RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
Native Americans Have Been Taking on Billionaires in the Hamptons Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=57253"><span class="small">Walker Bragman and Mark Colangelo, Jacobin</span></a>   
Monday, 30 November 2020 09:23

Excerpt: "Southampton, New York, is the famed summer retreat of billionaires and celebrities. Now it's the scene of an indigenous struggle for justice and survival."

Protesters outside Mike Bloomberg's house in Southampton on July 1, 2020. (photo: Steve Pfost/Getty Images)
Protesters outside Mike Bloomberg's house in Southampton on July 1, 2020. (photo: Steve Pfost/Getty Images)


Native Americans Have Been Taking on Billionaires in the Hamptons

By Walker Bragman and Mark Colangelo, Jacobin

30 November 20


Southampton, New York, is the famed summer retreat of billionaires and celebrities. Now it's the scene of an indigenous struggle for justice and survival.

outhampton, New York, is the famed summer retreat of billionaires and celebrities. A two-hour drive east from New York City, mansions line its picturesque beaches and luxury vehicles parade its streets. But just outside of town, a Native American group has been staging a month-long occupation for their tribe’s economic empowerment. The protest ends today, on the Native American National Day of Mourning, when millions will be celebrating Thanksgiving.

The Sovereignty Camp 2020 is set across the Sunrise Highway from a 61-foot tall electronic billboard featuring the Shinnecock Indian Nation seal. Down the side, ads for NYU Langone Health flash in brilliant technicolor. Recently, it also featured public safety messages from Southampton Town related to COVID-19 — ad space the Nation gave free of charge. The highway, which cuts through dense woods, doesn’t have lights or any other billboards, making this one a jarring sight at night. The Nation is planning to build another sign at the campsite, but the state of New York is fighting them in court.

To the moguls nearby, the billboards are an assault on their idyllic way of life — one they are trying to tear down. To the Shinnecock, the signs are monuments asserting their continued existence in the face of generational oppression. The billboards are also about immediate survival: When completed, the structures should generate millions in desperately needed revenue for the Nation from advertisers eager for visual promotion in a spot promising maximum visibility to an affluent audience.

The conflict spotlights not merely one local property battle, but the ongoing displacement of indigenous peoples from their own tribal lands. It is a parable affiliated in popular culture with South America and the western United States — and now it is playing out in the vacation hideaway of the wealthiest and most powerful people on the planet.

“Our Cherished Way Of Life”

The Shinnecock are one of 13 tribes indigenous to Long Island — and the only one with federal recognition, which they secured in 2010. Their original territory ranged about 146 square miles — from current day Eastport to East Hampton; from Peconic Bay to the Atlantic Ocean. Since their first encounter with English settlers in 1640, their holdings have been diminished to less than 1,000 acres.

There are 1,550 Shinnecock alive today — many of them descendants of enslaved natives and Africans. About half of that population lives on a 1.3 square mile reservation that borders Southampton. The Rez, as it is called by locals, accounts for most of Shinnecock tribal holdings and is stricken with poverty.

Meanwhile, about 100 yards from the Rez is Meadow Lane, also known as “Billionaire Lane.” This seaside road is home to the exclusive Meadow Club of Southampton as well as designer Calvin Klein, KKR & Co. co-founder Henry Kravis, hedge fund mogul Daniel Och, and Apollo Global Management co-founder Leon Black. In February, a home on Meadow Lane sold for $41 million. An 8-minute drive from The Rez is Coopers Neck Lane, ranked by Zillow as the 8th richest street in America in 2015, with a median home value of $11.8 million.

From the start, the Town of Southampton and New York State sought to stop the project before it ever got off the ground. The battle has received widespread media attention, even making an appearance on The Daily Show, which took out an ad on the billboard that read, “Relax and enjoy your stolen land.”

After several stop-work orders and a cease and desist were ignored, the New York Attorney General’s office filed suit in 2019 on behalf of the state’s Department of Transportation seeking to remove the completed structure and prevent construction of the second sign. The suit alleges that the Nation did not seek proper permitting, that there are safety concerns for highway drivers, and that the Westwoods is not Shinnecock land. In May, a New York State lower court judge denied the state’s request for a preliminary injunction to remove the monument, but the battle is far from over.

Meanwhile, residents from the surrounding community circulated a petition on Change.org demanding the removal of the billboard — and the controversy has driven advertisers away, depriving the tribe of desperately needed revenue.

“As residents of the Town of Southampton, we enjoy the beauty of our town and take great pride in our environment, which offers lush woods, beautiful waterways and the quaint communities in which we live,” the petition read. “But the large illuminated billboards that are being erected on Sunrise Highway threaten to damage our cherished way of life.”

The ongoing battle prompted the Warriors of the Sunrise, a Shinnecock-led activist group dedicated to the Nation’s economic development, to organize the 26-day Sovereignty Camp. The protesters argue that the site of the monument billboards, a territory known as the Westwoods, is Shinnecock land and thus New York State’s lawsuit represents an unlawful incursion on the Nation’s sovereignty. The Nation shares this position. The encampment also has the support of groups like The Long Island Progressive Coalition, Cooperation LI, and both the Nassau County and Suffolk County Democratic Socialists of America.

“Monuments can tell a story, and that’s exactly what this is,” said Tela Troge, spokesperson for the Warriors and a tribal attorney. “It’s a monument to the Shinnecock Nation and it’s a monument to the Nation’s continued existence.”

Southampton town Supervisor Jay Schneiderman told the Daily Poster that while he did object to the billboards when they first went up, believing them to be “out of character for the area” — a sentiment he still holds — the town was not standing in the way of their construction or operation.

“Large illuminated digital advertising displays are more typical of urban areas,” Schneiderman wrote in an email. “However, I respect the Nation’s desire for income to help address social and economic issues on the reservation. The town has not blocked the operation of the billboard or the construction of the second billboard. [New York] State believes that the billboards violate federal highway law.”

Schneiderman declined to say whether or not he felt the state’s lawsuit ought to continue.

