During pandemic's first 9 months, depression and anxiety increased sharply among Americans

Surveys of 1.5 million Americans reveal reports of anxiety and depression rose sharply in 2020, Boston College researchers find

BOSTON COLLEGE

Research News

 

Chestnut Hill, Mass. (4/22/2021) - Confirming anecdotal evidence that the spread of the coronavirus has strained Americans' mental health, Boston College researchers found reports of anxiety increased to 50 percent and depression to 44 percent by November, 2020 - rates six times higher than 2019 - according to a new report in the journal Translational Behavioral Medicine.

Among U.S. adults aged 18-29, the impact on mental health was even more severe. Rates of anxiety and depression increased to 65 percent and 61 percent, respectively, of the respondents in that age group, according to the report.

Use of prescription medication, counseling services, and unmet need for mental health services also rose significantly, according to the co-authors of the new study, Boston College developmental psychologist Rebekah Levine Coley and economist Christopher F. Baum, who reviewed survey data from nearly 1.5 million U.S. adults.

Rates of mental health disorders were highest among young, less-educated, single parent, female, Black and Hispanic respondents, Coley and Baum report. Disparities between young versus older and less educated versus more educated adults rose over time. Young, female, and moderately educated respondents also reported higher unmet needs for services.

"Disparities in estimates of mental health disorders and mental health treatment indicate a striking disequilibrium between the potential need for and the use of mental health services during the COVID-19 pandemic," said Coley, a professor in the Lynch School of Education and Human Development. "Rising mental health challenges are being borne largely by young, less advantaged people of color, and women, with the potential for expanded interruptions to optimal functioning and societal recovery from COVID-19."

Despite extensive anecdotal evidence of rising mental health challenges posed by the pandemic, little prior evidence had systematically assessed rates of mental health disorders or use of mental health symptoms through the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, said Coley.

"We discerned a need to track rates of depression and anxiety, as well as rates of use of mental health services and reports of unmet need for such services between April and November, 2020," she said. "We also sought to assess whether the rates of mental health disorders and service use varied across key demographic groups in the U.S."

The researchers analyzed data gathered between April and November 2020 as part of the U.S. Census' Household Pulse Survey, a series of cross-sectional surveys conducted weekly. Survey respondents self-reported their symptoms of anxiety and depression, use of medication, use of counseling services, and unmet need for services. Coley and Baum analyzed these surveys to track trends in mental health disorder symptoms and access to and use of mental health services.

While the researchers expected to see increases in the rates of depression and anxiety, they were surprised by the magnitude of the increases, Coley said.

"The fact that prevalence rates were six times higher than national norms from 2019 was striking, as was the fact that these increases were born primarily by younger adults, aged 18-29 years, whose rates of anxiety and depression were nearly twice as high as those of older adults, aged 70 and above," Coley said.

The analysis reveals a need for continued study of the pandemic's impact on mental health.

The findings suggest the need for increased access to mental health services and other supports to help adults face the economic, social, and psychological stressors of the COVID-19 pandemic, Coley said. There is also a need to assess whether rising mental health challenges continue to grow as the pandemic rages on, and to delineate the longer-term effects of the social, economic, and psychological disruptions caused by COVID-19. For young adults particularly, the pandemic may have interrupted higher education plans and the initiation of careers and social and financial independence, with unknown long-term repercussions.

"The myriad stressors imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic have impaired mental health and well-being," said Baum, who also holds an appointment at BC's School of Social Work. "Although evidence from early in the pandemic revealed elevated rates of mental health conditions, research had not documented whether psychological disorders have continued to rise as the pandemic has persisted, or for whom they have risen most dramatically."

###

Why blasphemy is a capital offence in some Muslim countries

Execution for a Facebook post?

The Prophet Muhammad never executed anyone for apostasy, nor encouraged his followers to do so. Nor is criminalising sacrilege based on Islam’s main sacred text, the Koran. In this essay, Ahmet Kuru exposes the political motivations for criminalising blasphemy and apostasy.

Half of the world’s 49 Muslim-majority countries have additional laws banning apostasy, meaning people may be punished for leaving Islam. All countries with apostasy laws are Muslim-majority except India. Apostasy is often charged alongside blasphemy.

\Junaid Hafeez, a university lecturer in Pakistan, had been imprisoned for six years when he was sentenced to death in December 2019. The charge: blasphemy, specifically insulting Prophet Muhammad on Facebook.

According to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, Pakistan has the world’s second strictest blasphemy laws after Iran. Hafeez, whose death sentence is under appeal, is one of about 1,500 Pakistanis charged with blasphemy, or sacrilegious speech, over the last three decades. No executions have taken place.

