truthout--2020-12-09--Trump Backs Herd Immunity and Calls Millions Contracting COVID “Terrific”

During a White House coronavirus vaccine event that took place on Tuesday , President Donald Trump appeared to voice strong support for the idea of so-called natural “ herd immunity , ” the controversial idea that a population can develop immunities and stop the spread of a virus simply by allowing it to “ run its course ” without significant efforts to mitigate it .
Throughout the year , Trump has been reluctant to back social distancing standards , including encouraging individuals to restrict personal travel and to wear masks , which have been found effective in actually limiting the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dangerously downplayed the seriousness of coronavirus , in spite of describing the pandemic as “ deadly ” earlier this year in an interview with Bob Woodward .
On Tuesday , Trump described vaccines for COVID-19 as “ our goal ” that “ was number one , because that ’ s the way it ends , ” referring to the pandemic .
But in other comments , he suggested that large numbers of infections in the U.S. over the past year were somehow a good thing .
“ I hear we ’ re close @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hearing that , and that ’ s terrific , that ’ s a very powerful vaccine in itself , ” Trump said , describing the number of Americans estimated to have had coronavirus so far .
In fact , a recent study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC ) notes that closer to 16 percent of Americans have likely had the virus , many without presenting symptoms .
But that means a significant number haven ’ t yet been exposed to COVID-19 .
“ This indicates that approximately 84 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yet been infected , and thus most of the country remains at risk , despite already high rates of hospitalization , ” a report from the health agency said .
Over the past several months , White House officials have demonstrated an eagerness to accept the idea of herd immunity — even going so far as to peddle a petition that signaled support for the concept from supposed medical professionals .
While the petition did include real doctors and health professionals who believed in promoting herd immunity , many of the names on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ based on common jokes , such as Dr. I.P .
Freely and Dr .
Person Fakename .
That dubious petition , endorsed by officials within the Trump administration , suggested that a herd immunity threshold of 20 percent was all that was needed in order to reduce the impact of the spread of COVID-19 .
However , most epidemiologists disagree with that idea , as immunity for other infectious diseases typically requires over 90 percent of the population to be vaccinated to prevent the spread of that disease .
Measles , for example @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to achieve herd immunity .
So-called natural herd immunity — developing immunities within a population without using safely administered inoculations — has been denounced by most health experts as a dangerous method of trying to combat coronavirus .
Many have likened it to the practice of eugenics , as it would probably result in millions of deaths among individuals with weaker immune systems .
Beyond the mortality rate for COVID , there are grave concerns about its long-term effects among survivors , many of whom are now living with debilitating symptoms .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ symptoms , which can include blood clots and organ failure , will linger .
Promoting natural herd immunity , which Trump and others in his administration have consistently done , would undoubtedly lead to more individuals having to live with these serious long-term health issues .
Since the start of the pandemic , more than 15.2 million Americans have contracted the coronavirus and as of now , 286,443 individuals have died from COVID-19 .

Most health experts agree herd immunity is a dangerous method to combat COVID-19 and would result in many more deaths.
During a White House coronavirus vaccine event that took place on Tuesday, President Donald Trump appeared to voice strong support for the idea of so-called natural “herd immunity,” the controversial idea that a population can develop immunities and stop the spread of a virus simply by allowing it to “run its course” without significant efforts to mitigate it.
Throughout the year, Trump has been reluctant to back social distancing standards, including encouraging individuals to restrict personal travel and to wear masks, which have been found effective in actually limiting the spread of COVID-19. He has also dangerously downplayed the seriousness of coronavirus, in spite of describing the pandemic as “deadly” earlier this year in an interview with Bob Woodward.
On Tuesday, Trump described vaccines for COVID-19 as “our goal” that “was number one, because that’s the way it ends,” referring to the pandemic. But in other comments, he suggested that large numbers of infections in the U.S. over the past year were somehow a good thing.
“I hear we’re close to 15 percent, I’m hearing that, and that’s terrific, that’s a very powerful vaccine in itself,” Trump said, describing the number of Americans estimated to have had coronavirus so far.
