Here's what Republicans really mean when they say they're fighting for 'parents' rights'

John Stoehr
November 03, 2021

"Parents Against Critical Theory" activist Scott Mineo appears on Fox News (screenshot) earlier in 2021

This article was paid for by Raw Story subscribers. Not a subscriber? Try us and go ad-free for $1. Prefer to give a one-time tip? Click here.

The top issue in yesterday's Virginia election was reportedly "parents' rights." I had some thoughts about that but first wanted to see arguments in favor laid out in full. My friend Bill Scher watched the governor's race for Washington Monthly. I asked if he knew of an article capturing the position. He said, "An honest one?" I guess enough said about that.

Juan Williams got ahead of me. He's a news analyst for Fox. He's also a Black conservative, which is not a white conservative who happens to be Black. In his latest for The Hill, Williams said "parents' rights" in Virginia is code for white power. "It is a campaign to stop classroom discussion of Black Lives Matter protests or slavery because it could upset some children, especially white children who might feel guilt."

He added:
"Unlike their earlier defense of Confederate monuments, the "Parents' Rights" campaign message at first glance looks to have zero to do with race. That puts Democrats on the defensive. They are in the uncomfortable position of calling the attention of suburban white moms to divisive racial politics being used by Republican Glenn Youngkin's campaign."

Put these together — it's a dishonest argument and it's designed to put Democrats on their heels. But that's where I think I might be able to help. Those "suburban white moms"? They're the respectable white people I spend so much time talking about. They care for their kids. They fear for their kids. No one should blame them. But they need to know there's something scarier: men talking about parents' rights. Williams is right. It's code for anti-Black. But as a conservative, a Black one, he seems rather blind to the other awful truth. It's anti-woman.

First, remember what I said Monday. There's always someone willing to make the goals of the authoritarian collective, which is what the GOP has become, seem respectable. In Virginia, that's gubernatorial candidate Glenn Youngkin. He's very good at respectability politics. Right now, he's riding an anti-Black backlash, but he's casting himself as a kind of warrior for "suburban white moms" and their kids.

He's not. What he's doing is rationalizing the thing "suburban white moms" need to fear, which is this: a long effort to restore America to its original, Godly and "constitutional" order by which white Christian men stand atop, ruling over everyone else, including their women. Indeed, the first goal of authoritarians is putting women back in their place in the natural orders of power, which means making them, once again, dependent on a man for their health, safety and good fortune.


What does this have to do with "suburban white moms"? Parents hold a special place in the natural order of things. There's God over Mankind, men over women and — right before you get to white people being over everyone else — there's parents over children. The "over" here is important to bear in mind, because whoever's "over" is the one in charge. Whoever's "under" is expected to obey. Otherwise, it's a perversion of the natural order of things, which must be punished.

In the world of the authoritarian collective, which is what the GOP has become, there's no democracy between and among the natural orders of power, because there is no such thing as political equality. None.

Efforts to reform the natural order of things, which is to say, for instance, efforts to enshrine greater rights and privileges for women on account of being created equally, are met with fierce opposition. Efforts can't be, according to the authoritarians, driven by morality, because morality isn't about doing unto others what you would have done unto you. Morality is about authority. It's about obedience. A woman asking for equality is a woman asking for punishment.

What does this have to do with public education? Public education is the greatest tool invented for flattening the natural order of things, creating space for demands for political equality, where there was no space before when morality was about obedience instead of morality. An educated girl is one who might question the authority of her father before questioning the authority of her husband. (Forget about LGBTQ rights, because in the authoritarian world, LGBTQ people do not exist.) Public education doesn't punish girls for asking for political equality, as it should. Instead, it validates, supports and drives their hunger for it.

So when Youngkin says the first thing he's going to do is use the power of the state to censor information and police thought ("I will ban critical race theory"), what he's saying is he's going to use the power of the state to restore the natural order of things — to bring Virginia back to its original, Godly and "constitutional" order by which white Christian men stood atop the hierarchy, ruling over everyone else, including their women. When he says he's gonna fight for parents' rights, the parent doesn't include moms. Just men, and their women.

This is what "suburban white moms" need to know. Whether they believe it or not is another question. No one appears to be saying what needs saying, which is that "parents' rights" isn't only code for white power. "Parents' rights" is about protecting the "rights" of men.


John Stoehr is a fellow at the Yale Journalism Initiative; a contributing writer for the Washington Monthly; a contributing editor for Religion Dispatches; and senior editor at Alternet. Follow him @johnastoehr.

Noted business expert explains what America is teaching us about the willful ignorance of a failed state


Umair Haque, Dc Report @Rawstory
November 02, 2021

Alabama AG vows to revive law protecting Confederate monuments after it's struck down by judge
Confederate flag supporters rally in Alabama (screenshot/Twitter)

It's a peculiar pattern of history. Like the axis around which a cycle of ruin spins. Societies — even civilizations — don't see their own collapses coming. And not seeing them coming, they can hardly take steps to avert them. They're left like deer in the headlights. And you know what happens next. If anything, curiously, societies tend to lean into their collapses.

So why don't societies see their own collapses coming? Why do they accelerate and intensify them? It's an especially relevant question, because, well, look around. Things aren't exactly going too well for our civilization. We're threatened by everything from global warming to ecological implosion to mass extinction to the pandemics and poverty and fascisms they're already breeding.

If I think about it, four reasons jump out at me. In this little essay, I'll use the examples of everyone's favorite collapsing societies, America and Britain, to illustrate them.

The first reason's simple: entrenched elites want to preserve the status quo. Think about America. The average American's life is in freefall. Every single social indicator imaginable — from longevity to trust to happiness to income — is either flatlining or plummeting. Every single one. As a result, it's not too hard to see why Americans are turning to hatred, superstition, fanaticism and other assorted forms of stupidity. They're literally losing their minds as their lives fall apart.

And yet the really curious thing is that that's been going on for decades now — and the whole while, America's ruling classes have pretended that everything's OK. Which classes are those? Well, there are the political class, the intellectual class and the capitalist class. None of these three classes can even brook the idea that America is in serious, deep trouble, which adds up to a collapsing society.

Hence, American pundits will say, on cue, every quarter, that the "economy's roaring" and that "confidence is rising" and all the other flavors of canned doublespeak they're renowned for. Meanwhile, life keeps on falling apart.

The Soviet Union's laughing in its grave, because it's seen all this before. Why do entrenched elites want to preserve the status quo? You're right to say that it preserves their power. But in a subtler way than I think is often understood. To say that a society is collapsing would be for elites to admit they mismanaged them. They'd have to admit they were badly, badly wrong — ideologically, theoretically, paradigmatically. Who wants to do that? And that, of course, would probably cost them. Fancy sinecures and "consulting" contracts and high office and all the rest of it.

So entrenched elites go on pretending nothing's wrong — even in societies like America, where social collapse has reached breathtaking proportions. Kids shoot each other in schools, people just…die…because they can't afford insulin which is profiteered on…the average American lives and dies in debt, with little to no real freedoms or choices. And elites just whistle, shrug and walk away.

I have to give a special mention to intellectual elites. America's in a funny place. It thinks of itself as having the finest thinkers in the world — and yet practically none of these fine thinkers can see that America's collapsing, much less explain why, much less offer many ideas to stave it off. Intellectual elites, too, are complicit in the game of self-preservation, perhaps most of all so — because a collapsing society means their ideologies and theories were all badly wrong, too. Just ask the Soviets.

That brings me to the next reason that societies don't foresee their own collapses. If elites want to preserve the status quo, then why don't people…do something about those elites? Because elites in collapsing societies are entrenched. That means they're dug tight into impregnable bunkers — and nobody can force them out and regain control of a society's resources and decisions.

