NEITHER FAIR NOR BALANCED

Parents swept up into controversy over After School Satan Club speak out: 'At their wits' end'

Critics maintain After School Satan Clubs are 'wearing down the inhibitions' of impressionable children

By Jon Brown | Fox News
Published December 9, 2022

Tucker: School offers after-school Satan club

"Tucker Carlson Tonight" features The Satanic Temple co-founder Lucien Greaves as he describes what an after-school club offers children.

As controversy roils a Virginia town over a planned Satanist after-school club, organizers and parents on both sides of the issue spoke to Fox News Digital to share their perspectives.

The city of Chesapeake has recently drawn national attention as the center of a firestorm sweeping the southeastern Virginia community after The Satanic Temple has attempted to establish an After School Satan Club (ASSC) for kids at the local B.M. Williams Primary School.

‘Fear and indoctrination’

"Regarding parents who are upset about the club, I would like them to know that we are here because we have worked with educators to develop an after-school program that is engaging and fun and helps young minds grow and thrive," June Everett, an ordained minister in The Satanic Temple and campaign director of ASSC, told Fox News Digital.

Maintaining that ASSC "fosters creativity and projects [that] are often designed to benefit the community and promote empathy," Everett said The Satanic Temple attempts to establish such clubs "as a constructive and positive alternative to other religious after-school clubs that often glorify fear and indoctrination."

ORGANIZERS RESUBMIT APPLICATION FOR AFTER-SCHOOL SATAN CLUB AT VIRGINIA SCHOOL AFTER FIRST SPONSOR WITHDRAWS

Everett said she was first led to The Satanic Temple five years ago after her first-grader "was traumatized by his classmates on the playground one day, and they were attendees of the Good News Club that was taking place at the public elementary school he was attending at the time."


Candles are seen for sale at the headquarters of The Satanic Temple in Salem, Massachusetts, on Oct. 8, 2019. (Joseph Prezioso/AFP via Getty Images)

"I picked him up from school one afternoon, crying and upset after he was told that he would burn in hell away from his mommy and daddy and Molly, our dog at the time, if we didn’t accept Jesus Christ into our hearts and start going to church," Everett continued. "I knew there was a Good News Club [there] at the time, and this prompted me to start researching them more, and I realized that this is their goal: to use children who attend the club to proselytize to their peers."

"Satanism truly has made me a better person, a better friend, a better parent and a much better contributing member of society."

Everett, who earlier this week resubmitted an application to establish an ASSC in Chesapeake after the original sponsor withdrew, said the congregation at her local chapter of The Satanic Temple took her in "with such open arms."

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL HOSTS ‘AFTER-SCHOOL SATAN CLUB,’ INFURIATES PARENTS: ‘ABOMINATION AGAINST GOD’

"I had never met such genuine, non-judgmental people in my life," she said. "Satanism truly has made me a better person, a better friend, a better parent and a much better contributing member of society."

Everett said she believes that "the evangelicals" in particular emphasize fear and indoctrination in their approach, citing that the Child Evangelism Fellowship's (CEF) stated mission for the Good News Clubs they sponsor is "to evangelize boys and girls with the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ and to establish (disciple) them in the Word of God and in a local church for Christian living."

‘We emphasize the goodness of God’

Lydia Kaiser, a spokesperson for the Missouri-based CEF, could not comment on the specifics of Everett's situation because she was not involved, but she described as "typical" the accusation that Good News Clubs browbeat children into Christianity. Their curriculum materials for children, however, emphasize God's goodness and do not contain vivid descriptions of hell, she told Fox News Digital.

"We believe that there is a physical place called hell, we believe all that the Bible says about it," said Kaiser. "But when we're talking to children, the way we describe it is ‘separation from God.’"

"You don't need all the scary description," Kaiser continued. "We don't want to scare children into making a decision. We want them to desire a relationship with God. That's our goal. And so we emphasize the goodness of God, how much God loves them and wants to forgive them for their sin and be their friend, their Savior and their Lord."


Lydia Kaiser of the Child Evangelism Fellowship said their curriculum emphasizes God's goodness and does not contain vivid descriptions of hell. (Manusapon Kasosod via Getty Images)

"We try to draw children into a relationship with God by describing him as good, and the bad we describe as separation from all of that," she added.

Kaiser, who noted that parents are welcome to observe what goes on at after-school Good News Clubs, parried arguments that children are too young to reflect on spiritual issues by pointing out how children are expected by adults to learn other basics of human existence such as a healthy diet and personal hygiene.

‘The real danger’

Stephen Mannix, who said he has served for about 15 years as the chairman of his local CEF chapter in the Virginia Tidewater region, said he plans to speak about the ASSC brouhaha at next week's scheduled school board meeting in Chesapeake.

"They say they don't have any religious content, but it's bigger than that," Mannix told Fox News Digital of the Satan clubs.

ASSC claims not to teach of a personal devil, but rather serves as a place where young students can learn about benevolence and empathy, critical thinking, problem-solving, creative expression, personal sovereignty and compassion.

Both Mannix and Kaiser believe that since The Satanic Temple started its ASSC campaign in 2016, it has been using the 2001 Supreme Court decision in Good News Club v. Milford Central School to stir up hysteria in various places that sponsor Good News Clubs until school boards feel compelled to shut down after-school clubs altogether.

The case ultimately rose to the Supreme Court after an upstate New York school district denied an application to a Good News Club on the basis that "the kinds of activities proposed to be engaged in by the Good News Club were not a discussion of secular subjects such as child-rearing, development of character and development of morals from a religious perspective, but were in fact the equivalent of religious instruction itself."




AFTER-SCHOOL ‘SATAN CLUB’ TAKES NEW AIM AT ARCHENEMY: CHRISTIAN CLUBS FOR KIDS

The Supreme Court's opinion, which was written by former Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, ruled in favor of the Good News Club, noting that restrictions on speech in a "limited public forum" such as a public school must not discriminate on the basis of the speaker's viewpoint.

The school district's attorneys in the case argued that having a religious club on public school property, even after school hours, would violate the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution by leading children to believe that the school or the government was somehow establishing a particular religion.

Associate Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the opinion of the Supreme Court in Good News Club v. Milford Central School, which critics argue has been used by The Satanic Temple to bludgeon after-school Christian clubs. (Alex Wong via Getty Images)

The Court shot that argument down, writing: "Finally, even if we were to inquire into the minds of schoolchildren in this case, we cannot say the danger that children would misperceive the endorsement of religion is any greater than the danger that they would perceive a hostility toward the religious viewpoint if the Club were excluded from the public forum."

SATANIC TEMPLE DISPLAYS DEVIL NEXT TO NATIVITY IN ILLINOIS CAPITOL

The Satanic Temple "does not believe in introducing religion into public schools and will only open a club if other religious groups are operating on campus," according to their website.

"We are only doing this because Good News Clubs have created a need for this," Lucien Greaves, cofounder of The Satanic Temple, told The Washington Post in 2016. "If Good News Clubs would operate in churches rather than public schools, that need would disappear. But our point is that if you let one religion into the public schools you have to let others, otherwise it’s an establishment of religion."


