as a reason for which war in general must be avoided– i.e. in the sort of spiritually mature manner that Portman is calling for.

Note that I am not comparing the experience of civilians being nuclear-bombed to the Nazi genocide against Jews. They are incommensurate experiences, both productive of long-term historical trauma. The question is, how should we remember and deploy them in today’s world? The majority of the Japanese public has the right idea, in my view, while I think there is something pathological about the Likud Party (just as there is about the Japanese right wing). It is legitimate for Jews to be wary of racial bigotry directed against them by populist movements and to take what steps they can to protect themselves from it– that is a lesson of genocide. But to confuse protests against the illegal Israeli annexation of the Palestinian West Bank with racism is just naked nationalism, a demand to be freed from all critique or constraint because of past suffering. It is not the demand of a grown-up.

Portman is being prophetic in the tradition of the Hebrew Bible, where there were no voices more critical of ancient Jewry than the Isaiahs. She is calling us all to turn hate and trauma not to the purposes of aggrandizement and suspicion but to those of care for today’s victims. Those who cannot understand her need to check their ethics.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Bottom Line on Wall Street: Watch Your Wallets Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=36361"><span class="small">Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Facebook Page</span></a>   
Wednesday, 26 August 2015 08:44

Reich writes: "What's happening to the stock market? It's lost billions over the last few days, then late this morning gained some back."

Robert Reich. (photo: Getty Images)
Robert Reich. (photo: Getty Images)


Bottom Line on Wall Street: Watch Your Wallets

By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Facebook Page

26 August 15

 

hat’s happening to the stock market? It's lost billions over the last few days, then late this morning gained some back. The consensus view is global investors are panicked about (1) the apparent inability of China’s leaders to deal with China’s stock-market bubble and gigantic debt load, which could mean China’s economy is in even worse shape than commonly thought, and (2) the likelihood the Fed will raise interest rates in September – which would not just end the era of cheap money but cause worldwide speculators, who have borrowed cheaply in order to invest in high-risk but higher-return assets, to lose their shirts.

But that's not all.The immediate cause of drop was short-selling (i.e. betting the market will drop) by Wall Street and other global moneyed interests, who have been making a fortune for the last few years on market volatility – placing bets the market will rise (just before it does) and then betting it will fall (just before it does). These bets are self-fulfilling prophesies because so many pension funds, insurance funds, mutual funds, and sovereign-wealth funds follow the leaders – leaving small investors holding the bag. The leaders also have the benefit of inside information unavailable to most other investors (insider trading is now common on the Street, as the Securities and Exchange Commission and the federal courts have relaxed scrutiny.)

Bottom line: Watch your wallets.

Your thoughts?

What’s happening to the stock market? It's lost billions over the last few days, then late this morning gained some...

Posted by Robert Reich on Monday, August 24, 2015


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Why I Endorse Bernie Sanders Print
Tuesday, 25 August 2015 13:31

West writes: "Brother Bernie and Brother Trump are authentic human beings in stark contrast to their donor-driven opponents. Yet only Bernie has authenticity and integrity, whereas Trump is for real but not for right. Trump's attacks on precious Mexican brothers and sisters are unconscionable."

Cornel West. (photo: AOL)
Cornel West. (photo: AOL)


Why I Endorse Bernie Sanders

By Cornel West, Cornel West's Facebook Page

25 August 15

 

hy I Endorse Brother Bernie and Reject Brother Trump.

The American Empire is in decline. Our market-driven culture is in decay. The criminal justice system has failed us. And the political system is collapsing due to the weight of corrupt lobbyists and greedy capitalists. Only organized power of courageous and compassionate people can turn around these catastrophic realities. Social movements in the streets and jails over against the Establishment in both decrepit political parties are fundamental. And prophetic politicians -- always with their faults and blind spots -- who tell the truth about Wall Street, white supremacy, empire, patriarchy and homophobia, deserve our critical support. Yet even more important is the issue of integrity.

Brother Bernie and Brother Trump are authentic human beings in stark contrast to their donor-driven opponents. Yet only Bernie has authenticity and integrity, whereas Trump is for real but not for right. Trump's attacks on precious Mexican brothers and sisters are unconscionable -- even as his blessed mother was born in Scotland and grandfather (Mr. Drumpf) was born in Germany. His kind of nativistic hostility could have excluded them. And Trump's unpatriotic complicity with the plutocratic corruption of our political system for over 30 years calls into question his integrity, including his commitment to "make America great again."

My endorsement of Brother Bernie in the primaries is not an affirmation of the neo-liberal Democratic Party or a downplaying of the immorality of the ugly Israeli occupation of Palestinians. I do so because he is a long-distance runner with integrity in the struggle for justice for over 50 years. Now is the time for his prophetic voice to be heard across our crisis-ridden country, even as we push him with integrity toward a more comprehensive vision of freedom for all.

Why I Endorse Brother Bernie and Reject Brother TrumpThe American Empire is in decline. Our market-driven culture is...