In fact, a recent study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) notes that closer to 16 percent of Americans have likely had the virus, many without presenting symptoms. But that means a significant number haven’t yet been exposed to COVID-19.
“This indicates that approximately 84% of the U.S. population has not yet been infected, and thus most of the country remains at risk, despite already high rates of hospitalization,” a report from the health agency said.
Over the past several months, White House officials have demonstrated an eagerness to accept the idea of herd immunity — even going so far as to peddle a petition that signaled support for the concept from supposed medical professionals. While the petition did include real doctors and health professionals who believed in promoting herd immunity, many of the names on the list turned out to be pranks based on common jokes, such as Dr. I.P. Freely and Dr. Person Fakename.
That dubious petition, endorsed by officials within the Trump administration, suggested that a herd immunity threshold of 20 percent was all that was needed in order to reduce the impact of the spread of COVID-19. However, most epidemiologists disagree with that idea, as immunity for other infectious diseases typically requires over 90 percent of the population to be vaccinated to prevent the spread of that disease. Measles, for example, requires a 94 percent vaccination threshold to achieve herd immunity.
So-called natural herd immunity — developing immunities within a population without using safely administered inoculations — has been denounced by most health experts as a dangerous method of trying to combat coronavirus. Many have likened it to the practice of eugenics, as it would probably result in millions of deaths among individuals with weaker immune systems.
Beyond the mortality rate for COVID, there are grave concerns about its long-term effects among survivors, many of whom are now living with debilitating symptoms. It’s also unclear how long these symptoms, which can include blood clots and organ failure, will linger. Promoting natural herd immunity, which Trump and others in his administration have consistently done, would undoubtedly lead to more individuals having to live with these serious long-term health issues.
Since the start of the pandemic, more than 15.2 million Americans have contracted the coronavirus and as of now, 286,443 individuals have died from COVID-19.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-12-09--With Abortion Rights Under Attack, Activists Urge Biden to Strike Hyde Amendment

Last June , the campaign of then-candidate Joe Biden reaffirmed Biden ’ s longstanding support for the Hyde Amendment , the 44-year-old ban that withholds coverage of abortion from millions of low-income people .
The next day , after a chorus of condemnation from fellow Democratic candidates and reproductive rights groups , Biden changed his mind .
“ If I believe health care is a right , as I do , I can no longer support an amendment that makes that right dependent on someone ’ s zip code , ” he said .
Now , advocates say , Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a budget that strikes down Hyde and related bans that force Native Americans , federal employees and Medicaid recipients in most states to raise hundreds or thousands of dollars for abortion or remain pregnant if they can ’ t .
More than 150 reproductive health , rights and justice organizations sent a letter to Biden Tuesday calling on him to introduce a budget that repeals Hyde .
“ He committed to ending Hyde during his campaign — and this is the clear first step to keeping that commitment and sending a message that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on abortion coverage , ” said Georgeanne Usova , senior legislative counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union .
President Obama left the Hyde Amendment intact in the budgets he sent to Congress , although he did repeal the ban on the use of local funds in Washington , D.C. , for abortion .
The last president to send Congress a budget that attempted to remove federal restrictions on abortion funding was Bill Clinton .
During Clinton ’ s first term , in 1993 , spokesperson George Stephanopoulos said , “ The President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Amendment during the campaign , and that will be his position.
” Over the past four years , the tide has shifted on the topic of public funding of abortion , thanks in large part to organizing by the reproductive justice group All* Above All .
“ Fundamentally , there is now a groundswell of public support , a groundswell of support in Congress , ” Destiny Lopez , co-director of All* Above All Action Fund , told Truthout in an interview .
If Biden removes the Hyde Amendment from his budget , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lifting this coverage ban that is impacting the folks who are in the crosshairs of the social and political moment that we ’ re living in , ” Lopez added .
“ People of color struggling financially are at the center of the uprising ; they ’ re at the center of the pandemic ; they ’ re dying and they ’ re going to bear the brunt of the economic downturn that COVID has created.
