Showing posts sorted by date for query orwellian. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query orwellian. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Tuesday, July 04, 2023

 chase money dollar trap welfare free market

The Myth Of The Free Market – OpEd

By 

The media are really going overboard in telling us the days of the free market are over with Biden’s new economic policies. President Biden has quite explicitly implemented policies intended to reshape the direction of the economy, pushing clean energy and more domestic production of advanced semiconductors and other products. He also has reinvigorated anti-trust policy, which was largely shelved by his predecessors.

But the idea that the policies of the last four decades were somehow a matter of just leaving things to the market is a grotesque lie that no person remotely familiar with economic policy should be repeating.

The Finance Industry Cesspool

I will reverse the usual course of my diatribe here and start with the financial sector. Suppose back in 2008-09 we let the market work its magic when Citigroup, Bank of America, and other financial giants were effectively bankrupted by their own greed and stupidity. We would have a radically downsized financial sector, with many fewer people earning seven and eight-figure salaries at banks. (No, we would not have had a Second Great Depression. Keynes taught us how to prevent a depression: spend money.)

We would also have a much smaller financial sector if we taxed sales of stocks, bonds, and derivatives like we taxed sales of clothes, cars, and furniture. It is the power of the financial industry, not the free market, that tells us that these financial transactions should be exempted from the sales taxes that apply to just about everything else we buy.

There is also nothing “free market” about the special tax treatment that some of the richest people in the country get when they have “carried interest” income as partners in hedge funds or private equity funds. Nor is it the free market when these funds prey on public pension funds, promising high returns that they rarely deliver.

“Free Trade” is a Story for Children and Elite Pundits

The “free trade” deals of the last forty years had little to do with free trade. We did want to remove trade barriers on manufactured goods, in order to subject our manufacturing workers to direct competition with low-paid workers in the developing world. This had the predicted effect of costing us millions of manufacturing jobs, and substantially reducing the pay of the jobs that remained.

But we could have made the focus of free trade removing barriers that protected doctors, dentists, and other highly paid professionals from competition with their lower paid counterparts in the developing world. This would have had the effect of reducing jobs and pay for U.S. born professionals.

For some reason, this was never a part of our “free trade” agreements. We could speculate this was because the people deciding on trade policy were far more likely to have friends and family members who are highly paid professionals than friends and family members who were autoworkers or textile workers, but that would be rude. In any case, this part of “free trade” deals was about a having a freer trade in a particular sector of the economy, where the predicted and actual effect was to drive down the pay of non-college educated workers.

Patent and Copyright Monopolies

The other really big part of our free trade deals was to make patent and copyright monopolies, and related protections, longer and stronger. It is incredibly Orwellian that these government-granted monopolies are somehow discussed as being the free market.

And, their impact is not some small sideshow. We will spend over $550 billion this year on prescription drugs. If drugs sold in a free market, without patents or related protections, the cost would almost certainly be less than $100 billion. The difference of $450 billion is more than four times the annual food stamp budget. It’s more than half of what we spend on the military each year. It comes to more than $3,000 a family.

If we projected out over ten years, and accounted for growth in spending, it would be close to $6 trillion. That is six times President Biden’s widely touted infrastructure program.

And, it has a huge impact on inequality. The people who benefit from these monopolies are many of the country’s richest people. Bill Gates is the poster child. He would likely still be working for a living if the government didn’t threaten to arrest people who copy Microsoft software without his permission.

Just since the pandemic, we created five Moderna billionaires by paying the company to develop vaccines and then letting them keep control over the vaccines. Don’t try to tell us that is the free market.

By my calculation we transfer over $1 trillion a year to the beneficiaries of patent and copyright monopolies, compared to a situation where items like drugs, medical equipment, computer software and other items sold at their free market price. This is around 40 percent of all after-tax corporate profits.

Why the Free Market Lie?

I could on at great length laying out other areas where the government has structured the market in ways that redistribute income upward. (See Rigged, it’s free.) It should be obvious to anyone at all familiar with economic policy over the last four decades that it was not about the free market, it was about structuring the economy in ways that made the rich richer.

It is understandable that the proponents of these policies would like to claim it was just the free market. After all it sounds much better to tell the public, the vast majority who are losers from these policies, that “the market creates both winners and losers,” as opposed to saying, “we’re implementing polices to transfer money from you to us.”

But why do people who oppose these policies go along with the hoax? There apparently is a big market for this sort of pretending in major media outlets, but it would be nice if we could get more reality-based policy discussions.




This first appeared on CEPR.

Dean Baker is the co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR). He is the author of Plunder and Blunder: The Rise and Fall of the Bubble Economy.

Wednesday, May 24, 2023

PAKISTAN

Harassing journalists

DAWN
Editorial 
Published May 24, 2023

THE state has cast a wide dragnet to haul up all those allegedly involved in the May 9 rioting, while also using the opportunity to weaken the PTI. However, there can be no excuse for the hundreds of journalists that have been hounded by police just for carrying out their professional duties on the day of the mayhem.

Sadly, the methods are straight out of the colonial playbook; the state has used these tactics for decades to teach all those who have come in its way a lesson. According to the Lahore Press Club president, around 250 journalists and other media workers have complained of police harassment post-May 9.