Corruption Run Rampant

Why can't elites be forced out? How do they end up entrenched? Well, again, take a hard look at America. It has probably the most openly corrupt set of elites since the Soviet Union. In Europe, if politicians took "donations" the way American politicians do, it'd be a scandal every hour for decades. But in America, it's just business as usual. The pervasive corruption of elites is another grand theme in collapsing societies. Who cares if Rome falls — as long as you've got your villa and your servants? That seems to be the feeling among elites when it comes to American collapse, too. Corruption saps incentives for elites to do anything but aggressively pursue self-preservation in the most antisocial and corrosive ways imaginable.

And yet it's not just corruption that entrenches elites. That's necessary, but not sufficient. A deeper force is at play: the disempowerment of the demos, as in, the democratic unit that is "the people."

Think about that mouthful this way. The average American is completely disenchanted with their elites. Nobody much likes Biden or Pelosi or McConnell or any of the rest of them. But the problem is that Americans don't have the time or energy or spirit or willpower to do anything about their failed elites. The American demos has little to no power over its elites.

Why not? Because they're too busy just trying to survive. Just trying to make it through another day in America is a wearying affair. Life is an endless game of brutal competition, right down to death. Lose that job? Whoops, there goes everything, from health care to a home. So Americans, caught in the trap of capitalism, have to work every single day, to the bone, just to make ends meet. And even then, they can't. Remember, the average American dies in debt — "credit card debt," "medical debt," "mortgage debt" and so on.

Trapped in Debt

To a good economist, societies where the average person dies in debt are also societies incapable of forcing entrenched elites out — at least short of a grand revolution. That's the trap Americans are in. Elites have made sure they're indebted…to elites…so Americans, worn out, broken, defeated, having to fight each other every day, over and over again…to pay off those debts…don't have the energy or power left to dislodge those very entrenched elites.

Why don't Americans protest? At least the way, say, the French famously do? It's not just a cultural thing, though any proper Frenchman or woman is practically born waving a placard and shouting non! It's also, more to the point, a matter of political economy: the French have time and energy left over to protest, like Europe and Canada generally do. From an American point of view, those societies hardly work at all — Americans work twice as long and receive less in return. No wonder Americans are indebted — and don't have the energy left over to remove their entrenched yet failed elites from power.


If you're working 80 hours a week at some crap job — like many Americans are — what time or energy do you really have left over for serious reflection about your society? Protesting? Giving "voice," as political scientists, call it, to your discontents? Who's going to organize and coordinate and fund all that, anyway? Maybe you see the problem. America's ended up a democracy in name only, one without a demos exerting any real power over entrenched, failed elites.

Result? The grim, disheartening choice between Biden and Trump.

And yet there's an even starker, darker path to collapse. Often, there is someone who sees a society's in trouble, serious trouble, even beginning to collapse. The demagogue. The demagogue sees that a society's not doing well, that things are beginning to break and crumble and fall apart. But he or she then scapegoats the most powerless groups in society for those problems — instead of fixing them. The obvious result is that the problems afflicting a society only get worse, while people are incited to hate, and so the vicious cycle of collapse only accelerates, usually hard and fast. Societies like this lean into their collapse — baffling and bewildering those around them, usually, too.

Britain Turns on Europe

It's modern-day Britain that exemplifies this weird, sinister path to social collapse best. Britain was beset by problems after the financial crisis of the 2000s. But those problems came from a bungled bank bailout, which simply shifted costs to the public balance sheet, and led to a decade of austerity. In this vacuum, demagoguery arose — an entire generation of British leaders blamed Europe for Britain's woes. Europe had nothing — nothing whatsoever — to do with British austerity, which led to falling living standards. And yet this class of demagogues — expertly scapegoated Europe, to the point that you'd turn on the BBC, and see someone called an "economist" or "analyst," with no credentials whatsoever, just spouting folly, lies and hate…every day.

The catastrophic result was Brexit. And the consequences of Brexit, today, are as funny and absurd as they are shocking. Brits can't get food — they see cardboard cutouts of food at supermarkets. The country's running out of beer. Raw sewage is floating down waterways because the chemicals to treat it can't be found. All that stuff came from Europe. And now it doesn't come from anywhere.

Meanwhile, nobody in Britain, at least in a position of power, is allowed to say the word "Brexit." It's Voldemort, at idiot Hogwarts. Even the leader of the opposition, Keir Starmer, won't say the obvious, which is that Brits can't get food or fuel or, shortly, medicine, because it all used to come from Europe, and Britain is still busy picking fights with Europe, instead of trying to figure out how to supply itself with basic goods.

Meanwhile, Europe's baffled — and at this point, infuriated — with Britain. It has little appetite left to be scapegoated. Give Europe some credit — it took Britain's insults for five years, with grace and kindness, just out of friendship. Shortly, though, Europe's going to do things like stop supplying Britain with power and gas, because Britain keeps on provoking it, demonizing it, attacking it. And then the real chaos will begin.

In this form of social collapse — let's call it the Brexit Pattern — nobody sees collapse coming because they're too busy cheering it on. The demagogue's lies appeal to people because their lives really are hurting — and it's always easiest to blame it on a scapegoat. Hence, Britain became literally a "hostile" country to foreigners — as its own government puts it — and especially to Europeans.

But attacking and insulting and provoking Europeans didn't fix Britain's problems. It only created far, far bigger ones — ones that have led Britain squarely to the point of collapse. What else do you call a society where people are given…cardboard cutouts of food…raw sewage is floating down rivers…where the lights are likely going to go off in the winter…while the people who created this mess are riding higher in the polls than ever…because, still, idiotically, astonishingly, it's all someone else's fault? Britain's still so busy blaming Europe that it can't see it's collapsing because it began blaming Europe from the start.

It's hard to unpack and unpick the layers of stupidity and irony therein, so many abound.

Five Decades of Decline

America took about half a century to collapse. Incomes began stagnating in the '70s, social mobility began to stall in the '80s, living standards began to flatline in the '90s, by the end of the '00s, America's famed middle class was a minority and an underclass. That was the point at which debt, drugs and despair began to ravage (even white) America in earnest. That's a pretty standard form of social collapse — it took the Soviet Union about three decades of stagnation and falling living standards to come undone.

Britain, though, is something closer to Weimar Germany. It took Weimar Germany a decade, maybe 15 years, depending on how you count it, to really implode into Nazi Germany. Britain's much closer to that pattern, that form of collapse. Just 20 years ago, it was the envy of the world, with one of the world's highest living standards, finest healthcare system, most renowned public broadcaster. Today? All that's in tatters, precisely because Britain leaned into collapse even harder than America did.

In that respect, Britain and America teach us different lessons about how societies collapse. America teaches us that time, neglect, ignorance and poverty can slowly crumble the foundations of even the mightiest empires until they totter and fall. Britain teaches us an even darker lesson: Give a society a crisis, a demagogue and a scapegoat — and it takes just a decade or two of stupidity and anger to turn into hate and venom to the point of total and utter self-destruction.

America teaches us that small amounts of the social poisons of greed and indifference and inequality can add up to a very big collapse, in the end, given time. But Britain teaches us that societies can implode with lightning quickness, too; that even wise and gentle people like the British are not immune to the Big Lies of hate and nationalism and intolerance and unkindness, that anyone can be seduced by a demagogue offering a nation growing poorer a convenient scapegoat for its ills.

