Saturday, June 25, 2022

ANS -- The End of Roe Is a Bullet to the Heart of American Democracy This Is Just the Beginning of the Theocratic Fascist State They Wanted All Along

We are losing our democracy, our rights, our country, our civilization.  Read this.  
--Kim


Jun 24

·
11 min read
·

The End of Roe Is a Bullet to the Heart of American Democracy

This Is Just the Beginning of the Theocratic Fascist State They Wanted All Along

Image Credit: Ting Shen

Today is one of the darkest days in American history. The end of Roe v Wade, which is the decision that legalized women's reproductive healthcare rights in America, aka "abortion."

A Supreme Court made up of fanatics and lunatics, whose vision is a fascist theocracy, has, in one fell swoop, eviscerated American democracy. Five people have taken the most basic of rights away from 330 million70%, by some counts, 80%, of Americans don't want this. This is how a democracy ends.

Let me put in context just how incredibly dark this day really is. It's one of the darkest in modern history, period. I can't think of another example, certainly not in the developed world, where such fundamental rights, and so many of them, have been lost, for so many, in one fell swoop.

America went half a century backwards today — and more. That is an incredibly grim thing to see. It has almost never happened before in modern history, outside perhaps the Weimar Republic or the Soviet Union. This is how serious the stakes are.

What are those stakes? Let us all understand them with crystal clarity. This isn't just "the end of abortion" — though that itself is huge. It is something much, much more grotesque than that. This is the end of a modern, free society for women in America. Yes, really. How so?

Anticipating this, Red State after Red State passed laws that were almost ludicrously Gilead-like. Women were to be informed on. Citizen-vigilantes were to be empowered to arrest them, sue them, deputize themselves as agents of a theocratic state. Women were to be policed by everyone. "Aiding and abetting" them was criminalized. The Morality Police of Iran or Saudi Arabia had arrived in America. That sounds bad enough, until you think about it, and then you understand what bad really is.

What does all that mean? Well, it means, for example, that if you're a woman, sitting at a cafe, talking to a friend. The guy at the next table — a self-proclaimed "Patriot," now carrying a gun in public, thanks to the very same Supreme Court, overhears you. And he decides that you've crossed the line. But he's a deputy, because, well, anyone and everyone is. He turns you in. Or maybe he arrests you. For what? For a thoughtcrime. Wanting not to have a child. Are you even pregnant? Maybe, maybe not. Now the burden of proof is on you. And the friend you were speaking to? He's arrested, too.

Grim enough for you? Then consider the next step. In some Red States, women were to be prevented from leaving the stateBut how was anyone to know why a woman was leaving the state? Knowing would entail building a whole infrastructure to surveil and police woman. Ma'am, pull over. Can you show us your phone, please? We need to inspect all your social media, emails, correspondence. You need to prove it to us. We're the Stasi — and we're here to check up on…

Your purity. Your faith.

This is how a democracy dies.

This is the end of abortion. It's also the end of democracy. How so? Well, think about the examples above. They are about to become true. But what is really happening in them? Basic rights no longer exist. Privacy. Expression. Association. Movement. The most basic rights of all — poof, gone. Not just for women. For everyone, because, well, anyone can "aid and abet" a woman.

This is actually how a democracy dies.

I want you to stop and think about that. Because Americans have been making fools of themselves for a while now. The process goes like this. Pundits tell them it can't happen here. Intelligent observers like me, Sarah Kendzior, take your pick, say it is and it will. Denial prevails in the end. Nobody thinks it through. And it happens here.

This is really the beginning of end of democracy. Let me say it again. This is really the beginning of the end of democracy. 26 states already have trigger laws on the books criminalizing women's rights. Many, in ways like the above. But those laws are hardly benign — sorry, you can't go to an abortion clinic. They go much, much further than that. They are attacks on the fundamental fabric of democracy itself, the fabric of basic rights. They eviscerate freedoms of everything from privacy to expression to association. Now, you have to watch what you say. Who you say it you. Whom you meet. What you write down.