It is likely that the media personnel were identified through geo-fencing when they were in the field covering the protests in key areas of Lahore after Imran Khan’s arrest. Particularly disturbing is the fact that family members of some media workers have also been picked up. The Lahore High Court has been petitioned to stop this flagrant abuse of authority, while the caretaker Punjab administration has also formed a committee to look into the matter.

While the wholesale crackdown on all PTI sympathisers cannot be condoned, the targeting of journalists who were simply doing their jobs has no justification whatsoever. The federal energy minister has described the ongoing actions as the “process of filtering the criminals from the onlookers”.

This cannot be used as an excuse to harass journalists and media workers. As it is, the media fraternity faces a difficult working environment in Pakistan, and journalists often put their lives on the line in the course of discharging their duties.

Using the anti-PTI crackdown as a cover to threaten journalists is not to be tolerated, and the Punjab government must stop this campaign of fear. The administration must also reveal the whereabouts of anchorperson Imran Riaz Khan, who has been missing for the last two weeks.

RSF, Amnesty ask Pakistan to find pro-Khan anchor Imran Riaz

The prominent journalist and supporter of ex-PM Imran Khan was detained by the Pakistani police, but the authorities then failed to present him in court.

Haroon Janjua in Islamabad | Darko Janjevic
DW
May 23, 2023

Imran Riaz, a well-known TV anchor and YouTuber, was among thousands of Imran Khan supporters who were detained following the former premier's arrest and violent protests in Pakistan earlier this month. The journalist was reportedly taken into custody from the airport at the eastern city of Sialkot on May 11 on suspicion of inciting violence. He was due to appear before court in Lahore this Monday.

But then, the story took an an usual turn — authorities failed to present Riaz during the hearing, and Punjab police chief Usman Anwar told the court he was "clueless" about his whereabouts.

The chief justice of the Lahore High Court warned the authorities that "no one will be spared if anything happened" to the 47-year-old reporter.

Riaz's wife Arbab Imran told DW she is worried for her husband's safety.

"The arrest of my husband is deeply troubling. He raised voices for the vulnerable people and for the truth. My four children are concerned about him and we don't know the whereabouts of him. He was taken off air many times and I demand from authorities for his immediate release," she said.

 

RSF points to Pakistan's military intelligence

Pakistan is going through a deep political crisis marked by a power struggle between Imran Khan's Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party and the current government led by Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif, with the military and the judiciary also being affected. Khan has recently stepped up his attacks on the military, accusing it of working against him. Riaz is a wellknown media figure among Khan's supporters.

On Tuesday, Reporters Without Border (RSF) representative Daniel Bastard said it was "clearly Pakistan's military intelligence agencies that abducted Imran Riaz," after the Punjabi inspector spoke of unspecified "agencies" during the court hearing.

"According to confidential diplomatic sources consulted by RSF, the government's silence about the TV anchor's fate suggests that he may have fared badly since his abduction and may even have died in detention," the watchdog organization said.

Separately, Amnesty International called for Riaz's immediate recovery.

"On 22 May, the police told the Lahore High Court that there is no trace of him in any police department in the province."

The organization said the events amount to "an enforced disappearance" under international law.


"Punishing dissenting voices using enforced disappearance has been a worrying trend in Pakistan for many years and must be ended," Amnesty said.
Riaz missing, Sharif killed in exile

Riaz's lawyer Azhar Siddique says that the arrest is a "blatant violation of freedom of expression."

Riaz has decried Imran Khan's ouster from power in April last year, linking it to "regime change" and amplifying Khan's claims that the military was involved in ending his government. The anchor was already arrested twice, in July 2022 and in February 2023. The latter saw Pakistan's Federal Investigation Agency suspect him of hate speech and criticism of the military.



The disappearance of Riaz prompted some in Pakistan to draw parallels with the killing of veteran reporter Arshad Sharif last October. Sharif was well-known for criticizing the Pakistani military and was forced to flee Pakistan in August 2022 to avoid arrest. He was killed in Kenya in what a team of Pakistani investigators described to be a "targeted assassination." The background of the murder remains unclear.
Bad optics for freedom of speech?

With the country on edge, a disappearance of a prominent journalist is sure to chill other reporters in the country. Journalist Javeria Siddique, the widow of late Sharif, told DW that Riaz's arrest was "really alarming and a bad optic for freedom of speech in Pakistan."

"The government is arresting journalists over their stories and being vocal," she said, pointing to her husband's killing in Kenya. "Then we have seen the same pattern for Imran Riaz," she added.

"I am requesting from the authorities that they should immediately and unconditionally release the journalist Imran Riaz Khan. Criticizing the ruling elite of Pakistan is not something which falls in hate speech," Siddique added.

Legal expert Osama Malik notes that the freedom of information and the freedom of expression are guaranteed by the Pakistani constitution.

"Imran Riaz's brand of journalism may not be palatable to everyone, but that is certainly not a reason for the state to spirit him away," he told DW. "It is highly condemnable that despite the province's highest court asking about his whereabouts, the law enforcement agencies are unable or unwilling to present Imran Riaz in court or divulge his location."


Edited by: Shamil Shams


‘Orwellian doublespeak’: Journalists, rights activists call out Marriyum Aurangzeb for remarks on Imran Riaz’s disappearance

Following backlash, the minister claims she did not justify enforced disappearances and had categorically condemned the issue of missing persons.

