Rechercher dans ce blog

Monday, May 31, 2021

It was much more than Tulsa - Washington Post

No one should be under the impression that the burning of “Black Wall Street” in Tulsa a century ago was a one-off atrocity. In fact, it was part of a long and shameful pattern in which White mobs used murderous violence to erase African American prosperity.

It happened in Atlanta in September 1906. Fabricated “reports” of sexual assaults by Black men against White women were used to inflame White vigilantes to attack African Americans. The mobs initially focused on Black-owned businesses that had established a foothold downtown — and were thriving in competition with enterprises owned by Whites.

Store windows were smashed, in what amounted to an American Kristallnacht. Men and women were randomly snatched from streetcars and murdered. One barbershop that the mob targeted — because of its burgeoning success — was closed, so the White rioters trashed the place and then moved on to another barbershop across the street, where they killed all the barbers.

When the mobs fanned out and headed toward other Black neighborhoods, the famed Black scholar W.E.B. Du Bois — then a professor at Atlanta University, later one of the founders of the NAACP — bought a shotgun to defend himself and his family. Afterward, he wrote a powerful poem, “A Litany of Atlanta,” about the riot: “Red was the midnight; clang, crack and cry of death and fury filled the air and trembled underneath the stars …”

No one knows how many Black Atlantans were killed in the riot — at least 25, according to most historians, and perhaps many more. Two White people are known to have died, one from a heart attack.

It happened in East St. Louis, Ill., in the summer of 1917. White workers at steel, aluminum and meatpacking plants resented the fact that African Americans — part of the Great Migration moving north out of the Deep South — were filling jobs. Thousands of White men marched through downtown, attacking Black people on the street and setting fires.

A few weeks later, someone fired on an automobile occupied by White men, including two police officers, as it drove through a Black neighborhood. In reprisal, White mobs rampaged through African American parts of the city, killing indiscriminately. A reporter for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch wrote: “For an hour and a half last evening I saw the massacre of helpless negroes at Broadway and Fourth Street, in downtown East St. Louis, where black skin was a death warrant.” Estimates of the final death toll ranged from 40 to 250.

It happened in Chester, Pa., that same year. Once again, Whites resented the influx of African American workers who were competing for jobs in the booming industrial sector. Once again, mobs attacked Black businesses and individuals at random. This time, however, an armed African American counter-mob fought back. The official final death toll was seven.

And it happened in two dozen cities across the country in 1919, during what came to be known as the “Red Summer.”

Perhaps the worst of the 1919 riots was in Chicago. By now, you can guess the context: the Great Migration, African American workers competing for jobs, growing Black prosperity. The spark came on July 27, when a Black teenager crossed the unofficial color line demarcating where Whites and African Americans were allowed to swim at the 29th Street beach on Lake Michigan. That youth, named Eugene Williams, was pelted with rocks by a White beachgoer and drowned.

Black Chicagoans protested. Whites rioted and set fires throughout heavily African American neighborhoods on the city’s South Side. In the end, 38 people were killed and more than 500 injured, most of them Black.

Two years later came the horrific events in Tulsa, which claimed hundreds of lives and literally wiped one of the nation’s more prosperous Black business districts from the face of the Earth. Tulsa may have been the worst of the early-20th-century race riots — and that’s what “race riot” meant in those days, a pogrom by Whites against African Americans — but it was part of a familiar pattern.

The aftermath of the riots saw the codification of Jim Crow laws and the intensification of unwritten practices such as redlining, intended to keep Black Americans “in their place.” The destruction of African American businesses amounted to theft on a massive scale — a theft whose impact was felt for generations. The Greenwood neighborhood of Tulsa could have become an enclave of Black millionaires. But Whites were not about to let that happen.

The point is this: There are those who deny that anything called “systemic racism” is a feature of the American landscape. They should be aware that history tells a very different story.

Read more:

Adblock test (Why?)



"Opinion" - Google News
June 01, 2021 at 02:43AM
https://ift.tt/3uHsZei

It was much more than Tulsa - Washington Post
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update

Betraying the country while others served - The Washington Post

Average Americans scarified their lives to protect the country and our democracy while Republicans in Congress continue to betray the constitution they swore to defend.

Adblock test (Why?)



"Opinion" - Google News
June 01, 2021 at 01:30AM
https://ift.tt/3vER86F

Betraying the country while others served - The Washington Post
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update

Senate Republicans know they chose cowardice in killing a Jan. 6 investigation. They just proved it. - The Washington Post

Give Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Tex.) some credit. On Friday, Senate Republicans put the final nail in the coffin of an independent commission to investigate the Jan. 6 insurrection. On Sunday, not one Republican senator appeared on the network talk shows to defend another GOP blow against democracy. Instead, they left it to McCaul to make their case for them during an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

“Some” credit doesn’t mean “a lot.” McCaul’s argument didn’t resolve the hypocrisies and contradictions Republicans have relied on to avoid looking too closely at what happened in January and who is responsible for it. There’s no good way to do that. But at least McCaul defended that position rather than hiding from host Jake Tapper’s questions.

Unlike some Republicans who sought to minimize the events of Jan. 6 from the beginning, McCaul earlier this year came out in support of legislation that would make it easier for prosecutors to charge domestic terrorists and international terrorists the same way. And when defending House Republicans’ sixth investigation into two coordinated attacks on U.S. facilities in the Libyan city of Benghazi, which the party tried to weaponize against former secretary of state Hillary Clinton as she prepared to run for president, McCaul made a strong argument in favor of transparency. “We owe it to the victims, their families and the American people to find out the truth,” he said in 2014.

But when Tapper pressed McCaul on why the public deserved a thorough investigation of Benghazi then, but doesn’t need an independent commission to investigate a catastrophe closer to home, McCaul didn’t have much of an answer.