” The president ’ s draft of the budget is only a first step — any attempt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Congress .
The movement to repeal Hyde through passage of the EACH Woman Act faces an uphill battle there , with the balance of power in the Senate resting on two runoff races in Georgia next month .
But there are a number of steps Biden can take on his own , Lopez said , including pledging not to sign legislation that includes abortion coverage restrictions , highlighting abortion access in his first State of the Union address and reversing the Trump administration ’ s efforts to restrict private insurance coverage of abortion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the power of the bully pulpit , ” Lopez said , citing the 2016 Democratic presidential campaign as an example .
“ When I think about the game-changing moment for us , it was actually back during the last cycle , when both [ Hillary ] Clinton and [ Bernie ] Sanders went on the record saying that they support a repeal of Hyde.
” In the latest sign of growing momentum against the bans on public funding of abortion , Rep. Rosa DeLauro ( D-Connecticut ) convened a subcommittee hearing Tuesday that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first proactive hearing ” on the subject in the House Appropriations Committee , which determines how to spend the federal budget .
The hearing was one of DeLauro ’ s first steps after her House colleagues elected her to the powerful post of chair of that committee last week .
“ The inequities in our country ’ s health care system that have been exposed by the COVID-19 pandemic all further expose the impact of the Hyde Amendment , ” DeLauro said as she kicked off the hearing .
“ All of these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ color and their ability to do well for their families and their communities.
” Speakers at the hearing underscored how Black , Latinx and Native American people — who have borne the brunt of infections , hospitalizations and deaths from COVID-19 as well as the economic recession — are also disproportionately impacted by funding restrictions on abortion .
“ As our country undergoes a racial reckoning , I want to be very clear : the Hyde Amendment is a racist policy , ” Herminia Palacio , president and CEO of the Guttmacher Institute @ @ @ @ @ @ @ noted Black and Native American women are two to three times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes .
“ I ask you to reflect on these overlapping and perverse indignities , ” Palacio said .
“ The Hyde Amendment disproportionately withholds abortion coverage from Black and Brown communities , a potential consequence of which is being forced to continue pregnancy in a system in which Black and Indigenous people are astonishingly more likely to die.
” Palacio cited a Guttmacher literature review that found about one in four women who would have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ funding is not available .
Women who want an abortion but are denied access to one have four times greater odds of living below the federal poverty level and are more likely to experience serious pregnancy complications and to stay with abusive partners , according to the Turnaway Study .
Even before the pandemic and the soaring unemployment it has ushered in , about 40 percent of Americans said they would struggle to raise $ 400 for an emergency expense , which is less than what an abortion often costs .
The pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ travel further for care , especially in states like Texas that tried to use COVID as a pretext to ban abortion .
That has put pressure on groups like the Lilith Fund in Texas that work to help people afford abortions .
“ The average distance traveled by our clients in 2019 before the pandemic was 158 miles , about the distance from D.C. to Philadelphia , ” Amanda Beatriz Williams , executive director of the Lilith Fund , testified Tuesday .
“ But during the pandemic , when our callers were forced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ care , it increased to 635 miles , which is more than the distance from D.C. to Louisville , Kentucky.
” As abortion access faces an uncertain future due to the appointment of three Trump nominees to the Supreme Court , the issue of repealing Hyde has moved from a third rail in abortion politics to a more central issue .
As Biden and Kamala Harris prepare to enter office , reproductive justice groups are preparing to exert the pressure that may be necessary to force Biden to take action .
“ The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and that means if he does not move on this , he will be on the wrong side of history , ” Lopez said .
“ And I think we ’ re at a moment where we will have to hold the administration accountable .
”

Last June, the campaign of then-candidate Joe Biden reaffirmed Biden’s longstanding support for the Hyde Amendment, the 44-year-old ban that withholds coverage of abortion from millions of low-income people.
The next day, after a chorus of condemnation from fellow Democratic candidates and reproductive rights groups, Biden changed his mind.
