Ivanka Trump’s personal assistant is among the latest at the White House to test positive for the coronavirus. Vice President Pence’s press secretary, Katie Miller, tested positive this week, as well as a White House valet. The White House insists it is taking precautions, but President Trump was not seen wearing a mask at a ceremony for WWII veterans. This comes as whistleblower Rick Bright spoke out on “60 Minutes” after being removed from his job for what he says was “putting science over politics.” Nikole Killion looks at the exclusive interview.
Economist Andrew I. Friedson says they flattened the curve. Economist Lyman Stone disagrees.
An an anarchist, I approach modern secular theocracy, or state-worship, in the same way that an atheist might have approached traditional theocracy in the period before church and state were separated. For instance, let’s say that the sectarian warfare between Catholics and Lutherans that occurred in the early modern period was still going on.
Here, Gills once again illustrates why the mainstream anarchist movement is as great a failure as it is. He emphatically states that his primary commitment is not to fight the state, the ruling class, or the global capitalist/American empire. Instead, his primary commitment is to fight with other very marginal and powerless groups.
On one hand, it is not inherently illegitimate to have anarchist groups that are committing to fight with another fringe political or cultural tendency. For instance, there can certainly be “anarchist Red Sox fans” fighting with “anarchist Yankee fans,” “anarchist Goths” versus “anarchist hippies,” or even “anarchist Crips” versus “anarchist Bloods.”
The battle for the title of Pussy Grabber-in-Chief rolls on.
Hat tip to Robert Smith for finding this. I can’t say I really disagree with any of it. The only thing I might add is that anarchists should not only carve out an independent political identity for themselves but also nurture anti-authoritarian tendencies wherever they appear, left, right, or center. Most ideologies and most people generally tend to be a mixed bag of anti-authoritarian and authoritarian ideas.
Krystal and Saagar discuss recent arrests of the father and son that shot Ahmaud Arbery, after newly released video from Feb. went viral this week that showed them hunt Arbery down and kill him.
Marcus Arbery Sr. recalls the memory of his son on the day of his 26th birthday. Arbery Sr. called his son’s death a “modern-day lynching” following the arrest of two men charged with Ahmaud Arbery’s murder.
His Goofiness throws in his two cents worth. This is actually a pretty good article, and I agree with most of its contents, the usual Goofy Gillis hysteria that someone, somehow, somewhere might do something “reactionary” or un-progressive aside. Given that I am an anarcho-pluralist/pan-anarchist, I am sometimes asked if I consider those in the anarchist milieu that I criticize most frequently to be legitimate anarchists, e.g. Gillis, Alexander Reid-Ross, SJW anarchists, Antifa anarchists, etc. The answer is yes, of course. The great paradox of pan-anarchism is that even anti-pan-anarchists can theoretically be pan-anarchists.
The re-feudalization of the US economy and the re-proletarianization of the working class is now complete, which is what the power elite had in mind all along. The finally succeeded. I imagine many of them are behind closed doors saying, “This coronavirus thing is fucking awesome, man!”
By Heather Long
The U.S. unemployment rate jumped to 14.7 percent in April, the highest level since the Great Depression, as most businesses shut down or severely curtailed operations to fight the deadly coronavirus.
Over 20 million people lost their jobs in April, the Labor Department said Friday, wiping out a decade of job gains in a single month. The staggering losses are roughly double what the nation experienced during the 2007-09 crisis, which used to be described as the harshest economic situation most people ever confronted. Now that has been quickly dwarfed by the fallout from the global pandemic.
President Trump and numerous state and local leaders decided to put the economy in a deep freeze in an effort to minimize exposure to the virus. This led businesses to suddenly shed millions of workers at a rapid rate never seen before. Analysts warn it could take many years to return to the 3.5 percent unemployment rate the nation experienced in February.
One interesting aspect of this segment is where Michael Brooks describes himself as having been a “Chomsky kid” (#metoo, Michael) and how the far-left in the US is largely just “progressive liberalism with an anarchist tinge.” Amen, brother. Michael seems to have since moved to something along the lines of a Jacobin Magazine-like socialism, while I have (hopefully) moved toward a more substantive anarchism.
