Friday, October 13, 2023

Playboy fires former adult film star for 'disgusting and reprehensible comments' on Hamas attack

MILAN, ITALY - FEBRUARY 23: Mia Khalifa is seen on the front row of the Moschino fashion show during the Milan Fashion Week Womenswear Fall/Winter 2023/2024 on February 23, 2023 in Milan, Italy.
 (Photo by Daniele Venturelli/WireImage)
October 10, 2023

According to the Associated Press, the death toll in the Israel/Hamas War has reached 1600. At least 900 Israelis and 700 Palestinians, AP reports, have been killed since Hamas terrorists attacked Israel on Saturday, October 7 — a day Israeli officials have been describing as "Israel's 9/11."

Mia Khalifa, a former adult film performer who was born in Beirut, Lebanon, has been expressing her views on the conflict on X, formerly Twitter. And Playboy has fired her from its Centerfold platform in response to some anti-Israel comments it slammed as "disgusting and reprehensible."

In an e-mail to Centerfold subscribers, Playboy — according to the Daily Mail and the Daily Beast — announced, "We are writing today to let you know of our decision to terminate Playboy's relationship with Mia Khalifa, including deleting Mia's Playboy channel on our creator platform…. Over the past few days, Mia has made disgusting and reprehensible comments celebrating Hamas' attacks on Israel and the murder of innocent men, women and children. At Playboy, we encourage free expression and constructive political debate, but we have a zero-tolerance policy for hate speech."


On October 7, Khalifa tweeted, "Can someone please tell the freedom fighters in Palestine to flip their phones and film horizontal." Later in the day, Khalifa posted, "I can't believe the Zionist apartheid regime is being brought down by guerrilla fighters in fake Gucci shirts - the biopics of these moments better reflect that.

Khalifa, however, also said she was "in no way shape or form…. enticing" the "spread of violence" but wrote that "Palestinian citizens are…. fighting for freedom every day.”



How the religiously unaffiliated are finding purpose and spirituality in psychedelic churches

Are psychedelics the answer to addiction and depression?

October 11, 2023

More and more surveys point to decreasing membership in religious institutions and a corresponding rise of “nones.” Many people might assume that this indicates the absence of belief or a lack of spirituality.

Particularly in the West, people tend to think about religion in terms of belief in a higher power, such as God. For many nones, however, spirituality does not need a god or the supernatural to address questions of purpose, meaning, belonging and well-being.

While abandoning mainstream religious affiliation, many turn to alternative expressions, including secular, atheist and psychedelic churches.

For about a decade, as a scholar who studies alternative expressions of spirituality, I have tracked these groups online, visited churches and interacted with attendees. At times, I have been able to attend services or simply visit locations. At other times, out of respect for participants, I have met members – but not during services and rituals.

These churches demonstrate not a rejection of religion, as surveys suggest, but continued interest in spiritual community, rituals and virtues.

Psychedelic churches

One such church is The Divine Assembly, or TDA, in Salt Lake City, Utah. Founded in 2020 as “a magic mushroom church” by Steve Urquhart, a former member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, TDA conducts worship that connects people without dogma or intermediaries. TDA is not atheistic but maintains an inclusive notion of belief regarding God or a higher power.

Where members depart from traditional notions of religion and church, however, is within their practices and aims. Through psychedelic drugs, members believe they can directly experience the divine – as they define it – while gaining insight into their own and others’ well-being. Within the church, members participate in collective meaning-making rituals that fortify their everyday lives.

Distinctly, using psilocybin is not part of these activities, nor are instructions provided on conducting mushroom ceremonies. This is done on one’s own time, according to individual practices.

Through the church, members participate in practices to help cultivate the value of psychedelic exploration. These include a range of activities, from ice baths to meditation in a room with flashing lights. TDA also offers courses on growing psilocybin through its educational initiative “shroomiversity.”

To borrow from its stated mission, TDA works to connect “people to self, others and the Divine.” It also seeks to “protect responsible and religious use of psilocybin, and cultivate health and healing.” This mission does not deny the place of belief but highlights broader therapeutic concerns.

Through shared rituals, members cultivate community while enhancing their total well-being.


The Magic Mushroom Church.


Mushroom churches: an American tradition

Louisville, Kentucky’s Psanctuary Church brings “people together for healing and connection to divine revelation through communion with sacred mushrooms.” Nondenominational, Psanctuary defines itself as a “Constitutional Church.”

Indicating their legal status as a a nonprofit, tax-exempt, faith-based organization, Psanctuary situates itself as a uniquely American religion. For Psanctuary and other psychedelic churches, the use of psychedelics is simultaneously a sacred right and an expression of political freedom.

As with many psychedelic churches, Psanctuary is not atheistic. It understands divinity as “pure consciousness” that “permeates all being.” Positioned this way, religion moves away from monotheistic understandings of God.

Instead, it follows non-Western, indigenous and New Age understandings that view divinity as within everyone. It also reorients people from seeking salvation in a world to come by encouraging focus on the present.

Like TDA, religion for Psanctuary expresses the pursuit of “pure consciousness” as “the origin of health and well-being.” By experiencing this origin through psychedelics, members are “empowered to discover our own divinity.”

This dual emphasis on self-divinity and healing reflects common themes across psychedelic churches.

The Church of Ambrosia and Zide Door

Inspired by The Church of Ambrosia, a nondenominational, interfaith religion, Zide Door in Oakland, California, supports “the safe access and use of Entheogenic Plants.” Founded in 2019 by Dave Hodges, Zide Door affords space for members to “explore their spirituality.”

Commonly, mainstream religion requires believers to interact with the sacred through designated leaders or texts. At Zide Door and other psychedelic churches, the emphasis is on self-realization and interconnection through direct experience.

Psychedelics offer members firsthand access to religious understanding. Church, accordingly, becomes a place to support individual awakening.

Sacred Garden Community captures this shift. Also located in Oakland, SGC – as it announces on its website – is a “post-modern church” based on “faith of least dogma.” Through psychedelic sacraments, SGC claims to facilitate “direct experience of and relationship to Divine presence for individuals and community.”

Beyond the experience, SGC helps members integrate “the benefits” the “experience and relationship can bring” into everyday life. Like other psychedelic churches, SGC highlights how rejection of conventional religion is often accompanied by new avenues to pursue spirituality.

Ayahuasca churches and healing



A participant at an ayahuasca ceremony at a Hummingbird Church retreat in Hildale, Utah, in October 2022.  AP Photo/Jessie Wardarski

Ayahuasca churches rely on indigenous understandings of ayahuasca, a plant-based psychedelic brew. For Indigenous people of South America, ayahuasca is a sacred rite based on local knowledge. They argue that removing ayahuasca from that context takes away its power and impact.

Indigenous practitioners and scholars thus warn about both the appropriation and commodification of indigenous practices. While such concerns should not be ignored, ayahuasca churches tell us much about contemporary religion.

The turn to ayahuasca rituals highlights the growing connection between spiritual needs and healing. The emergence of ayahuasca churches in the U.S. suggests that such healing requires the support of community.

