Thursday, August 13, 2020

Biden calls for mask mandates nationwide for 3 months, targeting Trump's pandemic response

Biden called on all governors to issue mask mandates in their states.

By John Verhov Molly Nagle Libby Cathey

13 August 2020,


President attacks Biden’s mask mandate




Former Vice President Joe Biden on Thursday called for immediate mask mandates nationwide for the next three months, keeping the focus on drawing a stark contrast between how he would respond to the pandemic crisis compared to how he says it's been mishandled by President Donald Trump.
Trump fired back at an evening news conference, saying, "We want to have a certain freedom, that's what we’re about."
"He wants the federal government to issue a sweeping new mandate to law-abiding citizens, wants the president of the United States with the mere stroke of a pen to order over 300 million American citizens to wear a mask for a minimum of three straight months," Trump said

Biden, notably, called on governors to issue mask mandates in their states, though Trump said Biden doesn't understand the powers of the president to issue such an order.
"Different states are much different, both in terms of the atmosphere itself and also in terms of the corona problem," Trump continued. "He does not identify what authority the president has to issue such a mandate or how federal law enforcement could possibly enforce it or why we would be stepping on governors throughout our country, many of whom have done a very good job and they know what is needed."
While Biden said he was leaning on health experts in making the call, Trump continued to question the effectiveness of masks, saying "maybe they are just good, maybe they are not so good."
Though Biden has previously supported nationwide mask-wearing, he specified his call in remarks earlier Thursday, saying that every American should wear a mask when they're in public for the next three months "at a minimum" and every governor should make it a mandate immediately.
"Today I want to talk about one thing, very straightforward. It doesn't have anything to do with Democrats, Republicans, or Independents. It has to do with a simple simple proposition," Biden said following a coronavirus briefing with his newly-minted running mate, Sen. Kamala Harris, continuing the main attack line he and Harris started making in their nationwide debut on Wednesday.

It's not lost on the Biden-Harris campaign that it took the president two months to wear a mask in public after he first announced the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidance on the practice in a news conference.
"The estimates by the experts are it will save over 40,000 lives in the next three months. 40,000 lives if people act responsibly. And it's not about your rights. It's about your responsibilities as an American," Biden said.
Biden said he hopes the president has "learned the lesson" now that masks save lives but added it's not about politics.
"Look, this is America. Be a patriot. Protect your fellow citizens. Protect your fellow citizens. Step up. Do the right thing. Do the right thing," Biden implored. "So let's institute a mask mandate nationwide, starting immediately."

Harris, speaking after Biden, said the call for a mask mandate "real leadership."
"What real leadership looks like is Joe Biden. To speak up. Sometimes, telling us the stuff that we don't necessarily want to hear, but we need to know," Harris said.

Harris also encouraged the public to keep pressure on the Trump administration for a timeline on a vaccine for COVID-19.
"I think it's important that the American people looking at the election coming up, ask the current occupant of the White House, 'When am I going to get vaccinated?'" she said. "Because there may be some grand gestures offered by the current president, about a vaccine, but it really doesn't matter until you can answer the question."

Heading into the election, the coronavirus is an issue at the top of the ticket for many voters -- and Democrats want to highlight to voters how they say their ticket would handle the deadly pandemic better than the president.
Earlier Thursday, inside a makeshift, television-like studio at a hotel in downtown Wilmington, Delaware, Biden and Harris participated in their first joint COVID-19 briefing with health care experts over a video call as deaths from the virus rise in the United States.
Seated at spaced-out tables that faced one another before a large screen that featured at least four doctors -- at least some of whom have been regularly briefing Biden for the last four months -- the candidates briefly spoke with reporters before their later remarks.

"These are some of the brightest minds, not only in our country but internationally. And as the vice president has been saying since the beginning of this pandemic it should be the public health professionals that are leading policy in our country to address this lethal pandemic," Harris told reporters.
The Biden-Harris campaign presented the event as two briefings in one that will address both the public health crisis and the economic downturn from the pandemic -- with former Federal Reserve Board Chair Janet Yellen appearing as a part of the group briefing the candidates on the economy.
Biden said the briefing focused on the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on different races and the availability of PPE and testing capacity.
The events come one day after Biden and Harris' first joint appearance as running mates in which the pair slammed Trump's response to the coronavirus crisis.
"This virus has impacted almost every country, but there's a reason it has hit America worse than any other advanced nation. It's because of Trump's failure to take it seriously from the start," Harris said Wednesday, the same day the U.S. reported its highest number of deaths from coronavirus in a single day since mid-May.

Biden called out Trump for touting himself as a dealmaker yet taking to the golf course instead of working across the aisle on a coronavirus relief deal for Americans while negotiations hit an impasse "like every other president has done in a crisis, to get Americans the relief they need and deserve."
Together the two hit on the president's mixed messages on the virus since it arrived on U.S. soil.
Trump continued to hold mega-rallies through June, despite warnings from health care experts to limit group events, especially indoors, due to social distancing concerns, and he largely stopped holding public coronavirus briefings at the end of April, until recently reviving them three months later in late July amid poor polling numbers.