America? Or the Soviet Union? Or Nazi Germany? Certainly, in free societies, you don't have to do that. You don't have to to prove your morality, faith, rectitude, piety, purity, to anyone. Because it's nobody's business but yours, and maybe you don't think of it much at all. But now? In more than half of America? You do.

That isn't democracy. Nor is it democracy when five unelected people who are lunatics and fanatics can take the most basic rights away from 80% of people — against their wishes. Stop and think about that, too. Five unelected people are taking the most basic rights away from society — far from just "abortion," but right down to what you can say where you can go, what you can think, express, write, want — against 80% of their wishes.

This is the beginning of the end of democracy. I'm not exaggerating or kidding. This is it. And you cannot be in denial about it anymore.

Why not? Well, how did it happen? Let's think about it. The Republicans turned into a fanatical, neo-fascist machine. And they began to appoint genuine, bona fide lunatics to the Supreme Court. An alleged sexual predator, who cried and whined and shouted at his confirmation, sneering. A woman who's a member of a religious sect which demands women who used to literally be called Handmaids, until it was bad press, be literally "submissive" to men. This is who is on America's Supreme Court.

What were such people obviously going to do? You don't appoint lunatics like this if you want, I don't know, a Canadian healthcare system. You appoint them when you want a fascist theocracy. But something strange happened. When those of us who had survived and studied collapse before warned of this, our own side attacked us. Hey, give them the benefit of the doubt! You don't know that woman is going to take everyone's right away in the name of God — there's no evidence of that! LOL — how much more do you need?

We are on the same side. We alarmists, and the sober ones who dismiss us as fantasists. We want the same things. But there is a big difference between us. They don't know what the hell they're talking about, and we do. We have gotten everything right — all of it — from fascist collapse, to theocracy, to authoritarianism, to the coup, to how this terrible giant leap backwards would play out.

We have got to come together. They need to recognize that we have been right — you, me, etcetera — and we need to be able to counsel them to use their power in wiser ways. Or else the bad guys keep winning. What does that look like?

Well, it doesn't take a genius to see what happens next, because one of those lunatic Justices already drew an outline. Next to fall? All the cases alongside Roe, which guaranteed rights for anyone in any way outside theocratic-fascist lines. Gay rights, rights to gay marriage, equality, representation. Rights to contraception. And then, of course, "interracial" rights — the return of segregation.

The lunatics talk about this openly. They slaver over it. The hard right is ecstatic that Justice Thomas laid out an outline for America to become a theocratic-fascist state. But where is the center left?

The vision the lunatics have for America is clear now. And it will not do to spend even one more second in denial about itThat vision culminates in taking every modern right away from everyone. In Clarence Thomas's opinion, he writes: "In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, & Obergefell." That's contraception, same-sex relationships, and gay marriage, respectively. They are not even being subtle about their plans. This is plain to see.

No more gay rights. No more interracial marriage, or even relationships. No more teaching kids what a modern, free society is. Forced birthing for women. No more privacy in the bedroom, the living room, the cafe, anywhere. No more, no more, no more. All these things are to be criminalized, in the same that women's rights have been criminalized.

Did your kid do something gay? Time to turn him in. Wait, was he reading the wrong book? I'm going to turn your whole family in. Was that man wearing something that could be gay? Wait, did you see those two — they're not even the same race! Hold on — we need to check. Are you dating outside your race? Is your kid exhibiting homosexual tendencies? Is that song talking about being gay? Does that book say women should have rights? Did you use contraception? You're a criminal. You can't say that, express that, meet people who say that, talk about that, want that, think that. We'll check. Want to ever leave the state? How about a random stop to check your phone for evidence of being gay, having sex outside marriage, using contraceptives, having a relationship outside your race?

This is where it's going. Stop the denial. Stop it. Jesus, for the love of all that's holy, stop it. I know what a lot of you thought reading that last paragraph. Scary, but it can't happen here. That's also what you thought about Roe vs Wade what, five, ten years ago. And now here we are. Stop the denial. The first thing that scholars and survivors of social collapse have to teach you is that it happens in a blitzkrieg — faster, harder, swifter than you think. Like an avalanche.

Stop the denial and understand that this is real, and no, they won't stop at this. Their vision is totalitarian. They want a totalized society, where they have total control of bodies, thoughts, actions, interactions, relationships, possibilities. They will not stop until they have that, because that is what fascism and theocracy both are — totalized visions of a moral order. They won't stop at this. They will go all the way.

You want to know how to fight them. There are so, so many ways. A party that genuinely wanted to fight for democracy? It'd lead a general strike, right now. It would bring the nation to a standstill, and demand that these rogue institutions be reformed. It would keep that strike going as long as necessary.

It would impeach and remove justices for lying under oath. That's an obvious step to take. When public officials lie under oath, they are derelict in their most fundamental duty. Steps must be taken to remove them from office. Not should, but must — because otherwise, anyone can say anything, contest any office, and nothing means anything anymore. It's the basic, primary responsibility of a party to remove public officials who lie under oath — especially Supreme Court Justice. That should be happening, too.

And such a party would reform these broken institutions. It'd expand — aka "stack" — the court. Why should five people have that much power in a democracy — forever? It'd end lifetime tenure. It'd put in mechanisms of recourse for obviously undemocratic decisions. It would codify basic rights into law, and then go even further than that — it would draft whole new constitutional amendment, to redouble just how inalienable basic rights like speech, freedom, association, expression, and movement really are.

It would spark a grass roots movement, because, remember, 80% of American don't want this. It would unify people and lead them to organize themselves to challenge these corrupt, horrific, malign institutions, and restore optimism and faith in self-governance.

My point isn't that the Democrats will do that. Quite the opposite. My point is to teach you that, yes, even in social collapse, it's possible to fight for democracy. Countries do it all the time. But it takes more than what Americans know. It's not about trending on Twitter or escaping into Marvel-Movie land. It's about getting real. And demanding better. Should there be a general strike? Should justice who lie under oath be impeached and removed from office? Should broken institutions which are fundamentally undemocratic be reformed? Of course.

But Americans need to begin genuinely demanding all that. Not acting like it's impossible, and then retreating into apathy, doom, gloom, and despair. They need to barrage their representative with messages, arrive at their offices, and demand it. The right wing does it, don't they? They do it so much and so well that they literally have little kits to organize pressure campaigns.

This is the development of an institution known as "the silent majority." When that's 80% of people, and they've grown so fatalistic, so hopeless, that they accept five people taking their most basic rights away — something is terribly wrong. It tells us that the party whose job it is to defend democracy has failed to galvanize them, to teach them, to lead them.

And so the people must lead themselves. This is not a game. It's not a drill, a joke, or some kind of childish fantasy. This is it.

This is the beginning of the end of democracy. It's the endgame, and it's almost checkmate. There's still time for a few moves left. But Americans have to learn to make them, instead of sitting there, helpless, in despair. We are Americans, goddamit. We went to the moon and defeated the Nazis. Don't tell me we can't. That's not who we are. We do, because we can. We had better begin remembering that, now — or else all really is lost.

(Editors Note: I want to say something, as a woman. We knew this was going to happen. The draft was leaked. This wasn't a surprise. And yet, the Dems did nothing. We went through the cycle of outrage, the Dems did some handwringing, and then… nothing. No strike, no action, no organising, no mobilising to prevent this from happening. If you want things to change, you have to be prepared to be relentless. I no longer see that spirit in Americans, except for the far right. They keep taking and taking from you — your rights, your livelihoods, your kids lives — and nothing ever changes. When will enough be enough? Will it ever? If not now, when half the population has had their rights taken away, when? Are we just going to sleepwalk into Gilead?

I don't think men understand how it feels. To know that the government is inside your body. To know that your body is a political battleground, that is no longer your own. It is a violation. It is violent. And that is the point. To punish women for the "sin" of being sexually active. To put women in their place, to remind us that our bodies aren't ours. They belong to men. To externalise costs to women, because that is what patriarchy is built on. So to me, I see the inaction that came after Roe, the way both left and right use us as pawns in a political game, as proof of just how much patriarchy hates women. And that's how I really feel. I feel hated right now.

And I am furious. I am white hot with rage. I am furious at the far right, who dehumanise us and hate us. I am furious at the Dems, who did not care enough about us to codify Roe when they had the chance. I am furious at the inaction. To me it says: women weren't worth the fight. I am furious that I have to explain to people that they won't stop at abortion, that contraception is next, that America is going to become a country, save for a few liberal havens, where women are forced to become pregnant and give birth. Like chattel. That's what we are now. Again.

I am furious that I have to be furious. But that is a fact of life being a woman in patriarchy. We've fought and won the right to vote, to own property, to have our own bank accounts, to be seen as people, to be full members of society. But to do those things, we were relentless. We have to be again.

On this day, remember Gerri Santoro, bear witness to what happened to her. See the reality of it. Don't hide from it. And say, "we won't go back.")




Umair
June 2022



ANS -- I Want to Be an Armed Teacher I just have a few questions

This is the kind of thing one might pass on to one of your more right-wing reltives.  Someone who thinks arming teachers is a good idea.  It's somewhat humorous, and somewhat serious.  

 

--Kim


May 31

·
7 min read
·

I Want to Be an Armed Teacher

I just have a few questions

Photo by Sander Sammy on Unsplash

By most measures, I would be the ideal teacher to arm. I've been around guns my whole life. I had a BB gun when I was a small child. At age 12, I received my first .22 rifle for hunting squirrels and rabbits, and at age 14, I received my first deer rifle. When I was in Boy Scouts, I tied for first place in a rifle competition with over 200 participants. At age 18 I joined the United States Army and qualified as an expert marksman. I had the highest score in my platoon.

I know how to handle guns.

That being said, I am more than willing to do my part to keep our schools safe by arming myself. Before we proceed with this, however, I just have one or two questions.

One thing I am curious about is the selection process as to which teachers would be armed. Would the teachers being armed be volunteers? Given the gravity of carrying a lethal weapon in a building filled with children, I cannot imagine it being otherwise. What happens in the event no one volunteers to be armed? Are we talking about possibly arming teachers who have no experience with guns and forcing them to learn how and when to use one? I think there is some work to be done in this area. Who has the final say as to which teachers are armed? The principal? The superintendent? The school board? Someone else?

While I know my way around guns reasonably well, there are some things I am rusty on. We would need to train the armed teachers how to properly handle, load, clean, and otherwise take care of a gun, but it seems like there is more to it than just that. Would we armed teachers receive some kind of tactical training? I have been trained how to take a bunker, low crawl, shoot from behind a tree, and how to use a fox hole, but the school setting is a little different. Would we receive training in how to talk someone down? Would we learn the intricacies of hostage negotiations? I never learned any of this stuff in the Army or from hunting. In those situations, I just shot stuff. I didn't need to negotiate anything. Somehow I think breaching a classroom, library, or another part of a school where children are being held hostage would be different from shooting a deer in the woods.

Photo by hosein charbaghi on Unsplash

I also want to express my concern about the equipment I would be issued. I am guessing we teachers would be issued something along the lines of a police revolver like a .38 or a .45. There are many to choose from. I would imagine too that these handguns hold somewhere around 15 shots.

Would you think less of me if I brought up the idea teachers might need more than that? Some of these school shooters are coming in with AR-15s with large capacity clips and tactical gear that includes bulletproof vests and helmets. I think I would be outgunned approaching someone with this kind of equipment if all I had was a handgun. Is there any hope that armed teachers might also be issued Kevlar vests and helmets to level the playing field, so to speak? It seems like a reasonable request. Also, given that the police and perhaps SWAT teams might come to the school, it might be a good idea to equip teachers with radios as well so they could communicate with law enforcement officers.

At what point would I be allowed to use lethal force? Would I need to wait until the intruder shoots, or could I lay him out right away when he enters the building? What if a student in the building is found with a weapon? Could I just walk up to him and pop a cap on his ass? I need to know.

I've taken some time to scribble out a few other questions and concerns I have. Here they are:

Would teachers who wanted to be armed need to undergo some sort of psychological testing to see if they are fit to carry a gun in school? Most teachers are reasonably well-adjusted people, but teaching is a stressful occupation, you know?