“I view this not as an overview of policy, like the 9/11 Commission did,” argued McCaul. “It’s a criminal investigation … that properly falls within the venue, the purview of the Department of Justice, where I worked for many years, rather than a politically appointed commission.” While prosecuting campaign finance violations at the Justice Department, where he previously worked, McCaul said a concurrent congressional investigation “provided duplicative testimonies. It undermined our federal investigation.”

That’s hard to swallow. McCaul did not explain how two concurrent investigations would cloud a full accounting of the Jan. 6 insurrection, but six consecutive Benghazi probes, separate from the FBI’s investigation into the attacks, were necessary or helpful.

But more broadly, whether an independent panel on Jan. 6 would have focused on matters of policy or criminal investigations is beside the point. The country needs a Jan. 6 commission similar in structure to a Sept. 11 commission because both days saw an attack on the United States. That the actors behind one assault were foreign and the ones behind the other domestic makes no difference. We need the truth — no matter how inconvenient for one party.

At least McCaul made his case, however weak.

Despite Senate Republicans blocking legislation to create a Jan. 6 commission, members of Congress remained optimistic on May 30 about another investigation. (The Washington Post)

Republican senators, whose votes actually doomed the commission, did not even defend themselves.

On “Fox News Sunday,” Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) stuck to answering questions on a bipartisan infrastructure package. The rest of her GOP colleagues were absent.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) may believe that a commission will hurt Republicans politically. But clearly his caucus believes killing the commission isn’t something to crow about either. And no wonder: A YouGov/Economist poll released last week found that voters supported the commission by a margin of 56 percent to 30 percent. Fifty-one percent of independents and even 28 percent of Republicans back an independent commission. In a heavily polarized country, that’s practically a landslide.

If Sens. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) would finally come to their senses and stop treating the filibuster like their highest priority, Republican cowardice would matter far less. Manchin rightly called GOP opposition to the commission “unconscionable” and a “betrayal of the oath we each take.” But so long as the pair continues to allow Republicans to block any bill of major consequence, that outrage is just empty words.

Nevertheless, the fault ultimately lies with McConnell and the members his caucus. As former Republican congresswoman Barbara Comstock said on “Meet the Press,” many Americans “still don’t realize how violent that [day] was. … People are still talking about [sic] these were like tourists. We need to have that full story out. It’s going to get out one way or the other."

Senate Republicans had a chance to stand up for that truth, and to stand in solidarity against an attack on the democratic process itself. They chose cowardice — and their behavior since Friday shows that they know it.

Read more:

Adblock test (Why?)



"Opinion" - Google News
May 31, 2021 at 09:29PM
https://ift.tt/3uE0LB0

Senate Republicans know they chose cowardice in killing a Jan. 6 investigation. They just proved it. - The Washington Post
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update

Opinion: History needs a face - Juneau Empire

Part of the genius of historic films by Ken Burns revolves around the people, the faces, he explores. History needs a face because without some human link to the past, some reminder of combat’s ultimate obscenity, wartime sacrifices blur into obscurity. My memories of WWII Korea, and Vietnam all have faces.

While some have seen William Wyler’s WWII documentary about The Memphis Belle or its Hollywood remake, I got to know some of those flyers who bombed the Nazi empire. My uncle’s B-17F also flew with that famous plane from the 8th Air Force, 91st Bomb Group, 324th Squadron. But instead of going home like the Belle’s crew, my tail gunner uncle was shot down on his 25th mission, 12-31-43, and spent the rest of the war in a prisoner of war camp, Stalag XVIIb. Though that uncle passed away years ago, his stories remain. Later, at a reunion, I got to talk with my uncle’s pilot about the day they were shot down, what they were fighting against, and more.

How can anyone grasp the ugliest inhumanity, the systematic murder of 6 million Jews? To put a face on this tragedy, one Rotary Club brought a holocaust survivor to Juneau. Later, on a plane from LAX to Seattle, I sat next to and talked to yet another survivor who had also escaped camp death. Much later, looking through the family photo album of my Jewish, college roommate, he pointed out relatives who did not survive Hitler’s final solution.

To me, the Korean War also has a face. Another uncle still survives with his own stories, of wartime camaraderie, of pointless death.

What hit me hardest about Vietnam was the funeral for an especially promising fellow student whose college career included internships during alternating years, not something approved by the draft board. Vern’s funeral in small-town Oregon was well-attended, but I had to leave before it was over; I couldn’t hold back tears and prefer to cry alone. Much later, when Leo Buscaglia spoke at the Alaska State Museum, sadness came flooding back during his talk about someone’s amazing big brother who didn’t come back from ‘Nam. I had to leave then, too, to be alone for sad tears to dilute my grief, but I can still see Vern’s face. In my mind, he’ll always be young, filled with potential — such a waste.

Years before I went to Washington, D.C., to see its long, low, black granite wall, the traveling version came to town. The first time I saw my name in print on that portable wall (same initial, different middle name), I realized how close I came to being there. Back then, because of Air Force ROTC, I was appointed to lead our group of potential, college town inductees headed to Portland, Oregon, for our pre-draft physical. I would later serve in another uniform, but still have the list of guys briefly under my charge for that one trip.

For me, the face of America’s first military response to 9-11 will be that of a young F-16 pilot, 1st Lt. Heather Penney. Watching an extended CSPAN interview (worth your viewing) gave me ample insight into her purpose beyond self. Her call sign, “Lucky,” became prophetic after she and wingman “Sass” took off to take down a high-jacked commercial jet, flight 93, that would instead be brought down by its courageous passengers. As their DC Air Guard fighters took off unarmed from Andrews AFB, headed north, scanning the sky for incoming targets they might have to ram, they flew low over the burning Pentagon. The unmistakable afterburner roar from their F-16’s gave survivors below them reason to cheer; that sound meant nobody else would hurt them.