The federal government still largely lacks a national strategy on reopening schools, a point the Biden and Harris campaign are likely to seize on, while Trump continues the push for full in-person instruction.
Harris on Wednesday took a quick swipe at Trump on schools calling the current state over when and how to reopen "complete chaos."
Countdown to Conventions
Both campaigns also have the challenge of delivering acceptance speeches in the time of COVID-19, largely without the pomp and circumstance of previous years.
The Biden campaign confirmed Thursday that Biden and Harris will both give their acceptance speeches for the Democratic National Convention at the Chase Center, a large event space on the waterfront in Wilmington, Delaware.
Trump said he'll deliver his acceptance speech from the White House of the battlefield of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, despite criticism to both venues.
And in spite of the Democratic National Convention making the move to have all its speakers appear virtually instead of in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Trump announced he would travel to Wisconsin Monday, the first day of the DNC.
"I'll be there, as a matter of fact, on Monday and many times throughout the campaign and beyond," Trump said on a tele-rally with supporters Wednesday night.
ABC News' Molly Nagle and Averi Harper contributed to this report.
‘Americans must have their freedoms’: Trump rejects Biden’s call for MASK MANDATE, says states should decide
13 Aug, 2020 22:09
Get short URL

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during a briefing on the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic response at the White House in Washington, U.S., August 12, 2020. © REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

Follow RT https://www.rt.com/usa/497976-trump-biden-mask-mandate-freedom/

President Donald Trump rejected his rival Joe Biden’s call for a nationwide face mask mandate, saying he trusted elected governors to make science-based decisions about the Covid-19 pandemic that best fit their states.

Biden's approach is "regressive, anti-scientific and very defeatist," Trump said on Thursday during a White House press briefing, accusing the Democrat presidential candidate of hiding in his Delaware basement and wanting the same fate inflicted on all Americans.

The Trump administration is strongly recommending people to wear face masks when social distancing is not practical, but "Americans must have their freedoms,” Trump added.

ALSO ON RT.COMVote Democrat to wear a mask? Biden says Americans must mask up for AT LEAST 3 months as CDC warns of ‘worst fall ever’

Biden called for all governors to mandate the wearing of masks and for “every single American” to wear a mask “for the next three months at a minimum,” during his own press event on Thursday.

Earlier in the day, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) director Robert Redfield told WebMD that Americans needed to comply with his agency’s instructions, or face “the worst fall, from a public health perspective, we’ve ever had.”

Neglecting to wear a mask, social distance, wash hands and “be smart about crowds” will cause a 'second wave' of Covid-19, combined with the flu season and colder weather keeping people indoors, Redfield warned.ALSO ON RT.COMFace masks at home: The latest sign that public health officials have lost any sense of perspective

Coronavirus response has become intensely politicized during the election year, with Democrat governors and politicians demanding extended lockdowns and draconian measures while Republican governors and Trump supporting reopenings while maintaining CDC guidelines intended to hinder the spread of the virus.

The use of masks has become another political football, with Democrats insisting people must use them everywhere, even at home, while Republicans rejecting mandates as un-American. Neither side has quoted actual scientific studies on their effectiveness or lack thereof, and the existing body of evidence on the subject is contradictory.

US public health authorities initially advised against wearing face coverings, later admitting this had nothing to do with their effectiveness or lack thereof, but entirely to ensure the adequate supply of protective equipment for healthcare workers.
Posted by at No comments:
Coronavirus Rural Road Empty Pandemic Covid-19 Stay Home

COVID-19: Institutional Inertia, Need For Vision And Collapse Of US And UK – OpEd

   Andy Worthington  0 Comments
Six months since the arrival of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, prompted an unprecedented lockdown on social and economic activity, a veneer of normality has been resumed, although it remains an uneasy time. Pubs and restaurants are open, cars once more fill the streets, turning the taste of the air to one of petrol after months without it, and zombie shoppers once more return to high streets and shopping malls to buy clothing produced in factories — mostly in the “developing world” — that involves economic exploitation of the unseen, and nothing short of environmental destruction, as these factories kill off rivers with their noxious chemicals.
As I see on an almost daily basis, however, on my bike rides into the West End and the City of London to take photos for my ongoing photo-journalism project ‘The State of London’, the veneer is very thin. Although people have been returning to the West End since June 15, when “non-essential” shops were allowed to to reopen, the numbers are down, and massively so.
As I explained in my most recent COVID-related article, COVID-19: Workers and Employers Show No Great Enthusiasm for Returning to the Office to Revive “Business As Usual”, 5.1m people visited the West End in the first full month of the post-lockdown re-opening of retail outlets, but that was 73% down year-on-year, and will not enable businesses to survive unless landlords also write off 73% of their rents. If they do, the virus will have succeeded in denting the wealth of the rich; if they don’t, the West End will soon be a wasteland of shuttered shops, because however much some people are enjoying al fresco street dining in pedestrianised streets in Soho, there is an achingly huge financial hole where the tourists and office workers used to be.
Part of this is because of the collapse of international tourism, and the ongoing refusal of office workers to return to paranoid, sanitised workplaces after months of working — largely successfully — from home, but it is also due to the termination, since March, of all forms of live culture. The West End’s theatres, which used to draw huge and regular audiences from across the Uk and around the world for their main business these days — musicals — have been shut since March, cinemas are still shut, despite having been allowed to reopen, and music venues and nightclubs are also shut.
The loss of live culture is, for many people, the most depressing aspect of the coronavirus, and I share those feelings. I miss live music and theatre, I miss the buzz and warmth of social gatherings, and the easy manner in which we used to embrace close friends, and to hug — really hug — those we loved the most, but the bigger picture, as the virus continues to stalk us, waiting for us to slip up and get too promiscuously sociable, is our seeming inability to embrace the radical opportunities for massive political change that the virus has offered us — and particularly, it seems, in the US and the UK, both stymied by deluded notions of exceptionalism.