"The danger becomes this lie of a secularized space that bans and censors and tells Christians to go home," said Mannix. "That's where the real danger is."

Close-up on a black book with an inverse pentagram on a brown wooden board. (iStock)

Kaiser and Mannix pointed out the short shelf life of Satanist clubs as an indication of their intention merely to sow discord in an attempt to shut down competing Christian clubs.

AFTER-SCHOOL ‘SATAN CLUB’ IN ILLINOIS DISTRICT ELICITS ‘CONCERN,’ SUPERINTENDENT RESPONSE

Everett confirmed to Fox News Digital that only four clubs are currently active in the U.S., pending the approval of a fifth in Chesapeake.

‘Wearing down the inhibition of children’

"They say that they don't actually teach kids about Satan," Kaiser said of the Satan clubs. "They say it's more about humanism and so-called tolerance, which is ironic when they're actually being intolerant, trying to get us kicked out."

"But they have an 8,000-pound statue of Satan with two little elementary-aged children looking at it adoringly," Kaiser continued. "If every time the story was run, they would show a picture of this mascot, people would be able to judge for themselves whether they're trying to appeal to children with Satanism."

"They're wearing down the inhibition of children so that they'll think it's fine to attend a truly satanic event when they're older," she added.

A statue depicting children gazing up at a satanic figure in the conversion room at The Satanic Temple in Salem, Massachusetts, on Oct. 8, 2019. (Joseph Prezioso/AFP via Getty Images)

The statue Kaiser referenced, which The Satanic Temple unveiled in 2015, cost $100,000 to make and has featured repeatedly in its public campaigns. Standing at nearly 9 feet tall, the bronze figure depicts a boy and a girl gazing up at a winged, goat-headed hermaphrodite known as Baphomet, which has historically been presented as a satanic symbol.

Based on an 1856 sketch of the "Sabbatic Goat" by French occultist Éliphas Lévi, the statue is replete with occult symbolism representing the union of supposed binary opposites such as human and animal, male and female or good and evil.

The Satanic Temple's statue of Baphomet was based on an 1856 drawing by French occultist Éliphas Lévi, pictured above at a museum in Germany. (picture alliance via Getty Images)

In Lévi's original depiction, the figure was androgynous, but Greaves told the BBC in 2015 that in their iteration, Baphomet's breasts were removed to avoid wading into cultural gender debates. He noted to the outlet that the original drawing's "male-female dualism" is represented instead by the two children.

‘At their wits’ end’

Citing "the heightened emotional situation in our city" following the recent mass shooting at a local Walmart, the original sponsor of the ASSC in Chesapeake withdrew her name this week, according to The Virginian-Pilot. Other organizers promptly resubmitted the necessary paperwork and still aim to roll out the ASSC at the primary school on Dec. 15.

Aspen Nolette, a local parent and founder of Chesapeake Parents for Freedom, said the ASSC has caused an "uproar" in her community and that parents are increasingly wearied by what is going on in public schools.

"People are extremely upset, they're extremely disturbed, I think," Nolette told Fox News Digital. "In the nation right now, you've got boys attempting to go into girls' bathrooms. You saw what happened in Loudoun County, Virginia, and the assault that happened there because of that. You've got pornographic books and graphic novels in our schools that parents are extremely upset about because we have laws about distributing pornography to children."

"And now you've got After School Satan Clubs. From what I've seen, and I've been involved in this for a couple of years, parents are at their wits' end," Nolette added. "The Satan clubs seem to be where they drew the line."

Jon Brown is a writer for Fox News Digital. Story tips can be sent to jon.brown@fox.com.

Playing with paradise: Defunct Bali golf course another Trump fiasco


Plans to redevelop the once-thriving Nirwana Golf Course in Bali under the Trump banner have fallen by the wayside. (Photo: AFP/Dicky Bisinglasi)

09 Dec 2022 

TANAH LOT, Indonesia: Beer bottles and broken plastic chairs litter the fairways of a derelict golf course on the Indonesian holiday island of Bali, where laid-off workers lament the unfulfilled promises of a Donald Trump "dream project".

Nearly a decade ago, the real estate mogul and future US president signed a deal to license his name to a six-star holiday destination intended to displace the Nirwana Golf Resort, one of the world's best.

But today, the once-thriving golf course is filled with weeds - another failed project for Trump, whose six casino and hotel bankruptcies spanning two decades have run up billions of dollars in debt and impacted thousands of lives.

"There was no clarity about our future. We heard that we would be re-recruited but it has never happened," said Ditta Dwi, a 26-year-old former caddy who was forced to take a waitressing job while awaiting a reopening that never came.

The Trump Organization and Indonesian developer MNC Group shut the resort in 2017 and laid off hundreds of workers after partnering to rebrand the Nirwana, which boasts idyllic views of the Indian Ocean.

The planned redevelopment - Trump's first venture into Southeast Asia's biggest economy - was dubbed a "dream project" by his son Donald Trump Jr on a 2019 visit to Jakarta.

But Trump's deal to license his name to the new resort and help operate it - first struck in 2015 - has turned out to be a pipe dream for Indonesian workers.

Five years after sending staff home, the hotel sits demolished and its course defunct, its forlorn fairways the domain of a solitary security guard who wheels around on a cart, warding off tourists.

The derelict, overgrown and empty site is a far cry from the luxury image Trump long maintained for his real estate interests before setting his sights on the White House.

But the property magnate, who recently announced he will seek the presidency again in 2024, is no stranger to colossal flops.

Six times between 1991 and 2009, his casino and hotel projects fell into bankruptcy.

The first to fail, the Trump Taj Mahal in the beachside gambling mecca of Atlantic City, New Jersey, threatened Trump's personal fortune. To cover some of the casino's debts, he had to sell off his yacht, private jet and half his shares.

"POSTPONED"

MNC chief and Trump ally Hary Tanoesoedibjo - who bought the Nirwana in 2013 - has previously cited lower consumer spending during the COVID-19 pandemic in explaining delays, but the project's troubles predate the outbreak.

Edwin Darmasetiawan, director of MNC's property arm, refused to confirm how many Indonesians were sacked when the development was abruptly sidelined.

He said "financial matters" had caused the years-long delays and said he hoped it would still be developed within two years, even though no work has begun.

"I don't see this project as a failure, but as postponed," he told AFP.

"We have another project in Lido, now we are focusing on that," he said, referring to a planned mega resort city of the same name south of Jakarta.

The project in West Java, which will include a Trump golf course and resort, has courted controversy over builders allegedly exhuming Islamic ancestral graves without locals' permission.

The Trump Organization did not respond to a request for comment about the Bali resort.

Many Balinese workers have lost opportunities due to the billionaires' decision to let the plot stagnate.

While hotel workers were compensated after losing their jobs, about 150 caddies on temporary contracts received no money when they were suddenly released.

"It was hard. The time I lost my job as a caddy was difficult. Many people were angry," said Dwi.