Published May 23, 2023 

Journalists and human rights activists have strongly criticised Information Minister Marriyum Aurangzeb’s comments regarding the case of anchorperson Imran Riaz Khan, who has been missing for more than a week after his arrest.

Riaz was among those apprehended in the wake of the protests that erupted following the arrest of PTI Chairman Imran Khan. Later, his lawyer had told Dawn.com that a writ petition was filed on May 12 over the anchorperson’s arrest and the Lahore High Court had directed the attorney general to present the anchor before the court the same day. But, after its orders were not followed, Sialkot police were given a 48-hour deadline to recover Riaz.

A day ago, Punjab Inspector General Dr Usman Anwar revealed there was no trace of the journalist at any police department across the country.

Separately, journalist Secunder Kermani, a Channel4 News foreign correspondent, had shared a video of an exchange with the information minister about the missing anchorperson.




He questioned Aurangzeb about journalists going missing and being detained, adding that these were the same issues that the PML-N had raised as matters of concern when in opposition during the previous PTI government.

In response, Aurangzeb asked Kermani to name even a single journalist who was missing. When Kermani mentioned Riaz, the minister responded, “Imran Riaz is a political party spokesperson now. You really have to draw [a] distinction.”

She further said, “You have to differentiate between journalists and the journalists who have joined political parties. Once they have joined political parties, they are inciting violence, they are spokespersons of that political parties.”

In a brief back and forth between the two, Aurangzeb mentioned former prime minister Imran being termed a “media predator” during his tenure and asserted that press freedom in Pakistan had improved by “seven points” during the past year.

When asked again about the issue of a person being missing despite his political leanings, she said she condemned anyone being missing, whether it was herself or Riaz.

Aurangzeb’s response elicited severe criticism from several journalists and rights activists, who reminded the minister that a person’s disappearance was an issue of basic human rights irrespective of what political party they favoured.

Lawyer and social activist Jibran Nasir said that Aurangzeb believed Riaz “should be seen as a supporter of PTI and hence considered a sub-human who deserves the treatment being meted out to them.

“Now just imagine the plight of ordinary citizens suffering military trials,” he added.







Pakistan Initiative at Atlantic Council’s South Asia Centre Director Uzair Younus said Riaz’s status as a journalist or not should not matter.

He said that Riaz had fundamental constitutional rights granted to him on account of his Pakistani citizenship.

“Stop violating his rights and those of countless others. These disappearances are heinous!” he tweeted.







Senior anchorperson Maria Memon pointed out the lack of an “honest answer”.







Journalist Roohan Ahmed tweeted: “It doesn’t matter if Imran Riaz Khan is a journalist or a ‘propagandist’, as Information Minister Aurangzeb calls him. What matters is that a Pakistani citizen is missing and being denied the right to defend himself in the court of law.”







Journalist Mehreen Zahra Malik called the information minister’s response “Orwellian doublespeak”, adding that it was “unacceptable” and that the government must answer for the missing anchor’s whereabouts.







Senior journalist Raza Ahmad Rumi commented that Riaz’s status as a journalist or party activist did not matter and that his being denied due process was a violation of the law.







Researcher Abdul Basit analysed much the same, saying that “under no circumstances you can arrest a person extrajudicially and refuse to produce him before a court of law. This is an affront against democracy and the rule of law.”







Journalist Murtaza Solangi, while expressing his differences with Riaz, also said: “A human being, a Pakistani citizen is missing and that is and should be a cause of concern. Regardless of the circumstances of his disappearance, it is the job of the state to find him and tell the people about the circumstances of his disappearance. Period.”





Meanwhile, journalist Matiullah Jan — who was himself abducted in Islamabad in July 2020 — said it was a “disappointing response” from a politician and spokesperson of the government, adding that it was “shameful to justify a possible enforced disappearance on the basis of someone not being a journalist.”

His harsh rebuke prompted a reply from the information minister who said she had not justified enforced disappearances and had condemned them.

“I have categorically stated that if a person is missing, any person, whether that person is me or Imran Riaz, I condemn that,” she said.



Wednesday, April 26, 2023

Few complained of ‘woke’ classes at Florida universities. Still, DeSantis pushed new bans

2023/04/26

ORWELLIAN SLOGAN
Ron DeSantis signed HB 7, known as the "Stop WOKE bill," in Hialeah Gardens. 
- Daniel A. Varela/Miami Herald/TNS

The way Gov. Ron DeSantis tells it, Florida’s public universities are bloated bureaucracies run by liberal elites who discriminate against conservative and white students while professors indoctrinate the rest with the “woke” idea that racism, sexism and oppression are baked into U.S. history and institutions.

“We won’t allow Florida tax dollars to be spent teaching kids to hate our country or to hate each other,” DeSantis said when he introduced the Stop WOKE Act, which became law in 2022 and restricted campus programming on subjects like privilege, oppression and racism.

But in the four and a half months that the law was enforced at public universities — before it was blocked by a preliminary injunction last November — only seven people reported potential violations of Stop WOKE across the 12 campuses, according to records obtained by the Herald through public records requests. All of the complaints were dismissed as unfounded, records show.

Kara Gross, legislative director and senior policy council of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida, said the scarcity of complaints proves what critics have suspected all along — “woke” indoctrination is not a widespread concern.