Does that get us a little closer to understanding why societies don't see their own collapses coming? Perhaps it does — you'll have to tell me. In the end, the answer may be as simple as this. Societies don't see their own collapses coming because they grow weak, blind, dull, defeated in the spirit, corroded in the heart, hubristic in the mind. They've been warned, time and again, that it can't happen here — and left too weary to fight it much, anyways. That's America's case. But that's the kind case. Even more revealing, some societies, like Nazi Germany, end up leaning aggressively into their own collapse, cheering it all on in a frenzy, attacking every scapegoat in sight, provoking newly made enemies, instead of fixing their own problems. A weird Orwellian freedom-is-slavery perversion of reality takes place. That's Britain's case right about now.

Which one, I wonder, will hit which nation next?

Umair Haque is a London-based consultant. He is director of Havas Media Lab, founder of Bubblegeneration and frequent tweeter and contributor to the online Harvard Business Review. Haque's initial training was in neuroscience. He studied at McGill University in Canada, went on to do an MBA at London Business School and is the author of The New Capitalist Manifesto: Building a Disruptively Better Business (2011).

Republicans have made it disturbingly clear: They think women are too stupid to have rights

Amanda Marcotte, Salon
November 02, 2021

Samuel Alito (screen capture)

On Monday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments over SB8, a new Texas law that set up a bounty hunter system that empowers private citizens to use lawsuits to prevent abortions. Going in, most observers expected the Republican-dominated court to be eager to uphold this law. In a twist, however, multiple conservative judges — including Donald Trump appointees, Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Justice Amy Coney Barrett — seemed skeptical.

To be sure, it's not because the conservative justices care about human rights, but because they care about their own power and look askance at a law designed to evade legal review by federal courts. Now the expectation in legal circles is that the court will throw out the Texas law and open the door to banning abortion through a Mississippi case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which is a straightforward challenge to Roe v. Wade.

Most of Monday's arguments were centered around impenetrable legalese about "ex parte young" and "sovereign immunity." But through the thicket of lawyerly jargon about who has what legal power here, a picture did emerge of the actual moral and political argument Republicans are making about abortion rights. It all boils down to one very basic, insulting premise: Women are simply too stupid to be allowed rights.

Throughout arguments, Solicitor General of Texas Judd Stone and Justice Samuel Alito, both Federalist Society-linked far-right Republicans, casually spoke about women as if they were incapable of handling the choice to have an abortion. When asked about who could be suffering "extreme moral or otherwise psychological harm" over someone else's abortion, for instance, Stone invoked the tragic tale of a mansplainer who is horribly abused by a woman who decides to ignore his opinion.

An individual discovers that -- that someone -- that a close friend of theirs who they'd spoken with about -- about pro-life issues and about abortion has chosen instead to have a late-term abortion in violation of S.B. 8, and they were very invested in the -- basically, in that child's upbringing and the child's coming into being.

Oof! Can you imagine the nerve of this hypothetical woman? After someone goes to all that effort to browbeat her about how much he hates abortion, she up and decides that she is going to abort a pregnancy anyway! One can feel Stone's heart breaking for the mansplainer denied his god-given right to boss women around.

And if that diatribe weren't sexist enough, Stone had to slide in that little jab about "late-term" abortion. It's been a common talking point for GOP defenders to claim that the law gives women plenty of time to get abortions. The implication is that only dum-dums can't get it done on time, and therefore they deserve forced childbirth. But this supposed "six weeks" to decide is utter nonsense. While the media keeps calling the Texas law a "six week" ban, it is, at best, a two-week ban, as that's the length of time since the missed period indicating pregnancy.

Alito, on the other hand, decided to insult women's intelligence from another angle, portraying women as mental children who are being manipulated by sinister abortion doctors and therefore need to be protected from having choices. Alito repeatedly invoked the specter of a bird-brained woman who didn't realize until after the fact that the abortion — the one she scheduled, went through and paid for — meant she wasn't going to have a baby. He spoke of a woman who wants to sue "the doctor who performed my abortion because it caused me physical and/or emotional harm," conjured up a woman who "sues an out-of-state doctor" for "for physical or emotional harm suffered as a result of the abortion," and asked of a woman who "sues a doctor who has flown in from another state to perform the abortion."

As Justice Sonia Sotomayor gently pointed out, there are already "common law torts" that cover "emotional infliction of harm, breach of contract, medical malpractice." So if a woman was actually forced or tricked into an abortion she didn't want, she can already sue for damages. Alito, however, wasn't interested in the real world. He wanted to wallow in an elaborate sexist fantasy, where women routinely get abortions without understanding such a procedure means they won't get to have the baby. Wouldn't the mansplaining hero in Stone's tragic tale have told them?

Alito was riffing on a sexist notion that has been rampant in the anti-choice world for decades. Women are naturally too dumb to make choices, the argument goes, and therefore end up awash in regret after foolishly letting the "abortion industry" take their babies away. This myth persists despite ample evidence that the opposite is true, and that a whopping 99% of patients report, five years after the fact, that their abortion was the right choice. In fact, most women who get abortions are already mothers, so they understand intimately what the other choice already looks like.

Alito's line of argument isn't just misogynist. It's also worrisome from a legal perspective.

The last time the Supreme Court chipped away at abortion rights, in the 2007 Gonzales vs. Carhart decision, Justice Anthony Kennedy justified upholding a federal ban on an abortion procedure used to end pregnancies in the late second or early third trimester. Even though most of those abortions are done for medical reasons, as Dahlia Lithwick noted in Slate at the time, "His opinion blossoms from the premise that if all women were as sensitive as he is about the fundamental awfulness of this procedure, they'd all refuse to undergo it."

Kennedy's argument wasn't just false and condescending, it also set up a legal precedent for the idea that women are too dumb to understand what abortion is and therefore need to be kept from having one for their own good. No doubt Alito was thinking of that as he kept harping on this fantasy of the woman tricked by a doctor into getting an abortion. It's looking unlikely the court will uphold the Texas law, but there's a good reason to worry that they will use the Mississippi case to end the legal right to abortion, citing the myth that women are too stupid to be trusted with rights.

CHATTEL SLAVERY AFTER 20 YRS OF WAR

CNN airs shocking footage showing old man 'buying' an 9-year-old girl in Afghanistan

Bob Brigham
November 02, 2021

"Old man" and Parwana. (CNN/Screengrabs)

CNN chief international correspondent Clarissa Ward broadcast shocking video of a 9-year-old girl being sold by her family to an old man in Afghanistan.

"It is important to note that parents gave us full access and permission to speak to the children and show their faces because they say they cannot change the practice themselves," Ward reported.

Ward interviewed 9-year-old Parwana, whose family sold her for 200,000 Afghanis which is just over 2,000 U.S. dollars.

"My father sold me because we don't have bread, rice, and flour. He sold me to an old man," Parwana said.

Ward also interviewed a 10-year-old who threatened suicide after her family borrowed money from a 70-year-old neighbor and planned to repay the debt by selling the man their daughter.

SEE LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for CHILD BRIDES 

 

UNICEF to directly fund Afghan teachers, bypassing Taliban authorities

By Gibran Naiyyar Peshimam

Posted on November 3, 2021

FILE PHOTO: Waheedullah Hashimi, Director of External Programmes and Aid at the Ministry of Education, speaks during an interview in Kabul

KABUL (Reuters) – The United Nations children’s agency said it was planning to set up a system to directly fund Afghan teachers, after the international community placed a freeze on funding to the Taliban-led administration.

“UNICEF is setting up a system that will allow direct payments to teachers without the funds being channelled through the de facto authorities,” Jeannette Vogelaar, UNICEF Afghanistan’s Chief of Education, told Reuters in an email.

In preparation, she said, UNICEF would begin registering all public school teachers.