Since 1990, however, 70 people have been murdered by mobs and vigilantes who accused them of insulting Islam. Several people who defended the accused have also been killed, including one of Hafeez’s lawyers and two high-level politicians who publicly opposed the death sentence of Asia Bibi, a Christian woman convicted for verbally insulting Prophet Muhammad. Though Bibi was acquitted in 2019, she fled Pakistan.

Blasphemy and apostasy

Of 71 countries that criminalise blasphemy, 32 are majority Muslim. Punishment and enforcement of these laws varies. In Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Brunei, Mauritania and Saudi Arabia, blasphemy is punishable by death. Among non-Muslim-majority cases, the harshest blasphemy laws are in Italy, where the maximum penalty is three years in prison.

Junaid Hafeez was a lecturer in English literature at Bahauddin Zakariya University in Multan, Pakistan. Appointed in 2011, he soon found himself targeted by an Islamist student group who objected to what they considered Hafeez's "liberal" teaching. On 13 March, 2013 Hafeez was arrested – accused of using a fake Facebook profile to insult the Prophet Muhammad in a closed group called "So-Called Liberals of Pakistan". Imprisoned without trial for six years, much of that time spent in solitary confinement, the academic was finally sentenced to death in December 2019

This class of religious laws enjoys considerable popularity across the Islamic world. According to a 2013 Pew survey, about 75% of respondents in Southeast Asia, the Middle East and North Africa, and South Asia favour making Sharia, or Islamic law, the official law of the land.

Among those who support Sharia, around 25% in Southeast Asia, 50% in the Middle East and North Africa, and 75% in South Asia say they support "executing those who leave Islam" – that is, they support laws punishing apostasy with death.

The ulema and the state

My 2019 book Islam, Authoritarianism, and Underdevelopment traces the root of blasphemy and apostasy laws in the Muslim world back to a historic alliance between Islamic scholars and government.

Starting around the year 1050, certain Sunni scholars of law and theology, called the "ulema", began working closely with political rulers to challenge what they considered to be the sacrilegious influence of Muslim philosophers on society.

For three centuries, Muslim philosophers had been making major contributions to mathematics, physics and medicine. They developed the Arabic number system used across the West today and invented a forerunner of the modern camera.



A conspiracy against Sunni Islam? For three centuries, Muslim philosophers had been making major contributions to mathematics, physics and medicine, developing the Arabic number system used across the West today and inventing a forerunner of the modern camera. Yet the conservative ulema felt these philosophers were inappropriately influenced against Sunni beliefs by Greek philosophy and Shia Islam. Their views were reinforced by the brilliant and respected Islamic scholar al-Ghazali, who declared two long-dead leading Muslim philosophers, Farabi and Ibn Sina (a.k.a. Avicenna), apostates for their unorthodox views on God’s power and the nature of resurrection. Their followers, al-Ghazali wrote, could be punished with death

The conservative ulema felt that these philosophers were inappropriately influenced by Greek philosophy and Shia Islam against Sunni beliefs. The most prominent in consolidating Sunni orthodoxy was the brilliant and respected Islamic scholar al-Ghazali, who died in the year 1111.

In several influential books still widely read today, al-Ghazali declared two long-dead leading Muslim philosophers, Farabi and Ibn Sina (a.k.a. Avicenna), apostates for their unorthodox views on God’s power and the nature of resurrection. Their followers, al-Ghazali wrote, could be punished with death.

As modern-day historians Omid Safi and Frank Griffel assert, al-Ghazali’s declaration provided justification to Muslim sultans from the 12th century onward who wished to persecute – even execute – thinkers seen as threats to conservative religious rule.

This “ulema-state alliance”, as I call it, began in the mid-11th century in Central Asia, Iran and Iraq and a century later spread to Syria, Egypt and North Africa. In these regimes, questioning religious orthodoxy and political authority wasn’t merely dissent – it was apostasy.

Wrong direction

Parts of Western Europe were ruled by a similar alliance between the Catholic Church and monarchs. These governments assaulted free thinking, too. During the Spanish Inquisition, between the 16th and 18th centuries, thousands of people were tortured and killed for apostasy.

Blasphemy laws were also in place, if infrequently used, in various European countries until recently. Denmark, Ireland and Malta all recently repealed their laws. But they persist in many parts of the Muslim world.

 

In Pakistan, the military dictator Zia ul Haq, who ruled the country from 1978 to 1988, is responsible for its harsh blasphemy laws. An ally of the ulema, Zia updated blasphemy laws – written by British colonisers to avoid interreligious conflict – to defend Sunni Islam specifically and increased the maximum punishment to death.

From the 1920s until Zia, these laws had been applied only about a dozen times. Since then they have become a powerful tool for crushing dissent. Some dozen Muslim countries have undergone a similar process over the past four decades, including Iran and Egypt.

Dissenting voices in Islam

The conservative ulema base their case for blasphemy and apostasy laws on a few reported sayings of Prophet Muhammad, known as hadith, primarily: "Whoever changes his religion, kill him."