Sixteen Coats, Sixty Bushels of Corn and Protection

At the heart of the state lawsuit is a 300-year-old land dispute over territory known as Shinnecock Hills, which separates the billboard monument sites — also contested land — from the reservation itself.

The Hills was Shinnecock territory for thousands of years before settlers first arrived and “purchased” land from the natives to establish Southampton in exchange for 16 coats, 60 bushels of corn, and protection from other tribes. The partition involved two dubious transactions in 1703 and 1859. In the first, the Shinnecock relinquished ownership of the Hills and Shinnecock Neck to the town in exchange for a 1,000-year lease. In the second, the state legislature approved a transfer of the Hills to the town’s proprietors in exchange for the Shinnecock reclaiming absolute ownership of the Neck — a move that reduced tribal holdings to less than 1,000 acres.

In his book “Colonizing Southampton,” the late David Goddard, a retired sociology professor at the City University of New York, noted that the Shinnecock had rejected similar offers from the town multiple times over the years, but faced mounting pressure in the form of continued encroachments on the land by the settlers and costly lawsuits.

There are also lingering questions about the signatures on the petition submitted to the legislature by the town. Around 1885, a dozen Shinnecock tribal members signed an affidavit alleging the signatures had been forged. Compounding those problems, Congress never authorized the exchange as required by The Federal Non?Intercourse Act of 1790, which prohibits states and local governments from engaging in land transactions with Native American tribes without federal approval.

Efforts to reclaim the land by the Nation have thus far been unsuccessful. A 2005 suit against New York State ended a decade later with an unfavorable ruling from the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals that remuneration would be too “disruptive” to the non-Native communities. The decision had been the latest in a string of similar rulings by the 2nd Circuit against tribes seeking to reclaim their ancestral territories. Still, the tides may be turning nationally. Over the summer, the Supreme Court ruled that much of the State of Oklahoma was situated on tribal land for the purposes of jurisdiction.

The partition of the Shinnecock Hills may affect the outcome of the current litigation over the Westwoods billboard monuments.

In his May decision preventing removal of the existing sign, New York State Supreme Court Judge Sanford Neil Berland wrote that “not only is it undisputed that the Nation owns the land in question, but there is no doubt that the Nation has owned it for many decades, if not centuries, predating most, if not all, significant development in the area.”

But in its amended complaint filed the next month, the state argued that actually the Westwoods “is separate and apart from the Shinnecock Indian Reservation” — an argument only made possible by the partition — and “is not aboriginal or sovereign lands.”

“We Are Seriously Struggling”

Contested land ownership has hindered Shinnecock efforts to develop economically. In 2007, plans for a casino and bingo hall in Hampton Bays on a Westwoods parcel fell through after the town sued and a federal judge ruled that the nation had lost aboriginal title to the Westwoods during colonial times.

At the time, the Shinnecock tribe was not federally recognized despite applying in 1978, and that lack of recognition presented a serious hurdle to its efforts. However, with the nation’s federal recognition in 2010, the outlook has changed. This past September, the nation announced that not only had the U.S. National Indian Gaming Commission approved its tribal gaming ordinance, but it had partnered with Native American gaming chain Seminole Hard Rock Entertainment and developer Tri-State Partners on plans for another casino.

But those plans are a ways off and The Rez is in desperate need now.

“Right now, [the billboard monument] is literally the only revenue that we have and it doesn’t even meet our minimum basic needs,” Warriors spokesperson Troge explained. “We are seriously struggling.”

She acknowledged that the situation is far from ideal in that the nation must rely on revenue from some of the same forces driving commercialization and development on the east end. The billboard has featured advertisements for Rolex, BMW, and other luxury brands.

“Everything about all of this is perverse,” she said.

But the reality is, 60 percent of The Rez’s population live below the poverty line according to the last census. Data compiled by TownCharts reveals that over half of the population earns less than $15,000 annually. Food insecurity, lack of basic supplies, and inadequate housing are persistent problems.

The COVID Threat

The COVID-19 pandemic has compounded the situation. The Shinnecock had to bar outsiders from their annual Labor Day Powwow at the Rez, which normally draws thousands and represents a substantial revenue source for the Nation. While Native Americans are disproportionately affected by the pandemic, the Shinnecock have been remarkably successful at containing the virus. Still, Troge said there has been a recent outbreak on The Rez linked to early voting, which could spell disaster.

“There’s a vast unmet need for a housing fund,” she said. “We have a situation where a lot of people on The Rez live in multigenerational households. Sometimes you have three or four generations living in one house so it’s almost impossible to quarantine from vulnerable members of your family.”

To her point, The Rez has a larger average household size than the rest of the state and the country as a whole, and 33 percent of families rely on a single earner.

“To make things worse, most houses have serious structural deficiencies,” she said. “Some lack plumbing, some lack heating, and it’s this widespread problem because we’re completely cut off from accessing any type of traditional capital that people would use for housing. Like, we can’t get mortgages, we can’t get home equity lines. So basically how people are building houses is like, you have to like, basically put away money from your paycheck each week or you have to max out your credit cards.”

Troge noted that there are tribal members who will be spending this winter living in tents on The Rez — and some who won’t even have that luxury.

Schneiderman, the Southampton town supervisor, told the Daily Poster that he has been working to secure a grant “to address some of the housing issues affecting a few of the elders living on the Reservation.” He also noted that he has supported “many of the Shinnecock Nation’s economic development initiatives, including the medical marijuana dispensary and the gas station.”

Asked about reparations, he cautioned that “the town would not be the proper party to discuss this. It would have to be at a federal level.”

A Debt Owed

Troge told the Daily Poster that economic development is part of a debt owed to the Shinnecock. Currently, economic development projects like the billboard account for 30 percent of the tribal government’s budget.

In the 400 years since they encountered settlers, the Shinnecock have faced genocide — outright enslavement and indentured servitude, decimation from foreign diseases like smallpox, forced assimilation through though Indian schools like the notorious Thomas Indian School of Eerie, New York and the Carlisle Indian School. That legacy of violence continues today through not only economic neglect, but continued encroachment and cultural desecration.

In 2018, a construction crew unearthed an ancient burial site while digging a foundation for a new development in the Shinnecock Hills, complete with skeletal remains and artifacts. While the Shinnecock long for their ancestors’ graves to be left in peace, there was little they could do to prevent the excavation, and the remains were removed from the site.

In September, the Southampton town board, after months of protest from tribal members, unanimously adopted the Graves Protection Act and placed a moratorium on construction in parts of the Shinnecock Hills. The move earned praise from Shinnecock Nation Chairman Bryan Polite who said it marked “a new brighter chapter in the three-hundred-and-eighty-year relationship between the Town of Southampton and the Shinnecock Nation.”

In our correspondence, Schneiderman called the act “landmark legislation.” But Rebecca Genia, a longtime Shinnecock activist and member of the Warriors, said the town’s actions were “watered-down” and took way too much work.

“For decades, we’ve been pleading with them to adopt these laws and keep the bulldozers out of our sacred hills,” she said, explaining that the the moratorium came “finally with more pressure, more public people, more allies coming together to email the town board, to call them to text them, to have personal conversations with them. We had a demonstration in January of 2020. It was freezing cold out there but 150 people showed up to stop the desecration of the Shinnecock Hills.”

Genia expressed doubt that much will change even with the moratorium in place. She noted that despite the protesters’ efforts, one home was still allowed to be constructed.

Troge said that the construction in the Hills has not stopped even now.

“They keep building. It’s horrible. It’s horrible to watch,” she said. “We’ve actively been there watching as they’re taking our ancestors’ skulls out of the ground.”

Troge said a justification often given for removal is that the remains could be from victims of MS-13 related gang violence. She said the desecrations are alarmingly common and necessitate “repatriation ceremonies” wherein the Nation repossesses the remains that have been removed, and buries them as close as possible to their original resting places. According to Genia, in the previous year alone, the Shinnecock have conducted over one hundred such ceremonies.

“I can’t explain the toll that it takes on you,” Troge added, describing having been in attendance.

The largest gravesite desecration happened in 1891 with the construction of the Shinnecock Hills Golf Club — the same Club that hosted the 2018 U.S. Open, an event from which the Shinnecock did not benefit financially except for being allowed to charge visitors for parking on their land. Untold numbers of gravesites were excavated during construction of the course. As there were no protocols for dealing with ancient remains, Genia explained, many of the bones ended up in trash cans, in people’s attics, or were swept into the golf course’s bunkers.

“These billionaires build their mansions on stolen land,” Genia said, “and play golf on our cemeteries.”

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Is Emmanuel Macron Pandering to the Far Right? Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=57252"><span class="small">Rebecca Rosman, Al Jazeera</span></a>   
Monday, 30 November 2020 09:22

Rosman writes: "The French president faces a tough balancing act, pressured to appeal to the right, but not so far as to abandon the left."

Unemployment is expected to be one of Macron's biggest challenges in the run up to the 2022 vote. (photo: Ludovic Marin/AP)
Unemployment is expected to be one of Macron's biggest challenges in the run up to the 2022 vote. (photo: Ludovic Marin/AP)


Is Emmanuel Macron Pandering to the Far Right?

By Rebecca Rosman, Al Jazeera

30 November 20


The French president faces a tough balancing act, pressured to appeal to the right, but not so far as to abandon the left.

aris, France – With his eyes on a second mandate and fierce challenge from far-right opposition leader Marine Le Pen, French President Emmanuel Macron’s desire to appeal to conservative voters may not come as a surprise.

But many say his recent rightward shift will not bring him any closer to pinching support from Le Pen’s stronghold base.

“What [Macron] is doing now is just preparing for the major success of Marine Le Pen,” Alexis Poulin, a political commentator, told Al Jazeera.

“[Far-right voters] clearly want to stick to the original and in Macron, they only see a fake president trying to act like he’s understanding.”

But the motivation behind Macron’s recent actions is more complicated than that.

The next presidential vote

With the next presidential elections 18 months away, France’s mainstream left and right parties have yet to present any viable candidates, leaving Le Pen in line for a 2017 repeat when she made it to the second-round runoff.

While Le Pen ultimately lost the vote to Macron with 35 to his 65 percent, there are growing fears within the president’s party that this could change in 2022.

Record unemployment in the wake of the coronavirus is expected to be one of Macron’s biggest challenges, and he continues to struggle to shake off his image as an ex-banker elitist out of touch with the everyday struggles of the country’s working class.

This leaves Macron faced with a difficult balancing act, under pressure to appeal to the country’s right, but not so far as to abandon the left.

Nevertheless, a series of controversial actions from the self-described centrist have puzzled voters on both sides of the political aisle.

Two forthcoming laws, in particular, have left many suspecting that Macron is pandering to the far right.

One proposal, known as the Global Security Bill, has already passed through the lower house of parliament.

Critics are up in arms about one clause in particular, which would restrict people from filming the police in a way that threatens their physical or mental integrity; violators would risk a 45,000-euro ($53,000) fine and one year in prison.

The second bill, which will be debated in Parliament next month, is part of a wider crackdown on “extremism” and what Macron has called “Islamist separatism”.

Among other things, the law would monitor international funding coming to mosques, limit homeschooling and create a special certificate programme for French imams.

Attack on freedoms

Earlier this month, 33 influential personalities who voted for Macron in 2017 signed an open letter in the French investigative website Mediapart decrying both proposals for “rolling back the freedoms of information, opinion, belief, education, association, demonstration and protest”.

“To allow this attack on our freedoms and rights is to install what the neo-fascist extreme right dreams of: an authoritarian state where the rule of law becomes a police state,” the letter read.

The country’s far right, on the other hand, has overwhelmingly supported both bills, with some calling for even stricter measures.