“If I believe health care is a right, as I do, I can no longer support an amendment that makes that right dependent on someone’s zip code,” he said.
Now, advocates say, Biden must fulfill that promise by sending Congress a budget that strikes down Hyde and related bans that force Native Americans, federal employees and Medicaid recipients in most states to raise hundreds or thousands of dollars for abortion or remain pregnant if they can’t. More than 150 reproductive health, rights and justice organizations sent a letter to Biden Tuesday calling on him to introduce a budget that repeals Hyde.
“He committed to ending Hyde during his campaign — and this is the clear first step to keeping that commitment and sending a message that this administration will not accept discriminatory restrictions on abortion coverage,” said Georgeanne Usova, senior legislative counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union.
President Obama left the Hyde Amendment intact in the budgets he sent to Congress, although he did repeal the ban on the use of local funds in Washington, D.C., for abortion. The last president to send Congress a budget that attempted to remove federal restrictions on abortion funding was Bill Clinton.
During Clinton’s first term, in 1993, spokesperson George Stephanopoulos said, “The President called for the repeal of the Hyde Amendment during the campaign, and that will be his position.”
Over the past four years, the tide has shifted on the topic of public funding of abortion, thanks in large part to organizing by the reproductive justice group All* Above All. “Fundamentally, there is now a groundswell of public support, a groundswell of support in Congress,” Destiny Lopez, co-director of All* Above All Action Fund, told Truthout in an interview.
If Biden removes the Hyde Amendment from his budget, it would “begin the process of lifting this coverage ban that is impacting the folks who are in the crosshairs of the social and political moment that we’re living in,” Lopez added. “People of color struggling financially are at the center of the uprising; they’re at the center of the pandemic; they’re dying and they’re going to bear the brunt of the economic downturn that COVID has created.”
The president’s draft of the budget is only a first step — any attempt to repeal Hyde would require cooperation by Congress.
The president’s draft of the budget is only a first step — any attempt to repeal Hyde would require cooperation by Congress. The movement to repeal Hyde through passage of the EACH Woman Act faces an uphill battle there, with the balance of power in the Senate resting on two runoff races in Georgia next month. But there are a number of steps Biden can take on his own, Lopez said, including pledging not to sign legislation that includes abortion coverage restrictions, highlighting abortion access in his first State of the Union address and reversing the Trump administration’s efforts to restrict private insurance coverage of abortion.
“I can’t underestimate the power of the bully pulpit,” Lopez said, citing the 2016 Democratic presidential campaign as an example. “When I think about the game-changing moment for us, it was actually back during the last cycle, when both [Hillary] Clinton and [Bernie] Sanders went on the record saying that they support a repeal of Hyde.”
In the latest sign of growing momentum against the bans on public funding of abortion, Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Connecticut) convened a subcommittee hearing Tuesday that All* Above All described as the “first proactive hearing” on the subject in the House Appropriations Committee, which determines how to spend the federal budget. The hearing was one of DeLauro’s first steps after her House colleagues elected her to the powerful post of chair of that committee last week.
“The inequities in our country’s health care system that have been exposed by the COVID-19 pandemic all further expose the impact of the Hyde Amendment,” DeLauro said as she kicked off the hearing. “All of these issues deny the humanity of people of color and their ability to do well for their families and their communities.”
Speakers at the hearing underscored how Black, Latinx and Native American people — who have borne the brunt of infections, hospitalizations and deaths from COVID-19 as well as the economic recession — are also disproportionately impacted by funding restrictions on abortion.
“As our country undergoes a racial reckoning, I want to be very clear: the Hyde Amendment is a racist policy,” Herminia Palacio, president and CEO of the Guttmacher Institute, said in her testimony. Palacio noted Black and Native American women are two to three times more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes.
“I ask you to reflect on these overlapping and perverse indignities,” Palacio said. “The Hyde Amendment disproportionately withholds abortion coverage from Black and Brown communities, a potential consequence of which is being forced to continue pregnancy in a system in which Black and Indigenous people are astonishingly more likely to die.”