The Unraveling of America — and of the UK

In ‘The Unraveling of America’, a powerful article for Rolling Stone last week, anthropologist Wade Davis began by noting how “[p]andemics and plagues have a way of shifting the course of history, and not always in a manner immediately evident to the survivors” noting how, in the 14th Century, when “the Black Death killed close to half of Europe’s population”, a “scarcity of labor led to increased wages” and workers’ agitation for better living standards that “marked the beginning of the end of the feudal order that had dominated medieval Europe for a thousand years.”
Davis sees the COVID pandemic as “such a moment in history, a seminal event whose significance will unfold only in the wake of the crisis”, which “will mark this era much as the 1914 assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, the stock market crash of 1929, and the 1933 ascent of Adolf Hitler became fundamental benchmarks of the last century, all harbingers of greater and more consequential outcomes.”
As he proceeds to explain:
COVID’s historic significance lies not in what it implies for our daily lives. Change, after all, is the one constant when it comes to culture. All peoples in all places at all times are always dancing with new possibilities for life. As companies eliminate or downsize central offices, employees work from home, restaurants close, shopping malls shutter, streaming brings entertainment and sporting events into the home, and airline travel becomes ever more problematic and miserable, people will adapt, as we’ve always done. Fluidity of memory and a capacity to forget is perhaps the most haunting trait of our species. As history confirms, it allows us to come to terms with any degree of social, moral, or environmental degradation.
There is, of course, as Davis also acknowledges, a huge financial cost to all this — and it may be that the loss of tens of millions of livelihoods, whose full impact has not yet been realised, will be to our hectic, messed-up, materialist neoliberal world what the Black Death was to feudal Europe, but what his article particularly focuses on is the fatal delusion of the United States — an analysis that also, repeatedly, has parallels with the UK.
As Davis explains:
No empire long endures, even if few anticipate their demise. Every kingdom is born to die. The 15th century belonged to the Portuguese, the 16th to Spain, 17th to the Dutch. France dominated the 18th and Britain the 19th. Bled white and left bankrupt by the Great War, the British maintained a pretense of domination as late as 1935, when the empire reached its greatest geographical extent. By then, of course, the torch had long passed into the hands of America.
Davis proceeds to write about how the US’s extraordinary productivity in the Second World War — shipyards building Liberty ships “at a rate of two a day for four years”, a single American factory, Chrysler’s Detroit Arsenal, building “more tanks than the whole of the Third Reich” — led, after the war, to a country with six percent of the world’s population accounting for “half of the global economy, including the production of 93 percent of all automobiles.”
As he explains:
Such economic dominance birthed a vibrant middle class, a trade union movement that allowed a single breadwinner with limited education to own a home and a car, support a family, and send his kids to good schools. It was not by any means a perfect world but affluence allowed for a truce between capital and labor, a reciprocity of opportunity in a time of rapid growth and declining income inequality, marked by high tax rates for the wealthy, who were by no means the only beneficiaries of a golden age of American capitalism.
However, the US’s “freedom and affluence came with a price.” Although the country was “virtually a demilitarized nation on the eve of the Second World War”, it “never stood down in the wake of victory.” What Jimmy Carter called “the most warlike nation in the history of the world” has, since 2001, “spent over $6 trillion on military operations and war, money that might have been invested in the infrastructure of home.” To add to this, the US led the cult of the individual, a destructive development that has since been exploited everywhere that sufficient disposable income exists to encourage people to think that their own self-gratification is more important that anything else.
In the post-war US, as Davis describes it, “What was gained in terms of mobility and personal freedom came at the expense of common purpose. In wide swaths of America, the family as an institution lost its grounding. By the 1960s, 40 percent of marriages were ending in divorce. Only six percent of American homes had grandparents living beneath the same roof as grandchildren; elders were abandoned to retirement homes.” The country also adopted a deranged work ethic, as “men and women exhausted themselves in jobs that only reinforced their isolation from their families.”
Particularly pernicious, however, as Davis also notes, is the galloping and relentless increase in inequality. As he describes it, “when the promise of a good life for a working family is shattered as factories close and corporate leaders, growing wealthier by the day, ship jobs abroad, the social contract is irrevocably broken.” He adds, “For two generations, America has celebrated globalization with iconic intensity, when, as any working man or woman can see, it’s nothing more than capital on the prowl in search of ever cheaper sources of labor.”
Cynically, the response of those on the right, politically, has been to invoke in the American people “a nostalgia for the 1950s, and an America that never was, but has to be presumed to have existed to rationalize their sense of loss and abandonment, their fear of change, their bitter resentments and lingering contempt for the social movements of the 1960s, a time of new aspirations for women, gays, and people of color.” The same process, very evidently, was used in the UK during the EU referendum, and has done colossal damage to the country over the last four years, as millions of people stew in a miasma of delusional bitterness, anger and racism, a process that cannot be satisfied, because its rosy future is an illusion, and that is fertile stalking ground for far-right authoritarians.
Exposing the lie of the revisionist right-wing 1950s dream, Davis explains how, in economic terms, the US of the 1950s “resembled Denmark as much as the America of today. Marginal tax rates for the wealthy were 90 percent. The salaries of CEOs were, on average, just 20 times that of their mid-management employees”, whereas, today, “the base pay of those at the top is commonly 400 times that of their salaried staff, with many earning orders of magnitude more in stock options and perks.”
As he also explains:
The elite one percent of Americans control $30 trillion of assets, while the bottom half have more debt than assets. The three richest Americans have more money than the poorest 160 million of their countrymen. Fully a fifth of American households have zero or negative net worth, a figure that rises to 37 percent for black families. The median wealth of black households is a tenth that of whites. The vast majority of Americans — white, black, and brown — are two paychecks removed from bankruptcy. Though living in a nation that celebrates itself as the wealthiest in history, most Americans live on a high wire, with no safety net to brace a fall.
The impact of COVID-19 on the US has been horrendous. As Davis puts it, “With the COVID crisis, 40 million Americans lost their jobs, and 3.3 million businesses shut down, including 41 percent of all black-owned enterprises. Black Americans, who significantly outnumber whites in federal prisons despite being but 13 percent of the population, are suffering shockingly high rates of morbidity and mortality, dying at nearly three times the rate of white Americans.” In the UK too, unemployment has reached levels not seen since the 1980s, and the worst is yet to come, as Aditya Chakrabortty noted in a recent Guardian article.