The next time you see a veteran’s hat, maybe that will start a conversation. Some of the most intimate aspects of war don’t make it into writing; at times, words fail those who were there. Many heroes and heroines never made it home, they can’t talk; some survivors won’t. Regardless, remember that real history (not just about war) has a face and be grateful if you’re lucky enough to get to know one because most history isn’t in books, it’s personal.

• Mike Clemens is a former statewide budget analyst. He resides in Juneau.

Adblock test (Why?)



"Opinion" - Google News
May 31, 2021 at 05:30PM
https://ift.tt/2RXEFMI

Opinion: History needs a face - Juneau Empire
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update

Opinion: Montana's rivers: Clean and cold and more precious than gold - The Missoulian

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Opinion: Montana's rivers: Clean and cold and more precious than gold  The Missoulian

"Opinion" - Google News
May 31, 2021 at 07:00PM
https://ift.tt/3p3ZLoQ

Opinion: Montana's rivers: Clean and cold and more precious than gold - The Missoulian
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update

Cartoon by Al Goodwyn - The Washington Post

Adblock test (Why?)



"Opinion" - Google News
May 30, 2021 at 11:56PM
https://ift.tt/34u8nLU

Cartoon by Al Goodwyn - The Washington Post
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update

Opinion: ‘Our enduring democracy made possible by those who laid down their lives’ - CT Post

Mark Corvino, vice president of the Connecticut Air & Space Center

Mark Corvino, vice president of the Connecticut Air & Space Center

Ned Gerard / Hearst Connecticut Media

Memorial Day, a time to honor the men and women who went into harm’s way who did not make it home to embrace their loved ones. They were Black, white, Native American, Asian, Hispanic, and others, all of different creeds who became one in the foxholes, one the high seas and in the skies above us.

Memorial Day, a time to pause and reflect on those lives that were lost at Bunker Hill, Chalmette Plantation, Gettysburg, the trenches in France, Iowa Jima, the Coral Sea, the skies over Europe, Chosin Reservoir, Ia Drang, Hamburger Hill , Iraq and Afghanistan — to name only a few. More than 1.3 million were killed serving our country. Many lay in foreign soils, many lost for all time.

Recently, the Connecticut Air & Space Center opened to the public an annex to the historic Curtiss Hangar at Sikorsky Airport to display restored vintage military aircraft from the World War II, Korean and Vietnam eras, restored by volunteers and veterans — one rivet at a time.

Stratford Mayor Laura Hoydick noted that Stratford’s place in aviation history is second to none in the state, and this annex will be an important step in cementing our observation and preservation of that heritage that we cherish, and wish to pass on to our future generations.

Mark Corvino, the center’s president, said Memorial Day is a time to reflect on our enduring democracy made possible by those who laid down their lives to keep us free. We honor these heroes not only today, but every day of the year.

Memorial Day, a time to mourn as Taps is sounded across America for those who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country; “Day is done, Gone the Sun. From the lake, from hill all is well. Safely rest, God is neigh.”

Ron Kurtz, of Monroe, served as a sergeant in the 101st Airborne Division in Vietnam, 1969-70.

Adblock test (Why?)



"Opinion" - Google News
May 31, 2021 at 11:06AM
https://ift.tt/3uC2zdK

Opinion: ‘Our enduring democracy made possible by those who laid down their lives’ - CT Post
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update

Significant role of blogosphere in discourse on climate change - Mirage News

israelob.blogspot.com

The climate change blogosphere is polarized, with on one side ‘the climate mainstream’ and on the other side ‘climate sceptics’. While it is difficult to quantify the impact, the climate change blogosphere has played a significant role in scientific, political, media, and public discourse on climate change. The thesis of C.W. van Eck, Wageningen University and Research “Opposing positions dividing interactions and hostile affect” a multi-dimensional approach to climate change polarization in the blogosphere, investigated the precise role of the blogosphere in climate change polarization.

A novel theoretical framework was developed to conceptualize climate change polarization, by distinguishing between positional, interactional, and affective climate change polarization:

  1. Positional climate change polarization: extreme climate change opposition or increasingly opposing climate change positions;
  2. Interactional climate change polarization: interactions in which participants are either disengaged from or increasingly contrasting others who hold opposing climate change positions;
  3. Affective climate change polarization: extreme or increasingly affective or emotional evaluations that reflect hostility toward opposing climate change groupings.

In six mixed methods research studies, the current thesis showed how climate change polarization is deeply ingrained in the blogosphere. Bloggers, commenters, and audience members are all (consciously or unconsciously) partaking in climate change polarization. More specifically, actors in the blogosphere hold extreme opposing climate change positions, have interactions where they either are disengaged or are increasingly contrasting others who hold opposing climate change positions, and affectively and emo­tionally evaluate opposing climate change groupings in a way that reflects hostility.

Polarizing interaction strategies

For example, one study showed how climate sceptical bloggers and climate mainstream bloggers both support similar journalistic norms (e.g. truth, novelty, dramatization). However, they both operationalize these norms in a way that is in line with their own climate change position, which leads to polarized blog content.

Another study showed how commenters mostly use polarizing interaction strategies when they are experiencing a framing difference with another commenter. When commenters are deploying such strategies, they repeat or upgrade their own position and are not open to the position of the other commenter. As a result, the framing difference is often left behind unresolved.

One last example is a study that showed that audience members with low climate change risk perceptions primarily visit climate sceptical blogs, whereas audience members with high climate change risk perceptions primarily visit climate mainstream blogs. This study therefore provides evidence for potential echo chamber effects.