She earned a 1.3 million rupiah (US$86) monthly salary, but tips from wealthy golfers meant she could earn as much as 15 million rupiah in a good month. Now she makes the same salary, but no tips.
"MOVING ON"

Yet the hotel and golf workers whose livelihoods were sliced into the rough are trying to forgive and forget.

Dwi, the former caddy, told AFP that getting her old job back now seemed "impossible".

"I have just let it go. I'm moving on," she said.

Pita Dewi, who worked at the hotel's spa for 18 years and now runs her parents' cafe, said Trump's shutdown of the resort had left her fearing for her future.

"I got stressed thinking about how I would earn money, because I have children," she said.

"I was 48 years old, how could I get another job?"

But in typical Balinese fashion, optimistic locals who believe staunchly in forgiveness are quick to throw away any negative feelings towards the larger-than-life tycoon.

"We have to continue our life," Dewi said.

"If we hated him, would that make him give us money?"
Source: AFP/st

 Op Eds

Here is Why Iran Actually Won the World Cup Match Last Week

By Ciara S. Moezidis, Contributing Opinion Writer

Ciara S. Moezidis is a second-year Master’s student in Theological Studies at the Harvard Divinity School.

December 9, 2022

Some tell us to keep politics out of the World Cup. Others tell us to keep the World Cup out of politics. Whether we like it or not, politics and the World Cup are inextricably intertwined.

The Iran vs. United States match was not like any other game — it was more than that. And I am not saying this because the match represents my Iranian-American identity. It is because the Iran team had more at stake than just advancing to win the World Cup. Their livelihoods were on the line.

The last time Iran and the U.S. played against each other was in 1998 in France. I was not even born yet. Throughout the last 24 years, a lot has changed geopolitically, but when it comes to Iran and the U.S., not much has — until recently.

A revolution is happening in Iran. The Iran team was playing with the backdrop of over 450 killed and 18,000 arrested in Iran since mid-September. As the Iranian diaspora grappled with whether or not to support the team, one thing remained true: Iran in the World Cup was another opportunity to amplify, from the stadiums of Qatar, the atrocities happening on the other side of the Persian Gulf. Playing against the U.S. was an opportunity for the revolution to reach a large crowd who might be avid sports watchers, but not avid news readers.

I came to the game somewhat indifferent about the outcome. But a few minutes in, it dawned on me that the Iranian team is not only an underdog in this game, but in real life. Under threat of crackdowns by the regime, their resistance on the field is a microcosm of what all of Iran is experiencing right now.

If you did not watch the game in this context, you missed a lot. After not singing the national anthem during the first round of games, it was allegedly reported that if the players did not behave, their families would face “violence and torture.” In their last two games, they reluctantly sang the national anthem with forlorn faces and refrained from any acts of resistance — seemingly out of fear of retribution.

Meanwhile, they played knowing that their fans who did any small act to support the revolution were being confronted and, in some alleged cases, arrested by the Qatari police for their political displays. Their experiences at the World Cup do not remain in Qatar; by way of the Qatari government, the Islamic Republic’s Basij General may have received these names and may make it difficult for these dissenters to return to Iran, as indicated in a recent leaked audio recording.

How can a team focus on playing when the real match is against the regime and its human rights violations? How can fans safely use the World Cup to draw light to the revolution knowing that Qatar is not a safe haven from this oppressive regime?

I recognize that the Iranian diaspora is fragmented on the World Cup and other things. I understand that many in the diaspora felt Iran’s presence at the World Cup was a distraction from the movement on the ground. Many Iranian Americans were not enthusiastically supporting the national team as they typically do because of the regime’s “sportswashing” aiming to act as a camouflage of its human rights violations.

Iran won in my eyes not because I am a sore loser — as I said, I was somewhat indifferent. To me, they won because the Iran team continued to persevere amidst these unprecedented circumstances. They are yet another example of victims of this brutal regime.

Many other teams will go home and train for 2026, but the players of Iran have gone home to an ongoing national movement pushing for civil rights for all and an end to the Islamic Republic. They have returned to a nation that has been on strike for three days. A nation where unlawfully detained protestors continue to face rape, torture, and executions. And a nation where the “morality police” and the ruthless terror of the regime continue, despite mainstream media attempting to prematurely confirm otherwise.

It is paramount that we recognize the people of Iran’s fight is not over. Although Iran is no longer in the World Cup, this match served as a reminder that we must dedicate the same energy we have given to this global sporting event to Iran’s historic liberation movement. We must keep our eyes on Iran as they fight for “women, life, freedom.”

Ciara S. Moezidis is a second-year Master’s student in Theological Studies at the Harvard Divinity School.

TSMC outlay helps rebuild US chips-making capacity

Vindicating Biden policy, Taiwanese industry leader raises Arizona investment from $12 billion to $40 billion

By SCOTT FOSTER

DECEMBER 9, 2022

Phoenix celebrates TSMC's big investment. Photo: LocalToday

The “tool-in” ceremony celebrating the installation of the first equipment at TSMC’s factory in Arizona on December 6 marked the start of a new era of semiconductor manufacturing in the United States and for Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company.

Not only is the world’s largest and most technologically advanced semiconductor foundry – contract manufacturer – building its first major production base outside Taiwan; but it also has announced plans to build a second factory that will raise its investment in Arizona from $12 billion to $40 billion.

On top of that, while the first factory will use the company’s N4 process technology (producing chips even smaller than does its standard 5-nm process), recent hints from management that production would be at 3-nm node in the second factory have been confirmed.


Construction of the first factory began in 2021. Mass production is expected to start in 2024 at a rate of 20,000 300mm wafers per month.

Production at the second factory will reportedly be 30,000 wafers per month, with production expected to start by the end of 2026.

President Joe Biden, who has made rebuilding semiconductor production capacity in the US a signature policy of his presidency, flew to Arizona for the ceremony.

Apple CEO Tim Cook and Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, whose companies will reportedly be the initial customers, were also in attendance, as was Lisa Su, CEO of AMD, which is also expected to be an early customer.

They were joined by senior representatives of equipment makers Applied Materials and Lam Research, materials specialist Entegris, electronic design automation provider Synopsis and IC design company Arm. The event was hosted by TSMC founder Morris Chang, Chairman Mark Liu and CEO C C Wei.


It was a second professional home-coming for Morris Chang, who had studied at Harvard, MIT and Stanford and worked at Texas Instruments for 25 years before moving to Taiwan to establish TSMC in 1987.

“When I started TSMC back in 1987,” Chang told the gathering, “I had a dream. Partly because of my background, my dream was to build fabs in the United States.”

But his first attempt at building a US fabrication facility, in 1996, turned into a “nightmare” due to cost, people and cultural problems. “It took us several years to untangle ourselves from my nightmare, and I decided that I needed to postpone the dream.”

So today, he said, the the new dream is “actually the old dream revived. Not only that, we did learn from our experience earlier and we are far more prepared now.”

Shortages of skilled personnel, resistance to long Taiwanese working hours, and an inadequate US supply chain are making things difficult but, as the equipment installation indicates, not impossible.