But many Islamic scholars and Muslim intellectuals reject this view as radical. They argue that Prophet Muhammad never executed anyone for apostasy, nor encouraged his followers to do so.

Nor is criminalising sacrilege based on Islam’s main sacred text, the Koran. It contains over 100 verses encouraging peace, freedom of conscience and religious tolerance.

In chapter 2, verse 256, the Koran states, "There is no coercion in religion". Chapter 4, verse 140 urges Muslims to simply leave blasphemous conversations: "When you hear the verses of God being rejected and mocked, do not sit with them."

By using their political connections and historical authority to interpret Islam, however, the conservative ulema have marginalised more moderate voices.

Reaction to global Islamophobia

Debates about blasphemy and apostasy laws among Muslims are naturally influenced by international affairs. Across the globe, Muslim minorities – including the Palestinians, Chechens of Russia, Kashmiris of India, Rohingya of Myanmar and Uighurs of China – have experienced severe persecution. No other religion is so widely targeted in so many different countries.

Alongside persecution are those Western policies that discriminate against Muslims, such as laws prohibiting headscarves in schools and the U.S. ban – now revoked by Joe Biden – on travellers from several Muslim-majority countries. Such Islamophobic laws and policies can create the impression that Muslims are under siege and provide an excuse that punishing sacrilege is a defence of the faith.

Instead, I find, such harsh religious rules can contribute to anti-Muslim stereotypes. Some of my Turkish relatives even discourage my work on this topic, fearing it fuels Islamophobia. But my research shows that criminalising blasphemy and apostasy is more political than it is religious.

The Koran does not require punishing sacrilege: authoritarian politics do.

Ahmet T. Kuru

© Qantara.de 2021

Ahmet T. Kuru is Porteous Professor of Political Science at San Diego State University, and FORIS scholar at Religious Freedom Institute. Author of "Secularism and State Policies toward Religion: The United States, France, and Turkey" and co-editor of "Democracy, Islam, and Secularism in Turkey", his works have been translated into Arabic, Bosnian, Chinese, French, Indonesian, and Turkish.

His recent book "Islam, Authoritarianism, and Underdevelopment: A Global and Historical Comparison" was co-winner of the American Political Science Association's International History and Politics Section Book Award.

This article was first published in The Conservation.

Putin On Coup And Lukashenko’s Assassination Plot: They Crossed All The Lines

BelarusFeed 2021-04-21 

Russian President Vladimir Putin denounced Western silence on the “coup d’etat attempt in Belarus.” He stated this during his annual address to the Federal Assembly in Moscow on Wednesday, 21 April.

Photo: press service of the President of Russia

Putin stressed that Russia intends to defend its own interests within the framework of international law, as other countries do.

“In the world, unfortunately, it seems that everyone is used to the practice of politically motivated, illegal sanctions in the economy. These are rough attempts to impose their own will on others by force. Today, this practice is growing into something much more dangerous. I mean the recently known direct attempt to organize a coup d’etat in Belarus and the assassination of the president of this country,” he said.

At the same time, it is characteristic, Putin continued, that even such flagrant actions do not find condemnation of the so-called collective West.

“Nobody seems to notice this. Everyone pretends that nothing is happening at all. You can think whatever you want about Ukrainian President Yanukovych, who was also almost killed and removed from power in an armed coup, or Maduro in Venezuela … You can have any point of view regarding the policy of Belarusian President Lukashenko. But the practice of organizing a coup d’etat, plans for political assassinations, including those of high-ranking officials, are too much! All lines have been crossed!”

In fact, it was a massive cyberattack, Putin said. “And all those confessions of the detained conspirators, that they planned to block Minsk, including the city infrastructure, a complete shutdown of the capital’s energy system. […] What would have happened if the coup d’etat attempt had been actually undertaken? How many people would have suffered? What would have happened to Belarus if such a coup took place, no one cares, as no one thought about Ukraine when the coup was carried out in this country.”

At the same time, Vladimir Putin emphasized the peacefulness of the Russian authorities, despite the unfriendly actions against it.

“In some countries, a nasty custom has been introduced: for any reason, and most often for no reason at all, to criticize Russia. In the sports sphere. In this regard, we behave in an extremely restrained manner, I will say directly without irony, modestly, we often do not respond at all not only to unfriendly actions but also to outright rudeness,” he said.

The Russian President assured that he did not want to burn the bridges and wants to have friendly relations with the world community

“But if some interpret our good intentions as indifference or weakness and intend to burn or blow up bridges himself, they should know: Russia’s response will be asymmetrical, rapid and harsh. The organizers of any provocations that threaten the fundamental interests of our security will regret their deeds like never before!”