California-based Hummingbird Church, for example, draws from ayahuasca rituals to provide “participants with opportunities to recharge their body, mind and soul with positive energy and reconnect with themselves.” Its “Statement of Faith” emphasizes this commitment to holistic healing.

It also situates the divine in “earthly” terms. Members, they believe, “should seek within Nature that which is contributory to our health and well-being.”

Located in Orlando, Florida, members of Soul Quest Ayahuasca Church of Mother Earth believe likewise. As members contend, “What is of the Earth is our holy sacrament.” Like others, they position psychedelics “as tools” that benefit “physical health, spiritual growth, and personal evolution.”

Through ayahuasca, members of both churches see psychedelic rituals as aiding in individual rejuvenation. Once rejuvenated, members believe they help restore nature or assist in another’s healing.


Well-being as spirituality

Collectively, these churches demonstrate not a rejection of religion, as the term “none” might suggest, but an embrace of well-being as spirituality.

And while they are distinct in many ways, they also share some common goals: They seek to provide members and practitioners ways to heal emotionally, psychologically and spiritually.

A key lesson members connect to psychedelics is the intrinsic sacredness of each person: The divine is not elsewhere but within everyone.

To be a none might reflect one’s total rejection of supernatural belief. But as psychedelic churches illustrate, identifying that way can also indicate spiritual pursuits that refuse to fit nicely within traditional religious categories.

Morgan Shipley, Foglio Endowed Chair of Spirituality & Associate Chair of Religious Studies, Michigan State University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

In Shawnee National Forest, a debate swirls around how to best protect trees amid climate change and wildfires


Chicago Tribune
2023/09/28
John Wallace, with Shawnee Forest Defense, examines harvested trees at the Bullwinkle timber sale of the Lee Mine project near Karbers Ridge on the eastern end of the Shawnee National Forest, Aug. 31, 2023.


The Shawnee National Forest in southern Illinois is a mosaic of towering trees, lush wetlands and commanding rock formations that are the native habitat for a wealth of plants and animals, including 19 species of oaks.

The forest is also a microcosm of an emergent national debate about how North America should manage public lands as wildfires burn through Canada, Hawaii and Louisiana. Climate change is catalyzing extreme weather events and drying ecosystems, making forests increasingly vulnerable.

“It’s impossible to take our hands all the way off. We’ve caused this climate change. We’ve introduced invasive species. We’ve put out historic wildfires. We’ve carved up the forest with roads. So, our influence on our forests is inescapable now,” said Chris Evans, a forest research specialist at University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

But the U.S. Forest Service and environmentalists have opposing philosophies about how to tend to the Shawnee and other forests in the face of the climate crisis.

The Forest Service wants to take a more active role in encouraging woodland health and mitigating wildfire risk while many environmentalists want to create preserves where nature can heal itself.

The federal agency’s primary goal is to regenerate native ecosystems and increase biodiversity lost to poor farming practices and fire suppression dating back to the mid-19th century.

“If we don’t actively reintroduce disturbances using tools such as fire and timber harvest in this ecosystem, we will lose a community that is disproportionately important for wildlife,” said Michael Chaveas, forest supervisor of the Shawnee and the Hoosier National Forest in Indiana.

To encourage new tree growth, the Forest Service has invited timber companies to log parcels of both forests, a practice environmentalists in Illinois have encountered before.

In 1990, John Wallace left his career as a public land manager in Carbondale and dedicated his life to stopping commercial activity in the Shawnee. As part of a 79-day occupation of a logging site, he tethered himself to a log skidder with a bike lock. Authorities had to forcefully removehim with a blowtorch and arrested him. His protests eventually helped lead to a 17-year injunction on logging that was lifted in 2013.

Today, Wallace once again sees timber lorries driving into Illinois’ only national forest, and he has revived the fight to keep them out, this time with climate change front and center.

The mature oaks in the 289,000-acre forest must be left alone so they can optimally sequester carbon and the forest can naturally heal from human disturbances, according to Wallace and his allies at the Shawnee Park and Climate Alliance.

These environmentalists are campaigning to transfer oversight of the Shawnee from the Forest Service to the National Park Service, whose mission to preserve natural ecosystems puts a near-total ban on for-profit resource extraction.

Under the proposal, popular destinations such as Garden of the Gods would become a national park with the strictest land use regulations. The rest of the Shawnee would become the nation’s first preserve created to mitigate climate change. Public hunting, backcountry camping and other noncommercial recreational uses would be permitted, but trees would be left intact.

“Climate change is happening fast and we need to take drastic action. … We need to really protect and encourage natural ecosystems for their ability to sequester and store carbon,” Wallace said.
A climate preserve

Healthy forests offset greenhouse gases, which are the main driver of climate change, by absorbing more carbon than they release. All U.S. forests combined absorb more than 10% of annual domestic greenhouse gas emissions, according to the Biden administration.

However, whether forests are carbon sinks or emit carbon depends on how they are managed. Large, mature trees sequester the most carbon, trees release carbon when they are cut down and fires emit carbon.

The Alliance, which is supported by the cities of Carbondale and Murphysboro and the Illinois Audubon Society, is part of a growing movement to leave forests alone.

In Indiana, local opposition has mounted against Forest Service plans to ramp up logging and prescribed burning in the Hoosier forest. Last month in Oregon, a federal judge found a Trump-era rule change allowing large trees in the Pacific Northwest to be harvested violates several laws. And, a week ago, a coalition of 28 environmental groups sent the Forest Service a letter opposing a logging project in Wisconsin’s Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest, citing concerns that it does not align with the Biden administration’s latest environmental recommendations.

The Biden administration has recognized mature and old-growth forests as “critical carbon sinks.” In April, the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management created an initial inventory of these forests, following an executive order to protect them from climate change threats and enhance carbon sequestration.

The Alliance’s campaign builds on this movement by pushing to establish the first national preserve explicitly intended to safeguard mature trees to tap into their carbon sequestration potential. First, Congress would have to pass legislation to transfer the forest to the Park Service.

However, there is no consensus about how much primacy should be given to protect mature trees.

Forests are complex ecosystems and a sole focus on preserving older trees to optimize carbon sequestration is shortsighted, according to Eric Holzmueller, a forestry professor at Southern Illinois University. Trees are simultaneously dying and growing at different rates, and these rates change over time, making it difficult to project sequestration levels.

“It is a challenging puzzle in that there’s not a real clear answer. (Carbon sequestration) can be complicated and no one has really looked at the details of how the proposed management actions would either help the forest accumulate carbon or not,” he said.

Before determining whether and where to allow old trees to grow without disturbances, Holzmueller says more research must be done to determine how much carbon the Shawnee is currently storing and if parts of the forest are sequestering more than others.

Holzmueller also expressed concern that the Alliance is prioritizing carbon sequestration at the expense of promoting biodiversity and resilience to unpredictable natural disasters like storms, floods, invasive insect outbreaks and fires that could result in massive tree loss.
‘Huge fire risk issue’

Climate change demands that wildfires of unprecedented intensity be confronted in new places.