“As our country undergoes a racial reckoning, I want to be very clear: the Hyde Amendment is a racist policy.”
Palacio cited a Guttmacher literature review that found about one in four women who would have Medicaid-funded abortions instead give birth when this funding is not available. Women who want an abortion but are denied access to one have four times greater odds of living below the federal poverty level and are more likely to experience serious pregnancy complications and to stay with abusive partners, according to the Turnaway Study.
Even before the pandemic and the soaring unemployment it has ushered in, about 40 percent of Americans said they would struggle to raise $400 for an emergency expense, which is less than what an abortion often costs. The pandemic has forced people to wait longer or travel further for care, especially in states like Texas that tried to use COVID as a pretext to ban abortion. That has put pressure on groups like the Lilith Fund in Texas that work to help people afford abortions.
“The average distance traveled by our clients in 2019 before the pandemic was 158 miles, about the distance from D.C. to Philadelphia,” Amanda Beatriz Williams, executive director of the Lilith Fund, testified Tuesday. “But during the pandemic, when our callers were forced to travel out of state for their care, it increased to 635 miles, which is more than the distance from D.C. to Louisville, Kentucky.”
As abortion access faces an uncertain future due to the appointment of three Trump nominees to the Supreme Court, the issue of repealing Hyde has moved from a third rail in abortion politics to a more central issue. As Biden and Kamala Harris prepare to enter office, reproductive justice groups are preparing to exert the pressure that may be necessary to force Biden to take action.
“The historical tide has turned on this issue, and that means if he does not move on this, he will be on the wrong side of history,” Lopez said. “And I think we’re at a moment where we will have to hold the administration accountable.”
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-12-09--Black Trans Feminist Thought Can Set Us Free

How can we move beyond a mindset dictated by the logic of prison , policing and anti-Blackness ?
What is “ abolition feminism ” ?
And how do the politics of gender , including the criminalization of trans and nonbinary people , dovetail with our understandings of race ?
How can deconstructing racialized gender binaries help us move toward justice and liberation ?
To confront these questions , I spoke with Che Gossett , a Black nonbinary femme writer based in Brooklyn , New York .
They are a 2019-2020 Helena Rubinstein Fellow in Critical Studies in the Whitney Independent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Women ’ s and Gender Studies , as well as a graduate fellow at the Center for Cultural Analysis at Rutgers University in New Brunswick , New Jersey .
They are co-editor with Professor Eva Hayward of University of Arizona of a forthcoming Transgender Studies Quarterly Journal special issue : “ Trans in a Time of HIV/AIDS.
” George Yancy : Within a context where Black people , Indigenous people and people of color ( or BIPOC ) continue to be victims of a form of racist and capitalist carceral punishment , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what is being called “ abolition feminism ” ?
Please define the meaning of this important term and speak to its relevance at this critical moment in U.S. history and global history .
Che Gossett : My knowledge of the term abolition feminism derives from Angela Davis and Gina Dent ’ s critical labor .
I think of it as an open invitation to the unfinished liberatory struggle for abolition that is also a Black feminist struggle against anti-Blackness and heteropatriarchy and forms of carceral and white feminism that continue to perpetuate these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grammars of capture.
” Abolition feminism would not only entail the abolition of the normative version of “ feminism , ” as opposed to its reform , and is not just a project of negative freedom but one that is immanent to and animate within already existing ensembles of struggle .
Spillers ’ s definition of Black feminism as a “ critical disposition ” is that it is “ a repertoire of concepts , practices , and alignments , ” that “ is progressive in outlook and dedicated to the view that sustainable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; it also stands up for the survival of this planet ” This concept really resonates with me and I see this as critical to a formulation of “ abolition feminism.
” Black trans women and femmes have historically and contemporaneously battled criminalization and policing , the precarious violence of lumpen proletarianization within the capitalist political economy — underground economies of drag and sex were and are criminalized — and also the violence of the anti-Black and anti-trans libidinal economy .
