newyorker--2020-07-29--Why Trump Will Never Win His New Cold War with China

Last week , Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visited the Nixon Presidential Library , a nine-acre compound in Yorba Linda , California , which was partially reopened , amid the pandemic , just for the occasion .
Pompeo placed a wreath of red , white , and blue flowers at Richard Nixon ’ s grave .
He toured the museum , where he was photographed at an exhibit featuring life-size statues of Nixon reaching out to shake the hand of Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai , during that historic first visit by an American President to China , in 1972 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a dais overlooking the parking lot—where folding chairs for a small audience were set up six feet apart , in spaces normally reserved for tourist buses—and angrily declared that Nixon ’ s outreach to China a half century ago had utterly failed .
He called on allies to create a new NATO-like coalition to confront the People ’ s Republic and stopped just short of calling for regime change .
Basically , he declared a new Cold War .
“ We , the free nations of the world , must induce change in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in more creative and assertive ways , because Beijing ’ s actions threaten our people and our prosperity , ” Pompeo said .
He railed against the long-standing U.S. policy of “ blind engagement ” that had allowed Beijing to “ rip off our intellectual property and trade secrets , ” endanger the world ’ s waterways , exploit international trade , and expand espionage in a quest for “ global dominance.
” Nixon ’ s policy of engagement benefitted Beijing more than it benefited the United States , Pompeo said , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assembled for the speech .
“ The truth is that our policies—and those of other free nations—resurrected China ’ s failing economy , only to see Beijing bite the international hands that fed it.
” If the free world doesn ’ t change Communist China , Pompeo warned , “ Communist China will surely change us.
” Pompeo ’ s provocative speech—the last of four on China in recent weeks by top U.S. officials , including Attorney General William Barr ; the F.B.I .
director , Christopher Wray ; and the national-security adviser @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy reversal by the Trump Administration .
For three years , Trump has heralded his personal connection with the Chinese President , Xi Jinping .
“ We have made tremendous progress in our relationship , ” Trump boasted during their first summit , at his Mar-a-Lago resort , in April of 2017 .
He declared the relationship “ outstanding.
” Trump even confided to Xi , over “ the most beautiful piece of chocolate cake that you ’ ve ever seen , ” that he had just ordered U.S. ships to attack Syria @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Xi was so surprised—over the disclosure of classified intelligence and a military operation—that he paused for ten seconds , then asked the interpreter to repeat it .
Even after the coronavirus from China began infecting the world , in January , Trump fawned over the Chinese leader .
He tweeted that the “ giant Trade Deal ” with the People ’ s Republic would bring the two nations even closer .
“ Terrific working with President Xi , a man who truly loves his country .
Much more to come !
” In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ handling of the pandemic .
“ Great discipline is taking place in China , as President Xi strongly leads what will be a very successful operation , ” he tweeted .
Relations have tanked since then , rather breathlessly .
The views reflected in Pompeo ’ s speech represent “ one of the fastest and most dramatic shifts in attitudes towards a major power in our history , ” a former U.S .
Ambassador to China , who served under another Republican President and asked not to be named , told me .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ pretty appalling.
” Stapleton Roy , who participated in the secret talks that led to U.S.-China relations in the nineteen-seventies and served as Ambassador in the nineteen-nineties , called Trump ’ s gambit reckless .
“ There was no strategic thinking , ” he said , dismissing Pompeo ’ s address as a political speech to appease voters who view China as a threat .
“ To mindlessly hurl yourself against China is a misunderstanding of the situation in China—and in East Asia , where countries don ’ t want a confrontation , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Beijing during the George H. W. Bush and Clinton Administrations , told me .
Even more stunning was the notion that Washington could win a Cold War with Beijing , former U.S. envoys told me .
“ We could win a Cold War with the Soviet Union thirty years ago , but we can ’ t win a Cold War with China today , ” the anonymous Ambassador said .
Unlike the Soviet Union , China is too integrated into the world economy , a point that Pompeo conceded .
“ Beijing is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on them , ” he claimed .
Yet America is also dependent on China for many basic commodities , including roughly half of its medical supplies .
China is the U.S. ’ s second-largest source of car parts—surpassing Canada , and tripling in value since 2007 .
Many are made in Wuhan , nicknamed the Motor City of China , and the initial center of the pandemic .
If China stopped exporting parts , it could close down multiple U.S. plants .
In 2017 , China provided sixty per cent of all imported @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the American market .
China even provides a significant share of bicycles sold in the United States .
China is also a valuable market for American goods .
China has provided “ the greatest contribution to global growth and fastest-growing destination for U.S. exports for fifteen years , until the Trump Administration , ” Robert Zoellick , the former World Bank president , said at the Aspen Security Forum this month .
The former Ambassador who asked not to be named added , “ They have a lot of leverage over us.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spanned more than four decades , the U.S. had powerful allies on the European front lines to stand united , pool resources , and squeeze Moscow .
Today , all major U.S. allies in and around Asia , including Australia , want to foster coöperation , not confrontation , with China—and don ’ t want to choose between Washington and Beijing .
All of America ’ s old friends in the Asia-Pacific region—Japan , South Korea , Singapore , Australia , Indonesia , the Philippines , Thailand , and Taiwan—have more trade with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Roy said , which means that “ Polarization doesn ’ t align with their interests.
” Western allies don ’ t want confrontation , either .
A U.S .
Cold War with China could be quite lonely .
Unlike the last Cold War , which pitted Washington and Moscow against each other in proxy military conflicts on four continents , Beijing has expanded its influence largely by investing in development projects , from as far afield as Ecuador and Kenya .
The projects are self-serving—pushing some countries , like Ecuador , into chronic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ states .
China ’ s railway projects in Africa are partly to provide transportation to export badly needed raw materials to China .
Its Belt and Road Initiative , launched by Xi in 2013 , is one of the most ambitious development schemes ever conceived .
It seeks to create a new transcontinental Silk Road—by land and sea—from China to Europe .
It ’ s way too late to do to the People ’ s Republic what the U.S. and its Western allies did to the Soviet Union .
Trump is also starting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hand .
He has reduced U.S. engagement globally as China has deepened involvement .
Within two days of taking office , Trump withdrew from the Trans-Pacific Partnership of twelve nations that accounted for forty per cent of the world ’ s economic output .
Amid the pandemic this year , Trump withdrew from the World Health Organization , the U.N. agency founded , in 1948 , to deal with pandemics and public health .
Beijing pledged to increase its financial commitment to the organization .
Trump also has limited leverage with the world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ globally , according to a Gallup poll released on Monday .
A survey of public opinion in a hundred and thirty-five countries found that , on average , only a third of the world approves of the current U.S. leadership—only one point higher than approval of the leadership in China ( and only three points higher than Russian leadership ) .
That , too , does not bode well for rallying global support to confront or contain Asia ’ s powerhouse .