Read also:

Russian Prime Minister Comes To Minsk, Lukashenko Announces Meeting With Putin

Peskov: Putin And Biden Discussed Information About Assassination Attempt On Lukashenko

Coup plot

On Saturday, 17 April, Alexander Lukashenko said that political analyst Alexander Feduta and lawyer Yury Zenkovich were involved in plotting the assassination attempt on him and his sons. “Then we found out about the involvement of foreign intelligence services. Most likely, the CIA, the FBI, I do not know which of the Americans exactly. We learned about their plans to come to Minsk and to organize an assassination against the president and his children,” said Lukashenko.

Later that day, the state-run ONT TV channel aired a report with a commentary by the KGB Chairperson Ivan Tertel that the special services “managed to prevent attempts of an armed coup in Belarus and elimination of government officials”. The official said that Alexander Feduta, Yuri Zenkovich and Grigory Kostusev were members of the criminal group. The ONT reported that “the conspirators plotted the coup for the summer of this year, June or July”.

The Federal Security Service (FSS) of Russia confirmed the information of the KGB of Belarus and stated that it had participated in the operation to detain Feduta and Zenkovich in Moscow. According to the agency, they arrived in the city after consultations in the U.S. and Poland to meet with “opposition-minded generals of the Belarusian Armed Forces.” At the same time, according to the FSS, seizing power by force in Belarus was planned for 9 May.

“Any suggestion that the U.S. government was behind this or was involved in the attempted assassination of Lukashenko is completely false,” said the U.S. State Department representative.

Source: TUT.BY

Psaki denies allegation US backed plot to assassinate Belarus strongman Lukashenko
European dictator is a close ally of Russia's Putin

By Tyler Olson | Fox News

White House press secretary Jen Psaki on Wednesday denied that the United States was involved in an alleged plot to assassinate contested Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko.

"I can confirm there's no basis in fact there," Psaki said when asked about the allegation.

The Russian military intelligence agency FSB said late last week that it arrested two men, including one with a dual citizenship in the United States and Belarus, who planned a military coup in Belarus and to assassinate Lukashenko.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki speaks during a press briefing at the White House in Washington, Monday, April 19, 2021. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

RUSSIA'S PUTIN, BELARUS' LUKASHENKO SPARK BACKLASH FOR SKIING, RIDING SNOWMOBILES DURING MASS PROTESTS

Lukashenko later alleged that the U.S. was behind the alleged plot. He said he was "surprised" that "the Americans behave this way" and that "no one can set the task of eliminating the president, except the top political leadership," according to his office's website.

Russia's President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday lamented the fact Western officials had not addressed the alleged plot against Lukashenko.

"It is typical that even such flagrant actions have not been condemned by the so-called collective West. Nobody seemed to notice. Everyone pretends nothing is happening," Putin said. "[T]he practice of staging coups d’état and planning political assassinations, including those of high-ranking officials — well, this goes too far. This is beyond any limits."

Psaki also responded to more general broadsides that Putin launched against Western countries in her press briefing Wednesday.

 

Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, left, greets International Ice Hockey Federation President Rene Fasel during their meeting in Minsk, Belarus, Monday, Jan. 11, 2021. White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki denied Lukashenko's allegation that the U.S. was behind a plot to assassinate him. (Nikolai Petrov/BelTA Pool Photo via AP)

BELARUS OLYMPIC BODY ELECTS LUKASHENKO'S SON AS LEADER

"I don't think we take anything President Putin says personally. We have tough skin," she said.


The United States officially categorizes Belarus, an ally of Russia, as an authoritarian country. The U.S. does not recognize the result of the 2020 presidential election. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken called it "fraudulent."

"As a result of government suppression surrounding the fraudulent August 2020 Presidential elections in Belarus and its aftermath, there are more than 340 political prisoners detained in Belarus today," Blinken said in a statement Monday. "The United States calls on the Belarusian authorities to immediately and unconditionally release all those unjustly detained or imprisoned."

On Tuesday, U.S. Ambassador to Belarus Julie Fisher met with Belarus opposition leader Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya in Lithuania. Tsikhanouskaya is in self-imposed exile in the neighboring country, according to Reuters.

"It is important that the international community speak up and speak out about what’s happening, that we pay close attention, and that we call for the immediate release of all political prisoners in Belarus," Fisher said, according to Reuters

Bizarre Belarus “coup plot” has all the hallmarks of a classic Kremlin drama

UkraineAlert by Brian Whitmore

Belarus President Alyaksandr Lukashenka and Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin meet in Minsk on April 16. (Alexander Astafyev/POOL/TASS via REUTERS)

One way to look at Belarus ruler Alyaksandr Lukashenka’s claim last week that he was the target of a US-backed coup and assassination attempt is that this is just the latest in a series of conspiratorial rants by an increasingly beleaguered dictator.