TSMC will receive subsidies and tax breaks from the federal government under the CHIPS Act and from the state of Arizona. That will make a dent in the cost of building the factories, but not come close to covering what TSMC calculates as 50% higher operating costs in the US compared with Taiwan.

However, American customers account for the majority of TSMC’s business and their dependence on production in Taiwan is too high considering China’s claim to the island.

That having been said, TSMC’s investment in Arizona will neither eliminate the dependence nor undermine TSMC’s technology and manufacturing base in Taiwan.A man walks past a company logo at the headquarters of the world’s largest semiconductor maker TSMC in Hsinchu, Taiwan, on January 29, 2021. Photo: AFP / Sam Yeh

The first Arizona factory’s planned output of 20,000 300mm wafers per month (240,000 per year) is only 1.6% of TSMC’s total current output, which should exceed 15 million 300mm wafer equivalents in 2022, and less than 15% of its output at the 5-nm node, which was raised to 150,000 per month earlier this year. The word “equivalents” is used because TSMC also processes some 200mm and 150mm wafers.

The second factory should boost production in Arizona to 50,000 wafers per month (600,000 per year). Assuming TSMC’s total capacity grows by 5% per annum (after more than 8% growth this year), Arizona should account for about 3% of the company’s total output five years from now.


Over the next 10 to 15 years, TSMC reportedly plans to build six factories in Arizona. That would raise these percentages, but not in a linear fashion since the company continues to expand in Taiwan and may add capacity in Japan, Singapore and Europe.

In addition, TSMC and the Taiwanese government are committed to keeping their leading-edge technology at home. TSMC is introducing 3-nm process technology there now and plans to start production at 2nm in 2025 – a year before starting 3-nm production in Arizona.

For this reason, Apple’s leading-edge products – and those of Nvidia, other American IC design companies, and even Intel – will probably be made in Taiwan for years to come.

Nevertheless, TSMC will soon be making a significant contribution to semiconductor production in the United States, vindicating President Biden’s decision to push through the CHIPS Act. Along with Intel and Micron’s decisions to make large new investments in the US, this is reversing the Wall Street-driven exodus of capital-intensive semiconductor manufacturing.

This can be seen either as a capitulation to East Asian mercantilist industrial policy (if you can’t beat them, join them) or – after a 30-year indulgence in outsourcing and pandering to financial markets at the expense of jobs, manufacturing expertise and national security – as a return to the industrialization that made America great. Actually, it is both.

TSMC’s investments in the US should also light a fire under Intel, which is arguably two process technology generations behind and which will soon face intense competition in its home market as it develops its own foundry business. Foundry customers, of course, will benefit. Apple lobbied for subsidies for TSMC in Arizona while Intel argued that they should go to American companies instead.

As TSMC, Intel and Micron ramp up production in the US over the next several years, their suppliers will follow, rebuilding the entire supply chain. Semiconductor makers are already helping universities educate a larger workforce. As more jobs in the industry are created, more students should be interested in studying engineering. With time, the supply chain problems and shortages of skilled workers that make news today should fade away.

The US share of global semiconductor production has declined from 37% in 1990 to about 12% now. A partial recovery now seems likely, but probably by only a few percentage points – or maybe not at all – since Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, China and Europe all are also intent on expanding capacity.

But what matters is not that percentage, but the ability to produce semiconductors at home should a crisis arise overseas.

From that perspective, the United States should be in a much more secure position by the end of the decade and TSMC should have an enormous production base far away from China – if a crisis in the Taiwan Strait does not intervene.

Follow this writer on Twitter: @ScottFo83517667

Biden’s regrettable Syria policy gives Turkey free rein

The US has been mostly silent, other than issuing a few meek statements

By HENRI J BARKEY

DECEMBER 9, 2022

A memorial is held in Istanbul after the bombing of November 13, 2022. Photo: Wikipedia

It is difficult to understand what US President Joe Biden’s administration is doing in northern Syria, where its allies the Syrian Kurds have been bombed to high heaven by Turkish forces. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has insisted that he also intends to mount a land operation against America’s partners there.

Although Turkey for some time had been bombing and assassinating members of the US-allied Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), this current offensive is different. It is designed to deal the Kurds a fatal blow. What is incomprehensible is that Turkish attacks are taking place within a few hundred meters of where US troops and other officials are collocated with the Syrian Kurds.

To understand the situation, we need to go back to 2014, when Islamic State (ISIS) swept through northern Syria and northern Iraq defeating a variety of forces, including those of the Iraqi army and the autonomous Iraqi Kurdish region.

US president Barack Obama asked Erdogan for help defending the Syrian-Kurdish town of Kobani that risked being overrun by ISIS. Erdogan simply refused, preferring an ISIS victory to a burgeoning Kurdish presence in northern Syria.

Obama, in turn, turned to the SDF and other Kurdish formations to fight ISIS. US troops and materiel were sent, and the American-Kurdish alliance successfully beat back ISIS.

The struggle against ISIS has continued as tens of thousands of militants and their families were captured and are still being held in a mammoth prison named Al-Hol. ISIS has endured, albeit in a much-diminished format, seeking to make a comeback. Hence US forces have remained to this day to help the Kurds keep the area under control.

This outcome was unacceptable to Erdogan, who tried his best to undermine US efforts there. Turkey has from the beginning viewed the burgeoning US-SDF alliance as a strategic threat. It fears that in a post-civil-war Syria, this will culminate in the Kurds gaining some form of autonomy.

Kurds have already achieved autonomy and international recognition in the form of the Kurdistan Regional Government, an autonomous component of federal Iraq. That came about because of US efforts in the 1990s to protect Iraq’s Kurdish population from Saddam Hussein’s murderous onslaughts. The Turks are petrified that a similar arrangement in Syria would encourage their own dissatisfied Kurdish minority to agitate for the same.

Erdogan’s justification for his Syria offensives is that the SDF is a terrorist organization because it is an offshoot of the Turkish PKK, the Kurdistan Workers Party, an organization considered terrorist by Turkey and the US. The SDF is ideologically close to the PKK but has never been engaged in terrorist activities against Turkey and has focused on maintaining its place in northern Syria.

Erdogan also claimed that a recent bomb attack in Istanbul that killed six people was perpetrated by the SDF.

This makes no sense. Why would the SDF engage in such a sloppy act that achieves absolutely nothing, and worse, risks its alliance with the US? Within an hour of the event, Turkey had not only concocted a story blaming the SDF but claimed it had found the perpetrators. Interior Minister Suleyman Soylu went further and accused the US of being behind the bombing.

While it is unclear who carried out the attack, Erdogan is using it for his own electoral calculations. Turkey must hold elections by next May, and with the economy in poor shape, inflation at 85% and a general sense of weariness with Erdogan’s 20-year rule, the Syria intervention is a way to put the already incoherent opposition on the defensive and change the domestic narrative.

The US has been mostly silent, other than issuing a few meek statements. The White House had the power to prevent this by taking Erdogan on. With rare exceptions, US policy vis-à-vis Turkey and especially Erdogan has sought to appease rather than stand up to an authoritarian leader.


The excuse has always been that as a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Turkey is too important and that the US has too many other interests there.