Last week, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visited the Nixon Presidential Library, a nine-acre compound in Yorba Linda, California, which was partially reopened, amid the pandemic, just for the occasion. Pompeo placed a wreath of red, white, and blue flowers at Richard Nixon’s grave. He toured the museum, where he was photographed at an exhibit featuring life-size statues of Nixon reaching out to shake the hand of Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai, during that historic first visit by an American President to China, in 1972. After his tour, Pompeo walked to a dais overlooking the parking lot—where folding chairs for a small audience were set up six feet apart, in spaces normally reserved for tourist buses—and angrily declared that Nixon’s outreach to China a half century ago had utterly failed. He called on allies to create a new NATO-like coalition to confront the People’s Republic and stopped just short of calling for regime change. Basically, he declared a new Cold War.
“We, the free nations of the world, must induce change in the Chinese Communist Party’s behavior in more creative and assertive ways, because Beijing’s actions threaten our people and our prosperity,” Pompeo said. He railed against the long-standing U.S. policy of “blind engagement” that had allowed Beijing to “rip off our intellectual property and trade secrets,” endanger the world’s waterways, exploit international trade, and expand espionage in a quest for “global dominance.” Nixon’s policy of engagement benefitted Beijing more than it benefited the United States, Pompeo said, in a remarkable insult to the Nixon family assembled for the speech. “The truth is that our policies—and those of other free nations—resurrected China’s failing economy, only to see Beijing bite the international hands that fed it.” If the free world doesn’t change Communist China, Pompeo warned, “Communist China will surely change us.”
Pompeo’s provocative speech—the last of four on China in recent weeks by top U.S. officials, including Attorney General William Barr; the F.B.I. director, Christopher Wray; and the national-security adviser, Robert O’Brien—represented a total policy reversal by the Trump Administration. For three years, Trump has heralded his personal connection with the Chinese President, Xi Jinping. “We have made tremendous progress in our relationship,” Trump boasted during their first summit, at his Mar-a-Lago resort, in April of 2017. He declared the relationship “outstanding.” Trump even confided to Xi, over “the most beautiful piece of chocolate cake that you’ve ever seen,” that he had just ordered U.S. ships to attack Syria for its use of chemical weapons. Xi was so surprised—over the disclosure of classified intelligence and a military operation—that he paused for ten seconds, then asked the interpreter to repeat it. Even after the coronavirus from China began infecting the world, in January, Trump fawned over the Chinese leader. He tweeted that the “giant Trade Deal” with the People’s Republic would bring the two nations even closer. “Terrific working with President Xi, a man who truly loves his country. Much more to come!” In February, he praised Xi’s handling of the pandemic. “Great discipline is taking place in China, as President Xi strongly leads what will be a very successful operation,” he tweeted.
Relations have tanked since then, rather breathlessly. The views reflected in Pompeo’s speech represent “one of the fastest and most dramatic shifts in attitudes towards a major power in our history,” a former U.S. Ambassador to China, who served under another Republican President and asked not to be named, told me. He called the new U.S. policy “pretty appalling.” Stapleton Roy, who participated in the secret talks that led to U.S.-China relations in the nineteen-seventies and served as Ambassador in the nineteen-nineties, called Trump’s gambit reckless. “There was no strategic thinking,” he said, dismissing Pompeo’s address as a political speech to appease voters who view China as a threat. “To mindlessly hurl yourself against China is a misunderstanding of the situation in China—and in East Asia, where countries don’t want a confrontation,” Roy, who was Ambassador to Beijing during the George H. W. Bush and Clinton Administrations, told me.
Even more stunning was the notion that Washington could win a Cold War with Beijing, former U.S. envoys told me. “We could win a Cold War with the Soviet Union thirty years ago, but we can’t win a Cold War with China today,” the anonymous Ambassador said. Unlike the Soviet Union, China is too integrated into the world economy, a point that Pompeo conceded. “Beijing is more dependent on us than we are on them,” he claimed. Yet America is also dependent on China for many basic commodities, including roughly half of its medical supplies. China is the U.S.’s second-largest source of car parts—surpassing Canada, and tripling in value since 2007. Many are made in Wuhan, nicknamed the Motor City of China, and the initial center of the pandemic. If China stopped exporting parts, it could close down multiple U.S. plants. In 2017, China provided sixty per cent of all imported electronics, including cell phones, to the American market. China even provides a significant share of bicycles sold in the United States. China is also a valuable market for American goods. China has provided “the greatest contribution to global growth and fastest-growing destination for U.S. exports for fifteen years, until the Trump Administration,” Robert Zoellick, the former World Bank president, said at the Aspen Security Forum this month. The former Ambassador who asked not to be named added, “They have a lot of leverage over us.”
Throughout the last Cold War, which spanned more than four decades, the U.S. had powerful allies on the European front lines to stand united, pool resources, and squeeze Moscow. Today, all major U.S. allies in and around Asia, including Australia, want to foster coöperation, not confrontation, with China—and don’t want to choose between Washington and Beijing. All of America’s old friends in the Asia-Pacific region—Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Australia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, and Taiwan—have more trade with China than with the United States, Roy said, which means that “Polarization doesn’t align with their interests.” Western allies don’t want confrontation, either. A U.S. Cold War with China could be quite lonely.
Unlike the last Cold War, which pitted Washington and Moscow against each other in proxy military conflicts on four continents, Beijing has expanded its influence largely by investing in development projects, from as far afield as Ecuador and Kenya. The projects are self-serving—pushing some countries, like Ecuador, into chronic debt, or making them virtual tributary states. China’s railway projects in Africa are partly to provide transportation to export badly needed raw materials to China. Its Belt and Road Initiative, launched by Xi in 2013, is one of the most ambitious development schemes ever conceived. It seeks to create a new transcontinental Silk Road—by land and sea—from China to Europe. It’s way too late to do to the People’s Republic what the U.S. and its Western allies did to the Soviet Union.
Trump is also starting his new Cold War with a weak hand. He has reduced U.S. engagement globally as China has deepened involvement. Within two days of taking office, Trump withdrew from the Trans-Pacific Partnership of twelve nations that accounted for forty per cent of the world’s economic output. Amid the pandemic this year, Trump withdrew from the World Health Organization, the U.N. agency founded, in 1948, to deal with pandemics and public health. Beijing pledged to increase its financial commitment to the organization. Trump also has limited leverage with the world right now. America is deeply unpopular globally, according to a Gallup poll released on Monday. A survey of public opinion in a hundred and thirty-five countries found that, on average, only a third of the world approves of the current U.S. leadership—only one point higher than approval of the leadership in China (and only three points higher than Russian leadership). That, too, does not bode well for rallying global support to confront or contain Asia’s powerhouse.
Pompeo’s speech was striking for the personal vitriol he used against President Xi, whom he dismissed as “a true believer in a bankrupt totalitarian ideology.” In one of several sweeping statements, Pompeo pronounced, “Communists almost always lie”—an ironic statement, given that Trump has made more than twenty thousand false or misleading statements since taking office, according to an analysis by the Washington Post. Pompeo called on the world to “engage and empower good actors”— a thinly veiled appeal to the Chinese people to rise up against their own government and, perhaps, a nod to democracy activists in Hong Kong. Xi is the most powerful Chinese leader since Mao Zedong, who led the Chinese revolution in 1949 and then ruled until his death, in 1976. The new U.S.-China policy mirrors the Trump Administration’s tactics on Iran. If the word “China” had been replaced with “Iran,” the policy prescriptions would have been almost identical.


newyorker--2020-07-29--Aliens Issue Statement Asserting That Sex with Them Does Not Spread the Coronavirus

OUTER SPACE ( The Borowitz Report ) —In a rare public statement by beings from another planet , a group @ @ @ @ @ Wednesday that having sex with them does not spread the coronavirus .
In the statement @ @ @ @ @ on Medium , the space creatures expressed concern that the dissemination of pseudoscience about sex @ @ @ @ @ might cause some Earthlings to erroneously conclude that intimate relations with aliens were in some @ @ @ @ @ “ We can assure you , based on years of research , that it is @ @ @ @ @ have sex with aliens , ” the aliens wrote .
“ In this , as @ @ @ @ @ ’ s important to follow the science.
” The extraterrestrials added that the coronavirus pandemic @ @ @ @ @ their planned invasion of the planet Earth , which had been pencilled in for later @ @ @ @ @ indicated that they would now limit their invasion to places like Canada and New Zealand @ @ @ @ @ United States .

OUTER SPACE (The Borowitz Report)—In a rare public statement by beings from another planet, a group of prominent aliens declared on Wednesday that having sex with them does not spread the coronavirus.
In the statement, which the aliens published on Medium, the space creatures expressed concern that the dissemination of pseudoscience about sex with demons and alien DNA might cause some Earthlings to erroneously conclude that intimate relations with aliens were in some way a health risk.
“We can assure you, based on years of research, that it is perfectly safe for Earthlings to have sex with aliens,” the aliens wrote. “In this, as in all matters, it’s important to follow the science.”
The extraterrestrials added that the coronavirus pandemic had caused them to rethink their planned invasion of the planet Earth, which had been pencilled in for later this year.
The aliens indicated that they would now limit their invasion to places like Canada and New Zealand, but would avoid the United States.
Read More Satire from the Borowitz Report