My thinking here is informed by Lindon Barrett in terms of how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ libidinal and corporeal protocols , that is , where “ Race is conceived of as a set of libidinal prohibitions ” — an economy wherein Black trans people face anti-Black and anti-trans patriarchal violence that is both legal and extralegal .
In this moment , I am also thinking about Layleen Polanco , who died at Rikers , in the women ’ s facility , where the carceral liberals and carceral feminists would have imagined her to be safe .
As CeCe McDonald reminds us , prisons are safe for no one .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ continues now in the middle of the COVID-19 epidemic .
I went to a powerful protest here in New York City over the summer for Black trans life , which was modeled after the 1917 Silent Parade .
The march this summer was a powerful surge of rage and mourning where an estimated 15,000 people attended .
This felt like a seismic shift .
Black trans demands continue and there ’ s dedicated mutual aid and organizing happening that made that moment possible .
The Brooklyn Liberation , The Okra Project , Marsha @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , GLITS and Black Trans Femmes in the Arts have all been doing incredible work at this historical juncture .
GLITS just opened the first by and for trans housing complex , and all of these organizations and formations center formerly incarcerated trans people and sex workers .
Black trans women and femmes have not only been at the epicenter of the struggle against racial patriarchy — even while being exiled from and unthought of by feminism — but also there ’ s an analysis , a study of racial patriarchy that is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political formations : an archive of zines and political grammar ( fag , non-men , street queen , etc . )
that continues and that is essential to and indispensable for the struggle against racial patriarchy and carceral violence in the present tense .
How do we creatively cultivate spaces that exist outside of carceral logics and anti-Black logics ?
I ’ m not sure that we can ever fully in this “ world ” create spaces that exist entirely outside of anti-Blackness and its carceral technologies , since we are always under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incredible lessons of the abolitionist movement , which is a form of critique and praxis , is that abolition is both an interior and external practice .
I think of Jared Sexton ’ s brilliant synopsis : “ Slavery is the threshold of the political world , abolition the interminable radicalization of every radical movement.
” The radicalization is perennial .
And rather than falling for the ruse of political immunity to carceral logics and anti-Blackness , perhaps knowing that this protracted struggle is one that preceded us , and will continue after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s a powerful line in Frantz Fanon ’ s The Wretched of the Earth that speaks to contamination and the illusion of purity and the need for an entangled effort : “ everyone must be involved in the struggle for the sake of the common salvation .
There are no clean hands , no innocent bystanders .
We are all in the process of dirtying our hands in the quagmire of our soil and the terrifying void of our minds.
” Black thought has always been “ thought of the outside ” ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this thinking of the outside is the project of moving against and beyond the coordinates of what Sylvia Wynter termed “ our narratively condemned status ” in her incredible essay “ No Human Involved , ” which she wrote following the brutal assault and viral circulation ( the digital afterlife of slavery ) on Rodney King .
Wynter ’ s “ Towards the Sociogenic Principle ” holds out a theoretical and political horizon for life beyond/against the racial and colonial figure of the Human , which she so brilliantly terms a genre @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parts ways with functionalism — the theory that the mind is what it does — and argues for sociogenesis : “ if the mind is what the brain does , what the brain does , is itself culturally determined through the mediation of the socialized sense of self , as well as of the ‘ social ’ situation in which this self is placed.
” For Wynter , not only is Man a genre but so too is ( the theory of ) Mind .
Within a context where the mind-body problem is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a priori universalized consciousness , the phylogenetic/ontogenetic dyad is a symptom of whiteness in that it ignores sociogeny and it can take that position of epistemic pseudo- or quasi-ignorance as a result of not experiencing racialization .
In this sense , mind is seen as universal and given , as opposed to constructed .
To modify and repurpose theories of mind that posit underlying laws that determine the necessity for consciousness in the face of the question as to why living creatures , humans in particular , require conscious experience at all , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sociogeny .
She brilliantly shows how thinking with Fanon opens up “ insights into the laws which govern the realm of lived subjective experience , human and nonhuman , which govern therefore , the interrelated phenomena of identity , mind and/or consciousness.