How to depolarize the blogosphere

Overall, the theoretical framework and findings of the current thesis contribute to our understanding of online climate change polarization dynamics. The thesis concludes with four recommendations to depolarize the blogosphere:

  1. Promote an exchange of views, in order to diminish echo chamber effects;
  2. Train audience members to recognize misinformation themselves;
  3. Introduce deliberative norms to promote civil dialogues and appoint facilitators that uphold these rules;
  4. Communicate effectively about climate change. For example, create content that resonates with the values, worldviews, and realities of audience members and content that appeals to their emotions. Another example includes that one should focus on similarities instead of differences and divides.
/Public Release. This material comes from the originating organization and may be of a point-in-time nature, edited for clarity, style and length. View in full here.

Adblock test (Why?)



"discourse" - Google News
May 31, 2021 at 10:22PM
https://ift.tt/3vDPQc4

Significant role of blogosphere in discourse on climate change - Mirage News
"discourse" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2KZL2bm
https://ift.tt/2z7DUH4

Opinion: It's time to accept that Naomi Osaka is human before she's an athlete - USA TODAY

Sunday, May 30, 2021

Service, patriotism and the promise of Black liberation - The Washington Post

When the signers of the Declaration of Independence pledged to each other “our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor,” they were describing precisely why we set aside Memorial Day to honor all who have died in service to our nation.

We often declare, rightly I think, that those who gave their lives for our country were fighting for freedom. But after a year marked by a searing confrontation with racial injustice, in the present and in our history, we would do well to ponder the military sacrifice of Black Americans from the Civil War forward. In World War II alone, 1.2 million Black Americans served in the military. What did freedom mean for those who faced racial oppression?

In his interviews with Black veterans, Parker, a political science professor at the University of Washington, found a patriotism rooted not in the reality of their moment but in aspirations for the future — “hope that America would recognize its founding values. It’s the thing that kept them going,” he told me.

Black Americans’ military service has been key to later advances in equal rights from the time of the Civil War, when formerly enslaved people signed up to fight for the Union. Their units, Parker notes, were separately designated as “United States Colored Troops.”

“President Lincoln, a late convert to allowing Black men to fight in the war, himself declared that without the role of the Black soldiers, the war would not have been won,” says Henry Louis Gates, university professor and director of the Hutchins Center for African and African-American Research at Harvard University.

Black military service had a direct relationship to “the achievement of the rights of citizenship,” Gates told me. “In Lincoln’s final speech, he tentatively floated the idea of Black male suffrage for the men who had played such a decisive role in the Union’s victory and for a small group of ‘very intelligent’ Black men. Some scholars argue that this statement led to Lincoln’s assassination, since John Wilkes Booth was in the audience and essentially said that this was the last straw.”

If the Civil War was unquestionably a battle for freedom, so was World War II. It led, as Gates noted, to the “Double V” campaign in the Black community, “victory over fascism abroad, and simultaneously victory over anti-black racism at home.”

In his magisterial book “From Slavery to Freedom,” the late historian John Hope Franklin showed how racial subjugation stood in direct contradiction to the war aims President Franklin D. Roosevelt outlined in his Four Freedoms speech.

“The experience of living in two worlds had prepared Negroes to wage two fights simultaneously,” Franklin wrote. “They felt compelled to carry on the fight for better treatment at home so as to give real meaning to the ideal of the Four Freedoms.”

Franklin cited the words of Eleanor Roosevelt, who advocated for civil rights far more forcefully than her husband. “The nation cannot expect colored people to feel that the United States is worth defending,” she said early in the war, “if the Negro continues to be treated as he is now.”

Service in World War II and later in Korea were crucibles for future civil rights leaders. Parker noted that Hosea Williams served in an all-Black unit under Gen. George Patton. In 1965, with a young John Lewis, Williams would lead voting-rights marchers across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Ala. Jackie Robinson, who would integrate Major League Baseball, was an Army lieutenant. In 1944, he refused to move to the back of an Army bus. He was court-martialed but acquitted.

“A lot of people talk about patriotism these days,” Parker told me. “But what is patriotism? It’s a commitment to a set of founding values so complete that one is willing to make the ultimate sacrifice.”

This can be said of all we honor on Memorial Day. But Parker and Gates, like Franklin before them, are right to call our attention to Black Americans who served and sacrificed on the basis of what the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. called “a promissory note,” written in our founding documents — one that still awaits full payment. It’s hard to imagine a more sweeping sense of faith — and hope.

Read more:

Adblock test (Why?)



"Opinion" - Google News
May 30, 2021 at 07:00PM
https://ift.tt/3uAFok7

Service, patriotism and the promise of Black liberation - The Washington Post
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update

My father’s words are being distorted by those who oppose D.C. statehood - The Washington Post

Our family is always flattered when my father, Robert Kennedy, is referenced in current public debates … if the result reflects his essential values. In the recent wrangling over D.C. statehood, however, his 1963 testimony before the House subcommittee on the District has been misleadingly cited to support the notion that only a constitutional amendment can make Washington, D.C., our 51st state. Sen. Joe Manchin III (W.Va.), whom I admire, pointed to that testimony as a central factor in his opposition to statehood; several Republicans, including Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.)and Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.)have made similar claims. I have watched this invocation with dismay, and I feel compelled to respond.

No one can say for certain the position of someone no longer around to speak for himself, but core principles outrank posthumous interpretations. And I can say with certainty what my father believed in: the equal right of every American to participate fully in our democracy. Robert Kennedy wanted all D.C. residents to elect their federal representatives — the same as their fellow Americans. He said so repeatedly. Today, more than 50 years after his death, the residents of our nation’s capital are still second-class citizens, and I am certain that my father would have demanded change by the speediest route.

Now to the comments in question: On his 38th birthday, Nov. 20, 1963, my father appeared before that subcommittee to support a bill expanding D.C. residents’ control over local matters. The discussion ranged into the esoterica of many possible approaches to the topic: home rule, retroceding (or transferring) part of D.C. to Maryland, and even statehood.