“We do not treat the causes. We know very well that mass immigration leads to community withdrawal,” National Rally spokesperson Sebastien Chenu told French radio France Info when asked about the “separatism” proposal.

“Timid advances will not meet the immense challenge. France is no longer confronted with a simple ‘separatism’, but with a communitarianism of conquest,” Nationally Rally Vice President Jordan Banealla said of the proposal earlier this year.

In the wake of two gruesome attacks, including the beheading of a school teacher near Paris followed by three fatal stabbings at a church in the southern city of Nice, public support for a law that claims to curb “extremism” remains high.

But in order to truly capture the far-right vote, Macron would need to take an even more hardline stance on immigration.

Something he is not willing to do, says Jean-Yves Camus, a political scientist specialising in the far right.

“He will never be able to serve this kind of stuff to his centre-left wing supporters,” Camus told Al Jazeera.

Because of his position as a centrist, Camus says Macron cannot succeed in capturing votes from the far right or far left.

“There are too many big differences and so many topics they do not agree on, especially when it comes to globalisation, the European Union and immigration policy.”

Camus says Macron’s latest moves should rather be taken as an appeal to more traditional French conservatives.

But even some deputies from the traditional right have shown restraint.

Four members of Les Republicains (LR) abstained from Tuesday’s vote on the Global Security Bill, after police were filmed using excessive force while dismantling a protest refugee camp set up on the Place de la République in central Paris.

Widespread public fury over the law increased days later, when surveillance footage caught three police officers brutally beating a Black music producer as he was entering his Paris studio.

The victim, Michel Zecler, later said he also endured a series of racial slurs from the officers.

In a Facebook post, Macron said the footage brought “shame upon us”, adding he was calling on the government to form proposals that “reaffirm the link that must naturally exist between the French people and those who protect them”.

Meanwhile, thousands turned up across the country over the weekend to protest the bill.

In Paris, demonstrators were sprayed with tear gas after launching fireworks at the police.

Le Pen, meanwhile, voted in favour of the law in Tuesday’s National Assembly vote, as she called for this “protection” to be extended to military forces.

Macron is not Le Pen

Given the widespread backlash, analysts suspect it is unlikely the text of that bill will remain in its current form.

But the influence of the far right in both the security and “separatism” proposals cannot be underestimated.

“[Macron] is creating policies Le Pen would never even dream of,” Poulin told Al Jazeera.

But for all his so-called pandering, Macron is not Le Pen. And that may very well be his saving grace in the next presidential election, according to Camus.

“You have to keep in mind that many people in this country will vote for the man who can just stop Marine Le Pen from winning the presidency,” Camus said.

If voters can rely on Macron for anything, it may be just that.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Beyond Breonna: Louisville Police Make the Case for Abolition Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=51505"><span class="small">Natasha Lennard, The Intercept</span></a>   
Sunday, 29 November 2020 14:00

Lennard writes: "The idea of defunding the police is roiling Democratic Party politics - but it’s not about that. It's about the horrors of policing."

Demonstrators protesting the fatal police shooting of Breonna Taylor display a flyer with photos of the Louisville Metro police officers accused of fatally wounding Taylor, at the Louis XVI statue on Aug. 1, 2020, in Louisville, Ky. (photo: Joshua Lott/The Washington Post/Getty Images)
Demonstrators protesting the fatal police shooting of Breonna Taylor display a flyer with photos of the Louisville Metro police officers accused of fatally wounding Taylor, at the Louis XVI statue on Aug. 1, 2020, in Louisville, Ky. (photo: Joshua Lott/The Washington Post/Getty Images)


Beyond Breonna: Louisville Police Make the Case for Abolition

By Natasha Lennard, The Intercept

29 November 20

 

n recent weeks, mainstream political discussions around the notion of “defunding the police” have taken a pernicious, if predictable turn. The so-called debate is no longer focused on the violent facts of U.S. policing. Instead, this ongoing news story has become, first and foremost, a narrative about the Democratic Party and its divisions. Such is the nature of the media-politics machine: A demand situated in a fight for life and liberation has been transmogrified into a realpolitik hot button — replete with polls, right-wing fearmongering, questions of electability, and calls for less “divisive” rhetoric.

Pushed to the background, meanwhile, is the unending flood of reports and revelations that again and again show policing to be an institution worthy of abolition. Just this month, two such stories came from Louisville, Kentucky, where 26-year-old Breonna Taylor was killed by police in March during a botched raid. Louisville Metro Police, the same department to which Taylor’s killers belonged, was found to have hidden from the public a staggering 738,000 records documenting sexual abuse of minors by two officers — concealment that was aided by the Jefferson County Attorney’s Office. The records related to the abuse of youths in the “Explorer Scouts” program, created for young people interested in law enforcement careers.

And just two weeks ago, a woman filed a sexual assault lawsuit against former Louisville detective Brett Hankison, one of the cops directly involved in Taylor’s death. The lawsuit claims that Hankison has a history of using his authority as a police officer to prey on women.

The wanton killing of a young Black woman involving a cop with an alleged history of predation, alongside the coverup of a major case of child sexual abuse — all recent events from just one department in one U.S. city. As is typical, funding for the policing operations will constitute the largest expenditure of Louisville’s 2020 city budget: $190.6 million out of $613 million.

Highlighting recent abuses committed by this one police department, which takes nearly a third of a city’s budget, does not dispositively prove the need for police abolition, let alone defunding. Reformists could well respond that oversight and training, or more drastic reforms, are the appropriate solutions. Following Taylor’s killing, and the potent anti-racist uprisings it helped catalyze, a number of such reforms were instituted, including an end to no-knock warrants. And news of the sexual abuse records coverup has brought reliable calls for accountability from local politicians.

Yet the Louisville cases highlight the problems of a violent and unaccountable law enforcement apparatus; problems which are so widespread and historic that they point to an unreformable institution. As abolitionist organizer Mariame Kaba put it, “When you see a police officer pressing his knee into a black man’s neck until he dies, that’s the logical result of policing in America. When a police officer brutalizes a black person, he is doing what he sees as his job.” The Louisville examples might not make for an airtight case for abolition, but they makes a case nonetheless — a case that can be made almost anywhere police are found across the country.