newyorker--2020-07-29--Don’t Get Caught Without Herbs

Don’t Get Caught Without Herbs

Don ’ t bother with rare French blue potatoes .
No one asked you to grow melons—give up .
But , if you cook at all and don ’ t currently have a plastic pot of consumptive basil or wizened rosemary by your kitchen sink or on your front stoop , you ’ re not a gardener .
You might not even be human .
Who can resist mass-produced pots of herbs , and why try ?
For a couple of pounds ( or dollars ) at your local supermarket , an operetta ’ s worth of melancholy , hope @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can be yours .
Herbs are essential for cooking , particularly during a summer of staying put : they ’ re a holiday in a leaf .
Basil will transport you to the Italian terrazzo of your dreams : Cinzano , cypresses , handsome men flirting meaninglessly .
Mint is frisky ; thyme and rosemary and bay give food soul .
The minor travails of a cilantro plant are endlessly absorbing , a miniature kitchen-sink drama .
Flat-leaved parsley : I eat it by the handful , like a grateful horse .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not even we gardeners , brave , pure , strangely attractive , are immune .
Among the most pernicious is the notion that , by dividing and repotting our seedlings , an Elizabethan apothecary ’ s garden will be ours .
This is false .
So what are the alternatives , for those of us who rely on herbage ?
Cuttings from one ’ s kindly grandfather ’ s ancient thyme and rosemary bushes ?
Unrealistic , even with the right sort of grandfather .
The seed catalogues are pornographically thrilling : Would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , seed-producing ?
Your basil Greek , holy , Thai , African blue , or lime ?
Imagine casually offering your friends sculpit , an Italian aromatic ; sprinkling fresh fenugreek on a curry ; or tucking stems of fresh papalo in your tacos ?
This is not to mention the complicated joy of online nurseries , where you can buy your varietals fully grown .
I ’ ve spent long hours persuading myself that buying a dozen expertly grown varieties of thyme ( Doone Valley , English , Archers Gold , Silver @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only valid but virtually my duty as a gardener , given that bees adore them so .
I ’ ve convinced myself that only Green Ginger Rosemary would get me through the weeks ahead .
I ’ ve bought Red Rubin basil because it shared a name with the family in my third novel ; bicolor shiso because , this year , surely , dear Lord , please , my shiso plant must succeed .
Each new variety brims with false hope and imaginary dinners .
And it is , sadly , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on all the mints— “ I want spear , pepper , pineapple , chocolate ” —before her teens , and not even the discovery that they all taste the same could cure her .
As summer deepens—and my need for strong tastes , easy returns , and something to tend intensifies—my roof terrace has lost all semblance of decency and is starting to look like a garden designed by toddlers .
Everywhere are tufts of basil , coaxed into life from seed and now far too precious to actually eat ; feeble , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seeds refusing to give me the Eastern European thrills of which I dream .
Mint is supposed to rampage , but mine has yet to crawl between pots ; my thyme never survives a London winter .
My only real successes are oregano , which I encourage to flower for bee-seduction , and my elderly but tough lemon verbena , which I ’ ve started introducing into far more recipes than perhaps I should .
When the herb plants in my garden fail me , I revert to the one herb source that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bedlam we unleash : weeds .
Since reading Patience Gray ’ s life-enhancing “ Honey from a Weed , ” I ’ m always eagerly checking for wild caper shrubs and glasswort , although I live on a sizable London bus route , not in a mule shed on Naxos .
Luckily , some herbs are available , even here , among the discarded face masks .
Glamorously bitter young dandelion leaves , Taraxacum officinale , are everywhere .
In spring , I could nibble the wasabi sting of garlic mustard ( Alliaria @ @ @ @ @ @ @ garlic , the broad-leaved kind ( ramsons , Allium ursinum ) is always hard to find , but the three-cornered leek variety ( Allium triquetrum ) overran every bike-and-box-strewn front garden .
Now , in summer , if we take it further , which of course I always do , there are the amusingly mucilaginous leaves of the common lime tree ( Tilia x europaea ) , or the arugula-ish kick of hairy bittercress ( Cardamine hirsuta ) .
Noshing as one walks , with the frisson of possible self-poisoning ; don ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bring .
All herbs , however familiar , make food more interesting ; better still , they improve life .
They ’ re wild food , even the supermarket kind .
They offer strife , temptation , and the thrill of the chase .
They ’ re almost as good as freedom .

Don’t bother with rare French blue potatoes. No one asked you to grow melons—give up. But, if you cook at all and don’t currently have a plastic pot of consumptive basil or wizened rosemary by your kitchen sink or on your front stoop, you’re not a gardener. You might not even be human.
Who can resist mass-produced pots of herbs, and why try? For a couple of pounds (or dollars) at your local supermarket, an operetta’s worth of melancholy, hope, possibility, and tragic early death can be yours. Herbs are essential for cooking, particularly during a summer of staying put: they’re a holiday in a leaf. Basil will transport you to the Italian terrazzo of your dreams: Cinzano, cypresses, handsome men flirting meaninglessly. Mint is frisky; thyme and rosemary and bay give food soul. The minor travails of a cilantro plant are endlessly absorbing, a miniature kitchen-sink drama. Flat-leaved parsley: I eat it by the handful, like a grateful horse.
We live in an era of lies; not even we gardeners, brave, pure, strangely attractive, are immune. Among the most pernicious is the notion that, by dividing and repotting our seedlings, an Elizabethan apothecary’s garden will be ours. This is false. So what are the alternatives, for those of us who rely on herbage? Cuttings from one’s kindly grandfather’s ancient thyme and rosemary bushes? Unrealistic, even with the right sort of grandfather.
The seed catalogues are pornographically thrilling: Would you prefer your coriander hardy, feathery, seed-producing? Your basil Greek, holy, Thai, African blue, or lime? Imagine casually offering your friends sculpit, an Italian aromatic; sprinkling fresh fenugreek on a curry; or tucking stems of fresh papalo in your tacos?
This is not to mention the complicated joy of online nurseries, where you can buy your varietals fully grown. I’ve spent long hours persuading myself that buying a dozen expertly grown varieties of thyme (Doone Valley, English, Archers Gold, Silver Queen, etc.) is not only valid but virtually my duty as a gardener, given that bees adore them so. I’ve convinced myself that only Green Ginger Rosemary would get me through the weeks ahead. I’ve bought Red Rubin basil because it shared a name with the family in my third novel; bicolor shiso because, this year, surely, dear Lord, please, my shiso plant must succeed. Each new variety brims with false hope and imaginary dinners. And it is, sadly, a genetic weakness: my daughter was set on all the mints—“I want spear, pepper, pineapple, chocolate”—before her teens, and not even the discovery that they all taste the same could cure her.
As summer deepens—and my need for strong tastes, easy returns, and something to tend intensifies—my roof terrace has lost all semblance of decency and is starting to look like a garden designed by toddlers. Everywhere are tufts of basil, coaxed into life from seed and now far too precious to actually eat; feeble, anemic patches of parsley; dormant dill seeds refusing to give me the Eastern European thrills of which I dream. Mint is supposed to rampage, but mine has yet to crawl between pots; my thyme never survives a London winter. My only real successes are oregano, which I encourage to flower for bee-seduction, and my elderly but tough lemon verbena, which I’ve started introducing into far more recipes than perhaps I should.
When the herb plants in my garden fail me, I revert to the one herb source that predates us, and will survive whatever bedlam we unleash: weeds. Since reading Patience Gray’s life-enhancing “Honey from a Weed,” I’m always eagerly checking for wild caper shrubs and glasswort, although I live on a sizable London bus route, not in a mule shed on Naxos. Luckily, some herbs are available, even here, among the discarded face masks. Glamorously bitter young dandelion leaves, Taraxacum officinale, are everywhere. In spring, I could nibble the wasabi sting of garlic mustard (Alliaria petiolata) in local hedgerows; wild garlic, the broad-leaved kind (ramsons, Allium ursinum) is always hard to find, but the three-cornered leek variety (Allium triquetrum) overran every bike-and-box-strewn front garden. Now, in summer, if we take it further, which of course I always do, there are the amusingly mucilaginous leaves of the common lime tree (Tilia x europaea), or the arugula-ish kick of hairy bittercress (Cardamine hirsuta). Noshing as one walks, with the frisson of possible self-poisoning; don’t underrate the fun a weed can bring.
All herbs, however familiar, make food more interesting; better still, they improve life. They’re wild food, even the supermarket kind. They offer strife, temptation, and the thrill of the chase. They’re almost as good as freedom.


newyorker--2020-07-29--Is the Postal Service Being Manipulated to Help Trump Get Reëlected?