Responding to a question — and speaking as attorney general, not as a constitutional scholar — Kennedy noted the relationship between the recently passed 23rd Amendment, which allows D.C. residents to vote for president and vice president, and the broader question of District representation; he echoed the consensus of the time that another constitutional amendment could offer a clear route to further voting rights.

But the memorandum he had the Justice Department send to the subcommittee shortly afterward made it clear that an amendment was not the only path. It said that “it is arguable that the choice [to change the District’s status] can now be reconsidered only by means of another constitutional Amendment” (emphasis added) and noted that the department did not “express an opinion on these questions.”

My father’s testimony that day was founded on his conviction that “the best government is that which is most responsive to the needs and wishes of the citizens. That is just as true in the District … as it is in Massachusetts, Wyoming or South Carolina.” That belief, the basis of his life-long support for D.C. home rule, now requires us not to further delay and deny congressional representation for D.C.'s more than 700,000 residents.

In the memorandum submitted to Congress, my father stated what he believed to be the historical framework for the treatment of District rights: “It was indispensably necessary to the independence and the very existence of the new Federal Government to have a seat of government which was not subject to the jurisdiction or control of any State.” We don’t need to be constitutional scholars — we can be casual students of our history — to understand that the necessity of protecting the “federal district” from pressures from any host state has been obviated by the reality that the federal government’s powers now dwarf those of any state.

Today, control comes from another quarter: D.C.'s citizens are frozen out of representation not only because they lack statehood but also because powerful members of Congress routinely impose their personal pet theories against the clear will of D.C.'s voters. D.C. has seen its local labor, anti-discrimination and gun laws threatened by members of Congress whose districts are across the country. Even the results of a referendum garnering nearly 70 percent support were overruled by Congress.

My father’s passion for self-government led him to work for the Voting Rights Act of 1964 and to vocally oppose segregation, colonialism, communism, apartheid — any system here or abroad that denied the core principle that “laws are administered to protect and expand individual freedom, not to compel individuals to follow the logic other men impose on them.” The 4½ years remaining to my father after his 1963 testimony saw him move with accelerating urgency in that effort: to right historic wrongs and achieve real equality. It is time for all of us who look to him as an example to do the same and take the most direct route to D.C. representation: passage of the Washington, D.C. Admission Act.

Read more:

Adblock test (Why?)



"Opinion" - Google News
May 30, 2021 at 07:00PM
https://ift.tt/3c0a5Jd

My father’s words are being distorted by those who oppose D.C. statehood - The Washington Post
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update

Opinion: Oregon must rectify injustices of nonunanimous jury law - OregonLive

Sandy Chung

Chung is executive director of ACLU of Oregon. She lives in Portland.

Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a longstanding Oregon law that allowed nonunanimous juries to convict people in criminal cases. In issuing its decision in the Ramos v. Louisiana case, the high court recognized that Oregon’s nonunanimous jury law, the last remaining of its kind among U.S. states, could be traced to white supremacy in the 1930s, including “the rise of the Ku Klux Klan and efforts to dilute ‘the influence of racial, ethnic, and religious minorities on Oregon juries.’”

Unfortunately, earlier this month, the court issued another decision in the Edwards v. Vannoy case that seems to ignore its own conclusions of the injustice dealt by such split verdicts. Under the Edwards decision, Oregonians whose cases were no longer in direct appeals as of the date of the Ramos decision are precluded from seeking retrials through federal courts. However, the high court noted, “States remain free, if they choose, to retroactively apply the jury-unanimity rule as a matter of state law in state post-conviction proceedings.”

As a result of the Edwards decision, there are hundreds of Oregonians still in prison or with criminal convictions who were unconstitutionally convicted by nonunanimous juries but have no path to justice under federal law. So now, the decision to undo the injustice of this racist Oregon law lies in Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum’s hands.

Juries hold an immense responsibility in our criminal justice system — the responsibility of making sure that the liberty of individuals is not taken away except when a conviction is supported by ample evidence. When the participation of jurors of color is systematically erased, however, juries can perpetuate racial inequality and unjust outcomes.

In college, while serving on a jury as the only person of color, I experienced the potential unfairness and injustice that can impact a person of color being tried by a jury. The defendant in my jury trial was a young man of color. He had been charged with driving under the influence of marijuana. Within about 10 minutes of entering the jury room, my fellow jurors announced that the young man of color was guilty. However, I wasn’t convinced. During the trial, prosecutors did not present any evidence that the young man had ever even smoked or ingested marijuana.

If we had been in Oregon, the young man would have been found guilty because my vote would not have mattered. However, we were in Massachusetts, which requires a unanimous jury decision. For three days, the other jurors pressured me to change my mind. No matter how tense the jury room became, I took my jury service seriously and persisted because I knew that it was wrong for this young man to be found guilty when the evidence did not support it. I also knew that a wrongful conviction would likely have devastating life consequences for this young man. Time in prison, a monetary fine, and a criminal record can destroy schooling and job prospects, and the mental and emotional trauma that follows can cause a cascade of harmful impacts on parents, siblings, spouses, other loved ones, and communities.

After the Supreme Court held that nonunanimous juries were unconstitutional, Oregon courts were required to allow retrials for any people convicted by a nonunanimous jury and whose cases were still being appealed as of the date of the Ramos decision, April 20, 2020. But what about the people with older cases? In the Edwards decision, the conservative judges on the high court decided they would offer no relief for those people, allowing the arbitrary timing of the Ramos decision to determine this denial of justice.

But there is still hope on the state level. As the Supreme Court made clear, Oregon’s courts have the power to rectify the legacy of our state’s racist nonunanimous jury law for all, not just some, impacted Oregonians. Unfortunately, like the high court’s conservative judges, Rosenblum continues to rely on the arbitrary April 20, 2020 cutoff date to oppose hundreds of Oregonians’ requests for relief. The attorney general has taken this position even though she knows that there is no legal mandate to oppose justice for these Oregonians. Indeed, the attorney general and her office regularly exercise their discretion to not oppose other types of requests in Oregon’s courts; she should do the same here.