“The best way to support the education of girls in Afghanistan is to continue supporting their schools and teachers. UNICEF is calling upon donors not to let Afghanistan’s children down,” Vogelaar added.

Afghanistan’s public services, in particular health and education, have been plunged into crisis since the Islamist Taliban movement took over the country on Aug. 15.

Many foreign governments have placed a ban on funding outside of humanitarian aid that is channelled through multilateral agencies.

That has generally been limited to urgent supplies such as wheat and blankets, leaving public service workers including teachers without pay for months. Billions of dollars in Afghan central bank funds held overseas have also been frozen.

The international community has raised alarm that the Taliban might restrict female education, and high schools for girls in many parts of the country have remained closed even while those for boys have been allowed to open.

A Taliban official told Reuters this week there would be “good news” soon on older girls being allowed to go back to school, and that they were working with UNICEF and other international organisations on the issue.

“We are working especially with UNICEF and some other international organisations … to come up with a good solution … we have meetings on a daily basis,” said Waheedullah Hashimi, Director of External Programmes and Aid at Afghanistan’s Ministry of Education.

“We have a problem that economically we are not good … that is why we are requesting the international community, international organisations, especially those who have funds for emergency situations, to help us in this regard,” he added.

(Reporting by Gibran Peshiman; Writing by Charlotte Greenfield; Editing by Mike Collett-White)

Teacher's Union boss Prez schools Tom Cotton: 'Is this a new hateful homophobic slur?'

David Badash, The New Civil Rights Movement
November 02, 2021

Tom Cotton (Fox News Screen grab)

U.S. Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) is under fire after attacking Randi Weingarten, the president of the nation's second-largest teachers' union, claiming she is not a mother and therefore should not have anything to do with children.

Throwing support to Republican Glenn Youngkin, the GOP nominee for governor of Virginia, Fox News' Bill Hemmer attacked Randi "Weingartener," mispronouncing the veteran labor leader's name.

Calling Weingarten a "target," Hemmer told Cotton that Democratic Virginia gubernatorial nominee Terry McAuliffe had the American Federation of Teachers' president on stage on Monday.

"What's that tell you?" Hemmer asked.

After slamming McAuliffe, Cotton went on to attack Weingarten.

"Randi Weingarten is a joke," Cotton told the Fox News host.

"Randi Weingarten does not even have children of her own. What the hell does she know about raising and teaching kids?" Cotton asked, falsely claiming she "shut down schools for two years" because of COVID. Cotton also appeared to suggest having children in the home was too difficult.

Weingarten did not hesitate to blast the Arkansas Republican.

"Wait…Did I misread this or did Tom Cotton just say any teacher who is not also a parent shouldn't be able to teach?" she tweeted. "Really? Is he now disqualifying every nun from teaching? Or is this simply a new divisive & hateful homophobic slur against LGBTQ teachers?"

The 63-year old Democrat who is a lawyer, a former teacher, a lesbian, and married wasn't finished.

"I guess Sen Cotton hasn't done his homework and doesn't know I have step-children, grandkids & nieces and nephews. They would certainly be surprised by his comments. As would the many students I taught ( and loved) at Clara Barton High School in Brooklyn," she added.

"Millions of people who raise and teach and care for America's children are not parents. Parents everywhere rely on their expertise. Parents everywhere rely on the profound commitment we all must have to other people's children, their health, well-being, and potential," Weingarten, proving her educator bona fides, continued schooling Cotton.

"We owe them- teachers who are parents, and teachers who are not parents- our thanks, not insults," Weingarten added. "Parents and educators are partners, and must work together to help our kids thrive… stop the dog whistles Tom and help us help our kids recover."

Engineer’s insurers argue they shouldn’t be on hook for millions in Surfside condo collapse

2021/11/3
© Miami Herald

Rescue workers continue to look through rubble for survivors at the partially collapsed Champlain Towers South Condo building in Surfside, Florida, on July 3, 2021. - Matias J. Ocner/Miami Herald/TNS

MIAMI — Soon after the deadly collapse of a Surfside condo tower, dozens of victims and their relatives started filing lawsuits accusing the building’s condo association and its engineering consultant of causing the tragedy because they failed to keep the oceanfront structure safe.

Now two major insurance companies are using that same argument to deny huge coverage claims by Morabito Consultants, which was hired by the Champlain Towers South condo association to inspect the 12-story building and come up with a structural renovation plan long before it partially fell down in June.

To support their refusal to provide potentially tens of millions of dollars in coverage, the two insurers have sued Morabito and cited allegations in lawsuits filed by the very people hoping to collect on that insurance. The insurers’ suits argue the Champlain tower deaths and property losses were caused by the consulting firm’s “negligence,” including “acts or omissions in connection” with providing “professional engineering services.”

In response, Morabito Consultants have sued National Fire Insurance Company of Hartford and Continental Casualty Company, claiming that they did provide professional services, completed a 2018 structural safety report and produced a restoration plan that was just getting under way before the Champlain tower partially collapsed.

With limited funds to divide among the 98 people who died and the 136 owners who lost their units, the escalating dispute over the consultant’s insurance coverage could make a substantial difference in how much money the victims of Champlain Towers South can collect in damages from the June building collapse.

Both the victims and their lawyers involved in individual and class-action cases are closely following the legal battle between Morabito Consultants and its insurers, National Fire Insurance Company of Hartford and Continental Casualty Company. Both insurers have not only rejected Morabito’s insurance claims but also those of the Champlain Towers South condo association, which was covered under the engineering firm’s policy too.

The two insurers’ refusal to honor their policies with the Champlain condo association under Morabito’s coverage stands in stark contrast to several other insurance companies that have already agreed to pay in full the association’s property damage and personal injury claims, totaling about $50 million.

A spokesman for Morabito Consultants, Brett Marcy, blasted the two insurers for denying the claims. The engineering company “believes all relevant and necessary parties should be included in any litigation related to insurance coverage,” he said. “That includes the condo association and those parties representing the victims.”

The leaders of a team of lawyers in the Champlain class-action case, though adversaries of Morabito and the condo association, agreed with that approach.

“Insurance proceeds are critical to compensate the victims of this tragedy,” said Miami attorneys Harley Tropin and Rachel Furst, who are among the team of lawyers heading the class-action case against the Champlain condo association. “The insurance companies that insured those that played a role in causing the collapse have an obligation to honor their commitment and to provide coverage.”

Miami attorney Stephen Binhak, who represents developers with condo- and construction-related matters but is not involved in the Champlain cases, said that while the collapse of the Surfside high-rise is an extraordinary situation, the legal fight between the tower’s engineering consultant and its insurers is commonplace. Sharp differences arise not only over insurance coverage and “exclusion” provisions, but also over the amount of the payouts based on liability, caps on damages and other factors — including the number of accidents. In the Surfside case, for example, the building partially collapsed on the night of June 24 and the remaining structure was later demolished for safety reasons.

“Litigation over insurance coverage and claims is normal — you see it all the time,” Binhak said. ”Initially, there is the question of whether a policy covers a claim. If so, there is the question of how much insurance is ultimately available. Larger claims increase the chances of a lawsuit — especially when the damage may exceed the policy limits.

“After the World Trade Center collapse in 2001, with billions of dollars of insurance on the line, there was a lawsuit to determine whether the attack on the towers was a single ‘occurrence’ or two separate ‘occurrences’ for the purposes of insurance coverage,” Binhak he said. “Even with that level of insurance in place, the federal government stepped in to make funds available to compensate victims,” referring to the massive litigation that followed the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the twin north and south World Trade Center towers.