Finally, after having allowed the air strikes to go on for days, the Biden administration had Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin call his Turkish counterpart to persuade them not to conduct the land operation. Then, American forces conducted conspicuous joint patrols with the SDF to send a message. This may be too little too late and does not prevent Erdogan from ordering a land operation in the future.

On two levels the US approach is a bankrupt policy. First, appeasement has not worked, because it has allowed Erdogan to bully the US. The daily diatribe from Turkish government sources is virulently anti-American. Washington has remained silent to the constant public abuse it receives.

Last year, Erdogan personally attacked one of Biden’s most senior aides, accusing Brett McGurk of supporting terrorism. A 2020 poll showed that 70% of respondents named the US as the single greatest threat to Turkey. Washington has only itself to blame for this as it never developed a counter narrative of its own.

Second, the US knows better. The SDF had nothing to do with the Istanbul bombing. Allowing your allies, who spilled their blood fighting extremists, to be attacked indiscriminately is morally wrong. If not for the SDF, ISIS might still be there. Moreover, just like the Russians in Ukraine, the Turks are targeting basic infrastructure, some of which was built with US taxpayers’ money.

Especially after the Afghanistan debacle, Washington ought to be careful about the kind of message it sends to allies and foes in the region and beyond about its trustworthiness. The image this crisis invokes is of a superpower’s military and civilian personnel having to cower and seek shelter from its ally Turkey’s bombardment.


This article was provided by Syndication Bureau, which holds copyright.

HENRI J BARKEY is the Cohen Professor of International Relations at Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, and an adjunct senior fellow for Middle East studies at the Council of Foreign Relations. He previously served as a member of the US State Department’s policy planning staff, working primarily on issues related to the Middle East, the Eastern Mediterranean and intelligence. More by Henri J Barkey

Arizona activists say a border wall hurts wildlife

The construction of an improvised border wall along Arizona's U.S.-Mexico border made from hundreds of shipping containers continues despite an ongoing legal battle between Governor Doug Ducey and the Biden administration.

The Predictable Resurgence of Fascism and Nazism On Both Sides of the North Atlantic and Its Consequences

BY VICENTE NAVARRO

DECEMBER 9, 2022

Facebook

TwitterRedditEmail

Photograph Source: Evan Nesterak – CC BY 2.0

The Origins of Fascism and Nazism: the Great Depression

Fascism and Nazism were the products of the Great Depression. The deteriorating economic situation had disastrous effects on the quality of life and well-being of the popular classes and undermined the credibility and legitimacy of democratic systems and governments in the United States and Europe. Fascism in southern Europe and the United States, and Nazism in central and northern Europe and also in the U.S., capitalized on the resulting discontent. These movements acquired significant influence on both sides of the North Atlantic, ultimately governing several countries of Western Europe.

The message of each was authoritarian and antidemocratic. Fascism and Nazism regarded all other political options as illegitimate, the basis for justifying their elimination. Both advocated extreme nationalism based on classism, racism,and machismo, presenting themselves as defenders of the Christian civilization and promoting force and violence against the “other”, whom they defined as an enemy. The two movements were profoundly antiunion, anticommunist, and antisocialist. These views made them attractive to the economic and financial power establishments who felt their power threatened by protests fueled by the labor movements. Hence, influential sectors of these establishments financed Fascism and Nazism.

The Defeat of Fascism and Nazism In World War Ii: The Empowerment of the Popular Classes

Fascism and Nazism were militarily defeated in World War II, a goal achieved through the broad alliance of political and social forces. The defeat of those political options and the weakening of economic and financial powers that supported them allowed for a redefinition of power relations between social classes, particularly between the owners and managers of capital on one side and the working classes on the other. It opened new possibilities, including the empowerment of the working classes that led to the establishment of welfare states and to the reduction of inequalities. Where the working class was stronger, as in Scandinavia, the redistribution of income and ownership of capital was greater and the welfare state more extensive. Where the working class was weaker, as in southern Europe and in the U.S., the redistribution and establishment of the welfare state was practically nonexistent (as happened in Spain, governed by a fascist government, and Portugal, governed by a fascistoid one) or very limited (as in the U.S. where the labor and social rights of the labor force were very reduced) and its class, race, and gender inequalities were very extensive. The structure and modus operandi of its democratic systems have always been clearly structured in favor of conservative political forces. As a consequence, the working class in the U.S. has been historically very weak. Federal law, namely the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act, restricts the activities and power of labor unions, limiting them to defend segmented and highly decentralized sectors of the labor force. General strikes are prohibited. The federal electoral system in the U.S. is hardly proportional or representative, with each state, regardless of population, represented equally by two senators, which inherently biases the legislative chamber, the Senate, in favor of the country’s rural and more conservative regions. Financing of the electoral process is fundamentally private, which enables the financial and economic establishments to “buy” politicians. It is the “liberal economic and political model” par excellence.

The Response of the Social Class of Owners and Managers Of Economic and Financial Capital to the Empowerment of the Popular Classes

The defeat of fascism and Nazism redefined power relations, empowering the working classes. A consequence was an increase in labor’s share of national income, with a proportional decrease in capital income during the post-World War II period through the decade of the 1970s. This led to protests by the economic and financial establishments and the advent of neoliberalism. Established in the U.S. with the election of President Ronald Reagan and in Great Britain with Margaret Thatcher, it was incorporated later in most governing social democratic parties—the majority parties within the European left—through the so-called Third Way.

This new version of liberalism promoted globalization of economic and financial activity with complete freedom of capital and labor mobility, creating a significant increase in migration and displacement of capital, primarily industrial, to the countries of the Global South. Such globalization also resulted in deregulation of the labor market, increased regressive fiscal policies, and the great containment and reduction of public social spending.

These policies aimed to weaken the working class in countries on both sides of the North Atlantic and reverse the distribution of income in favor of owners and managers of capital—at the cost of labor-derived income. The decline of income from labor as a percentage of national income declined significantly from the late 1970s, the end of the period known as the Golden Age of Capitalism, to 2019, before the pandemic started. Between 1978 and 2019, the United States saw a decline in labor-derived income from 70 to 63 percent, Germany from 70 to 62 percent, France from 74 to 66 percent, Italy from 72 to 62 percent, the United Kingdom from 74 to 70 percent, and Spain from 72 to 56 percent. The average decline in labor income among the fifteen countries that would form the European Union (EU 15) was 73 to 64 percent.

This neoliberal response was promoted and led primarily by the U.S. government, (joined later by the European Union whose governments were predominately of conservative and liberal persuasions), and by other U.S.-led organizations such as NATO. NATO expanded its ​​influence in areas of the North Atlantic, including the countries of Eastern Europe and now Ukraine, programming its incorporation into the organization.