“These are made-up issues by the governor to deflect and distract from the real issues that are facing Floridians,” Gross said. The ACLU sued Florida over Stop WOKE for allegedly violating constitutional protections on free speech and academic freedom at universities, ultimately resulting in a preliminary injunction last November.

Even unfounded complaints have a chilling effect and waste university resources, Gross said. Records show investigations into the seven complaints sometimes took up to a month to complete. In some cases, university compliance officers questioned the professors and department chairs before ultimately deciding to dismiss the complaint.

DeSantis and Florida Republicans are now advancing a higher education reform package that critics say doubles down on Stop WOKE and expands state control over universities by giving political appointees direct oversight over curriculum, campus programming and more control over the hiring and firing of faculty. Despite the injunction, the two higher education bills currently moving through the House and Senate (HB999 and SB266) explicitly reference Stop WOKE, all but guaranteeing another round of costly, taxpayer-funded court appearances should either become law.

“It is encouraging to see the Legislature taking up this important topic and joining the conversation that the governor began with his legislative proposals for higher-education reform in Florida,” said the governor’s deputy press secretary, Jeremy Redfern.

Redfern said the governor looks forward to signing a final form of the proposed legislation. He did not respond to questions regarding the few Stop WOKE complaints last year or whether more had been made to the governor’s office that were not passed on to universities.

Between July 1 and Nov. 17, 2022, Stop WOKE — later re-dubbed the Individual Freedom Act — prohibited university training or instruction promoting or compelling students to believe one of eight concepts, including the idea that someone might be oppressed due solely to their race or sex, or anything that makes anyone feel guilt due to the past actions of someone with a shared identity.

In a ruling granting the temporary injunction in November, Chief United States District Judge Mark Walker wrote that the Stop WOKE Act sought to give political appointees “unfettered authority to muzzle (Florida’s) its professors in the name of ‘freedom’” — an effort he called “positively dystopian.” The injunction was recently upheld by an appeals court pending the outcomes of the lawsuits brought by the ACLU and the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), a free-speech advocacy group focused on education, on behalf of several students and faculty members at universities across the state.

The Herald requested records from all 12 of Florida’s public universities related to potential violations of Stop WOKE and any subsequent investigations. Despite the law being enforceable for most of the 2022 summer and fall semesters, only three universities received complaints of potential Stop WOKE violations. The nine others reported having no records of any complaints or investigations.

Records show the three complaints made to Miami-Dade’s Florida International University were all immediately closed. Two were anonymous complaints about courses that the university quickly determined could not have violated the law because the class in question wasn’t offered at the time the law was in effect.

The other was made by an FIU professor who complained that a cyber security training had promoted the idea that one race or sex might be morally superior to another, which was illegal under the act. The university found no such themes in the training and the professor did not respond to the Herald’s request for comment.

The remaining four complaints were divided equally between the University of Florida in Gainesville, and the University of North Florida in Jacksonville.

Tipsters included an anonymous person who took issue with a UF class he or she claimed to have learned about over the internet, a woman who saw a blog post from the Young America’s Foundation, founded by the late conservative icon William F. Buckley Jr., and two mothers of UNF students. One mother complained that a professor in the UNF sports management department was presenting “woke” opinions as fact. The other said a reading assignment in the elementary education program titled “So You Want To Talk About Race” made her daughter feel bad for being white.

In each case, sometimes after lengthy review processes, the university provosts found no violation, noting the subjects of race and identity had come up as part of class discussions, which was permitted under the law so long as professors had not endorsed or promoted certain perspectives.

“The mission of UNF is not now and has never been to tell our students what to think,” wrote Karen Cousins, associate vice provost at UNF, in a written response to one mother. “Instead, UNF strives to teach our students how to think critically about a range of issues and topics and form their own well-reasoned opinions.”

Despite finding no violation of the law, UNF administrators noted the reading assignment about race — which was already voluntary — would no longer be included in the class.

It’s unclear how similar complaints would be handled under the latest proposed legislation for higher education reform, which critics say goes a step further than Stop WOKE in targeting curriculum.

Both the Senate and House bills would give a wide range of powers to the Board of Governors — the state university system’s governing body with the majority of members appointed by the governor — including the power to eliminate academic programs based on values that would also be determined by the board.

The bills would also have the board review university programming and general education courses for curriculum that violates Stop WOKE or that is “based on theories that systemic racism, sexism, oppression, and privilege are inherent in the institutions of the United States and were created to maintain social, political, and economic inequities.”

Meera Sitharam, professor of computer science and mathematics at UF, said the proposed legislation is unconstitutional and already has faculty self-censoring to avoid winding up the subject of a lengthy investigation.

Sitharam — who is also a chief negotiator for the UF faculty union — said she is most concerned that the Senate bill would empower university presidents, handpicked by political appointees, to hire and fire faculty, regardless of tenure, based on criteria she said measures “obedience” rather than job performance or expertise.

“That’s where they really slid the knife in,” Sitharam said. The bill would also prevent faculty from appealing their removal, she said, in direct violation of the current faculty union contract.

In a statement to the Herald, Katie Betta, the Senate president’s deputy chief of staff for communications, said that Republican lawmakers are confident that the Senate bill and past laws are constitutional and will ultimately be upheld in court.