“These fires and the way that they are behaving right now are not going to be as extreme as they are going to be in the next decade. We have yet to see the full fruition of climate change come to light and how it’s going to influence wildfire behavior,” said Kimiko Barrett, lead wildfire researcher and policy analyst at nonprofit research group Headwaters Economics.

Though it does not have a history of large wildfires, southern Illinois is not excluded from this increased threat.

“We have a huge fire risk issue here, and just because we’re in a humid part of the world, we think that would never happen to us, but it can happen. Look around the country,” said Charles Ruffner, another professor of forestry at Southern Illinois University.

The unprecedented and devastating fires experienced in Canada, Maui and Louisiana this year were perpetuated by excessive heat and dryness.

The Forest Service uses prescribed burns to reduce flammable vegetation in the Shawnee, but the Alliance say these fires, combined with logging, are actually making the Shawnee drier and more fire-prone.

The Shawnee’s forest floor is naturally very moist, which has historically made it less vulnerable to large fires like those seen in the West. But, logging trees inevitably leaves behind leaf litter and fallen branches. It also opens the canopy, allowing more sunlight to reach the forest floor. The sun then dries out the leaves and branches that would decompose under natural moist conditions, creating prime fuel for fire.

While prescribed burns do reduce the fuel load, the first thing to grow back after a fire is herbaceous growth, which dies in the winter and becomes more fuel for fires.

While Ruffner and other local forestry experts acknowledge the potential for prescribed fires and logging to dry the forest floor, they say that a more likely and dangerous scenario is that the Midwest will experience a large drought.

“If we had a serious drought that lasted two to three years and killed a lot of that midstory, we would have communities that would lie in parallel to the same thing that we saw in Maui and Gatlinburg, Tennessee, in 2016 around the Great Smoky Mountains,” said Ruffner.

During a severe drought in 2016, wildfires burned more than 10,000 acres in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, which has similar forest conditions to the Shawnee. More than 14,000 residents and tourists were forced to evacuate and more than 2,000 buildings were damaged or destroyed. In the deadliest fire in the United States in more than a century, at least 97 people were killed and 2,000 structures destroyed in August in Maui, where exceptionally high winds and dry conditions had been reported.

Over the last 10 years, the Forest Service has burned an average of 9,233 acres per year in the Shawnee to reduce fuel loads, with many acres being burned multiple times over a span of several years.

Ruffner said more burning is needed in strategically selected locations to thin the forest and remove understory brush.

Creating a climate preserve where trees are left intact is going to be counterproductive to mitigating the Shawnee’s “huge fire risk issue,” according to Ruffner.

Further, he and Barrett stressed that communities must not only think about how they manage their forests but also how they prepare their residents.

“People, communities and neighborhoods need to be better prepared for wildfires, but to do so requires a fundamental and significant upfront investment in how, where and under what conditions homes are placed in harm’s way,” Barrett said.

Since wildfires are uncommon, few communities in southern Illinois have community wildfire protection plans to mitigate fire risk. These plans would include practical measures like using fire resistant building materials, developing communications plans and thinning brush along highways to prevent fires from spreading onto the road.
Commercial interests

Throughout the Shawnee, swaths of barren land break up dense forest. On the edge of these logging sites, piles of trunks wait to be loaded onto timber lorries and taken to mills in Kentucky and Missouri. These lorries have overtaken roads that used to be dominated by hikers and horseback riders, according to Wallace.

When the injunction was lifted in 2013, 17,200 cubic feet of timber were harvested, or the equivalent volume of just under one-fifth of an Olympic-sized swimming pool, according to the Forest Service. In 2022, that figure had increased to 712,100 cubic feet, or the equivalent of eight Olympic-sized swimming pools.

Nested under the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Forest Service’s mission is to ensure forest “health, diversity and productivity.” It must balance the many benefits of the forest, including providing natural resources like timber.

“Storing carbon is one of many goals for a healthy, resilient forest,” Chaveas said.

But this mandate to make the forest hardy and profitable is inherently conflicting and not in the best interest of residents, members of the Alliance say.

The Forest Service gives contracts to the highest-bidding logging companies, many of which come from out of state.

Communities would see more benefit from the Shawnee if it were managed by the Park Service because the agency’s mission to preserve the forest for “enjoyment, education, and inspiration” would boost tourism, according to Alliance.

The economy in southern Illinois has historically centered on coal. As the industry declines, Murphysboro Mayor Will Stephens believes the creation of a national park and preserve could spark renewed interest in the region and revive the economy.

“We have to have a bias toward action in rural America, to try to find ways to make our communities vibrant and multidimensional so that when we go to market them in a regional or national way, people will make a decision to come see us instead of seeing somebody else,” he said.

In rural West Virginia, where the economy also suffered from the fall of coal, the establishment of the New River Gorge National Park and Preserve in 2020 brought in $96 million in economic impact in 2022, including more than 1,000 new jobs.

The Forest Service does not have an economic analysis of commercial logging, but Chaveas said “Southern Illinois clearly sees economic benefits from the projects on the forest.”

Even if the timber companies are not from Illinois, they hire loggers, equipment operators and truck drivers who are local. A portion of the timber sales also goes into the Secure Rural Schools Program, a federal program to maintain local schools and roads in areas where the tax base is limited by federal land.

Nevertheless, “maximizing revenue or focus on commercial interests do not factor into our decisions or actions,” Chaveas said.

Each harvest site is selectively chosen in the best interest of the forest, he said.
Restoring biodiversity

Restoring the Shawnee to its conditions pre-westward expansion is a priority for the Forest Service, according to its latest Forest Management Plan published in 2006.

“Our forests are not prepared for the shocks of climate change largely due to the legacy of land use,” Chaveas said.

When settlers arrived in the mid-19th century, they cleared large sections of the forest to plant corn, potatoes, wheat and oats. Over time, poor farming practices and over-logging made the soil infertile and southern Illinois entered a period of extreme economic decline.

The federal government established the Shawnee National Forest in 1933 in an effort to restore the forest and spur the depressed economy. However, the subsequent reforestation process happened relatively quickly, resulting in further loss of the native landscape.

Pines, which were introduced to control erosion, overtook native oaks in many areas. At the same time, suppression had become the dominant fire management strategy. Small, naturally occurring wildfires were extinguished before they could serve their ecological function of clearing the understory so sunlight could hit the forest floor.

Oaks need sunlight to grow so, over time, young oaks were replaced by maple and beech trees that thrive in shady conditions. Wildlife that find habitats in oaks suffered alongside the declining oak population.

Combined, the legacy of American settlement resulted in a forest that lacks diversity in age and composition.

“If you just let a forest kind of drive into a low diversity system that’s dominated by just a few species, there’s less species to adjust. Maintaining diversity as much as possible allows for more adaptation and more adjustment to climate change,” said Evans, the forestry specialist at U. of I.

By logging pines and mature oaks to open up the canopy and burning to clear the understory, the Forest Service says it is encouraging the growth of young oaks, which Chaveas points out are more efficient than mature trees at sequestering carbon.