Incident after incident might not convince a skittish liberal of the need to go beyond reform and toward abolition, but it should be sufficient to show that police defunding is a reasonable demand. The argument that police presence in communities is a source of harm should not be considered controversial.

Sexual assault committed by cops is not rare. A 2015 data investigation by the Buffalo News found that a police officer in the U.S. is accused of an act of sexual misconduct on average every five days. It’s an insult to survivors to suggest that police are a protection from rape and sexual violence.

Meanwhile, police lying in official reports and in court — perjury, that is — is so common that it has earned its own neologism: “testilying.”

It is an affront to Black and Indigenous lives, as well as the lives of other communities of color, to treat police racism as anomalous, or even endemic but curable within the existing justice system. A fantastical failure of empirical thinking is involved in claiming that an institution, which has always operated to uphold the hierarchies and brutalities of racial capitalism, can somehow be maintained while disentangled from that role.

There’s every reason for skepticism over claims that reform and oversight are ways to end the harm of policing; a century of attempted reforms have had no such effect. In another recent news story, newly released reports show that the New York Police Department consistently ignored and rejected recommendations from the Civilian Complaint Review Board on punishments for police misconduct. The board is an independent oversight agency, established in 1993 to address complaints about police impunity — which has continued apace regardless. “In about 71 percent of 6,900 serious misconduct charges, the Police Department reduced or rejected recommendations for stiff discipline of officers,” the New York Times reported, based on data from the last two decades.

In a related, and also recently reported, incident, four senior officials were fired from the Civilian Complaint Review Board. Fellow employees claimed that the officials were known for pushing a more aggressive stance toward the police.

The risk in drawing attention to cases of extreme police violence and duplicity is that police apologists can dismiss these brutalities as anomalous in the grand scheme of police work, even when they number in the thousands per year. But such abuses could only emerge within certain conditions: an impunity-drenched culture and history of dehumanizing Black life. These anti-abolitionist arguments tacitly treat as acceptable the normal activities of policing that have little to do with catching “bad guys” and everything to do with protecting capital while criminalizing poverty and Blackness.

It may be the case that campaigns to reduce or remove police funding do better with voters when “defund the police” rhetoric is avoided, in favor of calls to invest instead in other social services. Ballot Measure J in Los Angeles County, which requires 10 percent of the city’s unrestricted general funds be invested in social services and alternatives to incarceration, not prisons and policing, was successful on the election ballot, and commentators have credited the success in part to campaigners avoiding the word “defund.”

It is also the case that only a vanishingly small number of politicians, on both the local and national level, are seriously pushing for defunding within an abolitionist framework.

Yet these dynamics need not determine the terms of the debate. Indeed, calls to abolish the entire policing and carceral system should not be reduced to a Democratic Party “debate” at all. With new, vile chapters, like the latest from Louisville, added every week to policing’s unbroken history of racist, patriarchal violence, those calling for abolition should no longer have to demonstrate the basic grounds for this fight.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
The Challenge of Combating Fake News in Asian American Communities Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=56870"><span class="small">Terry Nguyen, Vox</span></a>   
Sunday, 29 November 2020 13:58

Nguyen writes: "Less than a week after Election Day, a spreadsheet titled 'Battling Asian American Misinformation' began circulating in progressive Asian American social media circles, primarily among those of Vietnamese and Chinese descent."

A copy of the Epoch Times, a free newspaper backed by the Chinese spiritual movement Falun Gong that tends to espouse anti-communist, pro-Trump views. (photo: Miguel Candela/SOPA Images/Lightrocket/Getty Images)
A copy of the Epoch Times, a free newspaper backed by the Chinese spiritual movement Falun Gong that tends to espouse anti-communist, pro-Trump views. (photo: Miguel Candela/SOPA Images/Lightrocket/Getty Images)


The Challenge of Combating Fake News in Asian American Communities

By Terry Nguyen, Vox

29 November 20


Language diversity within the AAPI community means misinformation is difficult to track.

ess than a week after Election Day, a spreadsheet titled “Battling Asian American Misinformation” began circulating in progressive Asian American social media circles, primarily among those of Vietnamese and Chinese descent.

The most popular YouTube channels flagged on the spreadsheet accumulated hundreds of thousands of subscribers, in which pundits discussed misleading claims about election fraud, Hunter Biden’s relationship with China (a conspiracy disseminated by pro-Trump figures), and the Chinese Communist Party’s meddling in the presidential election. Below some of these clips, YouTube included a label informing viewers that the Associated Press had called the election for Joe Biden. But beyond that small disclaimer, most channels were still monetized and still easily discoverable. Flagging it to YouTube, as some soon realized, amounted to doing nothing.

The election might be over, but the uphill battle against online misinformation, notably within first-generation immigrant communities, wages on.

According to CNN’s exit polling, Biden won over the majority of Asian American and Pacific Islander voters this presidential election — 61 percent of AAPI voters supported Biden, while 34 percent backed President Donald Trump. But if Democrats want to maintain a sizable lead, especially within specific ethnic groups where Democratic support has waned, they must address the growing issue of native-language misinformation, according to grassroots organizers and community activists.

Because upon disaggregating voter data — something few non-Asian polling organizations and publications tend to do — the political tendencies of this demographic are more complex and less predictable than meets the eye. A quarter of AAPI voters identify as independent, and as more people become naturalized citizens each cycle, Democrats and Republicans have a fresh slate of voters they’re able to court.

Data from the 2020 Asian American Voter Survey showed that out of the six ethnic groups surveyed, Vietnamese Americans were the only ones to express more support for Trump (48 percent) than Biden (36 percent). When factoring in surveys that extend back to 2012, however, data suggests that Republican margins, while still in the minority, are increasing. While some Asian experts thought AAPI voters might be turned off by Trump’s harsh xenophobic language (which fed into anti-Asian sentiments), surveys suggest that a not-insignificant minority of the electorate are not just tolerating it but have bought into the rhetoric, in addition to the rampant conspiracy theories.