“The bill does not ban discussions,” Betta said in the statement about SB266. “It authorizes the Board of Governors to provide guidance to universities on [their] curriculum, to protect taxpayer funds from discriminatory programs, and to specify that courses with certain content may not be appropriate as a general education course.”
DEI bans provide backdoor for Stop WOKE

After the Stop WOKE Act bogged down in legal challenges late last year, Gov. DeSantis quickly pivoted, introducing a new legislative proposal to ban university and college programs and activities related to Diversity, Equity and Inclusion and Critical Race Theory — often referred to as DEI and CRT.

Under orders from the governor, universities scrambled to produce a list of DEI- and CRT-related programs — search terms so broad and undefined that one university data administrator described DeSantis’ request as “rather ominous” in an email to his peers.

Left on their own to interpret the terms, universities used terms like “race” and “diversity” to search the course catalog, producing a haphazard roster of programs and classes, including everything from homeless outreach programs to a course on classical dance, emails show.

While complicating administrative efforts to identify such programs, the broad, ill-defined terms have allowed Republicans to use the proposed DEI/CRT bans as a backdoor for reintroducing key elements of the Stop WOKE Act and expanding state control of higher education during the 2023 legislative session.

“When they say critical race theory they mean the eight concepts in the Stop WOKE Act. They’re using them as stand-ins,” said Adam Steinbaugh, an attorney with FIRE.

In a February statement to the Herald, Bryan Griffin, press secretary for Desantis, confirmed the governor’s office considers Diversity, Equity and Inclusion and Critical Race Theory to be synonymous with concepts banned under Stop WOKE.

“DEI, CRT, and other similar ideological agendas are racial harassment and discriminatory, and we propose that they are defined in this proposed legislation by tracking the definitions in Florida’s anti-discrimination laws, Stat. 1000.05(4)(a),” Griffin said, citing the specific Stop WOKE statute currently barred from enforcement at public universities.

A rewrite of SB266 in mid-April removed all mentions of DEI and CRT after lawmakers worried federal funding and accreditation could be effected by such a sweeping ban. Betta, the spokesperson for Senate leadership, said the bill largely remained the same but “simply provides guidance on the harmful philosophy behind those titles.”

The references to the Stop WOKE statute remain in the text.

“Just removing the words is not fooling anyone,” said Andrew Gothard, president of the United Faculty of Florida. “What’s clear is the real purpose of this bill is to stop students and faculty from discussing the history of the United States.”

A subsequent revision of the amended bill reintroduced a reference to diversity, equity and inclusion and also seeks restrictions on programs or activities engaged in social and political activism.

Joe Cohn, legislative and policy director at FIRE, said that regardless of recent semantic changes made in committee, the Senate bill remains unconstitutional because it could be used to determine what concepts and ideas are taught in the classroom, which speakers can be brought to campus, and which student organizations might be allowed to exist.

“That doesn’t pass muster in higher ed, where you’re dealing with adults and not minors, where faculty are not just mouthpieces for the state but have their own academic freedom,” Cohn said.

Should either of the 2023 bills be signed into law, Cohn said that FIRE and other organizations would have to return to court to ensure the injunction was also applied to the new law. Ultimately, he warned that going to court for a second time over something that was already successfully blocked would come at huge cost to Florida taxpayers.

“If they insist on learning their lesson through litigation, they should rename the bill ‘The FIRE and ACLU’s Legal Fees Act of 2023,’” Cohn said.
Complaints from the outside

As with school boards besieged by activists objecting to individual books, records show many who complained about “wokeness” in the university system were not students or faculty. On Sept. 6, 2022, a self-described “private citizen” named Tracey Coker reported a potential violation of Stop WOKE to the governor’s chief inspector general.

Coker had read a post on the website of the Young America’s Foundation titled “Florida Professor Tells White Students They Must ‘Examine Their Privilege’” and was concerned that a summer class in the UF education department had focused on “systemic discrimination of various minority groups by the American education system,” according the complaint obtained by the Herald. Coker did not respond to questions sent to the email listed in the complaint.

The governor’s office passed Coker’s complaint on to the university, which spent the next month investigating. Records show investigators reviewed screenshots from the online course — which included activities asking students to think about how their personal identity and community might shape the way they teach — and determined the professor had not endorsed any banned concepts.

“Instead, the students are asked to consider and critically think about their positionality, which is not restricted to race, color, sex and national origin, and reach their own conclusions,” university administrators wrote in a close-out memo dated Oct. 5, 2022.

The online course also included a page where students were encouraged to “share resources that can help uplift Black humanity and promote anti-racist education.” The blog post described the page as riddled with links soliciting donations for Black Lives Matter, and arguing that “white students have avoided critical discussions of race their whole lives before college.”

Again the university noted the posted material was used for discussions, as was permitted under the law. And while everyone teaching in the department was reminded not to use their platforms to raise money for any cause, the existence of the link alone on a group page was not evidence the professor had violated those rules, administrators wrote.

Ultimately, the university determined there were no violations of the law and, according to the close-out memo, investigators found “no evidence that white students were singled out and ‘told to examine their privilege’ as alleged in the title of the article.”

The professor was a graduate student and no longer works at the university, the memo noted.