And yet, despite its claims of its own excellence, its own exceptionalism, the US response to the pandemic has been useless. Davis describes how, “As the crisis unfolded, with another American dying every minute of every day, a country that once turned out fighter planes by the hour could not manage to produce the paper masks or cotton swabs essential for tracking the disease. The nation that defeated smallpox and polio, and led the world for generations in medical innovation and discovery, was reduced to a laughing stock as a buffoon of a president advocated the use of household disinfectants as a treatment for a disease that intellectually he could not begin to understand.”
The UK is no different. 40 years of neoliberalism has created politicians whose defining characteristic is laziness, the purpose of their job, as they see it, being to transfer almost every aspect of economic activity that used to be in the hands of the state to private companies. In a little-known scandal, the corrupt and useless pimps of the British government — from Boris Johnson and his unelected chief advisor Dominic Cummings down through the ranks of the feeble-minded corporate pimps that make up his Cabinet — handed over billions of pounds to companies to deliver materials for the pandemic that never materialised, or spent outrageous amounts buying supplies from companies in other countries that were inadequate. Johnson, at the heart of his delusion, sees himself as akin to Winston Churchill, even though the Britain of the Second World War would probably have found a factory site and started producing what was needed within 24 hours.
Davis also notes how, “As a number of countries moved expeditiously to contain the virus, the United States stumbled along in denial, as if willfully blind. With less than four percent of the global population, the US soon accounted for more than a fifth of COVID deaths. The percentage of American victims of the disease who died was six times the global average. Achieving the world’s highest rate of morbidity and mortality provoked not shame, but only further lies, scapegoating, and boasts of miracle cures as dubious as the claims of a carnival barker, a grifter on the make.”
Again, the similarities with the UK are prominent. Tens of thousands of people died in the UK at the start of the pandemic because the government kept delaying the start of lockdown, with Johnson noticeably having repeatedly failed to attend meetings of COBRA, the organisation responsibly for addressing the UK’s response to emergency situations. The official death count in the UK today is over 46,000, while in the US it is over 166,000. With five times the UK population, the US death count would have to be 230,000 to be as bad as the death rate in the UK, and yet Johnson and his government, hiding behind a compliant media, have not been held to account for their murderous failures.
Memorably, Davis describes Trump as a president who “lives to cultivate resentments, demonize his opponents, validate hatred. His main tool of governance is the lie; as of July 9th, 2020, the documented tally of his distortions and false statements numbered 20,055.” A “dark troll of a man”, he “celebrates malice for all, and charity for none.” Crucially, however, “Trump is less the cause of America’s decline than a product of its descent.”
As Davis proceeds to explain:
As they stare into the mirror and perceive only the myth of their exceptionalism, Americans remain almost bizarrely incapable of seeing what has actually become of their country. The republic that defined the free flow of information as the life blood of democracy, today ranks 45th among nations when it comes to press freedom. In a land that once welcomed the huddled masses of the world, more people today favor building a wall along the southern border than supporting health care and protection for the undocumented mothers and children arriving in desperation at its doors. In a complete abandonment of the collective good, US laws define freedom as an individual’s inalienable right to own a personal arsenal of weaponry, a natural entitlement that trumps even the safety of children; in the past decade alone 346 American students and teachers have been shot on school grounds.
The American cult of the individual denies not just community but the very idea of society. No one owes anything to anyone. All must be prepared to fight for everything: education, shelter, food, medical care. What every prosperous and successful democracy deems to be fundamental rights — universal health care, equal access to quality public education, a social safety net for the weak, elderly, and infirmed — America dismisses as socialist indulgences, as if so many signs of weakness.
The UK is not quite as lost, but no one here should be complacent, as all the signs of America’s terminal moral decay are also present in the UK and have been growing remorselessly over the last 40 years. Brexit is Britain’s Mexican wall, and while British people should be grateful that there is no gun culture in the UK, the notion of a country in which “[n]o one owes anything to anyone” and “[a]ll must be prepared to fight for everything” looks ever more relevant to the UK.
Yes, we love our NHS, but it has been under major assault by the Tories since they first took office ten long and horrible years ago, and not for a moment have we come together to bring the country to a halt to defend it — or to have voted for a socialist alternative committed to preserving it — and meanwhile the notion of self-interest has become absolutely central to British life, threatening, corroding and destroying any notion of the “common good.”
In conclusion, Davis, who lives in Canada, tells the following story about the difference between the US and Canada, where there have been far fewer COVID-related deaths, focused on a supermarket shopping experience. “In the US”, he notes, “there is almost always a racial, economic, cultural, and educational chasm between the consumer and the check-out staff that is difficult if not impossible to bridge. In Canada, the experience is quite different. One interacts if not as peers, certainly as members of a wider community. The reason for this is very simple. The checkout person may not share your level of affluence, but they know that you know that they are getting a living wage because of the unions. And they know that you know that their kids and yours most probably go to the same neighborhood public school. Third, and most essential, they know that you know that if their children get sick, they will get exactly the same level of medical care not only of your children but of those of the prime minister. These three strands woven together become the fabric of Canadian social democracy.”
He adds, “Canada performed well during the COVID crisis because of our social contract, the bonds of community, the trust for each other and our institutions, our health care system in particular, with hospitals that cater to the medical needs of the collective, not the individual, and certainly not the private investor who views every hospital bed as if a rental property. The measure of wealth in a civilized nation is not the currency accumulated by the lucky few, but rather the strength and resonance of social relations and the bonds of reciprocity that connect all people in common purpose.”
The UK, honest British readers will acknowledge, is caught somewhere between the US and Canada. Those who serve us, in shops and supermarkets, are rarely unionised, and the children of the wealthy all go to public (i.e. private, fee-paying) schools. We have some notions of unity beyond the flag-waving ghosts of America’s example, but we cannot take that social glue for granted. What lies ahead will need solidarity across social and economic divides if we are to survive it without quite shocking levels of deprivation, and what we also clearly need is a willingness to discuss how we can adapt to both the threats and opportunities provided by this unprecedented collapse of almost our entire economic and social systems.
“Business as usual” is evidently dead in the water, although a government of lazy corporate whores will be unable to grasp that truth, because anything visionary is ruthlessly expunged from the current world of politics (Dominic Cummings, as an aside, thinks of himself as a visionary iconoclast, but is actually the worst sort of petulant, arrogant public schoolboy, driven primarily by his notion that he is the most brilliant man who ever lived, while almost everyone else in politics and the civil service — and society as a whole — is intellectually inferior).