The three main criticisms I have of the left-anarchist milieu are that 1) some anarchists only want anarchism to be the fringe wing of socialism, while I take a much more expansive view of what anarchism is; 2) for some anarchists “anarchism” is merely a euphemism for an extremist version of progressive liberalism (particularly the IdPol-obsessed SJW types); and 3) many anarchists of the left exhibit a pathological right-wingophobia that fails to recognize that a consistent application of anarchist principles requires a transcendence of the “left, right, and center” paradigm.
For instance, this article describes left-anarchism as “Anarchism is a process whereby authority and domination is being replaced with non-hierarchical, horizontal structures, with voluntary associations between human beings. It is a form of social organisation with a set of key principles, such as self-organisation, voluntary association, freedom, autonomy, solidarity, direct democracy, egalitarianism and mutual aid. ”
But how many “left-anarchists” ever even talk about these things as opposed to progressive liberal talking points or critical theory-inspired SJW rhetoric?
I disagree that anarchists must be leftists, and I consider non-leftist forms of anarchism to be legitimate forms of anarchism, but even a consistent application of left-anarchism would require a rejection or at least a modification of the conventional “left, right, center” framework.
It’s interesting how the Left and Right are spinning their own narratives on the coronavirus fallout. The Left is depicting a situation where greedy business owners and right-wing conspiracy nuts want to endanger everyone’s health by reopening the economy so they can make money. The Right is depicting a situation where government and media-fueled hysteria has resulted in an exaggerated threat and government overreach that has created an unnecessary economic depression. The Left thinks the situation wouldn’t have been as bad if it hadn’t been for the ineptness of the Trump administration. The Right thinks the situation would be as bad if it weren’t for the malevolence of the Chinese. The Left accuses the business class of profiteering off the pandemic, while the Right accuses liberal politicians and the media of using the situation to advance a political agenda.
As usual, the criticisms the Left and Right have of each other are generally true.
The Intra-Left civil wars really are becoming as divisive as the Left/Right Red/Blue civil war. Funny.
You should’ve worn that mask, Donnie.
Democraps: “We might actually get our asses kicked by Orange Man again if we don’t pretend to give a shit. Maybe we better actually do something.” I see Kamala’s playing her cards here.
By Burgess Everett
On Friday, Sens. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Ed Markey (D-Mass.) will release their Monthly Economic Crisis Support Act. It would dramatically expand upon the $1,200 sent to Americans as part of March’s gargantuan coronavirus response bill.
The legislation would send a monthly $2,000 check to people who make less than $120,000. It would expand to $4,000 to married couples who file taxes jointly and also provide $2,000 for each child up to three. Harris said the bill is a reflection that Congress’s efforts so far were not “nearly enough to meet the needs of this historic crisis” and Markey called the massive cash infusion “the most direct and efficient mechanism for delivering economic relief to those most vulnerable.”
The head of the UN wants a war on “hate speech.” What could possibly go wrong?
UNITED NATIONS (AP) — U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said Friday the coronavirus pandemic keeps unleashing “a tsunami of hate and xenophobia, scapegoating and scare-mongering” and appealed for “an all-out effort to end hate speech globally.”
The U.N. chief said “anti-foreigner sentiment has surged online and in the streets, anti-Semitic conspiracy theories have spread, and COVID-19-related anti-Muslim attacks have occurred.”
Guterres said migrants and refugees “have been vilified as a source of the virus — and then denied access to medical treatment.”
“With older persons among the most vulnerable, contemptible memes have emerged suggesting they are also the most expendable,” he said. “And journalists, whistleblowers, health professionals, aid workers and human rights defenders are being targeted simply for doing their jobs.”
By Alain de Benoist
History is always open, as everyone knows, and this makes it unpredictable. Yet in certain circumstances, it is easier to see the middle and long term than the near term, as the coronavirus pandemic shows well. For the short term, one surely imagines the worst: saturated health systems, hundreds of thousands, even millions of dead, ruptures of supply chains, riots, chaos, and all that might follow. In reality, we are being carried by a wave and no one knows where it will lead or when it will end. But if one looks further, certain matters become evident.