The American system for organizing elections is a crazy quilt of decentralization .
More than eight thousand counties and towns administer voting .
There is something admirably earnest and grassroots about the network of town clerks and gray-haired volunteers who fuss over the mechanisms of our democracy .
Yet , because the system is embedded in local politics , even in this era of relatively clean local administration ( by the standards of American history ) , it remains susceptible to bribery and scams .
More consequently , because election authorities are subordinate to city , county , and state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ racist voter suppression , as happened on a grand scale during the Jim Crow era and continues in subtler but important ways today .
This year , owing to the coronavirus pandemic , election technocrats face intense problems of a new kind , largely due to an unexpected surge in the use of mailed ballots .
Absentee voting exploded during the spring primary season ; in Wisconsin , in April , a million voters sent ballots through the mail , a fivefold increase over 2016 .
Growth on that scale is all but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ways that legal votes may fail to be counted are as diverse as the jurisdictions that will process the ballots , yet there is one big national institution that will play a decisive part : the United States Postal Service .
And there are many reasons to doubt that the service is ready to backstop American democracy in this time of peril .
In theory , elections by mail are good for the Postal Service—they are a source of revenue and a prominent reminder of the value of its mission of universal service @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years from advocates of privatization .
The pandemic has already made obvious the value of a service that still delivers mail reliably—even if unprofitably—to the most isolated rural households .
“ The Postal Service has never been more important in modern times than it is today , ” Devin Leonard , the author of “ Neither Snow nor Rain , ” a lively history of the institution , told me .
“ You can ’ t have stay-at-home orders and not have efficient and equal home delivery ” of medicine and other essential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election that is likely to be heavily conducted through the mail , he said , “ You need a governmental postal service to do that.
” Some of the problems with election by mail arise from the interplay between dated state election laws and slower mail-delivery times .
Inspired by successes in places such as Washington , Oregon , Colorado , and Utah , some states began expanding options for mail-in voting even before the pandemic .
Other states , such as Ohio , quickly pivoted to mail in response to the virus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regimes did not adequately account for the fact that , during the Obama Administration , to cope with deteriorating finances caused by punitive congressional accounting mandates and a decline in traditional mail volumes , the Postal Service formally adopted standards allowing slower delivery of first-class mail—in some cases , taking up to five days .
Some states accept any ballot postmarked before Election Day , even if it arrives late .
Yet a majority of states—including the Presidential battlegrounds of Pennsylvania , Michigan , and Arizona—don ’ t count mailed ballots unless they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mail ballots close to Election Day in states without the postmark rule have to gamble on mail-delivery times .
In Arizona ’ s 2018 election , more than three thousand votes were rejected because they turned up too late .
Election officials in Georgia rejected more than seven thousand mailed ballots in the 2018 midterms , or three per cent of all the ballots sent by mail .
In a close election , those are significant numbers .
During this year ’ s primary season , “ Mail delays meant that voters who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” were nonetheless disenfranchised , Wendy Weiser , who directs the democracy program at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law , told me .
“ We saw a lot of ballots that were rejected that shouldn ’ t have been rejected , cast by eligible voters , because of [ deadlines ] that don ’ t make sense during the pandemic.
” This year , in battleground states that do not have a postmark rule , such as Pennsylvania , groups aligned with the Democratic Party are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But that is not the only problem with state laws .
Some states also contemplate implausibly short timelines to send out absentee ballots and receive completed ones .
Georgia and Michigan , for example , assume that it will require as few as four days to mail out a requested absentee ballot and then receive a voter ’ s completed one .
Compounding all this , the new Postmaster General , Louis DeJoy , a Trump donor , recently mandated changes in postal operations , designed to cut back on overtime by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that some mail will not be delivered for another day .
The changes are part of an efficiency drive , yet it is hard to divorce DeJoy ’ s management choices from his partisan profile or from Trump ’ s contempt for the Post Office ; earlier this year , the President dismissed it as “ a joke.
” Trump has sought repeatedly to delegitimize the November vote by claiming falsely that mail voting is susceptible to significant fraud .
His demagoguery and the appointment of DeJoy raise obvious questions about whether the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ manipulated in service of Trump ’ s reëlection .
House Democrats , led by Representative Carolyn Maloney , recently sent a letter about the reported operating changes to DeJoy , complaining that “ increases in mail delivery timing would impair the ability of ballots to be received and counted in a timely manner—an unacceptable outcome for a free and fair election.
” ( The results in Maloney ’ s own primary , in June , have been delayed for more than a month , owing to problems in counting mailed-in ballots . )
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Will the leadership of the Post Office—the Postmaster General—understand that this is not just about vote-by-mail but about the whole infrastructure of our voting system ?
” Wendy Fields , the executive director of the Democracy Initiative , a coalition of groups that advocates for voting rights , told me .
“ Is the Postmaster General going to do it proactively and be open to having a historic election that really embraces every single voter , or are we going to have more chaos ?
” The Postal Service insists that it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ management reforms nor its chronically shaky finances—current forecasts are that it will run out of money sometime next year—will affect its performance in November .
“ The Postal Service is committed to delivering election mail in a timely manner , ” Martha Johnson , a spokeswoman , told me in a prepared statement .
She added , “ The Postal Service ’ s financial condition is not going to impact our ability to process and deliver election and political mail ” ; the service , she said , could handle this fall ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Justifiably , the Postal Service argues that it is not responsible for ill-conceived state election laws that put voter enfranchisement at risk by failing to account for well-established mail-delivery times , even if these are slower than in the past .
“ The Post Office can not substitute for the preparations that states have to make , ” Mark Dimondstein , the president of the American Postal Workers Union , which represents more than two hundred thousand postal employees , told me .

The American system for organizing elections is a crazy quilt of decentralization. More than eight thousand counties and towns administer voting. There is something admirably earnest and grassroots about the network of town clerks and gray-haired volunteers who fuss over the mechanisms of our democracy. Yet, because the system is embedded in local politics, even in this era of relatively clean local administration (by the standards of American history), it remains susceptible to bribery and scams. More consequently, because election authorities are subordinate to city, county, and state politicians, they have contributed to systematic racist voter suppression, as happened on a grand scale during the Jim Crow era and continues in subtler but important ways today.
This year, owing to the coronavirus pandemic, election technocrats face intense problems of a new kind, largely due to an unexpected surge in the use of mailed ballots. Absentee voting exploded during the spring primary season; in Wisconsin, in April, a million voters sent ballots through the mail, a fivefold increase over 2016. Growth on that scale is all but certain to continue into November. The ways that legal votes may fail to be counted are as diverse as the jurisdictions that will process the ballots, yet there is one big national institution that will play a decisive part: the United States Postal Service. And there are many reasons to doubt that the service is ready to backstop American democracy in this time of peril.
In theory, elections by mail are good for the Postal Service—they are a source of revenue and a prominent reminder of the value of its mission of universal service, which has been under assault for years from advocates of privatization. The pandemic has already made obvious the value of a service that still delivers mail reliably—even if unprofitably—to the most isolated rural households. “The Postal Service has never been more important in modern times than it is today,” Devin Leonard, the author of “Neither Snow Nor Rain,” a lively history of the institution, told me. “You can’t have stay-at-home orders and not have efficient and equal home delivery” of medicine and other essential goods. Now, facing a Presidential election that is likely to be heavily conducted through the mail, he said, “You need a governmental postal service to do that.”
Some of the problems with election by mail arise from the interplay between dated state election laws and slower mail-delivery times. Inspired by successes in places such as Washington, Oregon, Colorado, and Utah, some states began expanding options for mail-in voting even before the pandemic. Other states, such as Ohio, quickly pivoted to mail in response to the virus. Yet too many of the mail-voting regimes did not adequately account for the fact that, during the Obama Administration, to cope with deteriorating finances caused by punitive congressional accounting mandates and a decline in traditional mail volumes, the Postal Service formally adopted standards allowing slower delivery of first-class mail—in some cases, taking up to five days.
Some states accept any ballot postmarked before Election Day, even if it arrives late. Yet a majority of states—including the Presidential battlegrounds of Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Arizona—don’t count mailed ballots unless they arrive by Election Day. Voters who mail ballots close to Election Day in states without the postmark rule have to gamble on mail-delivery times. In Arizona’s 2018 election, more than three thousand votes were rejected because they turned up too late. Election officials in Georgia rejected more than seven thousand mailed ballots in the 2018 midterms, or three per cent of all the ballots sent by mail. In a close election, those are significant numbers. During this year’s primary season, “Mail delays meant that voters who did everything they were supposed to do” were nonetheless disenfranchised, Wendy Weiser, who directs the democracy program at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law, told me. “We saw a lot of ballots that were rejected that shouldn’t have been rejected, cast by eligible voters, because of [deadlines] that don’t make sense during the pandemic.”
This year, in battleground states that do not have a postmark rule, such as Pennsylvania, groups aligned with the Democratic Party are suing to insist that they adopt one. But that is not the only problem with state laws. Some states also contemplate implausibly short timelines to send out absentee ballots and receive completed ones. Georgia and Michigan, for example, assume that it will require as few as four days to mail out a requested absentee ballot and then receive a voter’s completed one.
Compounding all this, the new Postmaster General, Louis DeJoy, a Trump donor, recently mandated changes in postal operations, designed to cut back on overtime by postal workers, even if it means that some mail will not be delivered for another day. The changes are part of an efficiency drive, yet it is hard to divorce DeJoy’s management choices from his partisan profile or from Trump’s contempt for the Post Office; earlier this year, the President dismissed it as “a joke.” Trump has sought repeatedly to delegitimize the November vote by claiming falsely that mail voting is susceptible to significant fraud. His demagoguery and the appointment of DeJoy raise obvious questions about whether the management of voting by mail will be manipulated in service of Trump’s reëlection. House Democrats, led by Representative Carolyn Maloney, recently sent a letter about the reported operating changes to DeJoy, complaining that “increases in mail delivery timing would impair the ability of ballots to be received and counted in a timely manner—an unacceptable outcome for a free and fair election.” (The results in Maloney’s own primary, in June, have been delayed for more than a month, owing to problems in counting mailed-in ballots.)
“The question of the day is, Will the leadership of the Post Office—the Postmaster General—understand that this is not just about vote-by-mail but about the whole infrastructure of our voting system?” Wendy Fields, the executive director of the Democracy Initiative, a coalition of groups that advocates for voting rights, told me. “Is the Postmaster General going to do it proactively and be open to having a historic election that really embraces every single voter, or are we going to have more chaos?”
The Postal Service insists that it is ready and that neither the recent management reforms nor its chronically shaky finances—current forecasts are that it will run out of money sometime next year—will affect its performance in November. “The Postal Service is committed to delivering election mail in a timely manner,” Martha Johnson, a spokeswoman, told me in a prepared statement. She added, “The Postal Service’s financial condition is not going to impact our ability to process and deliver election and political mail”; the service, she said, could handle this fall’s expected increase in absentee ballots.
Justifiably, the Postal Service argues that it is not responsible for ill-conceived state election laws that put voter enfranchisement at risk by failing to account for well-established mail-delivery times,
even if these are slower than in the past. “The Post Office cannot substitute for the preparations that states have to make,” Mark Dimondstein, the president of the American Postal Workers Union, which represents more than two hundred thousand postal employees, told me.
The Postal Service recently sent a vote-by-mail kit to more than eleven thousand local election officials around the country, encouraging them to adopt best practices, such as electronic tracking technology—including its Intelligent Mail bar code—that allow mailed-in votes to be fully documented as they move to and from voters, which can make it easier to identify legal votes if there is a dispute. In the statement that Johnson sent me, the service also said that it would soon write again to election administrators in states “that have deadlines for requesting and casting mail-in ballots” that “appear to be incongruous with the Postal Service’s delivery standards.”