The need for vision

But vision is what we desperately need: a change to a greener world, in which environmental concerns take precedence over capitalism’s obsessive profiteering, in which jobs must be found — or universal basic income made available — to millions of people who, until just a few months ago, were just about getting by in precarious service jobs in a deranged inter-connected world of global travel and tourism that was very evidently unsustainable, but which pretended to be impervious and inevitable.
COVID may well have brought to an end the environmentally unsustainable ascendancy of tourism as the planet’s biggest business — in London as much as beach resorts around the world — but in the UK the virus’s arrival has also exposed the unsustainable greed of the real estate market: the artificially sustained bubble of house prices, of unfettered private rents, of social housing destroyed for profit (a process once more rearing its ugly head), of insanely expensive towers of office blocks that no one wants anymore, and, as noted above, of business rents that need to take the same kind of hit that so many businesses and individuals have experienced over the last six months.
New opportunities can arise from the collapse of the rentier economy, but only with a change of leadership, as the government’s immediate response has been to propose a bonfire of the planning regulations, which, instead of addressing the changing realities and opportunities of the COVID world with vision, grubbily attempts to create abundant slum-making rip-off opportunities for sleazy Tory donors, and, presumably, fat cat MPs — the absolute worst possible outcome.
Can visionaries overcome the myopic venality of politicians, or will we be caught in the worst of all possible worlds, one in which Brexit meets COVID in a meltdown of economic destruction and misery? As Wade Davis reminds us, in 2016, five months after the UK’s Brexit suicide note, Americans chose “to prioritize their personal indignations, placing their own resentments above any concerns for the fate of the country and the world, as they rushed to elect a man whose only credential for the job was his willingness to give voice to their hatreds, validate their anger, and target their enemies, real or imagined.”
The above, of course, characterised Britain on June 23, 2016, but the UK repeated its mistakes just eight months ago, when our broken electoral system, a corrupt press and the widespread delusion of far too many of my fellow citizens gave the risible figure of Boris Johnson a significant working majority in Parliament. To bring him down requires some sort of concerted opposition, the likes of which we haven’t seen since, perhaps, the Poll Tax Riot of 1990, but at present it’s simply nowhere to be seen.
In America, meanwhile, as Wade Davis describes it, “One shudders to think of what it will mean to the world if Americans in November, knowing all that they do, elect to keep such a man in political power. But even should Trump be resoundingly defeated, it’s not at all clear that such a profoundly polarized nation will be able to find a way forward. For better or for worse, America has had its time.”
As, indeed, has the Brexit-addled, greedy, self-obsessed neoliberal UK under Boris Johnson.
With the certainty that this summer’s heatwave will eventually recede, autumn and winter look like being, collectively, a long night of the soul, in which we need illumination to be provided, illumination that, at present, appears to be as sorely lacking here as it is in the US.