” Wynter makes a lateral move and offers , via her theorization of the Human as a genre , a de-hierarchization of life/subjectivities .
This to me , especially in this moment of what anti-Black capitalist planetary destruction might look like , speaks to other formations and orchestrations of life that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inhabitability of this planet .
I have written about how cisgender Black men have suffered under the gaze of whiteness , how they have been rendered both invisible and hyper-visible .
Within the context of the U.S. ’ s anti-Black imaginary , Black men are deemed criminals , thugs and brutal animals .
My work here presupposes a gender binary that I leave untroubled .
Could you speak to how violence operates precisely at the site of the gender binary ?
The violent figuration of Black people as criminals , thugs and brutal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they are imagined creatures , not actual animals — is also sexualized and gendered against Black trans , queer and gender nonconforming people .
This can be seen with the anti-Black and anti-trans viral lithograph of Black trans sex worker Mary Jones in 1836 .
She was demonized as “ monstrous ” as she testified that she had “ always dressed this way amongst people of my own colour.
” Or , think about the news media referring to the Black , gender-nonconforming queer young people known as the NJ4 — whose struggle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Night — who defended themselves against patriarchal and homophobic attacks and were prosecuted as a result , and referred to as a “ wolf pack.
” It is this aestheticization of anti-Blackness that we face in trying either to force us to be “ normal ” or in figuring us as disposable .
Again , this is the discursive violence of what Wynter calls “ our narratively condemned status.
” Blackness is gender trouble .
The etymology of cisgender itself presumes a correspondence between assigned sex and gender , which fails @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Black feminist and Black trans studies ’ deconstruction of sex and gender , of Spillers ’ s “ ungendering ” and also the work of Riley Snorton and also Zakiyyah Imani Jackson on the anti-Black logic of binary sexuation .
As Snorton argues , “ captive flesh figures a critical genealogy for modern transness , as chattel persons gave rise to an understanding of gender as mutable and as an amenable form of being ” — this happens through fungibility .
The slave is the ground for “ modern ” gender and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Scenes of Subjection , Saidiya Hartman expands the conceptualization of the commodity form by showing how the figure of the slave as commodity is situated not only in the political but also within a libidinal economy of what Frank Wilderson calls “ gratuitous violence.
” Hartman and Fred Moten think of the commodity that speaks ( which Marx only imagines ) and , moreover , the commodity that screams .
Black studies begin with the commodification of being .
Marx beyond Marx ( to sabotage Antonio Negri ) .
Hartman writes about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economy that is consecrated in the commodity form and its fungibility and trans-positionality .
In a paragraph worth quoting at length , she argues : Black queer and trans and feminist thought provide an arsenal of critique and praxis that allows us to think rigorously both about violence , and to think again alongside Frank Wilderson ’ s brilliant grammar , the demand for “ gratuitous freedom.
” The violence that you are describing is part of a broader matrix of the gender binary that constantly seeks to imperil and outlaw Blackness , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what Jared Sexton calls “ borrowed institutionality.
” How might the discourse and praxis of Trans Studies help us to move forward , to a world where justice and radical love prevails ?
One of the problems of the heralded moment of “ trans visibility ” is the assumption that trans is perceptible and knowable , that you can visually isolate trans or that there are more authentic versions of trans than others , which implies a kind of hierarchical and vertical visual economy .
Trans visibility so often means surveillance , especially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ security state — from TSA at airports to the welfare line .
This is rigorously studied and dismantled by Toby Beauchamp in Going Stealth : Transgender Politics and U.S. Surveillance Practices and in Eric Stanley ’ s brilliant essay on visibility as an anti-trans optic ( and operation ) .
I ’ m interested in how trans artists through their visual theorizing are subverting that order through iterations of trans “ opacity ” and troubling aesthetics as a racial and patriarchal regime .
For example , Ser Serpas , who in a show @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exhibited as “ self- portrait , ” undercuts the autobiographical notion of the self and its portrait , titled penultimate warrior .