newyorker--2020-07-29--The Perils of “People of Color”

The Perils of “People of Color”

The most recent time I was mistaken for white was a few weeks ago , on that most ignoble medium of Zoom .
This time , it was a virtual organizing meeting for a tenant-rights group in New York .
The handful of people on the call were mostly friends , all of us concerned about protecting neighbors from eviction , particularly during the pandemic .
As we discussed the welfare of longtime renters , and as Black Lives Matter protests erupted a few blocks away , a new member of the group tried to thoughtfully turn the lens .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ but everyone on this call is white , ” she said .
“ Oh , I just meant that we have no people of color , ” she said .
“ No Black or brown people.
” I nodded to clear the air and because I found the exchange more intriguing than discomfiting .
Though our organizing group included people of all races , it was true that this particular meeting was overwhelmingly white .
The woman had thus invoked “ people of color ” and “ Black and brown ” to mean @ @ @ @ @ @ @ older and lower-income .
I wondered if she would have said the same thing if younger , wealthier newcomers who happened to have dark skin had been on the call .
Would they qualify as “ people of color ” ?
I want to clarify that I do not look white .
I am Korean-American and appear very much the part .
So the woman ’ s mistake was not centered in her visual cortex but , rather , in whatever organs of intellect and affect tell us that one thing is not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ short , mundane encounter of the kind I ’ ve had many times before , with both Black and white people .
For decades , Americans have debated the place of Asians , Arabs , Latinx , indigenous people , and other interstitial minorities , and each community has waged its own battles over language : for example , people with indigenous roots in Mexico and Central and South America increasingly refuse the descriptors “ Latinx ” and “ Hispanic.
” But during these perilous months of COVID-19 and now the uprising for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ terms of cross-race solidarity have come into extreme flux .
Both online and in person , among protesters as well as the chattering class , there is anxious talk of whiteness and non-whiteness , who counts as a “ person of color ” or fits under “ Black and brown , ” and whether the neologism of BIPOC—Black , indigenous , and people of color—does sufficient work .
( A similar debate is unfolding in the United Kingdom over the term BAME—Black , Asian , and minority ethnic . )
Indeed , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this essay is a newly won victory of typographic recognition .
The phrase “ people of color ” finds its origins in the eighteenth-century “ gens de couleur , ” a French designation for mixed-race colonial subjects , and its permutation has been used in South Africa to name multiracial identities of all kinds ( “ coloureds ” ) .
In the twentieth-century United States , “ colored people ” was both a synonym for Black and , famously in the Third World Liberation Front of the late nineteen-sixties Bay Area , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s conference in 1977 , according to the anti-capitalist , feminist organizer Loretta Ross , “ women of color ” was negotiated as a “ solidarity definition , ” not a biological one , when women who were neither Black nor white asked to be included in a “ Black women ’ s agenda.
” “ People of color ” was subsequently popularized as a more radical , but also more mannerly , substitute for “ minority.
” This was how the term came to me , and came to structure much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been involved with since the late nineteen-nineties .
In student organizing as well as immigrant-rights work , housing campaigns , and the labor movement , “ people of color ” and the more revolutionary “ women of color ” helped define a united front against those in power—who were almost invariably white and male , whether boss or landlord , provost or governor .
These categories were most useful “ in overly white spaces where you aren ’ t seen as individuals , so you have to be like a union , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ P.O.C.
” and “ W.O.C.
” functioned as a kind of archipelago : as Filipinos or Black Ecuadorians , as Navajos or second-generation Ghanaians , one ’ s own island was the usual frame of reference , but it was also possible to zoom out and identify as part of a larger thing .
However formative this language was for some , a growing number of activists and commentators say that “ people of color ” no longer works .
The central point of Black Lives Matter , after all , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of anti-Black racism and name the particular experiences of the Black community .
“ People of color , ” by grouping all non-whites in the United States , if not the world , fails to capture the disproportionate per-capita harm to Blacks at the hands of the state .
The practical use of “ people of color ” has also devolved into “ diversity ” rhetoric , invoked by a white managerial class that may be willing to hire fair-skinned Latinx or Asian expats but not Black people ; or by non-Black minorities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s convenient .
Say Black if you mean Black .
S. Neyooxet Greymorning , a professor of anthropology and Native American studies at the University of Montana , told me that “ people of color ” tends to blot out the concerns of not only Black people but those who claim the “ political , ” non-racial category of indigenous .
“ The problem is , even when you have those kinds of alliances , normally one group will rise to the top and dominate the other groups , ” he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did not mean to contest the present focus on Black lives .
He applauded it and noted that every mobilization needs a definable aim ; ending all discriminatory violence would be too large and blurry a goal to structure a movement .
But it ’ s also the case that—since the emergence of the Black Lives Matter movement , in 2013—some intellectuals and activists have contended that anti-Blackness alone can explain U.S. history , and that all other campaigns for racial and social justice are tributaries of the Black liberation struggle .
Rejecting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may be of little consequence , but rejecting the solidarity it implies can result in an inaccurate and unduly limiting world view .
As Margo Okazawa-Rey , a professor emerita at San Francisco State University who participated in the Black feminist Combahee River Collective of the nineteen-seventies , put it , “ The history of this country is told from the East Coast , ” thereby privileging the Black-white binary .
This lens is foundational , and central to our racial imaginary , but it should not be the only one .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the caste system devised to maintain it— can not fully explain the attempted genocide of indigenous peoples , a decades-long ban on Chinese immigration , the mass deportations and lynching of Mexican migrant workers , the crackdown on Arab and Muslim communities after 9/11 , or our wars in the Philippines and Iraq .
The wealth of the United States owes not only to slavery but also the exploitation of migrant workers and poor whites , and the theft of land and natural resources here and abroad .
And although it is now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 solely to the civil-rights movement , its more proximate cause was the injunction of anti-Communist foreign policy .
Recognizing the various strands in the warp and weft of our history , alongside slavery and Black liberation , should be possible without unravelling the whole into “ All Lives Matter.
” This more complicated telling incorporates those who defy stereotypes of color and race : Black refugees , Samoans , biracial Arabs , Asian adoptees , and Latinx “ immigrants ” whose families have been in the Americas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ philosopher Lewis Gordon , the author of “ Bad Faith and Antiblack Racism , ” told me that it ’ s crucial to be “ precise about how American racism manifests ” while understanding “ that there were internment camps of Japanese-Americans , that there are reservations for indigenous peoples that were basically the inspiration for the South African Bantustans.
” In other words , look at what the empirical facts say—about who is affected by police violence , incarceration , school segregation , evictions , or job discrimination in a given sector—and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The fastest way to destroy coalition is by saying some of the ‘ people of color ’ under the umbrella have anti-Black racism , and my response is , ‘ That ’ s old news .
I don ’ t need to be in coalition with saints , ’ ” Gordon said .