Progressive Asian American organizers say online misinformation, specifically regarding the Democrats and the president-elect, played a role in exposing Asian American voters to more radical right-wing views since 2016. First-generation immigrants who have a contentious history with China and communist governments — such as those from Cambodia, Taiwan, Vietnam, and Laos — are more susceptible to the false claims Trump has made about China and its supposed impact on the election and the Democratic Party’s “socialist” tendencies.

Nonpartisan organizations, like APIAVote, are also concerned about how voters with limited English proficiency are vulnerable to disinformation about the voting process. Some fretted over the reliability of mail-in ballots, voter safety at the polls, and if their ballot would be counted if they voted for certain candidates.

“This election cycle, we were involved with a larger network of community organizations to make sure we fought back on disinformation about the election process,” Christine Chen, executive of APIAVote, told Vox. “It appeared that certain communities were more vulnerable and targeted, with the information translated into their language and posted onto WeChat or Facebook.”

The organization and its community partners don’t expect the torrent of fake news to subside post-election; these campaigns can have a future impact on how Asian Americans participate and vote in upcoming elections, including the Georgia Senate runoff elections, which could determine whether Biden will be able to push through his agenda.

Misinformation campaigns can be hard to track, due to the language and platform diversity of the AAPI community

The AAPI community is the fastest-growing electorate in the US, according to the Pew Research Center, growing from 4.6 million in 2000 to 11.1 million in 2020. Yet the categorization of “Asian American and Pacific Islander” is broad and vague, and rarely used as a self-identifier. There is little to no political solidarity among most of these voters, especially first-generation immigrants, who hail from different cultural, economic, and religious backgrounds with varying political histories and sensitivities. To put it simply, the Asian American electorate is overwhelmingly diverse.

Different ethnic groups communicate and receive news on different chat and social media platforms beyond the tech behemoths of Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, popular among English-language voters. Since the AAPI umbrella represents voters from more than 30 different ethnic groups and languages, misinformation campaigns within these communities are challenging to track.

For example, Chinese Americans who hail from mainland China tend to use WeChat, while those from Taiwan and Hong Kong use Line and WhatsApp, respectively. Korean Americans have KakaoTalk, Vietnamese Americans mostly rely on Facebook, and many Indian Americans use WhatsApp. Meanwhile, many immigrants with limited English proficiency naturally gravitate toward native-language media — television, radio, and print media — that is produced in the US or from their home country, which might carry its own individual biases.

“I don’t know if there is a liberal Korean newspaper in America,” said Jeong Park, a reporter who formerly covered the Asian American community for the Orange County Register. In the lead-up to the election, Park noticed that Korea Daily, the largest US newspaper for Korean Americans, began to produce videos that alleged election fraud and corruption within the Biden family, which garnered hundreds of thousands of views.

“Korean newspapers are mostly moderate to conservative and work to amplify the voices of the business class, but I’m pretty alarmed at how those videos have so many views,” he said.

The same dynamic exists among Vietnamese US-based media, according to volunteers at Viet Fact Check, a project launched by the Progressive Vietnamese American Organization (PIVOT). “In our own efforts to raise awareness in our community, we’ve been turned down or muzzled by Vietnamese-language press because of the fear of offending advertisers or the readership,” said Nick Nguyen, the group’s research lead. “The same pay-for-eyeballs phenomenon across the internet is also taking place here.”

Consistent among most Asian American organizers who spoke with Vox was the concern with the Epoch Times’s media empire — including affiliates like New Tang Dynasty Television (NTD TV) and China Uncensored, which have 1.29 million and 1.48 million YouTube subscribers, respectively. That’s a conservative estimate of the Epoch Times’s reach; its affiliates have separate YouTube channels and Facebook pages across multiple languages, all with hundreds of thousands of followers or subscribers. These pages employ a “sophisticated translation operation,” one activist described, in disseminating articles and videos on Facebook and YouTube with an anti-China slant.

Since misinformation experts and researchers usually specialize in one language or platform, there is little comprehensive research on how this phenomenon impacts AAPI voters as a whole. Groups like APIAVote, though, are anticipating misinformation will be a recurring tactic in future elections.

“We’re working with community-based organizations that have a presence on each of these platforms,” Chen said. “Based on what we’ve seen in the African American and Latino community, these types of fear-based attacks are also affecting our ethnic communities.”

How overlapping information networks can fuel false narratives

The types of false narratives Asian Americans encounter online are not wholly distinct from misleading English- or Spanish-language media. Some voters are already avid viewers and readers of One America News, Newsmax, or Fox News, and seeing content in their native language may only reaffirm existing beliefs.

“The core of this tactic relies on people’s sense of insecurity and fear by misinterpreting certain policies or outcomes,” said Sunny Shao of AAPI Data, who has done research on social media rhetoric, WeChat, and Chinese American voter behavior. “Sometimes it can be straight-out misinformation, but oftentimes, there’s a cultural twist.”

Inaccurate or false news about the presidential election results generally relies on similar narratives perpetrated on some English-language conservative channels and sites, like Breitbart and the Daily Caller: that voter fraud is a pervasive issue in the US or that Beijing favors Biden. Some content also stokes racial tensions by preying on anti-Black prejudices, in light of images from this summer’s Black Lives Matter protests and the “scarcity mindset” that some immigrants have. These biased narratives are usually oversimplified and presented without nuance, which make them easily digestible for audiences with limited English and cultural context.

Some unfounded claims, like that of Biden being a radical socialist, aren’t aimed at a specific community, as Recode’s Shirin Ghaffary reported. Yet they find resonance among Latino and Asian immigrants distrustful of communist governments, whose suspicions can lead them down information echo chambers that further solidifies these conspiratorial beliefs.