Home » COVID-19: Institutional Inertia, Need For Vision And Collapse Of US And UK – OpEd
Andy Worthington
Andy Worthington is the author of The Guantánamo Files: The Stories of the 774 Detainees in America’s Illegal Prison (published by Pluto Press, distributed by Macmillan in the US, and available from Amazon — click on the following for the US and the UK). To receive new articles in your inbox, please subscribe to his RSS feed (he can also be found on Facebook and Twitter). Also see his definitive Guantánamo prisoner list, updated in January 2010, and, if you appreciate his work, feel free to make a donation.
Posted by at No comments:


Revisiting Facial Recognition Technology And Privacy Concerns – Analysis

 August 14, 2020  By Sagnik Chakraborty* GATEWAY HOUSE

In June 2020, IBM, Microsoft and Amazon decided to stop selling facial recognition technology to law enforcement agencies, in light of potential misuse of the technology. IBM went a step further and stopped the development of the technology altogether.

No other company or entity, however, is taking the high moral ground on facial technology. The use of facial recognition by governments around the world has become quite prevalent. China has used it enforce quarantine in Beijing[1] and to crack down on protestors in Hong Kong.[2] Dubai’s Ooyun project uses facial recognition for smart policing.[3] Russia has used it against protestors[4] as well as to track citizens’ movements during the coronavirus lockdown.[5]

It is now so prevalent that ordinary citizens know that they are being watched from all angles, public and private. For example, even when Facebook prompts a name to be tagged in a photo, it uses facial recognition algorithm to determine their presence in an image.

Facial recognition technology analyses facial images and interprets the identity of a person. The surface and features of a face are broken down into several data points to derive the output, with the precision of a plastic surgeon. For instance, the distance between the nose and lips; the width and breadth of a lip; protrusion of cheek bones and several other such conditions are used. Facial recognition tech is an Artificial Intelligence driven system. This is because when two unequal entities such as one version of person’s facial expression is compared to his many photos taken across different time intervals, the system makes an intelligent judgement on whether it matches with the person’s face.

The source of a facial image can be both physical – such as street cameras – and digital, such as social media. The captured image is then compared with thousands of images collected in a database made out of social media profiles, photographs provided for social identification cards such as Social Security, driver’s licenses, passport etc. Technology companies can scrape the internet for images and videos containing faces, group them and map them to a single person. More data helps to train the facial recognition algorithm better, as every feature and expression is captured. For instance, it can recognise both a straight face and a laughing image of the same person. The more posts that are uploaded on Instagram, the more the facial recognition algorithm learns about the face.


The primary purpose of this technology is authentication and identification of a person. Authentication of an individual is a one-to-one verification process where the authenticating agency knows what it is searching for. For instance, at an immigration counter, the face of a traveller is scanned against the face of the person who he claims to be in the system. Identification of an individual is a one-to-many process where the identifier does not know the person being searched, like the identification of a suspect within a database of criminals.

There are two categories of players in this game – big tech and social media companies and the State.

Being a tech and social media giant like Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft is a huge advantage. Massive amounts of voluntary, in-coming facial images have created a global database. Facebook’s facial recognition system known as DeepFace[6] uses the tech to enrich the user experience on its platform. The rate of accuracy with which Facebook prompts the user with the name of the person in an image, has increased significantly over the years, and trained on large datasets of faces to reach an accuracy of 97.35% today.

Streaming services such as Amazon Prime Videoleverages an in-house Amazon product called X-Ray[7] to help the viewer identify the celebrity of screen. It uses the movie cataloguing website IMDB, also owned by Amazon, as the backend database for this process.

Amazon sells its facial recognition software called, Rekognition.[8] Amazon Rekognition claims to identify objects, people, scenes. It can also detect emotions such as happiness or sadness on people’s faces.Microsoft provides an API (Application Programmig Interface) called Face,[9] a re-usable code which can be downloaded by a customer for facial analysis. Age, emotion, pose, smile, facial hair and other features can be determined with Microsoft Face.

These companies have major customers: governments across the world.[10] [11] Their many agencies use facial recognition to provide government services and national security. The recent controversy surrounding police departments in the U.S using ClearviewAI software, a U.S. based surveillance company, to quell public protests,[12] [13] has brought to the forefront of the wide usage of such technology.

Facial recognition tech is a favourite policing tool because all current identification systems require close proximity between the person and the device. For instance, fingerprints require a person to touch a scanner; iris scanner, though contactless, requires a person to be near the scanner. Facial recognition allows identification from afar, eliminating the need for person-device proximity.

This gives the state unprecedented power over its citizens. The virtuous use of tracking and identifying criminals can easily convert into profiling citizens taking part in protests. For this very reason, the Chinese government banned the use of masks in the Hong Kong protest.[14] It’s easier to pick protestors once their facial image from a protest is captured and mapped against a database of citizen’s photos.

This problem multiplies manifold when the tech companies and government are intertwined. The Chinese government uses Face++ a product from Megvii,[15] a Facial recognition AI software company based in Beijing. Other Chinese companies such as Yitu[16] and SenseTime[17] also produce this tech which can be easily used for mass surveillance. China is accused of using this technology for the religious profiling of its Uighur population.[18] The fear of such abuse has resulted in many states in the U.S. such as Californiato ban this technology in police body cameras.[19] Regional bodies like the European Union are still debating whether to adopt this technology[20] or not.