The most recent time I was mistaken for white was a few weeks ago, on that most ignoble medium of Zoom. This time, it was a virtual organizing meeting for a tenant-rights group in New York. The handful of people on the call were mostly friends, all of us concerned about protecting neighbors from eviction, particularly during the pandemic. As we discussed the welfare of longtime renters, and as Black Lives Matter protests erupted a few blocks away, a new member of the group tried to thoughtfully turn the lens.
“We’re talking gentrification, but everyone on this call is white,” she said.
“Actually, I’m not white,” I replied.
“Oh, I just meant that we have no people of color,” she said. “No Black or brown people.”
I nodded to clear the air and because I found the exchange more intriguing than discomfiting. Though our organizing group included people of all races, it was true that this particular meeting was overwhelmingly white. The woman had thus invoked “people of color” and “Black and brown” to mean renters who were Black or Latinx, older and lower-income. I wondered if she would have said the same thing if younger, wealthier newcomers who happened to have dark skin had been on the call. Would they qualify as “people of color”?
I want to clarify that I do not look white. I am Korean-American and appear very much the part. So the woman’s mistake was not centered in her visual cortex but, rather, in whatever organs of intellect and affect tell us that one thing is not like the other. It was a short, mundane encounter of the kind I’ve had many times before, with both Black and white people. For decades, Americans have debated the place of Asians, Arabs, Latinx, indigenous people, and other interstitial minorities, and each community has waged its own battles over language: for example, people with indigenous roots in Mexico and Central and South America increasingly refuse the descriptors “Latinx” and “Hispanic.” But during these perilous months of COVID-19 and now the uprising for Black lives, the literal and figurative terms of cross-race solidarity have come into extreme flux. Both online and in person, among protesters as well as the chattering class, there is anxious talk of whiteness and non-whiteness, who counts as a “person of color” or fits under “Black and brown,” and whether the neologism of BIPOC—Black, indigenous, and people of color—does sufficient work. (A similar debate is unfolding in the United Kingdom over the term BAME—Black, Asian, and minority ethnic.) Indeed, the very capitalization of “Black” in this essay is a newly won victory of typographic recognition.
The phrase “people of color” finds its origins in the eighteenth-century “gens de couleur,” a French designation for mixed-race colonial subjects, and its permutation has been used in South Africa to name multiracial identities of all kinds (“coloureds”). In the twentieth-century United States, “colored people” was both a synonym for Black and, famously in the Third World Liberation Front of the late nineteen-sixties Bay Area, a postcolonial umbrella. At a national women’s conference in 1977, according to the anti-capitalist, feminist organizer Loretta Ross, “women of color” was negotiated as a “solidarity definition,” not a biological one, when women who were neither Black nor white asked to be included in a “Black women’s agenda.” “People of color” was subsequently popularized as a more radical, but also more mannerly, substitute for “minority.”
This was how the term came to me, and came to structure much of the U.S.-based activism I’ve been involved with since the late nineteen-nineties. In student organizing as well as immigrant-rights work, housing campaigns, and the labor movement, “people of color” and the more revolutionary “women of color” helped define a united front against those in power—who were almost invariably white and male, whether boss or landlord, provost or governor. These categories were most useful “in overly white spaces where you aren’t seen as individuals, so you have to be like a union,” an Indian-American friend in Los Angeles observed. “P.O.C.” and “W.O.C.” functioned as a kind of archipelago: as Filipinos or Black Ecuadorians, as Navajos or second-generation Ghanaians, one’s own island was the usual frame of reference, but it was also possible to zoom out and identify as part of a larger thing.
However formative this language was for some, a growing number of activists and commentators say that “people of color” no longer works. The central point of Black Lives Matter, after all, has been to condemn the mortal threat of anti-Black racism and name the particular experiences of the Black community. “People of color,” by grouping all non-whites in the United States, if not the world, fails to capture the disproportionate per-capita harm to Blacks at the hands of the state. The practical use of “people of color” has also devolved into “diversity” rhetoric, invoked by a white managerial class that may be willing to hire fair-skinned Latinx or Asian expats but not Black people, or by non-Black minorities who lean on the term only when it’s convenient. Say Black if you mean Black. S. Neyooxet Greymorning, a professor of anthropology and Native American studies at the University of Montana, told me that “people of color” tends to blot out the concerns of not only Black people but those who claim the “political,” non-racial category of indigenous. “The problem is, even when you have those kinds of alliances, normally one group will rise to the top and dominate the other groups,” he said.
To be clear, Greymorning did not mean to contest the present focus on Black lives. He applauded it and noted that every mobilization needs a definable aim; ending all discriminatory violence would be too large and blurry a goal to structure a movement. But it’s also the case that—since the emergence of the Black Lives Matter movement, in 2013—some intellectuals and activists have contended that anti-Blackness alone can explain U.S. history, and that all other campaigns for racial and social justice are tributaries of the Black liberation struggle. Rejecting the term “people of color” may be of little consequence, but rejecting the solidarity it implies can result in an inaccurate and unduly limiting world view.
As Margo Okazawa-Rey, a professor emerita at San Francisco State University who participated in the Black feminist Combahee River Collective of the nineteen-seventies, put it, “The history of this country is told from the East Coast,” thereby privileging the Black-white binary. This lens is foundational, and central to our racial imaginary, but it should not be the only one. The enslavement of Black people on this continent—and the caste system devised to maintain it—cannot fully explain the attempted genocide of indigenous peoples, a decades-long ban on Chinese immigration, the mass deportations and lynching of Mexican migrant workers, the crackdown on Arab and Muslim communities after 9/11, or our wars in the Philippines and Iraq. The wealth of the United States owes not only to slavery but also the exploitation of migrant workers and poor whites, and the theft of land and natural resources here and abroad. And although it is now common to attribute the passage of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 solely to the civil-rights movement, its more proximate cause was the injunction of anti-Communist foreign policy.
Recognizing the various strands in the warp and weft of our history, alongside slavery and Black liberation, should be possible without unravelling the whole into “All Lives Matter.” This more complicated telling incorporates those who defy stereotypes of color and race: Black refugees, Samoans, biracial Arabs, Asian adoptees, and Latinx “immigrants” whose families have been in the Americas for centuries. The University of Connecticut philosopher Lewis Gordon, the author of “Bad Faith and Antiblack Racism,” told me that it’s crucial to be “precise about how American racism manifests” while understanding “that there were internment camps of Japanese-Americans, that there are reservations for indigenous peoples that were basically the inspiration for the South African Bantustans.” In other words, look at what the empirical facts say—about who is affected by police violence, incarceration, school segregation, evictions, or job discrimination in a given sector—and then organize on that basis. “The fastest way to destroy coalition is by saying some of the ‘people of color’ under the umbrella have anti-Black racism, and my response is ‘That’s old news. I don’t need to be in coalition with saints,’ ” Gordon said.