However, even if they can sequester carbon at a faster rate, young trees have significantly less capacity to store carbon than older ones. The trees that are cut in the process also release carbon back into the atmosphere.

“It takes a forest that’s been cleared 10 to 30 years to regrow and become a carbon sink again. So, it’s giving up more carbon than it’s sequestering for 10 to 30 years and that’s no good. We don’t have time for that,” Wallace said.

Recent studies of the Shawnee and nearby deciduous forests also found that forest-clearing has not resulted in successful regeneration of oaks.

“The best way to regenerate oaks is to keep mature, acorn-producing oaks standing and not to use heavy equipment where young oaks can be found,” said Wallace, citing concerns that the machinery could damage young oaks.
The road ahead

The intense wildfires this summer forced the country to confront the delicate relationship between forests and worsening climate change.

The Chicago area experienced it intimately as smoke from Canada’s wildfires obscured the skyline on multiple days in June and July. On June 27, Chicago had the worst air quality of any major city in the world because of the fires, according to air quality monitoring site IQAir.

And those fires were over a thousand miles away.

As the Forest Service continues logging and burning projects in the Shawnee, the Alliance is crafting legislation. Members hope to introduce a bill to create Shawnee National Park and Climate Preserve on Capitol Hill by April 8, the date of the next total solar eclipse.

Crowds gathered in the Shawnee six years ago when it was deemed one of the best places to watch the Great American Eclipse of 2017.

“Everybody told me — all these visitors — ‘We had no idea this place is here. What a hidden gem! Who knew that the Shawnee was so special?’” Wallace recalled.

The forest is expected to be a prime location again for the 2024 eclipse, and this time, when visitors marvel at its beauty, he hopes it will inspire them to join the campaign to preserve it.

Ultimately, Alliance members realize that protecting the Shawnee alone will not result in enough carbon sequestration to make a significant dent in greenhouse gas emissions. But, they hope their campaign will inspire others to pursue similar efforts.

“It isn’t going to solve our climate problem, but taking the first step is always the most difficult one when it comes to change and the Shawnee is the perfect candidate,” Wallace said.

A tree marked to be harvested at a timber sale on the Waterfall Trail on the western end of the Shawnee National Forest near Murphysboro, Illinois, Aug. 30, 2023.


Garden of the Gods Wilderness area is framed by sandstone geologic structures on the eastern edge of the Shawnee National Forest, Aug. 31, 2023. 

Visitors watch the sunset over the Mississippi River valley from LaRue Pine Hills Inspiration Point on the western edge of the Shawnee National Forest, Aug. 30, 2023


PHOTOS: E. Jason Wambsgans/Chicago Tribune/TNS

© Chicago Tribune




Flesh-eating bacteria infections on the rise in the US

Photo by CDC on Unsplash


October 01, 2023

Flesh-eating bacteria sounds like the premise of a bad horror movie, but it’s a growing – and potentially fatal – threat to people.

In September 2023, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued a health advisory alerting doctors and public health officials of an increase in flesh-eating bacteria cases that can cause serious wound infections.

I’m a professor at the Indiana University School of Medicine, where my laboratory studies microbiology and infectious disease. Here’s why the CDC is so concerned about this deadly infection – and ways to avoid contracting it.
What does ‘flesh-eating’ mean?

There are several types of bacteria that can infect open wounds and cause a rare condition called necrotizing fasciitis. These bacteria do not merely damage the surface of the skin – they release toxins that destroy the underlying tissue, including muscles, nerves and blood vessels. Once the bacteria reach the bloodstream, they gain ready access to additional tissues and organ systems. If left untreated, necrotizing fasciitis can be fatal, sometimes within 48 hours.

The bacterial species group A Streptococcus, or group A strep, is the most common culprit behind necrotizing fasciitis. But the CDC’s latest warning points to an additional suspect, a type of bacteria called Vibrio vulnificus. There are only 150 to 200 cases of Vibrio vulnificus in the U.S. each year, but the mortality rate is high, with 1 in 5 people succumbing to the infection.


Climate change may be driving the rise in flesh-eating bacteria infections in the U.S.




How do you catch flesh-eating bacteria?

Vibrio vulnificus primarily lives in warm seawater but can also be found in brackish water – areas where the ocean mixes with freshwater. Most infections in the U.S. occur in the warmer months, between May and October. People who swim, fish or wade in these bodies of water can contract the bacteria through an open wound or sore.

Vibrio vulnificus can also get into seafood harvested from these waters, especially shellfish like oysters. Eating such foods raw or undercooked can lead to food poisoning, and handling them while having an open wound can provide an entry point for the bacteria to cause necrotizing fasciitis. In the U.S., Vibrio vulnificus is a leading cause of seafood-associated fatality.

Why are flesh-eating bacteria infections rising?

Vibrio vulnificus is found in warm coastal waters around the world. In the U.S., this includes southern Gulf Coast states. But rising ocean temperatures due to global warming are creating new habitats for this type of bacteria, which can now be found along the East Coast as far north as New York and Connecticut. A recent study noted that Vibrio vulnificus wound infections increased eightfold between 1988 and 2018 in the eastern U.S.

Climate change is also fueling stronger hurricanes and storm surges, which have been associated with spikes in flesh-eating bacteria infection cases.

Aside from increasing water temperatures, the number of people who are most vulnerable to severe infection, including those with diabetes and those taking medications that suppress immunity, is on the rise.

What are symptoms of necrotizing fasciitis? How is it treated?

Early symptoms of an infected wound include fever, redness, intense pain or swelling at the site of injury. If you have these symptoms, seek medical attention without delay. Necrotizing fasciitis can progress quickly, producing ulcers, blisters, skin discoloration and pus.

Treating flesh-eating bacteria is a race against time. Clinicians administer antibiotics directly into the bloodstream to kill the bacteria. In many cases, damaged tissue needs to be surgically removed to stop the rapid spread of the infection. This sometimes results in amputation of affected limbs.

Researchers are concerned that an increasing number of cases are becoming impossible to treat because Vibrio vulnificus has evolved resistance to certain antibiotics.

Necrotizing fasciitis is rare but deadly.


How do I protect myself?

The CDC offers several recommendations to help prevent infection.

People who have a fresh cut, including a new piercing or tattoo, are advised to stay out of water that could be home to Vibrio vulnificus. Otherwise, the wound should be completely covered with a waterproof bandage.

People with an open wound should also avoid handling raw seafood or fish. Wounds that occur while fishing, preparing seafood or swimming should be washed immediately and thoroughly with soap and water.

Anyone can contract necrotizing fasciitis, but people with weakened immune systems are most susceptible to severe disease. This includes people taking immunosuppressive medications or those who have pre-existing conditions such as liver disease, cancer, HIV or diabetes.

It is important to bear in mind that necrotizing fasciitis presently remains very rare. But given its severity, it is beneficial to stay informed.