A group of Florida International University students, staff and community members participated in the "Fight for Florida Students and Workers" protest on Thursday Feb. 23, 2023. - Pedro Portal/Miami Herald/TNS

© Miami Herald

Tuesday, April 18, 2023

The New Hate: Transphobia Rising in the Wake of  Nashville


 
 APRIL 14, 2023
Facebook

Trans wall art, Portland. Photo: Jeffrey St. Clair.

The Nashville mass shooting by the 28-year-old Audrey Hale has been seized upon by the reactionary right to intensify the campaign of hate against the trans community. Even as her motives were unknown and pending an investigation, rightwing officials and pundits pounced, blaming the shooting on trans-identity politics. This outcome is unsurprising for a party that treats hate as a family value.

The attempt to link trans identity to violence is part of a larger effort on the right to identify new targets in the culture wars, serving up fresh meat to a GOP base that’s long idealized racism, heterosexism, classism, and other forms of prejudice. There’s a bait and switch at work here, with rightwing officials and pundits designating trans people as the new public enemy number one. This shift springs from the political reality that bigotry against gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals is now widely considered to be beyond the pale. Right-wing activists, understanding they’ve lost on issues like same-sex marriage, gays in the military, adoption by gay and lesbian parents, and the battle over popular culture, are opening a new front in the war against the LGBTQ+ community. Their attacks involve a noxious effort to dehumanize trans people, which serves as a proxy for reinvigorating hyper masculinity, heterosexist authoritarianism, and fascist socio-political values.

GOP officials and other prominent political figures are signaling that it’s open season on trans Americans. Donald Trump announced after the Nashville shooting that the event was fueled by the “anger that was caused” from hormone treatments for transitioning individuals. Donald Trump Jr. similarly tweeted that there’s an “incredible rise” in trans-violence in America, and an “epidemic of trans-non-binary mass shooters.” Josh Hawley called the shooting “a horrific crime” and without evidence referred to it as “a hate crime” that was “specifically targeted” at the “Christian community,” while calling for an FBI investigation. Marjorie Taylor Greene postulated that the shooting represented a “trans day of vengeance,” blaming hormone treatments, prompting her to be suspended from Twitter. Greene asked: “How much hormones like testosterone and medications for mental illness was the transgender Nashville school shooter taking? Everyone can stop blaming guns now.”

Enlisting its foot soldiers in various media, the GOP disseminated its message of hate. Fox News’s Tucker Carlson included in his primetime program a photo of the shooter with the words “trans killer,” announcing that “we are witnessing the rise of trans violence” in America. Carlson issued a blanket attack on trans people, invoking reactionary Christian principles and natural law, claiming that “transgenderists hate Christians above all, because Christians refused to join every other liar in our society and proclaim that transgenderists are Gods with the power to change nature itself.”

Other rightwing pundits were equally extreme. Matt Walsh took aim at the “gender ideology movement,” depicting it as the “most hateful and violent movement in America,” and excoriating “leftwing trans extremists” as “violent, dangerous people who have been made to feel absolutely entitled to say and do whatever they want.” In the week after the Nashville shooting, Charlie Kirk of Turning Point USA depicted gun deaths as “worth it” so long as individuals’ right to own guns is protected, and instead attacked “trans jihadists” and “trans radicals” who are “on a kind of holy crusade,” embracing “a lot of violent fantasies” against rightwing pundits and Americans. Benny Johnson, also of Turning Point USAtweeted that “One thing is very clear: the modern trans movement is radicalizing activists into terrorists.” The comment was retweeted by Elon Musk, whose tweet was read by 7.8 million Americans.

The fantasy world constructed by rightwing pundits is far removed from the world we live in. Regarding mass shootings and domestic terrorism, there’s no evidence trans individuals represent a threat compared to other groups. While the Pew Research Center reports that 5 percent of young Americans 18-29 years old and 1.6 percent of adults identify as trans or non-binary, only four mass shootings since 2016 – or 0.11 percent of the 3,561 shootings in that time, were committed by trans or non-binary individuals.

Furthermore, the right’s baseless attacks on the trans community obscure the reality that the majority of domestic terrorism incidents in the U.S. – about two-thirds by the early 2020s – originated from rightwing political extremists, not LGBTQ+ individuals. By indulging in anti-trans propaganda and villainizing trans people, rightwing provocateurs divert attention from the primary domestic terror threat emanating from the right itself. This is an incredible example of projection, with rightwing pundits preventing GOP-allied Americans from looking in the mirror at the party’s dangerous rhetoric, which normalizes extremism and violence.

The GOP and its reactionary supporters invert reality with Orwellian propaganda claiming they are the real victims, and that others – including the LGBTQ+ community – are a threat to the nation’s survival. Contrary to this fantasy, trans individuals are systematically targeted by transphobic elements in America located primarily on the right. Trans youth are more likely to suffer from depression and are at higher risk of suicide because of being harassed, discriminated against, and terrorized by family, peers, the GOP, rightwing activists, and a political culture that treats them as a deviant and criminal.

The threat to trans youth is real. One Harvard University study finds that transgender teens face greater safety risks than other teens. Thirty-sex percent of transgender and non-binary teens who face “restricted bathroom or locker room access” report “being sexually assaulted,” compared to 25.9 percent “of all students surveyed.” Additional polling from the Kaiser Family Foundation finds that one in four trans individuals have been physically attacked “because of their gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation”; 64 percent say they have been verbally attacked, while 41 percent report “being harassed or feeling unsafe in a restroom or locker room.” This is a far cry from the baseless claim that trans people are predators waiting to strike in bathrooms and locker rooms.