Research shows that people are more likely to trust information that originates from sources they’re familiar with — friends, family, or those within their cultural community on Facebook groups, YouTube channels, or Instagram pages. As a result, peer-to-peer sharing within closed chat groups on platforms like WhatsApp and Telegram are driving the spread. And the misinformation is not just from one source: These information networks can overlap, and first-generation immigrants might be swayed by perceptions of US politics from their home country, according to anecdotes from community members.

For example, analysis of American politics from Taiwan — which has taken a proactive stance against domestic disinformation — has largely been in favor of Trump, said Rath Wang, communications director of Taiwanese Americans for Progress. While the Taiwanese government did not officially endorse any presidential candidate, its media ecosystem is still skewed. Pre-election polls by YouGov found Taiwan to be the only one out of 15 European and Asian states with citizens favoring Trump over Biden.

Several prominent Chinese dissidents have also promoted the message that Republicans and Donald Trump are the only ones who can “stop China” from politically encroaching on Taiwan, Wang added. It doesn’t help that most Americans traditionally lump the Chinese diaspora under the “Chinese American” umbrella, which overlooks the population’s geopolitical complexity. Immigrant voters who still have ties to their home country deeply care about foreign policy, and this generalizing “ignores the community’s political diversity,” Wang said.

A similar development has occurred in Vietnam, whose state media is predominantly pro-Trump. There, the Epoch Times — under the name Dai Ky Nguyen — developed an experimental network of pro-Trump, anti-China pages, which soon became one of the country’s largest Facebook publishers. The New York Times described the operation as “a Vietnamese experiment,” and the Vietnam team was reportedly tapped to build the US arm of the Epoch Times’s operation in 2017. This misinformation network has become “a force in right-wing media,” the New York Times reported, commanding tens of millions of social media followers on Facebook and YouTube spread across dozens of English and foreign-language pages.

“A lot of channels like the Epoch Times are superspreaders of misinformation, and it’s not clear from their Facebook or YouTube presence where they come from,” said Deanna Tran, Viet Fact Check’s operations lead. “It’s shared on multiple platforms at the same time, and then it gets absorbed into our communities and makes it seem like it’s homegrown, when in fact there might be outside influence involved potentially.”

Misinformation can also be community-specific, varying by region or by ethnic enclave. In early November, ProPublica reported that at least two dozen groups on WeChat had spread misinformation about how the federal government was “preparing to mobilize” in the case of riots on Election Day, in an attempt to frighten Chinese voters to stay home. Reuters also reported that several nonpartisan South Asian groups worked together to correct fake news about the voting process on WhatsApp, an unmoderated and decentralized chat service.

“It’s not that we only have a WeChat or a WhatsApp problem; these platforms are accelerants,” said Vincent Pan, executive director of Chinese for Affirmative Action and co-founder of Asian Americans Against Trump, who is familiar with misinformation on WeChat. “It accelerates a lot of vulnerabilities that Chinese and other Asian immigrants with limited English proficiency have. They live in scarcity, under tremendous social and economic pressure and uncertainty.”

“Meet the community where they’re at”: Organizers demand support from social media platforms and political parties

While the potential for misinformation on these platforms is known, the effort to stanch the spread has primarily fallen to the hands of grassroots organizers from within these ethnic communities. These efforts also vary by ethnic group. Community members are tasked with not just finding and reporting fake news but actively debunking these claims and becoming an accurate, neutral news source — often with little manpower and financial support.

According to Pan, the non-English social media landscape is usually homogeneous, operating as an insular echo chamber where little fact-checking is done. “There’s not the same level of balance, in terms of political balance or racial and ethnic balance,” he said. “It’s a priority of ours to meet the community where they’re at.”

This “data void” is also occurring in the Latino community, as Vox’s Ghaffary has reported: “There are only two major Spanish-language broadcast news networks in the US: Univision and Telemundo. This leaves room for media operations — not just on the internet but also via local radio channels and newspapers — to spread less accurate reporting,” according to a Spanish misinformation researcher.

While accurate and nonpartisan sources of information in Asian languages do exist, they are few and far between, and their online presence can’t compete against viral posts with an inflammatory or biased slant. “The message discipline in conservative media is amazing,” said Nguyen of Viet Fact Check. “Think of the juggernauts we’re facing, and there are no progressive alternative voices in Vietnamese media. For us, we just try to keep a very neutral and fact-based tone.”

But platforms too have a responsibility to mitigate the spread of non-English misinformation, Nguyen added, as this phenomenon is no longer unique to the English-speaking population. While Facebook announced it will take measures to stem election misinformation related to the vote count, similar content remains accessible on YouTube and is gaining traction. One researcher told Recode that YouTube doesn’t appear to actively push such content, which is “somewhat hard to find,” but it’s possible the platform’s moderation focus is less strict surrounding foreign-language misinformation on US elections.

Viet Fact Check, a volunteer-run group, has tried to register as an independent fact-checker on Facebook, but faced obstacles to verification. “I’m comfortable saying we are the No. 1 neutral-to-progressive fact-checking Vietnamese source in the US,” Nguyen said. “And while Facebook has tried to mobilize third-party groups to fact-check, we’re not technically a media organization. We’re all volunteers.”

This grassroots work isn’t sufficient, nor is it sustainable. Organizers say Democrats need to commit to outreach and budget in translation services to reach these historically overlooked communities. “The Democratic Party needs to recognize that there are certain political sensitivities within the Asian American umbrella,” said Wang of Taiwanese Americans for Progress. “For Taiwanese Americans, it’s crucial that candidates express their backing for Taiwan. … Since Trump has been so vocal about China, many believe that he will take action to support Taiwan.”

It’s also a matter of trust. About half of AAPI voters in the 2020 Asian American Voter Survey have not been contacted by a major party, a huge missed opportunity, according to Shao, the researcher from AAPI Data. Pockets of Asian American voters live in battleground states and can be a deciding factor in congressional or state legislature races.