During this neoliberal period, as part of the globalization led by the United States, an objective has been the expansion and promotion of the existing neoliberal model. An example of this is the economic and labor policies being put forth by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. These policies, which clearly have been influenced by the U.S. and countries of Western Europe, are forcing Ukraine to condition the delay of payment of its foreign debt upon approval of a change in the right to own land in Ukraine. Current law restricts property rights for foreigners. The policy change, however, gives international companies the right to own property in the country. The Ukrainian government, which has a neoliberal orientation, favors these policies which are very unpopular. Equally unpopular is the massive deregulation of the labor market proposed by this government before the war and approved just a few weeks ago. Both measures have been imposed by international organizations and adopted by the Ukrainian government under the assumption that they are necessary to “attract foreign capital to facilitate the reconstruction of the country.” Foreign capital, in this case, means North American and European companies.

The Conversion of the Left-Wing Governments to Neoliberalism and Its Consequences, Even in Countries With Long Progressive Traditions Like Sweden

The neoliberal reforms of the 1980s spread throughout the North Atlantic to the extent that the left-wing governments diluted their resistance to them and ended up making them their own. The greater the strengths of these governments, the longer the delay in the application of such policies. The latest and most notorious case has been Sweden, where progressive forces have historically held power, and where the Social Democratic Party was the longest governing. From 1932 to the late 1970s, the Social Democratic Party ruled Sweden supported on average by 48 percent of the electorate. Things began to change in the 1980s, although not until the 1990s and the beginning of the twenty-first century did neoliberal policies reach their maximum influence. The expansion of fascism was a direct consequence of the application of these policies.

It was predictable that the fascist movement would grow almost exponentially—and also that the detrimental effects of neoliberal policies would affect the electoral behavior of the social classes who would be most negatively impacted by them. I know Sweden, academically and personally, well. I have written extensively about the Swedish welfare state and part of my family is Swedish. And I predicted in my article “What happens in Sweden?,” Publico (June 9, 2013), that the public policies implemented would lead to the situation that exists today. It was precisely in the 1980s when the social democratic government started applying these policies, led by Sweden’s finance minister. These policies were later expanded by the governing alliance of conservative and liberal parties, a body known as the Bourgeoisie Alliance, and later on, continued by the Social Democratic Party who governed again from 2014 until 2022. These neo-liberal policies included the deregulation of the labor market (which allowed employers to pay workers according to their own criteria, whereby  employers, including the state, began to hire and pay weaker workers less, that is immigrants); the facilitation of immigration, which increased dramatically; the introduction of privatization in the management of public services, such as health and education, including by private profit-seeking companies; and the deregulation of housing prices.

Most of these policies had a negative effect on the welfare and quality of life of Sweden’s working class with large sections of that class distancing themselves from the social democratic party, and abstained from voting, or voted for the Nazi party, known as the Swedish Democrats. This party presented itself as the “anti-neoliberal establishment,” party, against the establishment political class. It swept the last election.

The Swedish capitalist class favored these neoliberal policies, even though some sectors of that class, close to the social democratic party, were uncomfortable with the Nazi party’s language and values.​ The vast majority of the media, controlled by economic groups belonging to such a class, did everything possible to destroy the parties to the left of the social democratic party to prevent them from channeling the anti-neoliberal-establishment anger in the popular classes. This is how the Nazi party grew. Everything that happened was totally predictable.

The Growth of Fascism in Western Europe was Predictable: Sweden Was a Clear Example of This

In the elections that took place in Sweden a few months ago, the progressive alliance—the Social Democratic Party, the Left Party, and the Green Party—won 163 seats in Parliament. That was just three votes fewer than the 166 won by the combined right-wing Conservative, Liberal, and Nazi parties. The Nazi party, founded in 1968 as heir to the Swedish Nazi Party, won 20 percent of the vote, becoming the second force in the Swedish Parliament. The majority, the Social Democratic Party, received the most votes, with 30.3 percent. The Nazi party attracted large numbers of voters from the other right-wing parties but also from sections of the working class, who voted previously for the Social Democratic Party. Support for the Nazi party has grown even among members of the union closest to the Social Democratic Party, the LO. Half of them, mostly men, supported the Nazi party. Across the board in this year’s elections, 60 percent of Swedish men voted for right-wing parties.

The causes of these vote transfers are easy to see: the neoliberal policies initiated by the Social Democratic Party and expanded by the liberal-conservative alliance that ruled Sweden for six years. This alliance was later replaced by the Social Democratic Party, which has been governing for the last six years. During this time, it maintained those policies while adding such unpopular austerity measures as the reduction of public health and disability insurance. Austerity policies and labor market deregulation were especially important in explaining the antagonism toward immigration, which increased substantially during this time. In 2015 Sweden experienced an immigration crisis when 163,000 immigrants arrived (doubling the number of immigrants in the country), many of them from Syria, Turkey, Iran, and Afghanistan.

All of these measures explain the growth of the Nazi party. In 2011 the party won only 5.7 percent of the votes, with just 8 percent of the population believing that immigration was a problem. Four years later, in 2015, when immigration peaked, the Nazi party obtained the support of 20 percent of the population. The following year, 24 percent of Swedes regarded immigration as the country’s most significant problem. Recently, 44 percent cited immigration as among the biggest problems facing the country. During the last election, the Nazi party campaigned on the premise, among others, that the socialists were “reducing social rights to free up public funds to assist immigrants.” And they adopted this slogan: “Sweden is for Swedes,” meaning that immigrants did not deserve the rights enjoyed by “true” Swedes.

The Experience at the Other Political Pole of the North Atlantic: The Enormous Crisis of the Neoliberal Model of the United States

The growth of fascism in the United States was equally predictable. The Reagan neoliberalism that began in the 1980s was expanding, and President Bill Clinton fully incorporated it into the Democratic Party and his government. While running for office in 1992, Clinton offered relatively progressive proposals, even adopting the establishment of a national health program that had made the left-wing candidacy of Jesse Jackson in the 1988 Democratic Party primaries and would have guaranteed the right of Americans to receive health care. As advisor to Jesse Jackson in 1988, I had worked on that proposal.

Clinton, however, changed after he was elected. In addition to approving the highly unpopular free trade agreement between the United States, Canada, and Mexico, he renounced many of his proposals, including the establishment of a national health program. Later his wife, Hillary Clinton, who served as Secretary of State during President Barack Obama’s administration, promoted the process of globalization with an increase in the mobility of industries to what is called the Global South.

The consequences of this neoliberal globalization were devastating for the working class in the industrial sectors. There are thousands of examples: For many years in Baltimore (where Johns Hopkins University, where I have been teaching for more than half-a-century, is located), the steel industry was one of the city’s most important sources of employment. The largest steel company left the city, and the neighborhoods of the steel workers (mostly white, blue-collar, and well paid) changed dramatically and are now desolate. Mortality in such areas has significantly increased due to disease of despair (suicide and drug addictions). The overwhelming majority of residents in these neighborhoods voted for Trump.