Each of us has a responsibility to do what we can to rectify the devastatingly harmful impacts of white supremacy and racism in our country. In 2014, Rosenblum took a stand and refused to defend an Oregon state law banning gay marriage because she believed that was the right thing to do. Rosenblum has the chance to do the right thing again, now on behalf of Oregonians who were unconstitutionally convicted by our state’s racist nonunanimous jury law, individuals who are disproportionately people of color.

Share your opinion

Submit your essay of 500-600 words on a highly topical issue or a theme of particular relevance to the Pacific Northwest, Oregon and the Portland area to commentary@oregonian.com. Please include your email and phone number for verification.

Adblock test (Why?)



"Opinion" - Google News
May 30, 2021 at 08:01PM
https://ift.tt/3p7nuVg

Opinion: Oregon must rectify injustices of nonunanimous jury law - OregonLive
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update

Opinion: A year later, readers wish for more results - OregonLive

Over the past week, The Oregonian/OregonLive has published a series of articles examining the work on numerous fronts to elicit change in the year since a Minneapolis police officer killed George Floyd by kneeling on his neck for more than nine minutes.

His death triggered a global movement for racial justice that reverberated in Oregon with more 100 consecutive nights of protests and a range of policy, legislative and community-based changes – many that had received support in the past, but had always failed to get traction.

Still, much work remains.

On Friday, we shared the views of several of the local Black Lives Matter leaders about what’s still to be done. As we honor Floyd this week and the reckoning his death brought, we also asked readers to share what changes they have seen in themselves and in their community over the past year. Here are their responses.

Here are their responses:

“Thank you for this series of articles. For me this is very painful: How long it has taken for such a large proportion of white people to recognize the truth of the deep and systemic racial bias in our country and the many ways it affects Black, Indigenous and other people of color. When I went to the March on Washington in 1963, I had hopes that the next 20 years would bring deeper change than occurred and the ongoing killings and disparate outcomes are still way too deep and wide. In the 1960s and 1970s we saw the backlash against the civil rights laws Congress passed and now, January 6th demonstrated that backlash coming out faster and more violently than ever.

When I went to the March in 1963 the vast majority of Americans were hostile to it or at best indifferent. Today, people on the lowest levels of society are working to build connection and each new generation has proportionately more young people who are not okay with “not knowing, not seeing” the reality around them. This is what gives me hope. There is a lot of hard work ahead, and every one of us needs to be doing our part to affect change in whatever sphere of life we have control of influence.”

Emily Pittman Newberry, Happy Valley

“Although there has been a great deal of turbulence around racial inequities in the past year, perhaps one of the positives to come out of all the disruption is that as many of us who are privileged white males have had enough consciousness raised to question the status quo and want to learn more about our Black and brown neighbors. I believe strongly that we cannot rely on the police, legal and incarceration systems to be our solution, but we all have to look in the mirror and ask ourselves how we can be part of the solution and not perpetuate the 400-year patterns of prejudice and inequality.

It’s time for us to listen and respect each other and push back on racism and white supremacy whether subtle or overt, even if it comes from the highest office in the land.”

Lawrence M. Jacobson, Portland

“The question by The Oregonian asks have we seen any change in racial justice over the past year since George Floyd was killed? My short answer is NO. During the 1960s I was active in letter writing and marches during all the civil rights movement. I see people now doing the same, but I still see no change.

People of color and who speak different languages are killed, incarcerated, shunned and left out more than whites. And it is worse with the Proud Boys and white supremacists. And the politicians who constantly say “We need to,” “We will look into” and little happens.

Has anything positive occurred? Sure. There are more conversations. More people are aware and there are many conversations but little to no action.”

Nancy R. Seebert, Gresham

“George Floyd’s murder was one more -- once again, a step over the line of America’s promise of equality and justice. It was more proof of systemic white supremacy. It was a call to action to speak up, to speak out against racism. Silence was no longer an option.

It means that this white male now sees the need to share his power and privilege with those who have been denied. An unjust society is a sick, broken society. Healing needs to happen now. Bridges need to be built now. I have a stronger commitment to making the U.S. a more perfect union for everyone.”

Ralph Goldstein, Oregon City

“Not enough!”

Kate Yager, Portland

Adblock test (Why?)



"Opinion" - Google News
May 30, 2021 at 09:02PM
https://ift.tt/34vfLXp

Opinion: A year later, readers wish for more results - OregonLive
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update

OPINION: Madison Cawthorn's social media posts feed toxic national tone - Asheville Citizen-Times

Opinion: Pass the salt, please, but I'll pass on politics at the dinner table - The Colorado Sun

I am the son of and husband to two women who I don’t always agree with politically.  I’m guessing that I’m not unique in this regard. Many couples and families are made up of people of all political viewpoints. They make it work, and often, work well.

How?

I can’t help but wonder if they, like in my family, hold to a pretty time-honored rule: No politics at the dinner table.  

Cory Gaines

I don’t mean that literally; I have had lots of political discussions with family at the family table.  I mean rather, that we recognize that we don’t agree and honor the other person’s views enough to not proselytize constantly; we recognize that there are times and places for lively discussion and times and places to lay off it.

The latter has felt especially important to me of late.  I enjoy following and talking politics and the issues of the day. I do so regularly at my Facebook page

I also enjoy breaks from politics. It sure feels lately that those get fewer and farther between. It’s gotten to the point where I feel resistant to read new books, watch new movies, and watch sports because I can’t get away from politics.

I have absolutely no problem with listening to viewpoints I disagree with.  Rather, I seek them out:  I read op-eds from people who I know I disagree with, I listen to Colorado Public Radio, I talk politics with people I don’t see eye to eye with.  

This isn’t about avoiding a shock to my fragile worldview.  It’s about wanting to turn my brain off.  