Posted by Dr. Cornel West on Monday, August 24, 2015

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Ring the Alarm: A No-Nonsense Warning on the Rise of Rape Culture Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=16175"><span class="small">Amanda Marcotte, Slate </span></a>   
Tuesday, 25 August 2015 13:22

Marcotte writes: "Rape culture: As far as feminist jargon goes, it's a phrase that's up there with patriarchy or male privilege in creating a surefire deflection response in broad swaths of the public. But in her new book Asking for It: The Alarming Rise of Rape Culture - and What We Can Do About It, writer Kate Harding doesn't hide from the term, employ euphemism, or otherwise mollycoddle her audience."

The reality is that rapists generally go unpunished, victims are blamed, and everyone continues to be confused about the difference between consensual sex and rape. (photo: Katarzyna Bialasiewicz/Thinkstock)
The reality is that rapists generally go unpunished, victims are blamed, and everyone continues to be confused about the difference between consensual sex and rape. (photo: Katarzyna Bialasiewicz/Thinkstock)


Ring the Alarm: A No-Nonsense Warning on the Rise of Rape Culture

By Amanda Marcotte, Slate

25 August 15

 

ape culture: As far as feminist jargon goes, it’s a phrase that’s up there with patriarchy or male privilege in creating a surefire deflection response in broad swaths of the public. But in her new book Asking for It: The Alarming Rise of Rape Culture—and What We Can Do About It, writer Kate Harding doesn’t hide from the term, employ euphemism, or otherwise mollycoddle her audience. In placing the words rape culture front and center in both her title and first sentence, she sets the tone for the rest of her book, a no-nonsense examination of sexual violence in modern America and the widespread cultural complicity that exists around it, whether we want to admit it or not.

In 2009, Harding published Lessons From the Fat-o-Sphere, in which she and co-author Marianne Kirby debunked the cherished myth that fat people can, with just some willpower and a pair of running sneakers, transform themselves permanently into thin people. Now Harding applies that finely honed impatience with bullshit to another great American myth: that we rate rape as a terrible crime and punish it with ferocity. The reality, as Harding details in chapter after chapter, is that rapists generally go unpunished, victims are blamed, and everyone from cable news pundits to TV show writers continues to be confused about the difference between consensual sex and rape, which isn’t actually confusing.

As Harding regularly points out, the explosion of online feminist discourse, as well as the growth in anti-rape activism on campus and elsewhere, has created a continuous public dialogue about rape and sexual assault. That dialogue has led to actual changes both on a cultural level and in policy, as more states start adopting “affirmative consent” standards on campus. But Asking for It serves as a useful reminder of why we still need books—even nonfiction books—in the age of the Internet. Just the sheer volume of stories and examples Harding collects in one place is disquieting and extremely convincing in a way that getting it in pieces through the day-to-day grind of Internet reading will never accomplish.

To be clear, this book is not a chronicle of depressing stories of sexual assault, which would be a miserable read. Harding isn’t here simply to register the existence of crime; she is working as a cultural critic, focusing on the cultural response to and understanding of sexual assault more than the crimes themselves.

Luckily for the reader, Harding has a wicked sense of humor. In response to people who claim that sexual consent is confusing and that it’s hard to know when a woman is saying no, for instance, Harding writes:

Pop quiz: Do the following responses mean yes or no?

  1. I’d love to, but I already have plans.

  2. Sweet of you to offer, but I’m afraid I won’t be able to make it.

  3. Oh geez, maybe another time?

  4. I so wish I could!

“Without knowing what your answers were, I can tell you with complete confidence that if you have the capacity to read this book, you just got 100 percent,” she concludes. In a debate where a lot of people say, with a completely straight face, that consent is ambiguous and that it’s hard to tell the difference between someone who can’t wait to have sex with you and someone who is trying to let you down easily, Harding models a no-nonsense approach.

Not that she shies away from knottier issues, especially when it comes to false rape reporting. One of the strongest chapters in this book is the one where Harding addresses concerns about due process and false rape reporting, taking an unflinching look at what, exactly, causes women to file false rape reports and what they look like.

The typical false reporter, she explains, is not “an evil minx who wraps the entire justice system around her little finger, just to hurt some poor, innocent man.” Instead, a false reporter will more likely claim a stranger rape, and because her story is more lurid and sympathetic that the “typical rape cases” involving alcohol and a victim who knows her assailant, the false reporter will end up getting more attention—and more sympathy—than the vast majority of reporters who tell the truth.

This chapter invariably brings to mind the fiasco over the Rolling Stone’s story about sexual assault at the University of Virginia, which was retracted after it was discovered the centerpiece of the story, an alleged fraternity gang rape, was likely fabricated by just such an attention-seeking and troubled young woman, “Jackie.” Perhaps if Rolling Stone writer Sabrina Rubin Erdely and her editors had read Harding’s book, they would have spotted the red flags in Jackie’s story.

The debate over rape and rape culture can be legitimately baffling because there are a lot of bad actors in our public discourse who deliberately stoke myths about the ambiguity of consent or the vengeance fantasies of feminists. All that noise can be crippling for journalists, politicians, and activists. Asking for It offers a solid grounding and a whole lot of clarity that can help cut through that noise, making it a critical primer for anyone who wants to fight the ongoing problem of sexual assault.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 2361 2362 2363 2364 2365 2366 2367 2368 2369 2370 Next > End >>

Page 2361 of 3432

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN