On the question of Saying Their Name: I have always understood about it for reasons having to do with my ancestors the Lloyds and the Goldsboroughs, and because it is a major South American theme, never again, nunca mais, say their name. But I have learned more about it from these disaster databases which are entirely resolute about it.
There are so many reasons to Say Their Name. To say it, and stand by it.
Filed under Movement, News
⇒ The best political action we can take right now is to work against voter suppression. (Z)
⇒ The roundups of indocumentados are a beginning, and we should pay attention. (Z)
⇒ The use of indocumentados is a form of slavery. Capitalism requires slavery, and slaves must be foreign. (Z)
⇒Racist imperatives fuel the militarization of the border. (Nicky)
⇒Poetry is only a havoc that restores. It dissipates the false pretenses of an ordered world. (Bataille 1943)
Today in culture:
Let’s look at a timeless Vermeer. And another. And more.
An interesting translation magazine: Palabras errantes.
Fifteen Afro-Latin films everyone should see.
I am not your negro is playing now and must be seen.
On Netflix, we must see 13th.
We will see Ixcanul on Netflix as well, and Herzog’s Into the inferno.
Sidney Blumenthal has a smart history of the Trump family in the London Review of Books.
Jonathan Mayhew has good advice on how to learn foreign languages.
Rosie Gray discusses Bannon and the white supremacy movement in The Atlantic.
Nikil Saval writes about Gareth Dale writing about Karl Polanyi, and I would have liked to converse with this man; he is important.
I have heard there is a number you can text to your phone, that will program in the numbers of your senators and representatives. You can do this, too.
I was going to make an announcement about, and a commitment to archiving bibliography in Zotero and/or JabRef, and not an Amazon wishlist or even Evernote. Instead, I simply started.
With the shock of war, however, the State comes into its own again. The Government, with no mandate from the people, without consultation of the people, conducts all the negotiations, the backing and filling, the menaces and explanations, which slowly bring it into collision with some other Government, and gently and irresistibly slides the country into war. For the benefit of proud and haughty citizens, it is fortified with a list of the intolerable insults which have been hurled toward us by the other nations; for the benefit of the liberal and beneficent, it has a convincing set of moral purposes which our going to war will achieve; for the ambitious and aggressive classes, it can gently whisper of a bigger role in the destiny of the world. The result is that, even in those countries where the business of declaring war is theoretically in the hands of representatives of the people, no legislature has ever been known to decline the request of an Executive, which has conducted all foreign affairs in utter privacy and irresponsibility, that it order the nation into battle. Good democrats are wont to feel the crucial difference between a State in which the popular Parliament or Congress declares war, and the State in which an absolute monarch or ruling class declares war. But, put to the stern pragmatic test, the difference is not striking. In the freest of republics as well as in the most tyrannical of empires, all foreign policy, the diplomatic negotiations which produce or forestall war, are equally the private property of the Executive part of the Government, and are equally exposed to no check whatever from popular bodies, or the people voting as a mass themselves. The moment war is declared, however, the mass of the people, through some spiritual alchemy, become convinced that they have willed and executed the deed themselves. They then, with the exception of a few malcontents, proceed to allow themselves to be regimented, coerced, deranged in all the environments of their lives, and turned into a solid manufactory of destruction toward whatever other people may have, in the appointed scheme of things, come within the range of the Government’s disapprobation. The citizen throws off his contempt and indifference to Government, identifies himself with its purposes, revives all his military memories and symbols, and the State once more walks, an august presence, through the imaginations of men. Patriotism becomes the dominant feeling, and produces immediately that intense and hopeless confusion between the relations which the individual bears and should bear toward the society of which he is a part.
This is about the Great War, or World War I.
Normalization is not an option. From Tikkun. Worth reading slowly.
Poem by Rachel Zucker. From The Nation. “ Meanwhile oil unstoppably pouring into the blue-green.”
Also from The Nation, a fascinating review of A Nation Without Borders–a book which has been widely discussed elsewhere as well, and which should clearly be read.