newyorker--2020-07-27--Summer School for Protest Writing

Summer School for Protest Writing

Bartley Jeannoute teaches sixth-grade humanities at the Abington Friends School , a private Quaker institution in the North Philadelphia suburb of Jenkintown .
When schools closed for the pandemic , in March , he was teaching via Zoom within days .
“ It was pretty easy for us to pivot to distance learning , ” he said , because of his school ’ s resources .
“ Meanwhile , kids in the public schools were just at home , getting no interaction from their teachers , for almost a month.
” Before joining Abington Friends , last year , Jeannoute @ @ @ @ @ @ @ private institution .
A decade earlier , he attended Seton Hall Prep , a Catholic boys ’ high school in New Jersey , where he was one of two dozen Black students in a class of around two hundred .
He got good grades , but he grew frustrated with the curriculum of all-white authors .
“ I felt like I was reading other people ’ s literature , other people ’ s theology , other people ’ s history , ” he said .
“ I was looking for something that spoke @ @ @ @ @ @ @ second-to-last chapter of the book that we never got to.
” When he asked his teachers about incorporating more Black voices , the school sent a letter to his mother .
His teachers had noted a “ radical shift ” in his behavior , describing him as “ hostile ” and “ aggressive.
” After that , Jeannoute stayed quiet in class .
But the world is a little different now .
This summer , Jeannoute is teaching a free course for inner-city high schoolers called Protest Writing .
It is hosted by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The reading list ranges from W. E. B .
Du Bois to Nikole Hannah-Jones and Kendrick Lamar , and the class culminates in the students writing their own pieces .
The other day , after eight students had shown up for class over Zoom , Jeannoute shared his screen , so that they could view a political cartoon .
The drawing , titled “ The American Dream Game , ” showed two boys—one white and one Black—taking different paths to get to the end of the same board game .
The white kid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , while the Black kid ’ s was three times as long , winding through such obstacles as “ Segregation : Lose 25 Turns.
” Federico , a sophomore in a green shirt , raised his hand .
“ White people tend to judge African-Americans , saying ‘ They ’ re slow ’ or something like that , when in reality they just have a lot more things to overcome in order to reach that American dream , ” he said .
Zion Perry , a junior who wore her hair in braids @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people are so comfortable in what they have or where they are that , if they see a person of color in the same position as them , then they think that they both got to that place in the same way.
” Jeannoute asked the class , “ How do you think that this board might look if , instead of a Black man , this was a Black woman ?
” A sophomore named Felix , whose Webcam was positioned so that only the top half of his face was visible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even twistier .
He said that he had heard Black women talk about the disrespect that they get from various groups , including Black men .
“ It must be really hard if you feel like even the people inside of your own race don ’ t respect you , ” he said .
“ I like what Felix said a lot , ” Perry said .
She described some of the difficulties of being a Black woman : “ When we ’ re passionate or loud about something , we ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ try to conform to societal standards we ’ re whitewashed .
” On to homework .
The students had been asked to read a piece in the Times about how two schools—one private and one public—had adjusted to remote learning .
They talked about the failings of their own public schools .
Perry , who goes to the Academy of the New Church , a private school in the affluent suburb of Bryn Athyn , said that her school had done a bad job transitioning to remote learning , too .
“ It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about you , ” she said , explaining that her teachers hadn ’ t seemed to care whether she fell behind on her work .
This past June , she began posting on Instagram about experiencing racism at her school .
She also wrote about it for Jeannoute ’ s class .
In a two-page poem titled “ The Masked Prisoner , ” she compares the school ’ s instructors to prison guards ( “ They were terrible overseers and their titles were ‘ teachers ’ / I was taught Latin and European @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one ” ) and describes how they seemed to favor some students over others ( “ ‘ The victims ’ that were always seen as nice / And kind and so sweet and ‘ oh so pretty ’ and white ” ) .
A spokesperson for the Academy of the New Church responded , in a statement , “ We support all our students , alumni , and families in courageously speaking out about the hurt they experienced while attending our schools and we thank them for sharing input on how to make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parents plan to enroll her in a new school this fall .
In her poem , she writes , “ COVID came around and the killer saved my life.
” ♦

Bartley Jeannoute teaches sixth-grade humanities at the Abington Friends School, a private Quaker institution in the North Philadelphia suburb of Jenkintown. When schools closed for the pandemic, in March, he was teaching via Zoom within days. “It was pretty easy for us to pivot to distance learning,” he said, because of his school’s resources. “Meanwhile, kids in the public schools were just at home, getting no interaction from their teachers, for almost a month.”
Before joining Abington Friends, last year, Jeannoute taught at the Philadelphia School, another private institution. A decade earlier, he attended Seton Hall Prep, a Catholic boys’ high school in New Jersey, where he was one of two dozen Black students in a class of around two hundred. He got good grades, but he grew frustrated with the curriculum of all-white authors. “I felt like I was reading other people’s literature, other people’s theology, other people’s history,” he said. “I was looking for something that spoke more to my experience—it was like the second-to-last chapter of the book that we never got to.” When he asked his teachers about incorporating more Black voices, the school sent a letter to his mother. His teachers had noted a “radical shift” in his behavior, describing him as “hostile” and “aggressive.” After that, Jeannoute stayed quiet in class.
But the world is a little different now. This summer, Jeannoute is teaching a free course for inner-city high schoolers called Protest Writing. It is hosted by Mighty Writers, a local nonprofit. The reading list ranges from W. E. B. Du Bois to Nikole Hannah-Jones and Kendrick Lamar, and the class culminates in the students writing their own pieces. The other day, after eight students had shown up for class over Zoom, Jeannoute shared his screen, so that they could view a political cartoon. The drawing, titled “The American Dream Game,” showed two boys—one white and one Black—taking different paths to get to the end of the same board game. The white kid’s path was straight and short, while the Black kid’s was three times as long, winding through such obstacles as “Segregation: Lose 25 Turns.”
Federico, a sophomore in a green shirt, raised his hand. “White people tend to judge African-Americans, saying ‘They’re slow’ or something like that, when in reality they just have a lot more things to overcome in order to reach that American dream,” he said.
Zion Perry, a junior who wore her hair in braids, chimed in: “Some white people are so comfortable in what they have or where they are that, if they see a person of color in the same position as them, then they think that they both got to that place in the same way.”
Jeannoute asked the class, “How do you think that this board might look if, instead of a Black man, this was a Black woman?” A sophomore named Felix, whose Webcam was positioned so that only the top half of his face was visible, guessed that the path would look even twistier. He said that he had heard Black women talk about the disrespect that they get from various groups, including Black men. “It must be really hard if you feel like even the people inside of your own race don’t respect you,” he said.
“I like what Felix said a lot,” Perry said. She described some of the difficulties of being a Black woman: “When we’re passionate or loud about something, we’re seen as ghetto. But when we try to conform to societal standards we’re whitewashed. ”
On to homework. The students had been asked to read a piece in the Times about how two schools—one private and one public—had adjusted to remote learning. They talked about the failings of their own public schools. Perry, who goes to the Academy of the New Church, a private school in the affluent suburb of Bryn Athyn, said that her school had done a bad job transitioning to remote learning, too. “It really showed you how they actually felt about you,” she said, explaining that her teachers hadn’t seemed to care whether she fell behind on her work.
This past June, she began posting on Instagram about experiencing racism at her school. She also wrote about it for Jeannoute’s class. In a two-page poem titled “The Masked Prisoner,” she compares the school’s instructors to prison guards (“They were terrible overseers and their titles were ‘teachers’ / I was taught Latin and European, and even how to be like one”) and describes how they seemed to favor some students over others (“ ‘The victims’ that were always seen as nice / And kind and so sweet and ‘oh so pretty’ and white”). A spokesperson for the Academy of the New Church responded, in a statement, “We support all our students, alumni, and families in courageously speaking out about the hurt they experienced while attending our schools and we thank them for sharing input on how to make our schools better.”
Perry’s parents plan to enroll her in a new school this fall. In her poem, she writes, “COVID came around and the killer saved my life.” ♦