Others are moving ahead. Russian courts in March 2020[21] have struck down a challenge to the use of facial recognition tech.[22] [23] Malaysia, Uganda, Zimbabwe have tied up with Chinese companies to implement facial recognition.[24] India’s National Crime Records Bureau plans to implement a country wide automated facial recognition system (AFRS). It has released a tender for proposals from tech companies for it.[25]

The technology has still not been perfected, though. A major challenge is the problem of misidentification, especially for women and individuals with darker skin tone. For instance, Amazon’s Rekognition falsely identified 28 non-white U.S. lawmakers as criminals. A study by MIT and Microsoft found an error rate of 35% for darker skinned women.[26] [27]

The fear of a dystopian world is legitimate, especially if the technology is not fool-proof. Though facial images are considered sensitive biometric data as per Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and India’s Personal Data Protection Bill 2019, these regulations exempt government agencies from their purview, on grounds of public safety and national security. India needs to be particularly careful because it is a heterogenous country, with varied ethnicities and facial types. Till the technology matures, facial recognition should be used only as a medium of screening individuals, along with other identity verification methods.

*About the author: Sagnik Chakraborty is Researcher, Cybersecurity Studies, and Manager, Management Office, Gateway House.

Source: This article was written for Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations.

References:

[1] Borak Masha, ‘Beijing considers using facial recognition to fight a new Covid-19 outbreak’, South China Morning Post, 17 June 2020, https://www.scmp.com/abacus/tech/article/3089378/beijing-considers-using-facial-recognition-fight-new-covid-19-outbreak

[2] Doffman Zak, ‘Hong Kong Exposes Both Sides of China’s Relentless Facial Recognition Machine’, Forbes, 26 Aug 2019, https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2019/08/26/hong-kong-exposes-both-sides-of-chinas-relentless-facial-recognition-machine/#1995dd1b42b7

[3] ‘Dubai Police Launch “Oyoon” AI Surveillance Programme’, 28 Jan 2018, https://www.dubaipolice.gov.ae/wps/portal/home/mediacenter/news/details/A70

[4] ‘Russia: Intrusive facial recognition technology must not be used to crackdown on protests’, Amnesty International, 31 January 2020, https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/01/russia-intrusive-facial-recognition-technology-must-not-be-used-to-crackdown-on-protests/

[5] Marrow Alexander, ‘Russia’s lockdown surveillance measures need regulating, rights group say’, Reuters, 24 April 2020, https://in.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-russia-facial-recogni/russias-lockdown-surveillance-measures-need-regulating-rights-groups-say-idINKCN2260CF

[6] TaigmanYaniv, Yang Ming, Ranzato Aurelio Marc’, Wolf Lior, ‘DeepFace: Closing the Gap to Human-Level Performance in Face Verification’, Facebook AI Research, Tel Aviv University, https://research.fb.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/deepface-closing-the-gap-to-human-level-performance-in-face-verification.pdf

[7] Staff One Day, ‘Behind the scenes with X-Ray’, The Amazon Blog, 27 June 2018, https://blog.aboutamazon.com/entertainment/behind-the-scenes-with-x-ray

[8] Amazon Rekognition, https://aws.amazon.com/rekognition/?blog-cards.sort-by=item.additionalFields.createdDate&blog-cards.sort-order=desc

[9] Microsoft Azure, https://azure.microsoft.com/en-in/services/cognitive-services/face/#demo

[10] AI Global Surveillance (AIGS) Index, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, https://carnegieendowment.org/files/AI_Global_Surveillance_Index1.pdf

[11] Feldstein Steven, ‘The Global Expansion of AI Surveillance’, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 17 September 2019,https://carnegieendowment.org/2019/09/17/global-expansion-of-ai-surveillance-pub-79847

[12] Markey J Edward, ‘United States Senate’, 8 June 2020, https://www.markey.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Clearview%20protests%2006.08.20.pdf

[13] Haskins Caroline, Mac Ryan, ‘Here Are The Minneapolis Police’s Tools To Identify Protesters’, Buzzfeed News, 29 May 2020, https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/carolinehaskins1/george-floyd-protests-surveillance-technology

[14] Doffman Zak, ‘Honk Kong Exposes Both Sides of China’s Relentless Facial Recognition Machine’, Forbes, 26 August 2019, https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2019/08/26/hong-kong-exposes-both-sides-of-chinas-relentless-facial-recognition-machine/#3856916042b7

[15] Simonite Tom, ‘Behind the Rise of China’s Facial Recognition Giants’, Wired, 9 March 2019, https://www.wired.com/story/behind-rise-chinas-facial-recognition-giants/

[16] Yitu, https://www.yitutech.com/en

[17] Sense Time, https://www.sensetime.com/en/technology-detail?categoryId=1030

[18] Doffman Zak, ‘China Is Facial Recognition To Track Ethnic Minorities, Even In Beijing’, Forbes, 3 May 2019, https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2019/05/03/china-new-data-breach-exposes-facial-recognition-and-ethnicity-tracking-in-beijing/#7fc2455234a7

[19] California Legislative Information, United States Government, http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB1215

[20] Wiewiorowski, Wojciech, ‘AI and Facial Recognition: Challenges and Opportunities’, European Data Protection Supervisor, 21 February 2020, https://edps.europa.eu/press-publications/press-news/blog/ai-and-facial-recognition-challenges-and-opportunities_en