Bill Sullivan, Professor of Pharmacology & Toxicology, Indiana University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Red scare at the Smithsonian? Battle brews over portrayal of Latino history in planned new museum

Photo by Lori Stevens on Unsplash

Amy Goodman
and
Democracy Now
September 28, 2023


A political battle is brewing in Washington, D.C., over plans to build a National Museum of the American Latino and the portrayal of American Latino history. Last year, the Smithsonian Institution opened a temporary preview exhibition inside the National Museum of American History that has become the focus of controversy within the Latino community, as Republican lawmakers and others challenge what one conservative writer described in The Hill as an “unabashedly Marxist portrayal of history.” We speak to two historians who were hired to develop a now-shelved exhibit on the Latino civil rights movement of the 1960s for the museum. Felipe Hinojosa is a history professor at Baylor University in Texas, and Johanna Fernández is an associate professor of history at the City University of New York’s Baruch College. We discuss their vision for the first national museum dedicated to Latino history, which Hinojosa describes as “complex” and “nuanced,” and how conservative backlash has sought to stymie and rewrite their work. “These conservatives are using fear to essentially push through their agenda,” says Fernández, who warns that the rising wave of censorship throughout the U.S. could be a “repeat of the Red Scare.”


This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González.

We turn now to look at a brewing controversy at the Smithsonian Institution over plans to build a National Museum of the American Latino. In 2020, Congress passed funding to create the museum, along with an American Women’s History Museum, but there’s been a deep divide in Washington over how Latinos should be portrayed in the museum. Last year, the museum opened a temporary exhibit inside the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History. The exhibition is called “¡Presente! A Latino History of the United States.” Republican lawmakers and other conservatives within the Latino community have attacked the exhibition, leading the Smithsonian to halt plans for a future exhibition on the Latino civil rights movement of the 1960s. In its place, the Smithsonian is now planning an exhibition on salsa and Latin music. This fight is exploding into public view in the midst of National Hispanic Heritage Month, which runs from September 15th to October 15th.

This is Jorge Zamanillo, the founding director of the National Museum of the American Latino, giving a brief tour of the current exhibit in a video posted by the Smithsonian.
JORGE ZAMANILLO: Well, Latino history is American history. And to tell that full story and to tell that full history, we have to acknowledge our colonial past. So, here, we feature a portrait of Popé, the sculpture. He’s a Tewa leader, organized the Pueblo Revolt of 1680. We feature Toypurina, who was a medicine woman. That was a post-colonial rule. So these are important stories to feature and highlight how important they are in shaping our future. And these communities were around for hundreds of years before European colonization. So that’s important on how that led to shaping our history. 

Lulu, in “¡Presente!,” we further explore how racism and colorism developed during the colonial period. And we have a few examples from Puerto Rico that illustrate this point for visitors. This 1973 poster by Augusto Marín emphasizes that role of Black Puerto Ricans in the abolition of slavery on their island in 1873. We can also find deep historical meaning in Latino music and dance traditions. This outfit belonged to Tata Cepeda, an icon of Puerto Rican Bomba music. Bomba is a family of rhythms and dances with African and Caribbean roots that has historically offered Black Puerto Ricans a space for creative resistance and renewal.

Bringing it back to today, here’s a great photo by Joaquin Medina documenting the Black Lives Matter movement in Puerto Rico. For us at the museum, “Latino” is a label that brings together racially and regionally diverse communities. Representing both our commonalities and our differences is a core part of our work.

AMY GOODMAN: That was Jorge Zamanillo, the founding director of the National Museum of the American Latino.

One vocal critic of the museum’s exhibition has been the Cuban-born Congressmember Mario Díaz-Balart, who threatened in July to block funding for the museum — he serves on the House Committee on Appropriations — and later backed down on his threat after he met with Jorge Zamanillo and Lonnie Bunch, the secretary of the overall Smithsonian Institution. After the meeting, the museum changed parts of the exhibit featuring a foam raft used by Cuban refugees to flee the country. The original exhibition text said the refugees were, quote, “escaping Cuba’s economic crisis.” In July, the text was changed to add a reference to Fidel Castro and, quote, “Cuba’s dictatorship, political repression, and economic crisis,” unquote. Some of the first public criticism of the current exhibition came from a group of conservative writers who penned a column in The Hill last year claiming the exhibit offered a, quote, “unabashedly Marxist portrayal of history,” unquote.

The controversy comes as the Smithsonian is seeking to raise enough money to build the museum, which will cost an estimated $800 million. The New York Timesreports $58 million has been raised so far.

We’re joined now by two historians who have been hired to develop the now-shelved exhibit on the Latino civil rights movement of the '60s for the museum. Felipe Hinojosa is a history professor at Baylor University in Texas. He's also the author of the book Apostles of Change: Latino Radical Politics, Church Occupations, and the Fight to Save the Barrio. Johanna Fernández is an associate professor of history at the City University of New York’s Baruch College. She’s also the author of The Young Lords: A Radical History of the United States.

We welcome you both to Democracy Now! Johanna Fernández, let’s begin with you. What has happened? I mean, the idea that this museum was going to be built either across the Mall from the Museum of African American History or in the Tidal Basin, but this, your “¡Presente!” exhibit, has led to this kind of uprising on the right. Can you explain what the current exhibit is, what the one that has been shelved is, at least for now, that you and Professor Hinojosa have been the creators of?


JOHANNA FERNÁNDEZ: “¡Presente!” — well, thank you for covering this evolving crisis. “¡Presente!” is the current exhibition at the Molina Family Gallery within the American History Museum at the Smithsonian. It’s an exhibition in waiting while the actual building of the Latino History Museum goes up in 10 to 12 years.

What is important about “¡Presente!” is that it really outlines the contours of Latino history, which are complicated. One of the points it makes is that the largest Latino population in the United States was integrated after the United States war with Mexico in 1848, which is responsible for giving the United States its contemporary boundaries. Half of the United States was acquired during that war, and the people who were in those Mexican lands remained in the now borders of the United States. And the integration of those people into a hostile America is part of American history. The “¡Presente!” exhibition also highlights the acquisition by the United States of Puerto Rico in 1898 and also discusses the ways in which U.S. foreign policy and economic policy has driven people out of Latin America and into the United States. So, what’s important is that it establishes the question: Who are Latinos? How did they get here? And what’s their relationship to their communities and to the nation and the world?

Unfortunately, conservative Latinos don’t want to hear that narrative. They want a narrative that emphasizes Latino military service and business success among Latinos in the United States.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Professor Felipe Hinojosa, you come from — you work and come from Texas, a state at the forefront of some of the culture wars that we’re experiencing today. Could you talk about how you learned of the concern here, and what you were told by folks at the Smithsonian about what needed to change or didn’t need to change in terms of the work you were doing?


FELIPE HINOJOSA: Well, thank you, first off, for having me.

Yes, I am from Texas. I’m from the Rio Grande Valley, born and raised in Brownsville, Texas. That has shaped a big part of who I am. It shapes a big part of the work that I do.

Writing about and teaching on the Latino civil rights movement has been a centerpiece of the work that I do and that I’ve collaborated with other historians in doing. And I think in joining with this work with the Smithsonian, I think, for me, the biggest joy and the biggest thrill was to be able to present these questions that Johanna has just mentioned. The larger and broader questions of who are we and who are we as a community and what is our relationship to the nation were central questions for Latino civil rights activists in the 1960s and 1970s.