Morabito, a Maryland-based firm, was hired in 2018 by the Champlain Towers South condo association to provide a structural safety inspection and renovation plan for the 40-year “recertification” of the 8777 Collins Ave. property. Morabito found “major structural damage” to a concrete slab in the pool area and “abundant” deterioration of garage columns supporting the condo tower, but the association did not move forward on Morabito’s restoration plan until just before the building partially collapsed.

In the aftermath, Morabito Consultants was sued by its two insurance companies, National Fire Insurance Company of Hartford and Continental Casualty Company. The companies, known together as CNA, have denied Morabito’s insurance claims and also refused to defend the engineering consultant against 19 individual lawsuits brought by Champlain Towers South condo owners. Morabito is also expected to be sued in the ongoing class-action case representing most of the victims in the condo collapse.

In their lawsuit, the two insurance companies claim that the liability coverage provided under Morabito’s policy does not apply to bodily injury or property damage “caused by the rendering or failure to render any professional service.” CNA says the coverage, dealing only with Morabito’s engineering services, is excluded from its “primary” and “umbrella” insurance policies between 2017 and 2021. Also, the insurers denied coverage to the Champlain condo association, which was added to Morabito’s policies in recent years.

CNA’s lawyers, who filed the firm’s suit in Maryland federal court, did not return phone and email messages for comment.

Morabito Consultants fired back, filing a motion to dismiss CNA’s federal suit. The consulting firm’s lawyers argue among other things that the coverage matter belongs in the Miami-Dade Circuit Court where all of the parties affected by the Champlain tower collapse are fighting over liability and damage issues.

In fact, the engineering firm filed a lawsuit in Miami-Dade Circuit Court against its two insurance carriers as well as the Champlain condo association and the building’s individual owners who sued them. The reason: They all have an interest in Morabito’s coverage with CNA.

Morabito’s lawyers assert the insurance companies have no legal basis for denying the consulting firm’s claims for property losses and deaths in the condo collapse. They argue the firm’s engineers performed their “professional services” for the Champlain condo association and that its insurance coverage must be interpreted broadly not narrowly.

“CNA has ignored settled law governing the interpretation of insurance policies and the duty to defend and has wrongfully refused to defend Morabito against the [condo owners’] lawsuits,” Morabito’s suit says.

“Moreover, any allegations that could be construed to assert a failure to perform inspection or engineering services are contradicted by allegations that acknowledge Morabito properly performed inspection and engineering services and identified and reported serious structural issues to the [condo] association,” the suit says.

The Champlain condo building, completed in 1981, was facing a formal structural, mechanical and electrical review, as required under Miami-Dade’s building code nearly 40 years later. Morabito Consultants was hired by the condo board in 2018 and produced a nine-page inspection report, which was an initial summary of its structural findings. The estimated initial cost of repairs was heavy — $9 million — a price tag that caused dissension among board members and rose significantly to $15 million as the association delayed the repairs for almost three years. Morabito was also retained to prepare and oversee the restoration plan, which got under way starting with the replacement of the Champlain tower’s roof just before the collapse in June.

Although Morabito’s initial report did not raise an obvious red flag that the building was “unsafe” or at risk of falling down, the firm did urge Champlain’s condo board to replace and repair the deteriorating structural areas in the pool and garage areas in a “timely fashion” because the concrete problems could “expand exponentially.”

Under Miami-Dade County’s building code, “a building, or part thereof, shall be presumed to be unsafe if ... there is a deterioration of the structure or structural parts.” The ordinance further states that “the [local] Building Official, on his own initiative or as a result of reports by others, shall examine or cause to be examined every building or structure appearing or reported to be unsafe.”

But after Surfside’s building official was sent Morabito’s engineering report by a Champlain condo association member, the official met with the board after reviewing the document and assured members that “it appears the building is in very good shape,” according to minutes of a Nov. 15, 2018, board meeting.

Several structural engineers, after evaluating public records, condo plans and video footage of the collapse, told the Herald that they suspect the Surfside tower began to fall after the pool deck caved into the parking garage, which in turn undermined the structural integrity of the tower and triggered the collapse of the middle and oceanfront sections of the building. However, the exact cause of the collapse, under investigation by local and federal authorities, is still not known.

In the months after the tragedy, Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Michael Hanzman has tried to steer the litigation in the direction of recovering and raising as much money as possible to compensate the hundreds of victims — including condo owners and those who died. So far, with the help of receiver Michael Goldberg, who has taken over the Champlain condo association’s role, the judge has managed to recover $30 million in property coverage and $19 million in personal injury coverage from the association’s various insurance carriers — all of whom immediately agreed to honor their maximum policy coverage, unlike CNA, which refuses to pay out anything.

In addition, the now-vacant, nearly two-acre Surfside property fetched an initial bid from a private developer of $120 million. Higher bids could be offered for the lot, where there are plans for a luxury condo high-rise.

But dividing up those funds has been difficult because of the tragic ordeal. Hanzman assigned a mediator to figure out how to compensate both the Champlain condo owners and those who died in the collapse. But the mediator, lawyer Bruce Greer, said he has been unable to bridge the gap, with some condo owners saying they should receive all the money and the families of deceased residents saying all the funds should go to them.

Whatever money might be recovered from third parties, such as Morabito’s insurance carrier, CNA, would be added to the total pot of compensation.

“There is a heavy divide between the two sides,” said Martin Langesfeld, whose sister, Nicole, and her husband, Luis Sadovnic, died in a Champlain condo unit owned by Langesfeld’s grandparents. “They think we deserve nothing when we think we deserve everything.”

E

xcavators are seen working in the rubble of the Champlain Towers South collapse, one day after a shift from search-and-rescue to recovery in Surfside, Florida, on July 8, 2021. - Pedro Portal/Miami Herald/TNS

Progressives on Virginia loss: Corporate Democrats have only themselves to blame

Jake Johnson, Common Dreams
November 03, 2021

Governor Terry McAuliffe [Facebook]

After Democratic candidate Terry McAuliffe—a conservative whose campaign was flush with billionaire cash—fell to Republican private equity mogul Glenn Youngkin in Virginia's closely watched gubernatorial race on Tuesday, establishment Democrats wasted no time pinning the blame on progressives.

The finger-pointing started days before the polls opened in Virginia, a state that has trended blue in recent years and that President Joe Biden won by 10 percentage points in 2020.

"Did progressives literally have a press conference yesterday for the sole purpose of declaring that a deal was not close? No, that was Joe Manchin."

Several conservative Democrats, including Sens. Mark Warner of Virginia and Jon Tester of Montana, suggested leading up to the contest that progressive lawmakers' refusal to allow a bipartisan infrastructure bill to pass the House without simultaneous approval of a broader reconciliation package could be at least partially to blame for a McAuliffe loss.

"I've got to tell you, in Virginia, where we've got a gubernatorial race tomorrow, that would have really helped Terry McAuliffe a lot if we had been able to notch that win," Warner—who, like McAuliffe, previously served as Virginia's governor—said in an appearance on MSNBC, referencing Democrats' inability to secure an infrastructure vote last week amid progressive opposition.

Warner expressed the same sentiment on Fox News hours before the Virginia results were reported. "I think it would have helped Terry McAuliffe in Virginia," the senator said of a vote on the $550 billion bipartisan infrastructure bill.

Tester, for his part, said of his progressive colleagues: "We haven't gotten anything done. That says enough about their strategy."

The blame game resumed almost immediately following McAuliffe's narrow defeat to Youngkin, a millionaire backed by former President Donald Trump and now the first Republican to win statewide office in Virginia since 2009. Politico reporter Heather Caygle tweeted after the race was called that Democratic members of Congress "are already texting me blaming progressives for [the] 'debacle' in Virginia."