Today the neoliberal political and media establishments are deeply discredited among the popular classes, especially among the working class—and especially among Whites, who mostly abstain from voting. This situation is responsible for the growth of the ultraright that preceded Trump, and which he has used in a very astute way by presenting himself as an “anti-neoliberal establishment”. In another article I explained that such a movement has the characteristics of the fascist movement of southern Europe, a reality that I know well because I experienced that fascism firsthand in my youth. I had to leave Spain because I was a member of the anti-fascist underground in the 1960s. And the Spanish ultraright now, successors of the fascist party in the sixties, has an ideology very similar to Trumpism with whom they have a close relationship. Trumpism has many characteristics and ideological positions similar to the Spanish and many other European rightwing movements that present themselves as the defenders of the homeland and Christian civilization. Its leading ideologue is Steve Bannon, who is trying to structure a new international ultraright that includes Putin, Giorgia Meloni, Le Pen, Bolsonaro, and many others.

Putin merits special mention in this paper because his government is presented by many conservative forces as a communist government, successor of the Soviet Union governments. Putin had been the right-hand man of Yeltsin, who was supported by Presidents Bush and Clinton of the U.S. in his complete dismantling of the Soviet Union and the economic and social system promoted by that regime. Yeltsin and Putin privatized most of the means of production (except energy) responsible for the greatest increase in mortality in the Russian population since World War II. Russia today is a capitalist economy run by a highly corrupted dictatorship, with a nationalistic profoundly conservative ideology, result of the alliance of the Russian state with the Christian Orthodox church. And the Putin government clearly sympathizes with the international right-wing movements, including the Trumpism in the U.S. (see my article, “Nazism and Fascism in the 30s, Trumpism and predictably Putinism now”, Publico, (April,14, 2022))

Is Trumpism a Fascist Movement?

The Republican party establishment has been losing its mobilizing capacity and being replaced by Trumpism, which is characterized by a discourse aimed mainly at the popular classes. It uses a workerist discourse (explicitly referring to the working people as his people), which presents the Washington-based political-media liberal establishment as the enemy. Today that movement includes most of the electoral base of the Republican party and the largest part of the party’s leadership, which has won a majority of the House of Representatives in the Congressional mid-term elections of the 8^th of November which would enable them to control the parliamentary leadership of that party, empowering it to weaken the Biden government, with a possibility of regaining the presidency of the United States in 2024. This would have devastating consequences not only for the United States but also for the world, a reality seemingly ignored by the European Union political establishment.

The Democratic party—the apparatus of which is controlled primarily by Clintonians, whose major influence is on foreign policy—is led by Joe Biden. Pressured by the left, under leadership of Senator Bernie Sanders, he cunningly presented himself as an heir to former president Franklin D. Roosevelt, favoring a New Deal with progressive elements. Since he assumed office, however, Biden’s progressive agenda has been boycotted or eliminated due to internal resistance within the party and pressure from economic interests and business and corporate lobbies.

This situation has disappointed large sectors of the Democratic electorate. The extremist measures of Trumpism, such as the Supreme Court (controlled by such a movement) decision in June 2022 to overturn Roe v. Wade (1973), which guaranteed a constitutional right to abortion, has mobilized resistance. Other Supreme Court decisions have also mobilized the electoral base of the Democratic party to stop Trumpism. The primary reason for mobilizing the electorate of the Democratic Party in the United States, however, is to stop Trumpism rather than to support Biden’s policies which have created considerable disappointment. President Biden’s popularity is very low, and most of the American population is dissatisfied with the current economic situation of the country that the majority of the population attributes to Biden’s policies.

One last note on the U.S.: The political and media establishments of the European Union are apparently not fully aware of the fascist character of Trumpism, as they consider this label to be an exaggeration. An anecdote, however, reflects why their reluctance is a mistake. On January 6, 2021, Donald Trump attempted to mobilize U.S. Army generals to stage a military coup to obstruct the peaceful transfer of power after he lost the election. This story was well documented by Susan B. Glasser and Peter Baker in the New Yorker (August 8, 2022) and referenced in the New York Times (September 8, 2022). That the military establishment refused to comply with or act on his orders frustrated and angered Trump, who announced that he wanted loyal generals, as Hitler had had. In a private conversation, an aide reminded the president that some German generals had tried to assassinate Hitler and almost succeeded, a fact that Trump angrily denied. He insisted that Hitler’s generals had been faithful and that he expected the same from his own brass.

Trump made this clear to General Mark A. Milley prior to naming him chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Milley promised that he would do anything the president asked. But he did not expect what Trump would ask of him or that he would learn the limits of his loyalty. It was at a Black Lives Matter protest in Washington, D.C., in June 2020. President Trump proposed that the general instruct the troops—who had been deployed to thwart the protests—to fire directly at the crowd. Milley chose not to give the order. It was not the first time the general was uncomfortable with a request from Trump, but this time he was tempted to resign. Milley wrote a letter to the president. While he never sent the letter, it was published in the articles mentioned above. In it Milley accused Trump of holding values ​​typical of fascism and Nazism. Referencing World War II, which he called a war against fascism and Nazism, the general wrote: “It is evident to me now that you do not understand the meaning of that war. You do not understand what that war meant. In fact, you subscribe to many of the principles that we fought against. I cannot be part of this project.”

How to Counter the Impact of Neoliberal Policies on Democracy and Popular Classes

Although this article has focused on the growth of fascism and Nazism on two poles of the political spectrum of the North Atlantic, Sweden and the United States – two countries I know well – a similar experience has occurred in many other countries responding to the same causes—the application of neoliberal policies by their governments—with similar consequences: the dramatic decline of the quality of life and well-being of the popular classes, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. As a consequence, today we are seeing a general discontent with the liberal democratic system, which faces a profound crisis of legitimization on both sides of the North Atlantic. If things do not change, the situation will get worse. A growing number of protests are being channeled by these ultra-right-wing parties that present themselves as the anti-establishment.

The only way to respond to this threat to democratic systems and defend the popular classes, which represent the majority of the population in any country, is for progressive parties everywhere to renew their commitment to a profound transformation of their respective societies. There is a need to reverse the concentration of economic, financial, media, and political power that has been occurring since the 1980s with the application of the so-called neoliberal revolution in most countries on both sides of the North Atlantic. We are witnessing the effects of that revolution. For that reversal to happen, there will need to be a popular pressure to democratize state institutions and diversify the major means of information and communication, which are highly controlled in the current times. And at the international level, it is imperative to change and oppose this neoliberal globalization and the wars it has generated that threaten the very survival of humanity. Evidence clearly shows that to stop these suicidal policies, they need to be replaced by solidaristic policies because the current world-wide problems (such as the pandemic, and the extreme climate change, and others) have shown that the well-being of the majority cannot be assured under the current international order, which enriches the few at the cost of misery for the many. To that purpose, there is an urgent need to demystify the dominant neo-liberal ideology, which persists in most intellectual and academic circles in this part of the world, falsifying the realities that surround us, leading us towards the end of humanity.

Vicente Navarro is Professor of Public Policy at Johns Hopkins University, and Director of the JHU-UPF Public Policy Center.

OPINION
Eating disorders are not just a “girl problem”

The Mathey College dining hall.
Mark Dodici / The Daily Princetonian

Maria Karakousis
December 8, 2022 | 

The Daily Princetonian

The following is a guest contribution and reflects the author’s views alone. For information on how to submit an article to the Opinion Section, click here.