UPDATE. Someone else said:
What we now have in the US is a takeover by a particularly virulent hybrid: a deeply masculinist, racist, corporo-fascism. For many white liberals the idea that the US is now a corporo-fascist regime was at first unthinkably shocking because it runs counter to deep veins of white exceptionalism– “It can’t really happen here.” The current corporo-fascist regime, with the largest imperial military in the world, the largest national surveillance intelligence apparatus in history, and the will to use both with the utmost brutality and ruthlessness in the interests of the patriarchal corporate 1%, is not national fascism in the sense that Nazi Germany was, or white nationalist South African apartheid was, but is a new, deeply dangerous political mutation, emerging from global neoliberal austerity, taking root in a country gutted by austerity, and now put in place to further gut the state, and gather all economic and political power in the hands of a tiny corporate-military-intelligence male minority. That’s why we could do with less fixating on Trump himself, as the fixation feeds off the US cult of personality and celebrity identification. We need to make visible and name the gathering figures in the shadows for whom Trump is simply the useful Avatar, an Avatar who (it is my bet) they will dispense with quite ruthlessly if he doesn’t toe their line. Which is looking pretty likely right now, given his megalomania. The corporo-fascism will remain, and we need to seek out its soft places of vulnerability, invent new strategies, and not underestimate their will to crush us, nor underestimate our own power to resist.
Nowhere is the abuse as frightening as in Louisiana—with the exception, perhaps, of its neighbor to the east (“Thank God for Mississippi!” is the unofficial state motto). Louisiana is the second-poorest state and second-to-last in human development, which is a measure of individual freedom. The state’s rate of fatal cancers is about 30 percent higher than the national average. For all its antifederalism, Louisiana is fourth in accepting government welfare, with 44 percent of its budget coming from Washington. (Many of Hochschild’s Tea Party friends are beneficiaries of federal welfare programs.) Louisiana has the highest rate of death by gunfire (nearly double the national average), the highest rate of incarceration, and is the fifth-least-educated, reflecting the fact that it spends the fifth-least on education. It is sixth in the nation in generating hazardous waste, and third in importing it, since it makes a side business out of storing other states’ trash.
Louisiana’s governor is among the most powerful chief executives in the nation, a legacy that dates back to Huey Long’s administration, and under Governor Bobby Jindal’s dictatorship, between 2008 and 2016, the state’s prospects declined with unprecedented severity. After he reduced corporate income taxes and expanded the exemptions granted to oil and gas companies, the state’s revenue tumbled roughly $3 billion. He transferred $1.6 billion from public schools and hospitals to oil companies in the form of new tax incentives, under the theory that the presence of oil and a robust petrochemical infrastructure were not incentives enough. (The Louisiana Legislature is not only soaked with oil and gas lobbyists—during a recent session there were seventy for 144 legislators—but many lawmakers themselves hold industry jobs while serving in office.) Jindal fired 30,000 state employees, furloughed many others, cut education funding by nearly half, and sold off as many state-owned parking lots, farms, and hospitals as he could.
Despite these punishing cuts, he managed over the course of his administration to turn a $900 million budget surplus into a $1.6 billion deficit. National agencies downgraded the state’s credit rating. The damage was so great that it helped to bring about one of the most unlikely election results in recent American history. Jindal’s successor is John Bel Edwards, a Democrat—the only one to hold statewide office. Edwards is vehemently pro-life and agnostic about climate change, but he is determined to hold the oil and gas industry responsible for funding their share of coastal restoration. He currently enjoys a 62.5 percent approval rating. Almost a year into his first term, however, despite several emergency measures, the state remains in arrears.
The book has key information, even if I am not convinced the author does not exoticize our people somewhat. And I LOVE the term “sacrifice zone,” it is SO apt.
Cerrar esta tienda y abrir otra, dos calles mas abajo. Pero empezar el negocio sin engañar a nadie, sin joder a otro porque piense distinto a ti, sin que te busquen pretextos para callarte la boca y sin decirte, además, que cuando te cogen el culo lo hacen por tu bien y por el bien de la humanidad, y que ni siquiera tienes derecho a protestar o a decir que te duele, pues no se le deben dar argumentos al enemigo y todas esas justificaciones. Sin chantajes… El problema es que quienes deciden por nosotros decidieron que estaba bien un poco de democracia, pero no tanta … y al final se olvidaron hasta del poco que nos tocaba, y toda aquella cosa tan bonita se convirtió en una comisaría de policías dedicados a proteger el poder. (Paduro)
It appears that only I think everyone should be on a tenure line. I understand the need for “flexible” faculty given shifting enrollments but I say that if you need someone clearly enough that you rehire them for longer than three years, you need them and should offer them a tenure track position. Pieces and comment threads like this, that talk about the need to treat contingent faculty well, do not go nearly far enough and it is as false that more tenure lines are unrealistic as it is that “we cannot afford” single-payer or national health insurance. Of course we can. Also, it is not more “conservative” but more “progressive” to say that if you are qualified to work, then you are qualified to be on the tenure track. That is not “meritocratic,” it is the opposite.