Progressives were quick to push back on that narrative, characterizing it as baseless and self-serving on the part of a Democratic establishment that threw its weight behind McAuliffe—the former chair of the Democratic National Committee—in the Virginia gubernatorial primary earlier this year.

Leah Greenberg, co-executive director of Indivisible, noted that "progressives have been earnestly working to deliver on Biden's full agenda. It's conservative Dems who've ensured that every day for the last several months, the headlines are about how we aren't delivering paid leave, prescription drug reform, elder care, or voting rights."

"Did progressives literally have a press conference yesterday for the sole purpose of declaring that a deal was not close? No, that was Joe Manchin," Greenberg continued. "Progressives were busy trying to pass Biden's agenda. As far as I'm aware, progressives also did not choose McAuliffe over a new generation of rising Black women leaders, nor did they run his campaign and choose his messaging, nor did they write his debate lines."

"I don't want to play the blame game. I'd rather be focusing on what to do next (hint: pass Biden's agenda)," Greenberg added. "But folks have been working overtime to seed this narrative before the election was even over and it's important that we be clear: it's a ridiculous red herring."

Other prominent progressives also weighed in.

Warren Gunnels, majority staff director for Senate Budget Committee Chair Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), tweeted that "maybe, just maybe, the 'debacle' in Virginia could have been avoided if we had a Congress that listened to the overwhelming majority of Americans and passed progressive policies like paid family leave and expanding Medicare instead of bowing down to wealthy campaign contributors."

Charles Idelson of National Nurses United lamented that "any time a Democrat loses, the party establishment, with the help of the corporate media, always blames progressives, no matter how weak or 'centrist' the losing candidate is, and no matter how much the Dem conservatives block reforms that would help the vast majority of people."

Writing for The Daily Beast late Tuesday, Democratic strategist Max Burns observed that Youngkin's campaign "centered around the bogeyman of 'Critical Race Theory,'" not the lack of a timely vote on a bipartisan infrastructure package that Trump and other Republicans have trashed.

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, made a similar point earlier this week. "I've watched all the attack ads on Terry McAuliffe and not a single one has talked about [infrastructure] not passing," she said Monday. "They've all been about other things."

In his Daily Beast column, Burns argued that "the worst thing that could possibly happen... is for the party's conservatives to read McAuliffe's loss as a sign that Americans are turned off by the Democratic agenda."

Alluding to fears that the Virginia race is a harbinger for Democratic performance in the 2022 midterm elections, Burns wrote that "there's one simple trick to averting a Democratic bloodbath next year: Do what voters say they want."

"A Vox/Data for Progress poll conducted last month found 71% of voters support raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans, and six-in-ten support Biden's signature spending plan at the full $3.5 trillion. These aren't mere 'suggestion' numbers—they're supermajorities. Democrats ignore those clearly stated wishes at their own electoral peril."

LAPD forced to protect comic book artists after anti-LGBTQ fans freak over bisexual Superman: report

David Badash, The New Civil Rights Movement
November 02, 2021

Photo by LOGAN WEAVER on Unsplash

It's just a comic book but for some it's yet another entry into a changing world they just cannot handle.

On National Coming Out Day last month DC Comics announced Superman is a proud member of the LGBTQ community. In the latest storyline, Superman's son Jonathan, who is taking over for dear old dad, comes out as bisexual, and will share a kiss with his friend/boyfriend Jay Nakamura.

DC Comics recently was forced to ask the Los Angeles Police Dept. to provide protection to some of its artists and the studio itself after it reported threats LAPD deemed "credible." There is no indication of what those threats actually were or who made them.

"LAPD officers were recently dispatched to patrol the homes of some of the illustrators/production staffers who created the latest iteration of Superman. The extra protection comes after major backlash that included some so-called fans making threats," TMZ reports. "We're told the pissed-off comic book readers inundated the studios to voice their displeasure with the character's newly-announced sexuality."

One angry and apparently flustered Arizona Republican state Senator, Wendy Rogers, was so triggered she tweeted, “Superman loves Lois Lane. Period. Hollywood is trying to make Superman gay and he is not."

She further embarrassed herself by using a bigoted and homophobic lisp “joke," saying, “Just rename the whole version Thooperman."

Image by Chris Yarzab via Flickr and a CC license

Extremism expert warns that unhappy QAnon believers are now being lured into far-right extremist groups

Chauncey Devega, Salon
November 03, 2021

Via Sandy Huffaker/AFP

LONG READ

America's mainstream news media has a short attention span, which has certainly played to the advantage of the long-running Republican-fascist assault on democracy (and on reality). Of late, the media has grown bored with QAnon, the antisemitic and racist conspiracy cult which claims to believes that a secret cabal of pedophile Democrats and other members of the "deep state" run the world — and gain superpowers from kidnapping and killing children and then ingesting their vital essence. In this demented worldview, only Donald Trump and other "patriots" can save America and the world.

It appears that QAnon followers played a significant role in the attack on the Capitol and coup attempt on Jan. 6. No leaders of that coup plot have been apprehended or punished, and most of the foot soldiers have received relatively lenient punishment to this point. President Joe Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland appear reluctant to apply the full power of the law to punish Donald Trump, along with his allies, operatives and followers.

QAnon followers are also attempting to undermine American democracy and civil society by infiltrating such "vulnerable" sites as local school boards, library committees and other ground-level institutions of local and state government. Their purported goal may be to ban the teaching of "critical race theory" (which is not taught in public schools), but the real goal is larger: to enforce punishment of "unpatriotic" thoughtcrimes, and to mainstream right-wing conspiracy theories and other lies about American history.

QAnon followers are also seeking to become election officials, where they are planning to use the fervor around Trump's Big Lie and other conspiracy theories to rig election results, overthrow multiracial democracy and replace it with one-party Republican rule.

In an article posted last June, the National Education Association explored the QAnon-fueled "radicalization" of school boards in communities all over America:

In a small town in Washington State, the newly elected mayor calls QAnon, "a truth movement," and recently fired the town's skeptical city manager. In coastal San Luis Obispo, California, a school board trustee's Facebook posts include a QAnon video, misinformation about COVID-19 and Black Lives Matter, and promotion of the ex-gay, conversion movement. She won, says the town's mayor, who is calling for her resignation, because "people had no idea this was going on," and didn't have the "bandwidth to research the school board election," reports the local newspaper, the Tribune.

Meanwhile, in Florida, a newly elected county sheriff is now explaining why he posed for photos last year with a supporter in a "We are Q" t-shirt.

Across the county, conspiracy theorists and proponents of fake news are winning local elections. And their new positions give them a powerful voice in everything from local law enforcement to libraries, trash pickup to textbook purchases.

QAnon followers are also gaining influence and power within white Christian evangelical churches and other faith communities. This is integral to the worsening radicalization of white Christianity and the threat of a right-wing "holy war" against Democrats, liberals, progressives, Black and brown people and anyone else who believes in the separation of church and state, or who holds values and beliefs deemed "un-American" or "anti-Christian."

Public opinion polls and other research show that a large percentage of Republicans and Trump followers say they believe in at least portions of the outlandish QAnon fantasy and — not coincidentally — are also willing to support right-wing political violence to protect their "traditional way of life" and "save the country." This includes removing President Joe Biden from office by violent means if deemed necessary.

Matthew Rozsa of Salon summarized these findings this week:

New public opinion research from the nonprofit Public Religion Research Institute, part of its 12th annual American Values Survey, has returned alarming findings.

Close to one-third of Republicans in the survey, or 30%, agreed with the statement that "true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country." That was more than the combined total of Democrats and independents who say the same thing (at 11% and 17%, respectively).