But as is often the case in the former Soviet Union, upon closer examination, there appears to be at least some method behind all the madness.

Lukashenka’s claim that the plot was approved “by the top political leadership” in the United States came just days after Russia’s Federal Security Service had arrested two Belarusians, including one with US citizenship, and accused them of plotting to carry out a coup during the May 9 Victory Day parade in Minsk.

Yuras Zyankovich, a Belarusian-born lawyer who also holds US citizenship, and Alyaksandr Fyaduta, who served as Lukashenka’s spokesman in the 1990s, were extradited to Belarus.

The Belarusian KGB said the alleged plot was connected to an online discussion on Zoom last summer among experts, opposition figures, and former law enforcement officials who were discussing the country’s political situation and possible future scenarios.

The immediate context surrounding the arrests and coup plot allegations suggests that these developments are part of a broader operation designed to advance Russia’s strategic goals both in Belarus and vis-a-vis the West.

News of the “coup plot” came as Lukashenka prepares to visit Moscow for talks with Kremlin leader Vladimir Putin on April 22. On the eve of Lukashenka’s visit, Putin raised the alleged plot in his bellicose state-of-the-nation speech on April 21, claiming that what he called “unjust sanctions” against Belarus are escalating into “something more dangerous: a coup attempt in Belarus.”

As speculation mounted over the coming meeting in Moscow, Lukashenka released an oblique statement on the state-run Telegram channel Pul Pervovo on April 17 announcing that he has made “the most principled decision of my quarter-of-a-century presidency,” adding that “it will be serious” and he will “formalize” the decision soon. This has led to speculation that some form of deeper integration between Russia and Belarus could be imminent.

The broader context surrounding the recent arrests and coup allegations is also important. The “exposure” of the alleged plot comes at a time when Russia is visibly expanding its political, economic, and military footprint in Belarus with the clear aim of achieving Moscow’s long-standing objective of turning its smaller but strategically vital 

One way to look at Belarus ruler Alyaksandr Lukashenka’s claim last week that he was the target of a US-backed coup and assassination attempt is that this is just the latest in a series of conspiratorial rants by an increasingly beleaguered dictator.

But as is often the case in the former Soviet Union, upon closer examination, there appears to be at least some method behind all the madness.

Lukashenka’s claim that the plot was approved “by the top political leadership” in the United States came just days after Russia’s Federal Security Service had arrested two Belarusians, including one with US citizenship, and accused them of plotting to carry out a coup during the May 9 Victory Day parade in Minsk.

Yuras Zyankovich, a Belarusian-born lawyer who also holds US citizenship, and Alyaksandr Fyaduta, who served as Lukashenka’s spokesman in the 1990s, were extradited to Belarus.

The Belarusian KGB said the alleged plot was connected to an online discussion on Zoom last summer among experts, opposition figures, and former law enforcement officials who were discussing the country’s political situation and possible future scenarios

The immediate context surrounding the arrests and coup plot allegations suggests that these developments are part of a broader operation designed to advance Russia’s strategic goals both in Belarus and vis-a-vis the West.

News of the “coup plot” came as Lukashenka prepares to visit Moscow for talks with Kremlin leader Vladimir Putin on April 22. On the eve of Lukashenka’s visit, Putin raised the alleged plot in his bellicose state-of-the-nation speech on April 21, claiming that what he called “unjust sanctions” against Belarus are escalating into “something more dangerous: a coup attempt in Belarus.”

As speculation mounted over the coming meeting in Moscow, Lukashenka released an oblique statement on the state-run Telegram channel Pul Pervovo on April 17 announcing that he has made “the most principled decision of my quarter-of-a-century presidency,” adding that “it will be serious” and he will “formalize” the decision soon. This has led to speculation that some form of deeper integration between Russia and Belarus could be imminent.

The broader context surrounding the recent arrests and coup allegations is also important. The “exposure” of the alleged plot comes at a time when Russia is visibly expanding its political, economic, and military footprint in Belarus with the clear aim of achieving Moscow’s long-standing objective of turning its smaller but strategically vital Western neighbor into a pliant and obedient vassal. It also comes when Belarusian society is increasingly distancing itself from Russia and embracing the West amid an unprecedented wave of pro-democracy protests.

At the most basic level, claims of a US-backed coup advance Moscow’s goal of increasing Belarusian isolation from the West and increasing its dependence on Russia. It also appears to be an attempt to foreclose any attempt by Lukashenka to return to his pre-August 2020 game of tacking between Moscow and the West in order to achieve the maximum degree of geopolitical flexibility.

The main objective here may have been to send a clear and unambiguous message to the Belarusian strongman: you are in Russia’s sphere of influence now and you have no place else to turn. Judging from his subsequent comments, Lukashenka appears to have received the message loud and clear.