Content Warning: This guest contribution contains mentions of eating disorders.

“It’s not like he has an eating disorder. He’s not a girl.”

My friend’s look of reproval lingered after the words left his mouth. I had approached him to voice my concerns over the well-being of our mutual friend, who had lost an alarming amount of weight since declaring his intent to achieve “better health” — which, for him, only included shedding “a couple of pounds” — two months prior.

I thought that the change in our mutual friend had become obvious enough to confide in his closest friend. And while he quickly confirmed and validated my observations about this individual’s deteriorating health, he disregarded the idea that such a person could be struggling with an eating disorder because he was a man — likening it to something that only a “certain demographic” could struggle with.

The more I pondered his quick-fire statement, the more I realized that it was rooted in a societal assumption stemming from the “men are from Mars, women are from Venus” worldview: eating disorders are for women — and, regardless of gender, femininity — and not for men or other masculine counterparts. And, as was being illuminated through our mutual case, it is an assumption that is incredibly harmful to people who suffer from eating disorders but fall outside of the feminine gender categories. For the physical and mental health of people of all demographics, we must prevent the perpetuation of this widespread stereotype.

As proven in ANT 201: Introduction to Anthropology, the societal myth that there are “men’s brains” and “women’s brains” is simply scientifically incorrect: there are minimal neurological differences corresponding to the gender binary. As popular thinking goes, women — and feminine people in general — place much more emphasis on achieving an ideal beauty standard, which includes thinness, than do their masculine counterparts. Therefore, women are more likely to engage in extreme and unhealthy behaviors (i.e., those symptomatic of eating disorders) to shape their bodies into what is deemed beautiful.

Firstly, it is untrue that a desire for thinness is the sole motivator of developing an eating disorder; an article published in the International Journal of Eating Disorders warns that “weight phobia should not be viewed as critical to the diagnosis of [eating disorders] and could be a culture-bound dimension.” Thus, even if there did exist a distinctly feminine neurobiology — rather than internalized sexism — that caused feminine people to strongly care about being thin, this “gender characteristic” would not fully suffice as the cause for eating disorders being a “woman problem.”

Additionally, as self-described feminist educator Dr. Melissa Fabello explains, our assumed correlation between femininity and eating disorders is likely rooted in “long-standing researcher bias” regarding gender roles and their definitions. The scales utilized to measure gender identity in eating disorder studies are often more rigid than is accurate, associating femininity strictly with womanhood and masculinity strictly with manhood. But one study published in Health Sociology Review reveals that when these gender identity scales are reiterated to allow for greater fluidity in gender roles, any significant correlation between femininity and eating disorder development is dissolved.

Thus, the logical conclusion is that femininity is not, in fact, a risk factor for eating disorders. Yes, it is true that eating disorders are more common in women. However, this is due to the differences in societal beauty standards for men and women (women are expected to be thin) and the pressure with which they are applied to the respective groups (women are more pressured to achieve the ideal), rather than a biological difference between men and women that causes women to be more prone to developing eating disorders. Therefore, eating disorders, as with many other health issues, are not a women- or feminine-only problem: they are a human problem, and to say that a suffering person does not and cannot have an eating disorder because they “aren’t a girl” is wrong and dangerous.

When our friend finally saw a doctor, he was, in his own words, “immediately diagnosed” with anorexia nervosa, a fairly common eating disorder characterized by low weight, food restriction, and body dysmorphia. However, because he was a man — because he was of a gender that, as the thinking goes, does not “get” eating disorders — these symptoms were detrimentally overlooked by his mostly male friends and his family.

Though “he’s not a girl,” he did develop and severely suffer from an eating disorder. As members of a society that values physical and mental health, we must abolish the stereotype that eating disorders are associated with femininity, as this myth excludes men and other entire gender categories from the critical chance to be acknowledged and helped with their suffering.

Maria Karakousis is a first-year from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 

Defense bill seeks to protect, restore threatened reefs

TIMOTHY HURLEY
THE HONOLULU STAR-ADVERTISER • December 8, 2022

An example of healthy coral at a reef off the the coast of Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, is seen on Nov. 23, 2015. (Charles E. White/U.S. Navy)

(Tribune News Service) — The final defense bill included the Restoring Resilient Reefs Act, which was authored by U.S. Sens. Brian Schatz, D- Hawaii, and Marco Rubio, R- Fla.

With climate change threatening the health of coral reefs around the world, Hawaii’s congressional delegation on Wednesday scored apparent victories on behalf of America’s coral reefs in two separate measures that were included in the National Defense Authorization Act, the annual defense bill expected to pass before the end of the session.

The final defense bill included the Restoring Resilient Reefs Act, which was authored by U.S. Sens. Brian Schatz, D- Hawaii, and Marco Rubio, R- Fla.

The bill increases fund ­ing for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Coral Reef Program from $16 million to $45 million annually. It also authorizes $12 million in annual state block grants to support state efforts to manage and restore coral reefs, and $4.5 million annually for Pacific and Atlantic coral reef cooperative institutes.

“This bill will put federal funding in the hands of states and territories to manage and restore reefs—a major step forward, “ Schatz tweeted Wednesday.

Also added to the defense bill was the Coral Reef Sustainability Through Innovation Act of 2022, introduced by U.S. Sen. Mazie Hirono, D- Hawaii, and U.S. Rep. Ed Case, D- Hawaii.

The legislation directs the federal agencies that are members of the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force to establish, individually or with one or more other agencies, a coral health prize competition in order to spur innovative solutions to preserve, sustain and restore coral reef ecosystems.

Hirono said decades of pollution and ocean warming caused by climate change have left corals in Hawaii and around the world at risk of extinction. “As we work to protect and restore coral reef ecosystems, this legislation will help incentivize innovation and inspire creative solutions to protect coral reefs, at no cost to taxpayers, “ Hirono said in a news release.

A 2019 U.S. Geological Survey study estimated the flood protection value of coral reefs in Hawaii alone at $836 million annually, while a 2011 NOAA study estimated the total economic value of Hawaii coral reefs to be $33.57 billion.

Coral reefs in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, including those in Hawaii, were found to be in “fair “ shape in the first-ever nationwide condition status report for U.S. coral reefs released in 2020 by NOAA. But the report also warned that the nation’s coral reefs are declining and vulnerable because of warming ocean waters, fishing, disease and pollution from the land.

The first detailed maps of the nearshore coral reefs of the main Hawaiian Islands, published in a scientific paper two years ago, found vast areas of decline and degradation linked to shoreline development, overfishing and increasing water heat waves.

Hawaii experienced serious bleaching events in 2015 and 2019, and NOAA is predicting there will be heat waves every year or two by 2030.

Overall the defense bill authorizes $858 billion in national defense spending and includes plenty of other provisions, including a pay raise for service members and the Department of Defense civilian workforce and additional support for Ukraine and NATO.

This summer the University of Hawaii was awarded up to $25 million by the Department of Defense to design and build a hybrid coral reef that aims to protect the coastline from the growing impacts of flooding, erosion and storms.

(c)2022 The Honolulu Star-Advertiser