Never missing a chance to portray themselves as victims, right-wingers’ demonization of trans people reveals their commitment to fascist ideology and politics. Their attacks are not based in simple conservatism. It’s true that historically, gay men have been subject to fascistic-style violence, stigmatized as perverts and child molesters, and as deeply immoral – terrorized by a society that was committed to denying their very existence, rights, and dignity. But the current shift to demonizing trans individuals represents an intensification of this historic repression campaign. Rightwing fascist politics and ideology have escalated the attack on trans people, who are dehumanized and assaulted by a political campaign that treats them as criminals. This updated version of fascism portrays trans people as an existential threat to the republic and to public safety. Trans identity is tied to mental illness and to an “epidemic” of violence, with trans individuals depicted as dangerous “radicals” and “terrorist” “killers” who are hell bent on destroying Christianity. If we accept such claims, what are we to do with such a group, other than neutralize them? This is the rhetoric of eliminationism, which is central to fascist politics.

The Orwellian fiction that it’s Christian Republicans – not trans persons – who are the real victims, is an integral part of fascist politics. Authoritarian leaders rely on lies, disseminated from political officialdom to the masses, which invert reality, deceive the public, and normalize bigotry and hatred against various others. The victims include racial, ethnic, gender, and religious minority groups, which are the first casualties in demagogues’ efforts to seize and consolidate political power. The demonization of trans people is useful for deflecting attention from a broader culture that worships guns, as fascist vigilantes feel empowered by minimal gun regulations to engage in mass shootings against those they deem a threat to the republic. The GOP won’t demonize guns and gun ownership, despite gun violence being an epidemic level threat to society. It’s much easier to reignite and intensify old bigotries against the LGBTQ+ community – one of the GOP’s favorite punching bags.

Rightwing officials and pundits are not alone in their assault on trans Americans. A sizable segment of the public buys into GOP hatemongering and is stoked by anti-trans rhetoric. As Dartmouth historian and religious studies professor Randall Balmer explains of Republican officials who traffic in anti-Trans rhetoric: “They have an interest in keeping the base riled up about one thing or another, and when one issue fades, as with same-sex relationships and same-sex marriage, they’ve got to find something else. It’s almost frantic.” Balmer’s insight speaks to a larger truth – that the rhetoric of fear, concentrating on an ominous and threatening other, is a powerful tool of political and social control.

A large segment of the public embraces anti-Trans beliefs, which fuel the GOP’s onslaught against this group. Pew polling from 2022 found that 43 percent of Americans expressed “discomfort” with “the pace of change around issues of gender identity” in the U.S. – speaking to the preference of a large minority of Americans to roll back the push for transgender equality and rights. The attack on trans people goes beyond simple discomfort, venturing into a full-blown assault on their right to exist and to maintain a public presence in America. This much is clear in Harris’s 2023 polling, which finds that 51 percent of Americans agree public school teachers should be prohibited from discussing gender identity and sexual orientation-related issues with students, and with 78 percent saying these discussions shouldn’t be allowed between teachers and K-3rd grade students.

The attack on trans people is also evident in relation to transitioning. Harris’s poll revealing that 55 percent of Americans agree gene hormone therapy for minors should be banned, even for those with parental permission. Pewpolling from 2022 finds that 72 percent of Republicans said the government should “make it illegal for health care professionals to help someone” who is younger than 18 “with medical care for gender transition,” while 69 percent of Republicans agreed government should “require trans individuals to use public bathrooms that match the sex they were assigned at birth.” Such attacks speak to the politics of eliminationism. As the thinking goes, there’s no need to be concerned about transgender rights if young Americans are taught that trans people don’t exist because they’ve been erased from public discourse and public spaces like restrooms. There’s no need to be concerned about rightwing bigotry if trans-gender youth are not allowed to exist because the state prohibits people from recognizing that they exist.

The GOP mobilization of its base in favor of transphobic politics is made easier by the party’s attacks, which are recycled from previous efforts to demonize gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals. Recent national polling from the Marcon Institute at Lehigh University reinforces this point. Marcon’s February 2023 survey of 1,021 Americans finds that 34 percent of Americans believe it’s “unnatural to identify as transgender.” A smaller number – 27 percent – say the same about gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals. What’s revealing in this survey is the strong statistical overlap between how people answered both questions.

Utilizing statistical regression analysis of the Marcon survey, I examine how strong anti-gay, lesbian and bisexual attitudes are in predicting anti-trans beliefs, while “controlling” for other factors, including respondents’ party affiliation, self-described ideology, income, education, race, gender, and age. Answering “yes” to saying that gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals are “unnatural” is associated with a 69 percent increased probability of adopting anti-trans beliefs. Anti gay, lesbian, and bi-sexual attitudes are a far stronger predictor of anti-trans beliefs than other factors, with partisanship and ideology (for Republicans and conservatives) associated with 9 and 8 percent increased likelihoods respectively of embracing anti-trans beliefs, after controlling for other factors in my analysis. What these data tell us are that the old bigotry against gay, lesbian, and bisexual Americans is a primary motivator for Republican Americans in their ongoing assault on the trans community.