Would teachers be given sidearms, or would they be given a tax deduction for buying their own, kind of like when they buy supplies for their classrooms? If schools are required to buy guns, what kind of tax increase would be needed to cover the costs? If teachers bought their own, would there be a limit on the cost to keep the tax deduction lower?

At the end of the school day, what would the armed teachers do with the gun and bullets? Would teachers be able to take the gun home with them, or would they have to turn them over to the school administration to be locked up? If they were turned in, where would the school store these guns to prevent theft? In the Army, we turned them in to our armory and a soldier walked guard duty around the building all night to ensure no one broke in.

If the teachers were allowed to take the guns home, could they use them for personal use as well, or would that be against the rules?

Photo by Afif Kusuma on Unsplash

I'm sorry to be taking up so much of your time, but it seems like every time I think of one question, another pops up in my head. I'm like that.

Would the gun holders be publicly known? If all the students in a given school know which teachers are armed, the intruder would also know if he or she was from that school. Would being armed make this teacher a target? I also would be concerned that other teachers might see them as a badass and not like them as much.

Would the teacher receive a stipend for being a gun carrier? Coaches receive stipends for their work outside of the school day. So do the advisors of student groups, department chairs, and the like. It seems reasonable to pay a stipend of some kind to those teachers who pack, doesn't it? Or do you think the prestige alone would do the trick? Who is worth more, the armed teacher or the football coach?

Nevermind. I withdraw that question.

Teachers sometimes miss school due to illness. What happens if the gun carrier is out sick? Would there be provisions to have alternative armed teachers, or would there be enough to begin with to cover any anticipated shortages?

Under what circumstances would they be stripped of being allowed to carry? If a teacher was, say, convicted of driving while intoxicated, would they lose their position as an armed teacher? What if they were accused of unethical conduct? What if they taught CRT?

When the shooting starts, there's no telling who is going to be on the receiving end of a bullet. In what ways would these teachers be held liable? What would happen if the teacher accidentally shot a student when they meant to hit the intruder? What if they accidentally hit the principal? Would they be accused of fragging?

Would gun-carrying teachers be present at extra-curricular activities too? So far the mass shootings at schools have happened inside the school during the school day, but there is nothing preventing someone from doing it during a football or basketball game, is there?

Finally, what would happen in the event that a teacher's gun came up missing, either because the teacher misplaced it or it was stolen by a student? Teachers are misplacing things all the time. I can't tell you how many times I have had to look for my stapler or a roll of masking tape. As for the students, I hate to be the harbinger of bad news, but we have some students who steal anything that isn't nailed down. Cell phones are a popular item, but I imagine making off with a teacher's sidearm would get special recognition in some circles.

One time when I was in the Army, one M-16 rifle came up missing and they shut down the entire base. No one was allowed to leave and no one was allowed to enter until the missing weapon was recovered. Would we close the school and seal it off? Would we search every student? Would the teacher whose gun was stolen be in trouble?

Arming teachers is more complicated than I first thought. It seems to me there are a lot of unanswered questions on this important topic that needs answering. Is anyone studying this important issue?

In the meantime, would anyone think ill of me if, after giving it more thought, I changed my mind about being an armed teacher?



Saturday, June 18, 2022

ANS -- Tidbits

I am forwarding this from Joyce.  
--Kim

Joyce Segal

8:01 AM (9 hours ago)
to me
I'm starting a new info service called TIDBITS! 
Here  is the 1st installment:
6/18/22

 The chip shortage strikes again. But not in the way you might think. As the Biden administration was brainstorming ways to help out Americans at the gas pump, it considered sending out rebate cards to Americans. Just one problem: There aren't enough computer chips to make cards in the volume required, so the White House scrapped that plan a few months ago, according to The Washington Post. It's apparently taking a second look now.

Stat: A record low 81% of Americans believe in God, according to a new Gallup poll. Something must have changed in just five years (TikTok?), because 87% did in 2017. And between 1944 and 2011, more than nine in 10 Americans believed in God. Young, liberal Americans are the least likely to believe in God, per Gallup.