In his public statements, Lukashenka has not only accepted Russia’s narrative about the arrests and the plot, but has also built on them enthusiastically. According to his evidence-free account, not only was there a US-backed plot to overthrow the Belarusian government, but also a conspiracy to assassinate him and his children.

Lukashenka has claimed that Putin raised the issue of the alleged US-backed plot in a recent phone call with US President Joe Biden. “I am grateful to Putin. When he was talking with Biden, he asked him this question,” Lukashenka reportedly commented. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov later confirmed Lukashenka’s account.

In addition to advancing Moscow’s geopolitical goals in Belarus, this “coup plot” also feeds into Moscow’s perennial goal of establishing a “whataboutism” narrative with the West at a time when Russia is under increasing scrutiny for massing troops on the Ukrainian border. It also follows news of new US sanctions over the SolarWinds hack against US federal agencies and interference in the 2020 US election. And it comes in the midst of an escalating diplomatic crisis with the Czech Republic, which expelled Russian diplomats last week over claims that Russian military agents were behind a deadly 2014 explosion at a Czech arms depot.

Despite US denials and a lack of any real evidence to support it, the alleged coup plot gives Moscow the ability to advance a narrative that it is not guilty of anything more nefarious than the West’s own actions. Indeed, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova claimed that the recent Czech decision to expel Russian diplomats was an effort by the West to distract attention from the alleged coup plot.

The Belarusian “coup plot” comes right out of the Kremlin playbook of using dramaturgy, subterfuge, and disinformation to muddy the waters, establish false equivalency narratives, and create facts on the ground to advance Moscow’s imperial and revanchist geopolitical goals. It is important for Western policymakers to remain clear-eyed amidst all this Kremlin-generated fog.

The essence of the conflict between Russia and the West is a normative struggle between a Western system based on the rule of law and accountability against an alternative advanced by the Putin regime that is based on kleptocracy and autocracy. It is a battle being played out in Russia’s neighboring countries, including Belarus, and inside Russia itself.

The West is on the right side of history in this struggle and must not allow itself to be distracted from this essential truth by the Kremlin’s dramaturgy and subterfuge.

In his public statements, Lukashenka has not only accepted Russia’s narrative about the arrests and the plot, but has also built on them enthusiastically. According to his evidence-free account, not only was there a US-backed plot to overthrow the Belarusian government, but also a conspiracy to assassinate him and his children.

Lukashenka has claimed that Putin raised the issue of the alleged US-backed plot in a recent phone call with US President Joe Biden. “I am grateful to Putin. When he was talking with Biden, he asked him this question,” Lukashenka reportedly commented. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov later confirmed Lukashenka’s accoun

In addition to advancing Moscow’s geopolitical goals in Belarus, this “coup plot” also feeds into Moscow’s perennial goal of establishing a “whataboutism” narrative with the West at a time when Russia is under increasing scrutiny for massing troops on the Ukrainian border. It also follows news of new US sanctions over the SolarWinds hack against US federal agencies and interference in the 2020 US election. And it comes in the midst of an escalating diplomatic crisis with the Czech Republic, which expelled Russian diplomats last week over claims that Russian military agents were behind a deadly 2014 explosion at a Czech arms depot.

Despite US denials and a lack of any real evidence to support it, the alleged coup plot gives Moscow the ability to advance a narrative that it is not guilty of anything more nefarious than the West’s own actions. Indeed, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova claimed that the recent Czech decision to expel Russian diplomats was an effort by the West to distract attention from the alleged coup plot.

The Belarusian “coup plot” comes right out of the Kremlin playbook of using dramaturgy, subterfuge, and disinformation to muddy the waters, establish false equivalency narratives, and create facts on the ground to advance Moscow’s imperial and revanchist geopolitical goals. It is important for Western policymakers to remain clear-eyed amidst all this Kremlin-generated fog.

The essence of the conflict between Russia and the West is a normative struggle between a Western system based on the rule of law and accountability against an alternative advanced by the Putin regime that is based on kleptocracy and autocracy. It is a battle being played out in Russia’s neighboring countries, including Belarus, and inside Russia itself.

The West is on the right side of history in this struggle and must not allow itself to be distracted from this essential truth by the Kremlin’s dramaturgy and subterfuge.

Brian Whitmore is a Nonresident Senior Fellow at The Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center, an Adjunct Assistant Professor at The University of Texas at Arlington, and host of The Power Vertical Podcast.

SURPRISE THE RIGHT IS REACTIONARY

Right-wing media erupts in incoherent rage after Derek Chauvin is found guilty

Tucker Carlson mocks Chauvin verdict as "please don't hurt us"; Tomi Lahren asks, "Is Foot Locker safe tonight?"