newyorker--2020-07-31--Trump Is the Election Crisis He Is Warning About

On Thursday morning , minutes after the worst U.S. economic data in seventy years were released and barely two hours before an American hero who risked his life for the right to vote was laid to rest , the President of the United States proposed delaying this fall ’ s election .
Amid the coronavirus pandemic and widespread remote voting , Donald Trump said that it would be the most “ INACCURATE & FRAUDULENT Election in history.
” Why shouldn ’ t the U.S. “ Delay the Election , ” he asked , “ until people can properly , securely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It was not the first time that the President has raised this particular canard—and a canard it is , a radical move that is not within his power to make happen—but it was by far his most inflammatory , destabilizing , and provocative attempt yet to call into question the legitimacy of the November election , in which he is trailing the Democratic candidate , Joe Biden , in virtually every poll .
Has there ever been a President who has done more to undermine American democracy ?
Trump himself has become the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that he warns about .
He is his own self-fulfilling prophecy .
Don ’ t be sucked in , Trump ’ s critics immediately warned .
He is trolling us .
He is distracting us .
Of course , they had a point .
It was no accident that the tweet came at 8:46 A.M. , sixteen minutes after the government reported that the U.S. economy had contracted by nearly ten per cent in the second quarter , the biggest drop in quarterly G.D.P .
ever .
There is so very much for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s tweet came just a day after a grievous milestone was reached : a hundred and fifty thousand Americans dead from COVID-19 .
And it was only a couple of hours before John Lewis , the longtime congressman and civil-rights leader , was laid to rest in what amounted to a state funeral—minus the decidedly unwelcome head of state .
But this was not merely one of Trump ’ s transitory diversions , in a week already full of them .
( Remember the demon-sperm-doctor controversy ?
The transparently racist appeal to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” free of low-income interlopers ? )
In fact , Trump ’ s attack on the legitimacy of the upcoming election has been intensifying for months , as his poll standing has sunk .
Trump ’ s “ Twitter Richter scale , ” as the Democratic lawyer Norm Eisen put it to me the other day , was already registering “ off the charts ” on the subject .
Indeed , when I asked Bill Frischling , who runs the Factbase Web site , which tracks Trump ’ s public statements and tweets @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President had questioned voting or suggested that an election would be rigged , unfair , or otherwise compromised , he came up with seven hundred and thirteen references by Trump since 2012 , the vast majority occurring in clusters as the elections of 2016 , 2018 , and 2020 neared .
Already , Factbase has recorded ninety-one instances of such rhetoric from Trump this year , a number which is all but sure to escalate .
So , sorry , we can not just ignore it when the President threatens to cancel an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statement that should haunt your dreams .
It is wannabe-dictator talk .
It is dangerous even if it is not attached to any actions .
And those who think that some actions will not follow have not been paying attention .
My alarm stems from having covered Russia when Vladimir Putin was dismantling the fragile , flawed democratic institutions that the country had established after the fall of the Soviet Union .
It stems from reading history .
It stems from having watched the past four years in America , where , day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and been justified , rationalized , and explained away .
Some of Trump ’ s supporters are already normalizing his attacks on the foundations of American democracy ; he has succeeded in getting us used to the idea , to having a conversation that should never be happening .
In April , Biden warned , at a fund-raiser , that Trump might attempt to “ kick back the election ” if he was losing .
At the time , Steve Guest , the director of rapid response for the Republican National Committee , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his rocker to make such an irresponsible allegation without any evidence.
” Well , now we have the evidence .
And what did Steve Guest have to say on Thursday ?
When I e-mailed him , he did not respond .
His Twitter feed was silent .
“ Those are the incoherent , conspiracy-theory ramblings of a lost candidate who is out of touch with reality , ” the Trump campaign spokesman Tim Murtaugh said , about Biden , back in April .
“ President Trump has been clear that the election will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are we supposed to think now ?
Trump ’ s most senior Cabinet officials have shown that they , too , are willing to follow their leader down even this most dubious of paths .
Attorney General William Barr , asked during congressional testimony earlier this week , before Trump ’ s tweet , about the possibility of a delayed election , refused to rule it out , dismissively saying that he had “ never looked into it.
” On Thursday , shortly after Trump ’ s tweet , Secretary of State Mike @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as well .
“ I ’ m not going to enter a legal judgment on that on the fly , ” Pompeo , a Harvard Law School graduate who is likely quite familiar with the Constitution , said .
He nonetheless added , “ In the end , the Department of Justice and others will make that legal determination , ” which is not at all how it will work .
Just as problematic were the lukewarm-at-best defenses of American democracy offered by some of the Republicans who did comment on Thursday .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ November since about 1788 , and I expect that will be the case again this year , ” the Senate Majority Whip , John Thune , of South Dakota , said .
“ I don ’ t think it ’ s a particularly good idea , ” Senator Lindsey Graham , Trump ’ s golfing buddy and confidant from South Carolina , said .
“ Expect ” ?
“ Particularly ” ?
Not exactly a rousing case for voting .
Perhaps most astonishing was this comment from Senator Kevin Cramer , of North @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if you guys take the bait , he ’ ll be the happiest guy in town .
I read it .
I laughed .
I thought , My gosh , this is going to consume a lot of people , except real people .
And it was clever.
” The fact that putting off an election is outside the power of the Presidency , that the Constitution clearly prescribes a transition of power on January 20th , 2021 , and that it would take an act of Congress to do anything about changing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the election is certainly relevant .
But there are many ways to cancel elections , and not all of them involve literally failing to hold the balloting .
Denying access to the polls , questioning the legitimacy of the results , throwing up legal challenges , forcing voters to stand in long lines : these have all happened , in our lifetimes , in the United States—we don ’ t have to look to foreign tyrannies for examples of how to influence elections .
So was it really reassuring when Senate Majority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ matter to rest by calling the November election date “ set in stone ” ?
When House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said , “ We should go forward with our election .
.
.
.
No way should we ever not hold an election on the day that we have it ” ?
The President did not back off his words .
He did not delete his tweet ; instead , he pinned it to the top of his feed for part of the day .
After hours of criticism , including from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who said that it was ground for his impeachment and removal , Trump ’ s unconvincing effort at spin was to suggest that it was all a brilliant ploy to get “ the very dishonest LameStream Media to finally start talking about the Risks to our Democracy from dangerous Universal Mail-in Voting.
” But , in fact , the risk to American democracy is Trump himself .

On Thursday morning, minutes after the worst U.S. economic data in seventy years were released and barely two hours before an American hero who risked his life for the right to vote was laid to rest, the President of the United States proposed delaying this fall’s election. Amid the coronavirus pandemic and widespread remote voting, Donald Trump said that it would be the most “INACCURATE & FRAUDULENT Election in history.” Why shouldn’t the U.S. “Delay the Election,” he asked, “until people can properly, securely and safely vote???”
It was not the first time that the President has raised this particular canard—and a canard it is, a radical move that is not within his power to make happen—but it was by far his most inflammatory, destabilizing, and provocative attempt yet to call into question the legitimacy of the November election, in which he is trailing the Democratic candidate, Joe Biden, in virtually every poll. Has there ever been a President who has done more to undermine American democracy? Trump himself has become the crisis of confidence in our political system that he warns about. He is his own self-fulfilling prophecy.
Don’t be sucked in, Trump’s critics immediately warned. He is trolling us. He is distracting us. Of course, they had a point. It was no accident that the tweet came at 8:46 A.M., sixteen minutes after the government reported that the U.S. economy had contracted by nearly ten per cent in the second quarter, the biggest drop in quarterly G.D.P. ever. There is so very much for Trump to distract us from. Trump’s tweet came just a day after a grievous milestone was reached: a hundred and fifty thousand Americans dead from COVID-19. And it was only a couple of hours before John Lewis, the longtime congressman and civil-rights leader, was laid to rest in what amounted to a state funeral—minus the decidedly unwelcome head of state.
But this was not merely one of Trump’s transitory diversions, in a week already full of them. (Remember the demon-sperm-doctor controversy? The transparently racist appeal to those living the “Suburban Lifestyle Dream” free of low-income interlopers?) In fact, Trump’s attack on the legitimacy of the upcoming election has been intensifying for months, as his poll standing has sunk. Trump’s “Twitter Richter scale,” as the Democratic lawyer Norm Eisen put it to me the other day, was already registering “off the charts” on the subject. Indeed, when I asked Bill Frischling, who runs the Factbase Web site, which tracks Trump’s public statements and tweets, to look at how often the President had questioned voting or suggested that an election would be rigged, unfair, or otherwise compromised, he came up with seven hundred and thirteen references by Trump since 2012, the vast majority occurring in clusters as the elections of 2016, 2018, and 2020 neared. Already, Factbase has recorded ninety-one instances of such rhetoric from Trump this year, a number which is all but sure to escalate.
So, sorry, we cannot just ignore it when the President threatens to cancel an election. This is the kind of statement that should haunt your dreams. It is wannabe-dictator talk. It is dangerous even if it is not attached to any actions. And those who think that some actions will not follow have not been paying attention. My alarm stems from having covered Russia when Vladimir Putin was dismantling the fragile, flawed democratic institutions that the country had established after the fall of the Soviet Union. It stems from reading history. It stems from having watched the past four years in America, where, day by day, the unthinkable has happened and been justified, rationalized, and explained away.
Some of Trump’s supporters are already normalizing his attacks on the foundations of American democracy; he has succeeded in getting us used to the idea, to having a conversation that should never be happening. In April, Biden warned, at a fund-raiser, that Trump might attempt to “kick back the election” if he was losing. At the time, Steve Guest, the director of rapid response for the Republican National Committee, responded, “Joe Biden is off his rocker to make such an irresponsible allegation without any evidence.” Well, now we have the evidence. And what did Steve Guest have to say on Thursday? When I e-mailed him, he did not respond. His Twitter feed was silent. “Those are the incoherent, conspiracy-theory ramblings of a lost candidate who is out of touch with reality,” the Trump campaign spokesman Tim Murtaugh said, about Biden, back in April. “President Trump has been clear that the election will happen on November 3rd.” So what are we supposed to think now?
Trump’s most senior Cabinet officials have shown that they, too, are willing to follow their leader down even this most dubious of paths. Attorney General William Barr, asked during congressional testimony earlier this week, before Trump’s tweet, about the possibility of a delayed election, refused to rule it out, dismissively saying that he had “never looked into it.” On Thursday, shortly after Trump’s tweet, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo refused to answer the question, as well. “I’m not going to enter a legal judgment on that on the fly,” Pompeo, a Harvard Law School graduate who is likely quite familiar with the Constitution, said. He nonetheless added, “In the end, the Department of Justice and others will make that legal determination,” which is not at all how it will work.
Just as problematic were the lukewarm-at-best defenses of American democracy offered by some of the Republicans who did comment on Thursday. “We’ve had elections every November since about 1788, and I expect that will be the case again this year,” the Senate Majority Whip, John Thune, of South Dakota, said. “I don’t think it’s a particularly good idea,” Senator Lindsey Graham, Trump’s golfing buddy and confidant from South Carolina, said. “Expect”? “Particularly”? Not exactly a rousing case for voting. Perhaps most astonishing was this comment from Senator Kevin Cramer, of North Dakota: “I think that, if you guys take the bait, he’ll be the happiest guy in town. I read it. I laughed. I thought, My gosh, this is going to consume a lot of people, except real people. And it was clever.”