PRRI CEO and founder Robert Jones said the large proportion of Republicans who appear ready to endorse political violence is "a direct result of former President Trump calling into question the election." Jones noted that according to the same survey, more than two-thirds of Republicans (68%) claim that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from Donald Trump, as opposed to only 26% of independents and 6% of Democrats.

The study also found that 39% of those who believed that Trump had won the 2020 election endorsed potential violence, compared to only 10% of those who rejected election misinformation. There were also signs of a split based on media consumption, with 40% of Republicans who trust far-right news sources agreeing that violence could be necessary, compared to 32% of those who trust Fox News and 22% among those who trust mainstream outlets. In addition, respondents who said violence may be necessary are more likely to report feeling like strangers in their country, to say American culture has mostly worsened since the 1950s and to believe that God has granted America a special role in human history.

Sophia Moskalenko is a social psychologist and expert on conspiracy theories, radicalization and extremism. She is currently a research fellow at the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (NC-START) and is the author of several books, including "Friction: How Radicalization Happens to Them and Us" and "The Marvel of Martyrdom: The Power of Self-Sacrifice in the Selfish World." Her new book, with co-author Mia Bloom, is "Pastels and Pedophiles: Inside the Mind of QAnon."

In this conversation Moskalenko discusses the dangers QAnon poses to American democracy and national security. She explains that QAnon is a community where overwhelmingly white and often socially alienated followers find fellowship and meaning as they are radicalized into extremism and other potentially dangerous antisocial behavior. In her view, QAnon functions as a space that nurtures and satisfies white fantasies of right-wing masculinity, femininity, violence and heroism about "protecting" children and reasserting "traditional values".

Toward the end of this conversation, Moskalenko explains what she would tell Joe Biden and other senior members of the administration about the threats posed by right-wing terrorism, as well as about the ways hostile foreign powers are using disinformation and other forms of propaganda to weaken American democracy and society.

This conversation has been edited for clarity and length.

You are an expert on terrorism and other forms of political extremism. You are also an expert on propaganda and disinformation. How are you feeling right now, given America's democracy crisis?

I've been feeling a little bit like Cassandra, the woman in Troy who was yelling as loud as he could about the city falling to ruin, and everybody was laughing at her. Then of course her warnings came true. It doesn't feel good. There was so much attention being paid to Islamic terrorism after 9/11. Unfortunately, there was not enough attention being paid to the trends right here in the United States domestically. This was all very alarming for somebody such as me who is an expert on terrorism and radicalization. These trends pointed to how right-wing groups were attracting more people and carrying out more and more lethal attacks.

There were people in positions of power and influence here in the United States who were beginning to pander increasingly to these groups. And of course, Trump's presidency was a type of pinnacle for that behavior. Those appeals to right-wing extremist groups are now crystallized in congressional representatives who are outspoken supporters of QAnon conspiracy theories.

There was also Trump's line after the riots in Charlottesville about "good people on both sides," which implies that maybe Nazis aren't so bad. This problem has been developing for a long time.

When you looked at the events of Jan. 6, what did you see? What jumped out at you?

I'm a psychologist, so I focused on the emotions that I observed in the faces, the screams and the actions of the Trump followers who were there that day at the Capitol.

It was just striking to me how angry and violent and ready to inflict serious damage a lot of those people were. On Jan. 6, I saw a huge crowd of people who look just like my neighbors but who were acting in a very threatening and menacing way. It was disturbing. I also, of course, saw many QAnon symbols and antisemitic symbols and other references to hate groups.

I was also struck by the composition of the people at the Capitol on Jan. 6. They were very diverse in terms of age and gender. From the Arab Spring to images from the Ukrainian revolution or Georgian revolution, we mostly see men carrying out these mass radical actions. But on Jan. 6 at the Capitol, we saw a lot of women. There were many young people and also people in their 60s and 70s. That is very unusual, in many ways, as far as radical movements go.

There were various right-wing extremist groups and other forces involved in the events of Jan. 6. What role did QAnon conspiracy believers play?

We know that between 10% and 20% of people present at the Jan. 6 insurrection were members of right-wing militia groups such as the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers and Three Percenters. A sizable proportion of those groups also consisted of active-duty military or veterans. Those militia groups also include active or retired police.

As for QAnon members, after Jan. 6 when the prophecy about Trump's return was unfulfilled, a number of QAnon followers became disenchanted. They went back online looking for answers, like they did before they found QAnon. Now they are looking for something else.

There was a concerted effort by the right-wing extremist groups to bring them in, because they were like lost sheep. The way these groups and individuals talk about the QAnon types is very dismissive. They call them idiots. They call the QAnon prophecy nonsense. But they felt this was an opportunity to recruit a bunch of disenchanted QAnoners into their ranks.

We know that both QAnon and the right-wingers I am discussing here are very antisemitic and racist. Whatever they may say about it, we know from the data we have collected from their own materials that they express clearly antisemitic and racist attitudes. In that aspect there is an overlap, at least psychologically, between QAnon and these right-wing extremists.

"I am Q." We see that language everywhere among the QAnon believers. What is the meaning?

"Q" is a mysterious person, or likely several people. This person or persons has "Q-level" government clearance, which indicates they are supposedly quite high in America's intelligence hierarchy. So while a given person may claim to be "Q," another way of thinking about the meaning of "Q" is that it is an expression of a larger identity. We are in the era of identity politics. Wearing some clothing that announces that one believes in QAnon is a way of projecting that membership and identity.

Wearing that symbol is also a way to connect to other QAnon followers. Because again, especially at these mass rallies or events, people come there for many different reasons, including a shared emotional experience, whether it's rage or hope or even fear. That is the attraction of being together with all these other people who are experiencing the same emotions – even if they are negative emotions. It's a way of establishing your tribe. In a rapidly changing world where we often do not know who our neighbors are, it can be very isolating and very unsettling to not have a tribe.

Carrying something like a big letter "Q" on your chest or over your head is likely an attempt to feel connected with other people who believe similar things.

One key aspect of QAnon is how it is a space for white male fantasies of power, home and family, and about using violence to "protect" children, women, faith and community. QAnon is also a space for fantasies about a particular type of white womanhood and femininity.

Much of QAnon behavior and beliefs are rooted in entertainment. In fact, they borrowed many of their tropes from traditional folklore, like vampires and witches, and also from Hollywood movies. Experimental research has shown that people are compelled to conspiracy theories because they are a lot better at eliciting strong emotions. Some people seek out conspiracy theories because they offer a chance to feel fear, like a horror movie, or anger, such as in a revenge movie.

At the same time, QAnon fills a void that was created when single-earner households where the dad goes to work and the mom stays home in her white little apron were increasingly not viable for most Americans. Such an idea, that a lot of white middle-class men and women grew up with, is no longer available to them. What is left behind are feelings of disillusionment, anger, grievance.

Of course, many of these grievances are then redirected by these QAnon or right-wing narratives more broadly towards immigrants who are supposedly taking the good jobs or taking money out of the economy that would have been enough to make the American dream possible for "real" Americans. Channeling that anger into a hatred toward minorities or immigrants is one way to make sense of their new reality.

QAnon is also a fantasy of action and about the ability of individuals to have agency in their own lives — albeit in delusional, dangerous and unhealthy ways. For example, this deranged belief that children are being held hostage by evil forces who drink their blood is likely to encourage people to get their weapons and go save them. How do these QAnon fantasies play out on the individual level?

QAnon really grew in power and popularity when the George Floyd protests and Black Lives Matter protests were also becoming more prominent. For a lot of women, it was an uncomfortable political conversation that they did not feel ready to have. This idea about saving children then became a safe political alternative for white suburban women to discuss. In their minds, who wouldn't want to save the children?