By ZACHARY PETRIZZO
APRIL 21, 2021 

Tomi Lahren (Getty/Joshua Blanchard)

With nationwide emotions running high following the conviction of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin for the murder George Floyd, right-wing media reacted in opposite fashion to the general public, attempting to infuriate followers and lash out at the verdict.

Many on the right, both in media and politics, invoked conservatives' word of the year, suggesting that the trial was "rigged" or impacted by "mob rule." Other, more "mainstream," conservative figures complained about the remarks made by President Biden and Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., who praised the verdict and called for a broader push for racial justice.

Some of the most shocking remarks came late on Tuesday night during Fox News host Laura Ingraham's program, where right-wing YouTuber Brandon Tatum made an incoherent case for a sinister conspiracy, suggesting that the media aims to have Black people confront police in order to be shot in exchange for a large payoff.

"And these political pundits and these political talking heads, they want you to fight the police, they want you to be killed so they can make all this money, they can promote it on the news, they can get a payout with the family, and you're going to be dead as a doornail," Tatum stated, who is currently himself at war with fellow Black conservatives.


How can Democrats unite with Republicans who enabled Trump?
00:56 / 03:11


Fox News host Tucker Carlson, hours after the verdict, opined that the jury's implicit statement amounted to "please don't hurt us."

"Everyone understood perfectly well the consequences of an acquittal in this case," Carlson said. "After nearly a year of burning and looting and murder by BLM, that was never in doubt."

Carlson then proceeded to ask rhetorical questions, addressing Chauvin's potential sentence of 40 years in prison. (Chauvin's actual sentence will not be decided for about eight weeks.) "Is that a fair punishment?" the Fox News host demanded. "Is the officer guilty of the specific crimes for which he was just convicted?"

Later during his Tuesday evening program, Carlson cut off a guest who pointed out that Chauvin, according to several law enforcement witnesses at his trial, had clearly used excessive force in restraining Floyd. "I just think that it was excessive, and it shouldn't have happened," said former New York City corrections officer Ed Gavin, who was about to move on to another point before being interrupted by Carlson.

Evidently impatient with this argument, Carlson remarked, "Yeah, but the guy that did it looks like he's going to spend the rest of his life in prison, so I'm kind of more worried about the rest of the country. Thanks to police inaction, in case you haven't noticed, [it's] like boarded up. That's more my concern." Gavin attempted to continue, but Carlson said: "Nope! Done. Thank you."

Other right-wing pundits online also attempted to sow discord. "Is the Foot Locker safe tonight? Should be, right? Justice, right? No need to steal in the name of George Floyd anymore, right?" Fox Nation personality Tomi Lahren remarked. Responding to a comment from CNN's Don Lemon that "justice has been served" in the case, conservative pundit Ben Shapiro responded that "we all know he would never have said this had the reverse verdict been reached."

Newsmax host Rob Schmitt claimed that the jury decided to "sacrifice" Chauvin to "the mob." One America News (OAN) correspondent and neo-Nazi sympathizer Jack Posobiec, after the verdict was released, said that "jurors may have feared for their lives," baselessly speculating there might have been "jury tampering."

Ex-President Trump's lawyer Rudy Giuliani, during Steve Bannon's "WarRoom" podcast on Tuesday afternoon, suggested that the case "was subverted by the media."

Even further to the right, personalities such as young white nationalist "groyper" guru Nicholas Fuentes were angered by the verdict. He tweeted, "Rigged System." Far-right Gateway Pundit blogger Cassandra Fairbanks wrote on Twitter, "Poor Chauvin. This is awful. He is a political prisoner. Nobody can change my mind on this," but later deleted the tweet.

As Salon's Jon Skolnik noted Tuesday upon the verdict being read to the nation, "Floyd's death, caught on tape as he repeated the words 'I can't breathe' 27 times in the first four minutes and 45 seconds of the incident, caused protests to erupt across the world last summer. Chauvin had faced three charges: second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter. Chauvin is now heading to jail for the first time since his initial arrest."

Some right-wingers appear to pin their hopes of overturning the verdict on the supposed effect of remarks by Democratic politicians calling for justice. Legal experts suggest that is unlikely to be a successful argument for reversal. "If you're relying on that for your appeal, that is not a hopeful situation," defense attorney Ken White told Law & Crime.

Zachary Petrizzo is a staff writer at Salon. He previously covered politics at Mediaite and The Daily Dot. Follow him on Twitter @ZTPetrizzo.

REPUBLICANS PANIC OVER CHAUVIN CONVICTION

4/21/21  by John Aravosis 

I’ve been watching the fallout from the Derek Chauvin verdict. As you know, Chauvin is the police officer convicted on three counts of killing George Floyd after pushing his knee against Floyd’s neck for 9 minutes and 29 seconds, ultimately killing him. It’s been remarkable, but perhaps not surprising, to see how upset many of the loudest Republicans are at Chauvin’s conviction.