[21] Courts of General Jurisdiction Moscow City, https://www.mos-gorsud.ru/rs/tverskoj/services/cases/kas/details/8f0ad27b-ba67-4e50-84eb-c3c5d788ef6c?participants=%D0%9C%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B2

[22] ‘Russian court rejects call to ban facial recognition technology’, DW https://www.dw.com/en/russian-court-rejects-call-to-ban-facial-recognition-technology/a-51135814

[23] Society, ‘В Москвесудотказалсяпризнатьнезаконнымиспользованиенамитингахкамер с распознаваниемлиц’, Novayagazete, 3 March 2020 https://novayagazeta.ru/news/2020/03/03/159500-v-moskve-sud-otkazalsya-priznat-nezakonnym-ispolzovanie-na-mitingah-kamer-s-raspoznavaniem-lits

[24] Feldstein Steven, ‘The Global Expansion of AI Surveillance’, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 17 September 2019, https://carnegieendowment.org/2019/09/17/global-expansion-of-ai-surveillance-pub-79847

[25] National Crime Records Bureau, http://www.ncrb.gov.in/TENDERS/AFRS/RFP_NAFRS.pdf

[26] Buolamwini Joy, GebruTimnit, ‘Gender Shades: Intersectional Accuracy Disparities in Commercial Gender Classification’, Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency, http://proceedings.mlr.press/v81/buolamwini18a/buolamwini18a.pdf

[27] Crumpler William, ‘The Problem of Bias in Facial Recognition’, Center for Strategic & International Studies’, 1 May 2020, https://www.csis.org/blogs/technology-policy-blog/problem-bias-facial-recognition

Home » Revisiting Facial Recognition Technology And Privacy Concerns – Analysis

Gateway House

Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations is a foreign policy think-tank established in 2009, to engage India’s leading corporations and individuals in debate and scholarship on India’s foreign policy and its role in global affairs. Gateway House’s studies programme will be at the heart of the institute’s scholarship, with original research by global and local scholars in Geo-economics, Geopolitics, Foreign Policy analysis, Bilateral relations, Democracy and nation-building, National security, ethnic conflict and terrorism, Science, technology and innovation, and Energy and Environment.
Posted by at No comments:

"One-Size-Fits-All" Approach to Clean Energy Could Cause Social Inequalities


According to a new study, a “one-size-fits-all” approach for generating cleaner energy based only on expenses could lead to social inequalities.

Spain’s solar and wind farms may not be the best option for everyone.
 Image Credit: Imperial College London.
The goal of the Paris Agreement is to maintain the increase in global temperature for this century less than 2 °C above pre-industrial levels and to continue measures to restrict it to 1.5 °C. One main way to realizing this is for countries to achieve “net zero” carbon emissions by 2050—by either producing zero emissions or eliminating the same amount that they produce.
To achieve this goal, a combination of alternatives to fossil fuels in energy production with sustainable alternatives such as wind and solar power, as well as the deployment of technologies that eliminate carbon dioxide either instantly from the air or from power plant emissions, would be required.
Various existing models for identifying the ideal combination of schemes that can be adopted by a country tend to focus on the projected costs of the technologies. In a new study published recently in the Joule journal, scientists from Imperial College London argue that the “one-size-fits-all” strategy disregards the current state of a country’s industrial strengths and energy economy, which could result in social inequalities.

The Right Energy Mix

Related Stories

The research team considered the example of three countries—the United Kingdom, Poland, and Spain–and performed an analysis that involved the social and economic impact of various energy combinations, and the technology costs.
For instance, in Poland, 80% of energy generation is based on coal and there is no in-country expertise in solar power. Therefore, technologically, even if the deployment of solar power is the most cost-effective option, the effect on the workforce would be huge, as it would be hard to retrain such a huge part of the workforce. This could lead to social inequality and economic upheaval.
Therefore, for Poland, the team contends that a better choice might be to continue the use of coal in the majority, but to install carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies that eliminate the carbon dioxide from the power plant emissions.
On the other hand, Spain already has a solid wind and solar power industry, which implies that an analysis based only on expenses is similar to the analysis that involves socio-economic effects, as it would be much less disruptive to install more wind and solar power.
Although the United Kingdom has a flourishing offshore wind industry, it would face issues with irregular power from an energy combination totally based on renewables, so the installation of CCS power stations continues to be a priority.

Avoiding Social Divisions

The transition to net zero needs to be technically feasible and financially viable, but should also be socially equitable, avoiding any potentially regressive outcomes, perceived or otherwise, that might be caused by changes in the labour market.
Dr Piera Patrizio, Study First Author, Centre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London
According to Professor Niall Mac Dowell, lead author of the study, from the Centre for Environmental Policy at Imperial, “If countries fail to account for the national situation; what resources are available both technically and in the labour market, they risk energy transitions that results in deeper social divisions, which, in the long term, will affect growth, productivity, wellbeing, and social cohesion.”
At present, the researchers are extending their analysis throughout the European Union, and to the United States, taking into account policies such as the latest thrust to adopt hydrogen fuel technologies and how that might impact several countries. In addition, they will consider the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic and how decisions about the transition to net-zero could influence recovering economies.

Journal Reference:

Patrizio, P., et al. (2020) Socially Equitable Energy System Transitions. Joule. doi.org/10.1016/j.joule.2020.07.010.

Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)