Transphobia is a powerful force. It’s linked to various reactionary and authoritarian political values. Drawing on the Marcon survey, I find that agreement that it’s unnatural to identify as transgender is a significant predictor of 1. support for Trump; 2. willingness to vote for Trump in 2024; 3. support for the January 6 (J6) insurrectionists; and 4. support for authoritarian patriarchal values. The Marcon survey reveals the following, after controlling for the other factors included in my analysis:

+ Support for the belief that trans identity is unnatural is associated with a 30 percent increased likelihood of expressing a “positive” feeling “toward Donald Trump.” Transphobia is an even stronger predictor of Trump support than other factors, including Republican partisanship and conservative ideology, which are associated with 29 and 16 percent increased likelihoods respectively of approving Trump.

+ Transphobia is associated with a 32 percent increased likelihood of voting “for Donald Trump for president in 2024 if he wins the Republican primary,” whereas Republican partisanship and conservative ideology are associated with 31 and 15 percent increased likelihoods respectively of Trump voting.

+ Transphobia predicts support for the J6 insurrectionists, and is associated with a 28 percent increased likelihood of expressing “positive” feelings about “those who occupied the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.” In contrast, Republican partisanship and ideology are associated with 10 and 11 percent increased likelihoods respectively of supporting the J6 insurrectionists.

+ Finally, transphobia predicts support for authoritarianism, and is associated with a 34 percent increased likelihood of agreeing that “our country will be great if we honor the ways of our forefathers, do what the authorities tell us to do, and get rid of the rotten applies who are ruining everything.” In contrast, Republican partisanship and conservative ideology are associated with 6 and 13 percent likelihoods respectively of adopting this patriarchal-authoritarian value.

These statistical associations are important because of what they tell us about the political culture of the American right. Transphobia is significantly linked to heterosexism, patriarchy, and toxic masculinity. And it’s associated with an authoritarian way of viewing the world, via support for authoritarian political figures like Trump. Transphobia is heavily linked to strongman-authoritarian politics, via the embrace of Trump’s efforts on J6 to install himself for a second term by undermining the 2020 presidential election, and in deference to patriarchal authority figures – past and present. The patriarchal-authoritarian link to transphobia isn’t just about maintaining the privileges and power of white men who are leading the war on trans people. It’s about the authoritarian values at the core of transphobia – which are fundamentally about dehumanizing, suppressing, and denying equal rights to a historically repressed group.

The rise of transphobia should be understood within the wider socio-political context of trans activists claiming their place in the public sphere. Recent attacks are part of the predictable reactionary backlash against them. Pew polling reveals that only 30 percent of Americans in 2016 reported personally knowing someone who was transgender-identifying. By 2021, that number had grown to 42 percent. A growing number of LGBTQ+ Americans are effectively challenging rightwing bigotry, with serious victories for the movement, including the 2015 success in establishing the right to same-sex marriage. This has stoked significant anger on the right, resulting in an intensifying fascist campaign to depict trans people as a severe threat to life and society. The goal is to force trans people back into the closet, and to erase their existence from discourse, politics, and the public sphere.

The revitalization of anti-LGBTQ+ politics is having predictable consequences. Trans activist Imara Jones reflectsabout GOP propaganda: “This disinformation, one of the things that it is doing is further isolating, stigmatizing, and demonizing trans people, allowing us to be targeted by all forms of violence, both from the state and from individuals.” The legitimation of violence against trans persons, conducted on behalf of the state, speaks to rising fascist politics in America. When the trans community is framed as an existential threat to national security, the message that’s implicitly delivered to GOP supporters, the far right, and Americans is that it’s open season on this group. Republican officials maintain plausible deniability, despite stoking this hate, by refusing to explicitly call for violence – leaving the actual violence to their base.

What’s the best way forward to combat transphobia? A simple two-pronged strategy will likely yield the best results. First, for those who are willing to listen, empathy building must be a central objective. Previous political science research demonstrates that efforts to humanize trans people by telling Americans about the individual stories and struggles they face as people help to cultivate support for this group, in the process combating anti-trans bigotry. This lessons is reflected in recent research finding that LGBTQ+ activists must remain in the public light, showcasing their humanity and struggles, to effectively build mass support. Second, for those who are unwilling to listen and to reconsider their beliefs, the public and private shaming and stigmatization of transphobia will help to beat back the attacks from the purveyors of hate. For many individuals who embrace hateful values, it may be unrealistic to expect they’ll have a change of heart and mind in the foreseeable future. But they can be made to pay a real social cost for their hatred.

As a nation claiming to pride itself in democracy and equal rights, we need to set a new tone for political discourse that makes it clear there’s no place in our society for transphobic beliefs or for fascist messages portraying trans people as a threat to human life and security. No democracy can allow for this sort of demonization and discrimination to persist as the status quo, particularly when it means empowering those trafficking in disinformation, hatred, sexism, and authoritarianism.

Anthony DiMaggio is Associate Professor of Political Science at Lehigh University. He is the author of Rising Fascism in America: It Can Happen Here (Routledge, 2022), in addition to Rebellion in America (Routledge, 2020), and Unequal America (Routledge, 2021). He can be reached at: anthonydimaggio612@gmail.com. A digital copy of Rebellion in America can be read for free here.