There are both cultural and language barriers that prevent people from breaking through the misinformation trap. For example, many first-generation immigrants lack the civic knowledge about how elections work, thus relying on community-driven translated content that might not always be true. A direct approach from political parties and candidates, then, could make a difference in how these voters perceive certain policies and elections. On-the-ground regional or state-level work is required to disaggregate and disentangle the myth of the “AAPI voter” and their varying interests.

“We ran Asian-language ads and direct mail in four to five different swing states against vulnerable Republicans,” said Pan, of Asian Americans Against Trump. “The parties and candidates weren’t doing it themselves, and it was too frustrating to sit and watch our communities go the wrong way.”

In late October, Bloomberg reported that Asian American voters could “play a decisive role” in turning Georgia blue, with Indian Americans as the state’s largest Asian ethnic group. With Georgia’s upcoming Senate runoff race in January, the AAPI vote is similarly coveted. These voters could be crucial in swaying elections in races that have thin margins, Pan added, and politicians — at the regional, state, and national levels — should be focused on investing and distributing more resources.

“We’ve realized that if we can’t always rely on regulatory protections from Facebook or backing from a national party,” Pan said. “We have to organize.”

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Want More Science-Based Policies? Start by Protecting the Scientists Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=51234"><span class="small">Maria Caffrey, Guardian UK</span></a>   
Sunday, 29 November 2020 13:57

Caffrey writes: "Now more than ever we need to establish scientific integrity policies and laws that prevent the suppression and distortion of scientific research, and prohibit retaliations against scientists."

Scientific integrity is key for protecting the field against attacks. (photo: sanjeri/Getty Images)
Scientific integrity is key for protecting the field against attacks. (photo: sanjeri/Getty Images)


Want More Science-Based Policies? Start by Protecting the Scientists

By Maria Caffrey, Union of Concerned Scientists

29 November 20

 

s we approach the holidays I, like most people, have been reflecting on everything 2020 has given us (or taken away) while starting to look ahead to 2021.

One thing I am particularly looking forward to is hearing more from experts and scientists so that we can usher in a new era of science-based policymaking. But before we get too excited about what those changes could be, there are some essential actions that the Biden administration must take to ensure that the scientists and their work will be protected over the next four years and beyond.

I am eager to put the past behind me, but I am also acutely aware that if we do not make the effort to learn from our history then we risk repeating it. So how can we close the gaps in our laws to ensure that industry cannot profit at the expense of public health or diminish our public lands? Two words: scientific integrity.

Scientific integrity refers to the professional culture, norms, and rules that underpin the production, communication, and use of scientific research. Now more than ever we need to establish scientific integrity policies and laws that prevent the suppression and distortion of scientific research, and prohibit retaliations against scientists. Without this we risk future abuse and manipulation of science and harm to the public good.

We Need More Than Listening

By now we have all become sadly accustomed to the current administration sidelining scientists, most prominently Dr. Anthony Fauci, because the facts they provide do not fit with the political rhetoric of the moment.

I have my own history of filing a scientific integrity complaint with the National Park Service (which falls under the Department of the Interior) after senior ranking employees attempted to censor one of my scientific reports. I know all too well the damage and pain that these actions cause, not just for the individual scientist, but also because these attacks on science over the last few years have undermined sound, evidence-based decision making.

President-elect Biden has repeatedly said that he will listen to the scientists. While this is certainly a welcome change, listening can only take us so far. This past week Lauren Kurtz from the Climate Science Legal Defense Fund and my colleague Gretchen Goldman published an article listing 10 actions the new administration should implement to show their commitment to strengthening government science:

  1. Clearly prohibit political interference and censorship.

  2. Protect scientists' communication rights.

  3. Acknowledge that attempts to violate scientific integrity, even if ultimately not fruitful, are still violations.

  4. Protect federal scientists' right to provide information to Congress and other lawmakers.

  5. Commit to incorporating the best science as part of agency decisions.

  6. Elevate agency scientific integrity policies to have the full force of law.

  7. Publicly release anonymized information about scientific integrity complaints and their resolutions at every agency.

  8. Institute an intra-agency workforce, potentially under the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, to coordinate scientific integrity efforts across agencies, foster discussion of policy improvements, and standardize criteria for policies across agencies.

  9. Strengthen whistleblower protections.

  10. Ensure that policies cover all actors who will be dealing with science.

All of these recommendations have been reinforced by what we have learned during the Trump administration. They would ensure that no future administration could do things like edit climate change reports to include scientifically unsound language questioning climate change, suppress oil and gas safety information, prevent scientists from discussing their work in public forums, or withhold vital scientific information that is required under other laws, such as the Endangered Species Act.

When it comes to changes at the Department of the Interior, the Union of Concerned Scientists has articulated specific actions that the Biden administration should implement if they want to ensure that government scientists are free to do their work without political interference. Scientists deserve the right of last review and the ability to comment publicly, they shouldn't have to fight for their publications to be published, and they should have a pathway to anonymously file a complaint if they think their rights have been breached.

I spent over a year staring at my finished climate change report on my National Park Service desk wondering why it was being delayed. I was later pressured to makes edits I did not agree with. When I fought back I was told that I could be removed as an author or have my work not published at all. Given my own experience, these suggestions to fix our current system are deeply personal to me because I have seen how Interior can work against scientists to silence them when their work is politically inconvenient.

Time for Action

I have spoken to many scientists, particularly federal scientists, who are eager to turn the page so they can hurry back to the work they had been doing before this administration, but I urge caution in assuming that things can be "normal" again.

Before Trump, I naively thought the scientific integrity policies established during the Obama administration would be sufficient. I never imagined that any administration could so willfully ignore and attack expert advice and evidence that is intended to protect us and our public lands.

I have personally witnessed how hard our federal scientists work. They put in long hours with minimal pay (far less that what they could get if they worked in private industry) to pursue one simple goal: to make things better for the nation.

We need stronger scientific integrity policies to protect these people and their work. But more than that, we need stronger scientific integrity laws because they also benefit society.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 Next > End >>

Page 275 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