Sometimes I just want to be entertained. I want to come home from work, put my feet up and turn off my brain. I want to see villains defeated. I want to see portraits of quirky characters. I want to be moved. I do not want a sermon seven days a week; I don’t want to be confronted no matter where I turn.

READ: Colorado Sun opinion columnists.

I wonder how many people share that view anymore. I read a Forbes article recently about a software company that had about a third of their employees quit when the owner said, basically, no politics at the dinner table. He didn’t tell people what to think. He simply said to leave what they think at home.  

Can you believe that a full third would rather leave their job than do that?

I fully understand that there are some who believe so strongly in something that they choose their workplace to match their values. I used to work at a school that was filled with people like that, myself included. We were all dedicated to the school’s mission of helping low-income, minority students get to college. 

What happened at the software company feels substantively different, however. I never felt that my school or my colleagues had to have the same values in order to work together. I never felt that my school had to echo every value I held dear to work there. I never felt that I had to be able to discuss politics to ably carry out my job or for the school to run.  

As a matter of fact, as a centrist conservative and registered Libertarian, my guess is that we wouldn’t have agreed on much.

Given our success at helping kids despite our differences, I find it baffling that a large percentage of software company workers would feel a need to pack up and go elsewhere when told they couldn’t talk politics at work. Is there something unique about software that makes this so?  I hate to say it, because I think it may be the first signs of my slow creep into old age, but I must ask where the world is headed these days.  

We should have vigorous debate, but we should also recognize when to put it aside. I want to talk politics and engage with others on it, but I don’t want to live in a culture where everything must be saturated until visibly dripping with it.  

UNDERWRITING

I am OK with being reminded that others see shortcomings in our country and how we do things, but I don’t need a moral lesson everywhere I turn my head.  

I’m (fortunately) still relatively safe in unplugging from electronic things to escape, and I do so regularly. I am finding, however, a narrower and narrower band of new things online, in movies, and in print where I can get away. That’s too bad.  

Despite my near-elderliness, I do want to see new things and would find cutting off media younger than 10 years old confining.  Our lives would be richer with room to breathe.  Our children would be better off — knowing and appreciating balance in life.

Please, can we make a new (old) rule?  No more politics at the dinner table.


Cory Gaines, a college instructor in Sterling who runs the Colorado Accountability Project on Facebook, lives for what Richard P. Feynman called “the pleasure of finding things out.”


The Colorado Sun is a nonpartisan news organization, and the opinions of columnists and editorial writers do not reflect the opinions of the newsroom. Read our ethics policy for more on The Sun’s opinion policy and submit columns, suggested writers and more to opinion@coloradosun.com.

The Colorado Sun has no paywall, meaning readers do not have to pay to access stories. We believe vital information needs to be seen by the people impacted, whether it’s a public health crisis, investigative reporting or keeping lawmakers accountable.

This reporting depends on support from readers like you. For just $5/month, you can invest in an informed community.

Adblock test (Why?)



"Opinion" - Google News
May 30, 2021 at 03:54PM
https://ift.tt/3vFCcFi

Opinion: Pass the salt, please, but I'll pass on politics at the dinner table - The Colorado Sun
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update

Saturday, May 29, 2021

Kamala Harris speaks the truth about race, unafraid - The Washington Post

This column has been updated.

Throughout her political career, Vice President Harris has never shied away from issues of race. In fact, the former senator from California, state attorney general and San Francisco district attorney has been very intentional about taking on problems that have their roots in our nation’s original sin. And she’s not about to stop now.

“We just have to speak truth no matter how painful it is to speak or hear,” Harris told me Friday during a telephone interview. “And the truth remains that racism is real in America. Sexism, homophobia, transphobia, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia — these things are all real in our country. To speak it doesn’t mean that it is about a wholesale attack on the country. But it certainly is about saying, ‘Look, let’s also not approach this with a sense of naivete or denial.’”

Harris is the first Black person, first South Asian and first woman elected vice president, which explains why Harris said, “I feel a heavy weight of responsibility to use the bully pulpit I have in a way that is about elevating public discourse and engaging in public education about issues that [others] may not have thought about or haven’t been presented with a certain perspective.”

That perspective is invaluable, especially this week. For in the annals of America’s fraught history with race, this seven-day period we are now in is most wretched because of what we must remember.

May 25 marked one year since the murder of George Floyd by a White Minneapolis police officer. May 31 and June 1 will mark 100 years since the Tulsa race massacre that killed as many as 300 Black people in a hail of bullets and airdropped turpentine bombs, and completely destroyed their prosperous Greenwood community known as Black Wall Street. In the sweep of history between those two tragic events, so much has changed, and yet too much remains the same.

But we talk more openly and honestly about race and racism today. That “we” includes President Biden and Harris. Many of their predecessors handled issues of race the way we tiptoe across the thinnest of ice — if they didn’t avoid them altogether. Biden and Harris are not afraid to take them head-on — perhaps because the omnipresent subject of race has become so unavoidable.

Harris spoke truth at the White House last month after Derek Chauvin was found guilty in Floyd’s murder. “Black men are fathers and brothers and sons and uncles and grandfathers and friends and neighbors,” she said then. As a Black man, I was struck by how deliberate Harris was in saying those words. “I was very purposeful in saying all of that … because these men are loved. These men love,” Harris told me.

The vice president said she was “in awe” of the Floyd family after their visit to the White House this week, praising their pursuit of police reform in the midst of their ongoing grief. The centerpiece of that reform is the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, which Harris co-authored with Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) when she was still in the Senate.

Harris was also in awe after meeting with two survivors of the Tulsa race massacre, Viola “Mother” Fletcher, 107, and her younger brother, Hughes Van Ellis, 100. “They were so extraordinary in terms of their grace and their dignity and the depth of their pain that they still carry.”