We worked on this exhibit, on the “Latino Youth Movements” exhibit, with the Smithsonian for two years. We were 65% complete. And the sort of rumblings that started to happen came immediately after the piece that was published in The Hill. I believe it was summer of 2022 when that came out. And there was some concern in terms of the kind of material that we would be presenting. But I think, for us, our major concern was to just make sure that we were telling a truthful story, a complex story and a nuanced story about how Latinos have grappled with their relationship to the United States.


The critiques that came to us and what we were told in terms of what could be and could not be included, I think, were alarming to us. And when the email came in November of 2022 that this exhibit was going to be paused or canceled, I think it confirmed our fears of the fact that the Smithsonian was not viewing the Latino civil rights movement as a broad enough story, as a story that would raise the kind of funds that this museum needs to open in 10 or 12 years. And I think, from the work, certainly, that we have done and the work that we were engaged in for two years, nothing could be further than the truth. What’s bigger and what’s more, I think, central than young people asking themselves and their communities how they can make this a nation that is better for all?

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Johanna Fernández, this whole issue of political leaders putting pressure on a museum to basically override the historians that the museum has chosen to develop its exhibitions?

JOHANNA FERNÁNDEZ: Well, I think we have to look at this conflict in the broader history of the last 10 years, when conservatives have launched a calculated and broad-sweeping campaign to essentially eliminate the teaching of Black American history, Latino history, ethnic studies, women’s history and LGBTQ+ history in the schools. And now what we see is that through this witch hunt and by smearing historians and curators as Marxists, these conservatives are using fear to essentially push through their agenda. And now, again, this has reached a federal museum, and not just any federal museum, but the largest network of museums in the world, which is known as the Smithsonian. In many ways, this sounds and looks like a repeat of the Red Scare or previous moments of repression in the United States.

AMY GOODMAN: So, Professor Fernández, what is your response to them sending you this email saying they’re putting your next exhibition on pause? To be clear, “¡Presente!” is now in that temporary National American History Museum space, and the one you’re doing on the civil rights movement is the one that is paused, saying that they want to appeal to a larger audience, especially because they’re fundraising, and so they’ll shelve the civil rights issue and do instead an exhibition on salsa music and Latin music.

JOHANNA FERNÁNDEZ: I think we have to say that there is no more integral matter in the United States than the struggle for freedom, democracy and to redefine the United States as a country for all. That’s integral and core to the American imagination. So, to say that this issue is a minor one is really to not understand the very essence of American history, upon which the American Revolution and its determination to fight for liberty and the pursuit of happiness is core.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Professor Hinojosa, I wanted to ask you, in terms of the — in Texas itself, there clearly is a very significant and strong conservative population in the Latino community. So, not only is this a national ethnic struggle, there’s also a class component to how people view history. What’s your sense of why it is so important to tell the story as you have researched it and looked into it throughout your career versus what some of the political leaders of your state might want?

FELIPE HINOJOSA: Well, first of all, I would say a lot of political leaders are often disconnected from the grassroots community. They don’t understand what the community is asking for. I’ve been in the classroom for over 20 years. Students are wanting more of this history, wanting to better understand how Latinos have shaped Texas politics, have shaped the history of the United States — and not just Latino students, by the way. I’m talking to students of all backgrounds that are very invested in telling a bigger story of American history and having a broader understanding of it.

The other thing is demographic change, the demographics of the state of Texas. Texas is now a Latino-majority state. And so, to have those demographic changes that have taken place in the last 20 years across the state, I think, signaled to us a tremendous responsibility to teach this history, to have a better understanding of the contributions of this community. We are not perpetual foreigners. We are not people that are new to this nation. We have contributed for generations to make this country what it is today, and in particular in my home state of Texas.

And the idea is not to simply talk about a liberal-versus-conservative idea of history. The idea here is to tell a story that is complex, that is nuanced and that gets at this idea of democracy, that gets at how different people from different sections of society have made this country what it is today, and I think in particular the state of Texas. I mean, there’s a reason why Texas history classes fill up the way that they do at universities across my home state of Texas. People love this history. They respect it. They admire it, as they should. But we need a bigger telling of it. We need a bigger story, a story that brings in marginalized voices, voices that have been silenced throughout history. And I think our exhibit was one small step to try to do that, not only at the state level, but at the national level.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And could you give, perhaps, some examples of [inaudible] that you wanted to put forth in the civil rights exhibit, especially in terms of Texas, a history that many Americans perhaps may not be aware of, whether it’s the Crystal City uprising in the early ’60s or other aspects of Texas Latino history?

FELIPE HINOJOSA: Yeah. In particular, we were looking at the ways in which Latinos in the state of Texas and across the Southwest and across the country have not waited for the nation to do something for us. We’re not sitting idly by. Historically, what we’ve done is we’ve taken matters into our own hands for political participation.

You mentioned Crystal City, in 1963 gaining ground to the Crystal City’s City Council. There was a group of five Mexican Americans that won those City Council seats. That was a huge, huge shift and, I think, a call to the state of Texas that Mexican Americans were serious about political participation. They went on to form La Raza Unida Party. They ran a candidate for a governor here in the state of Texas. And that’s the kind of history that we want to tell, one of agency, one of power, one that gets at how Latinos have not simply waited on but have acted upon to make this country more democratic and more representative for all.

AMY GOODMAN: Professor Hinojosa, we want to thank you for being with us, of Baylor University in Texas, and Johanna Fernández, professor of history at the City University of New York: Baruch College. And, Juan, thank you so much for your book, Harvest of Empire: Stories of Latinos in America. I’m Amy Goodman, with Juan González.
The movie ‘Barbie’ offers an example of what it takes for a revolution to launch. 

The ‘Barbie’ and ‘Star Wars’ universes are entertaining, but they also unexpectedly can help people understand why revolutions happen

THE CONVERSATION
Published: September 29, 2023 

Barbie dolls and “Star Wars” movies and toys have entertained generations of American children – in many cases, well into adulthood. But these brands’ influence stretches beyond a penchant for hot pink and lightsaber battles.

In particular, both the “Barbie” movie, released in July 2023, and a “Star Wars” franchise television series called “Andor” offer important lessons about revolutions.

Hollywood has long been obsessed with revolutions. There are uprisings in other popular movie franchises like “The Hunger Games,” “Harry Potter” and “Avatar.”

In each fictional universe, an oppressed group stages a revolution that fights for political and economic freedom.


As experts in violence and democratization, we have written about how popular culture allows people to better understand real-life political movements and crises.

We also use films and shows in our classes to help students learn about why revolutions happen.

Both “Barbie” and “Andor” are useful for those who want to understand why revolutions happen and what it takes for them to happen.

Their fundamental point: Before the start of any revolution, the oppressed have to first recognize their oppression

.
In a world of Barbies, the men – all called Ken – don’t have very much power. 