These QAnon "save the children" ads often portray white children who are being held roughly or muzzled by dark hands. It's a man of color holding this child. This is in contrast to the real Save the Children charity's posters, which overwhelmingly depict children from African and Asian countries who are smiling and laughing in the pictures. By comparison, the QAnon pictures show horrified, abused and generally unkempt kids who elicit sympathy and distress by their appearance alone.

These QAnon "save the children" ads are just a kind of placeholder, I believe, to project their racial discomfort and political beliefs with people who feel the same way — and to do without really calling things by their actual name.

How do you assess the Republican Party and the larger right-wing movement's use of stochastic terrorism? Are we at a tipping point where that stochastic terrorism could become direct encouragements to violence against "the enemy"?

I believe that we are past the tipping point. Hate speech has been increasing for a number of years. I published a book in 2018 where I traced trends for hate speech online, including on Facebook and Twitter. There was a very sizable increase since before the 2016 election, with hate speech becoming more and more prevalent.

For example, the rise of Nazism involved the use of dehumanizing language and other propaganda comparing Jewish people and others to vermin and cockroaches. Jews were depicted as being less than human, which makes it easier to call on people to exterminate them.

The language used by the Nazis might sound familiar in the present because it's also what we hear from places like OAN or Fox News about immigrants, especially in the context of COVID. As seen with the increasing number of attacks against the Asian and Asian American communities, we can see how such hate speech has an impact.

The question is now whether we will see more mass events such as the Jan. 6 insurrection, which require coordination, movement across the country, money and other resources. I am really hoping that the authorities who are tasked with preventing another such event are doing their jobs.

Donald Trump and his spokespeople and other agents have created a martyrs out of his follower who was killed by law enforcement in the Capitol on Jan. 6. The Trumpists and right-wing propaganda media are now referring to members of Trump's attack force as "political prisoners," who are by implication innocent and heroic. How do you explain to the public the importance of this narrative and the political work it is doing?

This is a classic move. We saw it in Nazi Germany. We also saw it in the Soviet Union. Mythologized martyrdoms manufactured sometimes literally out of nothing. In Nazi Germany before World War II, they created a fake martyr out of a man named Horst Wessel. He became a huge martyr, and it was completely fabricated.

Martyrdoms in general are a hugely potent mass radicalization weapon. A martyr always inspires followers who will make self-sacrifices of their own. And it always challenges opponents to prove that their values are not morally bankrupt and that they too can pay the cost in blood to support the cause they believe in. There is always conflict in the wake of a martyrdom, including a fake martyrdom.

What Donald Trump and his spokespeople are doing is capitalizing on the potential of right-wing martyrdom. Whether or not this is going to catch on like Horst Wessel's did depends on how ready the public is to carry the banner of fake martyrdom. Because any martyrdom is always a symphony between the individual and the public, even a true martyr will not inspire followers if they are not ready to make sacrifices in the name of the cause.

A fake martyr, on the other hand, can appeal to millions, as in Nazi Germany or in Soviet Union, if they are ready to jump on the bandwagon and express their rage in the name of the martyr.

What are you most concerned about in this crisis and going forward?

I am most concerned about mass radicalization and the related hatred and intolerance.

What advice would you give President Biden and other senior leadership?

Try not to pay attention to red herrings. Things like QAnon are a red herring. Try to not lose the forest for the trees. We have a massive right-wing radicalization problem in the United States where the followers are mobilized and armed and actively training. They have military or police training. They are also actively recruiting from those ranks. The resources should be going to confront that problem.

Do not discount the influence of malicious foreign actors, such as Russia and China. They are a lot more experienced with the weaponization of information and concocting propaganda narratives that are going to spread like wildfire and sow discord and mobilize people. The United States needs to catch up with their capabilities in that regard, and to protect ourselves in a way that we are not doing right now.

We need to do better with the social media giants about holding them accountable for what is taking place on their platforms. That means we need to demand that they become a lot more transparent, such as by sharing how they use algorithms and who they allow to dominate the discourse. At the moment, it's a complete black box. We need to hold those huge business entities responsible. They're like a type of public square — they need to be regulated.

U.S. blacklists Israeli hacking tool vendor NSO Group

2021/11/3
© Reuters


By Christopher Bing

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Commerce Department added Israel's NSO Group and Candiru to its trade blacklist on Wednesday, saying they sold spyware to foreign governments that used the equipment to target government officials, journalists and others.

Positive Technologies of Russia, and Computer Security Initiative Consultancy PTE LTD, from Singapore, were also listed. The Department said they trafficked in cyber tools used to gain unauthorized access to computer networks.

The companies' addition to the list, for engaging in activities contrary to U.S. national security or foreign policy interests, means that exports to them from U.S counterparts are restricted. It for instance makes it far harder for U.S. security researchers to sell them information about computer vulnerabilities.

"We are not taking action against countries or governments where these entities are located," said a spokesperson for the U.S. State Department.

Suppliers will need to apply for a license before selling to them, which is likely to be denied.

In the past, the NSO Group and Candiru have been accused of selling hacking tools to authoritarian regimes. NSO says it only sells its products to law enforcement and intelligence agencies and takes steps to curb abuse.

'DISMAYED'

An NSO spokesperson said the company was "dismayed" by the decision since its technologies "support U.S. national security interests and policies by preventing terrorism and crime, and thus we will advocate for this decision to be reversed."

NSO will present information regarding its "rigorous" compliance and human rights programs, "which already resulted in multiple terminations of contacts with government agencies that misused our products," the spokesperson said in an e-mailed statement to Reuters.

The Israeli defence ministry, which grants export licenses to NSO, declined to comment on the matter.

Contact information for Candiru was not available.

The Biden administration imposed sanctions on Positive Technologies, a Russian cybersecurity firm, this year for providing support to Russian security services. The company denies any wrongdoing.

Positive Technologies said the new sanctions will not affect their business and will not prevent the company from a planned public listing.

"We do not know on what grounds the U.S. Commerce Department added us to the list," General Director Denis Baranov said in an emailed comment.

"Anyway we repelled sanction risks earlier and they do not pose additional threats for us now," he wrote.

Computer Security Initiative Consultancy PTE LTD, also known as COSEINC, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

A former U.S. official familiar with Positive Technologies, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the firm had helped establish computer infrastructure used in Russian cyberattacks on U.S. organizations.

COSEINC founder Thomas Lim is known for organizing a security conference, named SyScan, which was sold https://tsyrklevich.net/2015/07/22/hacking-team-0day-market to Chinese technology firm Qihoo 360, a sanctioned entity. An email published https://wikileaks.org/hackingteam/emails/emailid/695766 by WikiLeaks in 2015 suggested Lim had also previously offered to sell hacking tools to infamous Italian spyware vendor HackingTeam.

Lim did not immediately respond to a request for comment sent to a social media account he owns.

Export control experts say the designation could have a far broader impact on the listed companies than simply limiting their access to U.S. technology.

"Many companies choose to avoid doing business with listed entities completely in order to eliminate the risk of an inadvertent violation and the costs of conducting complex legal analyses," said Kevin Wolf, former assistant secretary of Commerce for Export Administration during the Obama administration.

The entity list was increasingly used for national security and foreign policy aims during the Trump administration. Chinese telecom company Huawei was added in 2019, cutting it off from some key U.S. suppliers and making it difficult for them to produce mobile handsets.

(Reporting by Christopher Bing in Washington

Additional reporting by Steven Scheer in Jerusalem and Maria Tsvetkova in Moscow

Editing by William Maclean, Gareth Jones and Matthew Lewis)