What happened in Tulsa was more than a tragedy. Harris called it “a crime.” A crime that White Tulsa initially tried to blame on their Black neighbors before pretending it never happened. A crime that Black Tulsa and Black America would never forget. Harris told me it was “the intentionality” of the crime that stands out for her.

O.W. Gurley bought 40 acres of land in Tulsa in 1906 and called it Greenwood. The Black community that grew from it thrived despite Jim Crow laws meant to stunt Black citizenship and advancement. The intentionality involved in creating such success was met by the intentionality of White Tulsa to destroy it.

“This was not an accident. This was not a fight that got out of hand,” Harris said. “It was purposeful destruction.”

That 100-year-old crime and the 2020 murder of George Floyd speak to America’s never-ending cycle of progress and regression on matters of race. Harris believes we can break this cycle, “but in order to have significant change, there needs to be real, significant intervention.” That means tackling the racial wealth gap by addressing access to capital for minority-owned businesses, expanding homeownership and widening access to broadband. All issues Harris has been working on since taking office.

Still, deeds have to be matched by words. “So there are a lot of things that we need to do. But we have to speak truth, and I have to tell you that’s where we can’t let up. Again, no matter how difficult it may be to hear,” said Harris.

After four years of an administration that flooded the American people with white nationalism, White grievance and their attendant lies, speaking truth is exactly what this nation needs from the White House right now. And I’m all for Harris being unafraid to speak it.

Read more:

Adblock test (Why?)



"Opinion" - Google News
May 30, 2021 at 04:23AM
https://ift.tt/3vyy21P

Kamala Harris speaks the truth about race, unafraid - The Washington Post
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update

Opinion: Jim Martin: A call to emulate the greatest, selfless generation - Boulder Daily Camera

This is asking for a lot, but it rings true: We need a new “Greatest Generation” to seize control of their futures and ensure the United States’ status as the world’s most powerful nation.

With Memorial Day upon us, there’s no better time than now not only to thank those who made the ultimate sacrifice, but also to commit to triumph over turbulent times and contentious issues in order to maintain American greatness.

Jim Martin For the Camera

Former network broadcaster Tom Brokaw paid homage to those who served in his 1998 book, “The Greatest Generation,” a history of the World War II era. Brokaw saw these Americans as those who fought in WWII and those who contributed at home, enduring rationing and other sacrifices.

We never heard them ask for praise and recognition. Instead, they asked for us to always remember the nation they fought to save.

We must always remember and thank the 291,557 U.S. soldiers who were killed in WWII, as well as their families.

I call upon the graduating Class of 2021 – and all Americans – to re-create the selfless spirit of those who won WWII and built a great nation, and to become the new Greatest Generation. I ask you to do the same, and at a time when seemingly every field of endeavor is changing faster than ever.

The enemies today are not Japan, Italy and Germany. Instead, they are domestically produced, such as global warming – and that clock is ticking; the nation’s political divide; a growing antigovernment sentiment that’s exemplified by angry radio and television public affairs programs; social justice; the high costs of higher education and health care; the misuse of tech through such evil techniques such as ransomware; an economy that doesn’t work for all; rebuilding the middle class and more.

But we’re not a broken nation. We’re simply unfinished and always striving not to become perfect, but to become a “more perfect union,” as enumerated in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution.

Many students in the Class of 2021 have demonstrated they have the right stuff, bravely carrying on despite the pandemic’s damage to society – including the death of close to 600,000 Americans.

They’ve attended scaled-down graduation ceremonies, or none at all; they’ve watched as internship and job opportunities have vanished; they endured online classes; and their final year of college was less than it could have been.

Brokaw also said in his book that it was the greatest generation ever because they did their duty because it was the right thing to do, not to gain fame or recognition.

So what happened? When did we sacrifice solid American values and instead start wallowing in greed and self-centeredness? It may have been in the late 1900s, when the self-sacrifice and teamwork that helped the United States to persevere began disintegrating into blatant materialism. Today, the robber barons of the late 1890s look like saints.

How did we get so far off track? Maybe it’s because people debate such topics as scientific facts or simple truths every minute of every day on social media.

There’s a crying need for Americans of all ages to step up and live the noble ideals that carried us through tough times – not just World War II, but also historical benchmarks such as the Revolutionary War, Civil War, World War I, the Great Depression, the 9/11 attacks, Watergate, the Vietnam War, the Iraq War, the assassinations of President Kennedy and his brother Bobby as well as of Martin Luther King Jr., and more.

Let’s continue to share our talents overseas, offering the latest techniques in such areas as producing safe drinking water, operating a farm and vaccinating everyone against COVID (19).

On the home front, we need new volunteers to work in our schools, civic organizations and charities, and to help revitalize our communities.

We need parents to run for school boards and to help their kids with homework.

We also need courageous community leaders who will help local governments manage the public’s business without fear of mean-spirited personal attacks.

We need people to help tutor at-risk kids and to register new voters.

It took a foreigner to point out a truth about us. Winston Churchill said, “You can always count on Americans doing the right thing, once they’ve exhausted every other possible alternative.”

Are you ready to grab the baton, Class of 2021? Show us you’ve got the right stuff and that war is not the only way to prove greatness.

Jim Martin can be reached at jimmartinesq@gmail.com

Adblock test (Why?)



"Opinion" - Google News
May 29, 2021 at 11:51PM
https://ift.tt/3uBSQ7k

Opinion: Jim Martin: A call to emulate the greatest, selfless generation - Boulder Daily Camera
"Opinion" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2FkSo6m
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update

Search

Featured Post

I just paid $9.99 for a carton of 18 eggs. Will prices ever drop? | Opinion - Sacramento Bee

[unable to retrieve full-text content] I just paid $9.99 for a carton of 18 eggs. Will prices ever drop? | Opinion    Sacramento Bee ...

Postingan Populer