Repression leads to radicalization

“Barbie” begins in the fictional, very pink and California-perfect Barbieland. Almost everyone is either a version of a Barbie doll or a Ken doll. And the women – all called Barbie – are in charge of Barbieland. Yet the men – all collectively called Ken – are blissfully unaware that they experience political, economic and social repression.

These men are not part of the Barbieland government. They do not work. The primary Ken, played by actor Ryan Gosling, describes his job as “beach.” It was unclear where the Kens even live, since only the women live in the plastic, perfect homes.

It is only when the main Ken leaves the universe of Barbieland and accidentally enters the real world that he realizes men are oppressed back home.

Ken sees that men have power in corporate offices and other places in the real world. He returns to Barbieland with a desire to improve life for other Kens. The Kens then claim all of the Barbies’ houses as their own, and grab all of the important jobs in Barbieland. Then they try to change the constitution – but the Barbies ultimately stop them.

The lead character Cassian Andor from the “Star Wars” universe, meanwhile, had a similar experience. Andor lives under the autocratic Galatic Empire. Unlike the Kens, Andor is somewhat aware that the Empire is oppressive. At a young age, Andor witnesses the Empire’s army, called the Imperials, kill his friend. When he fights back, he is sent to a “youth center,” akin to a juvenile prison, for three years.

But instead of becoming a rebel when he is older, Andor quietly takes advantage of the system and makes money stealing from the Empire. It is not until he experiences severe repression in prison that he tries to actually overthrow the Empire.
Bottom-up revolutions are challenging

These fictional universes also show how difficult it is for revolutionary leaders to recruit and organize others to help fight for their cause. Sometimes, the cost to fight might be too high, as the government in power could imprison or execute anyone who tries to change the system. This discourages participation in the revolution. If the cost is lower, it might be easier to recruit revolutionaries.

In “Barbie,” when the Kens try to change the constitution to give men all of the power, the Barbies do not fight back with violence. Instead, they trick the Kens into being jealous of one another so they become divided and cannot work together to change the constitution. This lack of violent response by the Barbies lowers the potential risk of revolution for the Kens. As such, it is easier for the main Ken to recruit other Kens to change the system.

This is not the case in “Andor.” The cost of seeking change is death, and few people join in the revolution.

It is not until Andor goes to prison that he decides that the cost of doing nothing is higher than the cost of joining the revolution. When he is in prison, he realizes that no matter what he does, the Empire is going to kill him by working him to death. He then decides to revolt with other prisoners.

In real life, recruiting others to join a revolution can becomes easier over time if more and more people participate. The more people there are, the harder it becomes for the government to punish all the people who are rebelling. This, in turn, makes it safer to join the cause, implying that more people may join in.

The prison uprising in “Andor” illustrates this point.

Andor convinces other prisoners to rebel by truthfully telling them that 5,000 other people will fight with them. He explains that the number of prisoners would significantly outnumber the prison guards. All of the other prisoners then decide to fight back and escape, as their chance of successfully escaping is higher and their chance of being punished is lower

.
A billboard in Hollywood, Calif., promotes the ‘Star Wars’ show ‘Andor’ in September 2022. AaronP/Bauer-Griffin/GC Images

Maintaining peace in real life

Both “Barbie” and “Andor” also teach us what it takes to maintain peace after a revolution: It is essential to include the opposition in government.

After the Ken revolt, the Barbies bring the Kens more into the government of Barbieland. The narrator hints that the Kens will eventually gain as much power and influence as “women have in the real world.”

After the “Andor” rebellion, a government called the New Republic forms after the uprising and recognizes that in order to maintain peace, it must give political amnesty to former members of the failed Galactic Empire.

Most civil wars end with one side winning, and few end in a negotiated peace deal.

However, even with one side winning the war, research shows that the winning side still needs to include the losing side to prevent further violence.

After a revolution or civil war, government policies that aim at creating equality and equity, share power with marginalized groups and give amnesty to the opposition can go a long way toward preventing future violence.

However, it is still challenging to maintain peace after a revolution takes place. The civil uprisings in Afghanistan from 1992 through 1996, the Central African Republic from 2012 through the present, and Syria from 2011 until today all demonstrate that it is hard to maintain peace after a civil conflict. All three of these places have had violent uprisings to challenge the government in control. Violence and political instability are also common in these three countries, which are all internally divided and controlled by different governments and militia groups.

One of the best predictors of civil wars is whether a country has had a civil war within the last five years. The risk for a civil war decreases over time the further a country gets from its last internal conflict.

In Barbieland, the Kens need to feel like they have a voice and some control over their lives once the Barbies reassume power – or else they may see another Ken uprising. This is concerning because the president denies the Kens’ request for a Supreme Court seat and instead says that maybe a lower court judgeship could happen. Could this be a sign that there is more trouble ahead in Barbieland?

The revolution also does not resolve in “Andor,” and we have to wait until “Return of the Jedi” for that rebellion to resolve. However, the New Republic that eventually emerges is unable to stave off conflict, as the First Order rises and destroys the New Republic Senate in the seventh “Star Wars” movie.

While revolution is hard, governance is harder.


Authors
Michael A. Allen
Professor of Political Science, Boise State University
Assistant Professor of Political Science, Boise State University

Disclosure statement
Michael A. Allen has previously received funding from the Minerva Research Initiative, the Department of Defense, and the Army Research Office. The views expressed here are the authors' only and do not represent the views of any outside funder.
Under Trump, IRS targeted low-income families at higher rate than millionaires for first time

Residents are seen along the roadway in their devastated neighborhood as they welcome President Donald J. Trump and First Lady Melania Trump Friday, March 8, 2019, to Lee County, Ala.

October 06, 2023

During the final year of Donald Trump's presidency, the Internal Revenue Service audited low-income families at a higher rate than millionaires for the first time, according to an Americans for Tax Fairness analysis released as congressional Republicans work to further hamper the agency's ability to crack down on rich tax cheats.

Years of Republican-imposed budget cuts have left the IRS badly understaffed and without sufficient resources to aggressively pursue wealthy tax evaders, whose returns tend to be more complex.

As a result, ATF noted in its analysis, "audits of millionaires have dropped 92% over the last decade." Audits of Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) recipients have also fallen over the past 10 years, but not nearly as dramatically. Inadequate scrutiny of the rich has allowed more than a million wealthy Americans to evade close to $66 billion in federal taxes in recent years, according to IRS data.

In an effort to reverse the damage done by chronic underfunding, Democratic lawmakers and President Joe Biden approved an $80 billion budget increase for the IRS over the next decade, money that has already helped the agency increase its full-time staff, improve customer service, and collect tens of millions of dollars in delinquent taxes from rich Americans.

But that hasn't stopped Republicans from attempting to roll back the agency's recent budget increase and drumming up hysteria about armed IRS agents targeting ordinary
Americans.

Across their appropriations bills, House Republicans have proposed $67 billion in IRS cuts, which would add to the deficit by undermining the agency's ability to pursue wealthy tax dodgers. The House and Senate must pass appropriations bills to fund the government and avert a shutdown next month.