First up, leave it to Fox News to watch the Derek Chauvin verdict and feel outraged that the man was convicted of what was obviously an unnecessary and negligent death. No, Tucker — and no, Candace — jury trials are not “mob justice.” They’re simply justice.

Tucker was so upset by Chauvin’s conviction that he had a meltdown when a guest had the temerity to disagree with him:

---

Not to be left out, right-wing agitator Ben Shapiro jumped on the bandwagon, claiming that Chauvin was convicted because the media and politicians launched an “enormous pressure campaign.” Now, my friend Lindsay Beyerstein argues that it in fact was public pressure that led to the indictment and prosecution of Derek Chauvin, and that may be the case. But Chauvin was ultimately convicted because he was clearly guilty, and the evidence proved it. Regardless, why is the far-right so upset about this particular case? The killing of George Floyd was so outrageous and unnecessary — why take a stand on this case?

---

Meanwhile, QAnon loon Marjorie Taylor Greene, who’s actually a sitting member of Congress from Georgia, weighed in, and managed to craft quite a conspiracy theory out of the fact that there was no violence last night following the verdict. According to Greene, the fact that DC was “quiet” last night, and literally nothing happened, proves how violent Black people are, and how legitimately scared white people are of Black people.

---

I still want to know what happened to Alan Dershowitz.

archive John Aravosis

CyberDisobedience on Substack | @aravosis | Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn. John Aravosis is the Executive Editor of AMERICAblog, which he founded in 2004. He has a joint law degree (JD) and masters in Foreign Service from Georgetown; and has worked in the US Sen.ate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, the United Nations Development Programme, and as a stringer for the Economist. He is a frequent TV pundit, having appeared on the O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline, AM Joy & Reliable Sources, among others. John lives in Washington, DC. John's article 

After Derek Chauvin’s Conviction, Gratitude for Darnella Frazier


BY MICHELLE RUIZ22 APRIL 2021
BRITISH VOGUE


PHOTO CREDIT: DARNELLA FRAZIER/INSTAGRAM

Tuesday’s verdict made official in the eyes of law what people saw last May: Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin is guilty of killing George Floyd. It was a rare conviction in the death of a Black man at the hands of a police officer, and one that may have never happened if not for Darnella Frazier, the then 17-year-old girl who filmed the homicide on her phone and gave a powerful testimony in the case against Chauvin.

After the jury’s decision and the complex mix of emotions it brought, thoughts quickly turned to Frazier, a child who witnessed Floyd’s death firsthand. Valerie Jarrett, a former senior adviser to President Obama, tweeted that Frazier played an essential role in the historic verdict, praising her “strength and composure” in capturing the murder of Floyd on camera. That a Black teen knew to take out her phone and begin filming – because she may need evidence later – is an indictment on the state of our justice system itself. “Remember: none of Chauvin’s colleagues turned him in. He murdered a man in broad daylight and we are here today because a brave Black girl named Darnella Frazier kept taping despite threats from the cops on the scene,” author Mikel Jollett tweeted.

Frazier, now 18, was on a walk to Cup Foods convenience store to get snacks with her nine-year-old cousin when she saw the arrest outside. She was among the bystanders shouting at Chauvin to stop, telling him that Floyd couldn’t breathe, when Chauvin reached for a can of mace: “I felt in danger when he did that,” Frazier testified. But she continued filming an atrocity that would go on to spark protests around the world. “I see a man on the ground, and I see a cop kneeling down on him,” she told the jury, describing Floyd as “terrified, scared, begging for his life”. Not only was her video indispensable, but Frazier’s testimony “shaped the trial”, according to The New York Times. The Washington Post went on to hail her a hero, praising Frazier’s “presence of mind” while also grieving that “the intrepid Minneapolis teenager must live with a ghastly memory that will float alongside her for the rest of her life”.

Frazier has spoken about the devastating impact of Floyd’s death, testifying that she has suffered from anxiety. “It’s been nights I stayed up apologising and apologising to George Floyd for not doing more and not physically interacting and not saving his life,” she said. "But it’s like, it’s not what I should have done, it’s what [Chauvin] should have done.” A GoFundMe organised for Frazier has raised more than $639,000 toward her “peace and healing”. The fundraiser aims to help her cope with what she’s experienced: “In addition to the trauma of watching a Black man be murdered by police, she has had to deal with trolls, bullies, and ignorant people harassing her online... we cannot let this young Black woman become a casualty.”

Frazier reacted to Tuesday’s triple-guilty verdict on Facebook and Instagram. “I just cried so hard,” she said. “Thank you God. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.” Meanwhile, many people expressed their thanks to Frazier. As New York Times editor Jazmine Hughes put it: “We got here because of Darnella Frazier... I am forever grateful to her.”