"Extreme MAGA Republicans are demanding that their rich donors get a green light to evade taxes as the price of keeping our government open," said David Kass, ATF's executive director. "Just as restored IRS funding contained in the Inflation Reduction Act that President Biden and congressional Democrats enacted last year is beginning to bear fruit in the form of tougher tax enforcement on wealthy and corporate tax cheats, House Republicans want to return to the lawless days of rampant tax evasion by the nation's wealthiest."

ATF's analysis, released last week, shows that U.S. millionaires are now audited less than 1% of the time despite receiving a sixth of the nation's total household income.
Why Trump and the GOP are burning the entire system down

A wildfire in Australia in January 2020, Wikimedia Commons
Journalist decries climate inaction as record heat pounds Europe
October 12, 2023


Today’s Republican Party is dedicated to destroying what they call the “deep state” and the rest of us call the American government. From Trump followers in MAGA hats at rallies to Republican US Senators, they’ll all tell you this without a moment’s hesitation.

Steve Bannon even proclaimed it as the main goal of the Trump presidency in their first months in the White House, saying Trump’s goal was the “deconstruction of the administrative state.” Talking about government regulations that protect the environment, punish companies and con men who rip off consumers, and provide for a safe workplace, Bannon said in March, 2017:

“That’s all gonna be deconstructed and I think that that’s why this regulatory thing is so important.”

In this, the GOP, Putin, and fossil fuel billionaires are all working toward the same goal: to do away with or at least fatally weaken the institutions of our government that prevent the morbidly rich and wannabee strongman autocrats from taking over America.

They’re doing this because they don’t believe democracy is a good or even viable idea. Seven thousand years of the history of civilization, they’ll tell you, show that the one constant has been autocracy and strongman rule. Democracy is merely an experiment to protect the weak and “average” people from predation by the “supermen” among us, and that, they argue, violates the basic laws of nature.

In that, they’re wrong. Nature very much runs by democratic principles, as I detail at length in The Hidden History of American Democracy. Study after study of animals ranging from gnats to geese to fish to mammals all find that most species use majority-rule voting systems for group decision-making and to protect the young, vulnerable, and elderly.

For democracy to work in human societies isn’t some magic or organic thing; it depends on institutions and systems to function and remain free of corruption.

Without those administrative state functions, countries and states devolve into Third World status with corrupt leaders who steal everything that’s not nailed down, hand government and business functions off to their cronies, and suppress dissent or calls for democracy with violence and prisons.

The transformation of America from a modern “social democracy” with strong protections for the environment and the working class into strongman rule is exactly what Trump, Putin, and some of the billionaires who own the GOP want. Being answerable to the people is bothersome and inconvenient for them.

Conservative thinkers from Plato to William F. Buckley to Russell Kirk have denigrated democracy, claiming that it’s merely “mob rule.” Rightwing billionaires look over their shoulders at the teeming masses and shudder, remembering a time in America when the top income tax bracket was 90 percent for the morbidly rich and 50 percent for the most profitable corporations.

It was also a time of the greatest prosperity for the American middle-class, the highest levels of social mobility, and the strongest social cohesion.

Rather than submit to such “onerous” taxation, regardless of the social benefits it conferred, they’d rather burn the entire system down.

Special Prosecutor Jack Smith recently said of Trump:

“Like his previous public disinformation campaign regarding the 2020 presidential election, the defendant’s recent extrajudicial statements are intended to undermine public confidence in an institution — the judicial system — and to undermine confidence in and intimidate individuals — the court, the jury pool, witnesses and prosecutors.”


While most people believe Trump is ranting about our justice system to deflect attention from his many crimes, in fact he’s all-in on the program to Putin-ize America.


He knows — from his own experience in the White House — that the main barriers to a president declaring himself the king of America with rule-by-decree are the systems of checks-and-balances built into every modern democracy.

It was exactly those systems — legislative, judicial, and administrative — that Putin in Russia and Orbán in Hungary corrupted and then seized control over to achieve and maintain their iron-fisted rule.

Similarly, the next steps in the GOP’s plan to turn America into a single-party state — that mirrors what they’ve achieved in a dozen or so Red states — explicitly involves damaging, corrupting, and then controlling the systems of the US federal government.

In most fully GOP-controlled Red states:

— Low-income working people don’t have access to Medicaid, so if they or their kids get sick they either go bankrupt or die.
— Public education is under attack in those states with voucher programs designed to fully privatize and profit-ize schools.
— There are few scholarship programs for higher education, so students go deeply into debt.
— Women are denied the right to an abortion.
— Districts are so gerrymandered that voting is a largely symbolic exercise.
— Union rights are non-existent.
— Guns have more protections than children.

This is why in Blue states:

— Women live as much as 2 years longer.
— Overall life expectancy is as high as in Denmark (Connecticut), while in Red states it’s as low as Serbia or Brazil (Oklahoma).
— Cancer rates are lower (358 per 100,000 people in California) than Red states (504 per 100,000 in Kentucky).
— Heart disease can be as much as five times lower than in Red states.
— Children are less likely to die from gunfire (a child in Massachusetts is one-tenth as likely to die by gunfire as in Mississippi).
— People have measurably higher levels of primary school graduation and achievement.
— The vast majority of people are fully insured for healthcare.
— Babies and new mothers are far less likely to die than in Red states.
— Food insecurity (hunger) is rare, compared to Red states.
— Obesity and chronic disease rates are much lower than in Red states.
— Rates of hypertension are much lower than in Red states.

The lists go on and on. Do a search on just about any measurable index of quality-of-life and you’ll find that Democratic-controlled states are doing better than Red states. The only area where Red states do better is cost of living and taxation, but living cheap has its own problems as you can see above.


Which is exactly why Red states and their forms of governance appeal to the morbidly rich; their tax “burden” is lower than in Blue states. And it’s also why American oligarchs are working so hard to transform the entire country into Red state forms of governance.

The war against American institutions — and, thus, American democracy — is now going full-bore.

— The GOP is considering putting the man the January 6th Committee said played the largest role among members of Congress in that insurrection in charge of Congress as Speaker of the House.

— To cripple our government, Republicans in the Senate are blocking confirmation of our diplomats (including to Israel), promotions for our military, and appointees to the Departments of Energy, State, Veterans Affairs, and Justice.

— Republicans in the House are refusing to move forward appropriations legislation to keep our government operating past November 17th.

— Republicans in Red states are purging city-dwelling voters from the rolls by the millions and passing legislation making it harder to vote in every way they can imagine.

— Republicans on the Supreme Court have stripped away protections against politicians being corrupted by wealthy people and corporations.

— Republicans are taking to the media to tell outrageous lies, some so bad that even Fox “News” hosts can’t stomach them.

The difference between Republican and Democratic visions for America is as clear as the difference between Russia and Norway (or California and Mississippi).

Will we have rule by “We, the People” or by an elite group of autocrats? A high standard of living for all, or riches for a few and poverty for everybody else? Quality healthcare and education for all, or “you’re on your own if you weren’t smart enough to be born into a wealthy family”?

The next 15 months will determine which will ultimately prevail and, perhaps for the last time in the history of America, anybody who chooses to vote can have a say.