The “ self-portrait ” was an incinerated armchair that she had lit on fire after throwing estradiol on it .
The armchair isn ’ t an armchair anymore ; rather than perfected , it is undone .
Trans as gender in ruins .
Thinking about another intervention and troubling of trans linearity and visibility within the frame of trans studies is Eva Hayward ’ s “ More Lessons from a Starfish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hayward presents an alternative to the medical linear narrative of trans women and femme embodiment as ontological insufficiency and corporeal lack — the idea that to transition requires a supplement to an originary lack that is then solved by reassignment surgery that would make one into a “ real ” woman .
Instead , Hayward shows how every cut is a fold , how there ’ s no lack but instead a transition of body from itself to itself .
Finally , in thinking about Black trans art and the afterlife of slavery @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attention to the incredible aesthetic , cinematic and archival labor of the filmmaker and artist Tourmaline .
Hartman argues that the afterlife of slavery is an aesthetic problem and I see the work of Tourmaline as both an inhabitation of that problem , through speculative cinematography and what Hartman terms “ critical fabulation.
” Tourmaline ’ s film Salacia which is now in the permanent collection of both the Museum of Modern Art and the Tate in London , as well as her films Happy Birthday Marsha and Atlantic is a Sea of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aesthetics of abolition , as well as think of the historical temporality of Blackness and transness beyond the limits to and effacements of the archive of slavery .
This interview has been lightly edited for clarity .

How can we move beyond a mindset dictated by the logic of prison, policing and anti-Blackness? What is “abolition feminism”? And how do the politics of gender, including the criminalization of trans and nonbinary people, dovetail with our understandings of race? How can deconstructing racialized gender binaries help us move toward justice and liberation?
To confront these questions, I spoke with Che Gossett, a Black nonbinary femme writer based in Brooklyn, New York. They are a 2019-2020 Helena Rubinstein Fellow in Critical Studies in the Whitney Independent Study Program, and a Ph.D. candidate in Women’s and Gender Studies, as well as a graduate fellow at the Center for Cultural Analysis at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, New Jersey. They are co-editor with Professor Eva Hayward of University of Arizona of a forthcoming Transgender Studies Quarterly Journal special issue: “Trans in a Time of HIV/AIDS.”
George Yancy: Within a context where Black people, Indigenous people and people of color (or BIPOC) continue to be victims of a form of racist and capitalist carceral punishment, can you speak to the importance of what is being called “abolition feminism”? Please define the meaning of this important term and speak to its relevance at this critical moment in U.S. history and global history.
Che Gossett: My knowledge of the term abolition feminism derives from Angela Davis and Gina Dent’s critical labor. I think of it as an open invitation to the unfinished liberatory struggle for abolition that is also a Black feminist struggle against anti-Blackness and heteropatriarchy and forms of carceral and white feminism that continue to perpetuate these forms of what Hortense Spillers calls “grammars of capture.” Abolition feminism would not only entail the abolition of the normative version of “feminism,” as opposed to its reform, and is not just a project of negative freedom but one that is immanent to and animate within already existing ensembles of struggle. Spillers’s definition of Black feminism as a “critical disposition” is that it is “a repertoire of concepts, practices, and alignments,” that “is progressive in outlook and dedicated to the view that sustainable life systems must be available to everyone; it also stands up for the survival of this planet . ” This concept really resonates with me and I see this as critical to a formulation of “abolition feminism.”
Black trans women and femmes have historically and contemporaneously battled criminalization and policing, the precarious violence of lumpen proletarianization within the capitalist political economy — underground economies of drag and sex were and are criminalized — and also the violence of the anti-Black and anti-trans libidinal economy. My thinking here is informed by Lindon Barrett in terms of how race is conceived as a set of libidinal and corporeal protocols, that is, where “Race is conceived of as a set of libidinal prohibitions” — an economy wherein Black trans people face anti-Black and anti-trans patriarchal violence that is both legal and extralegal. In this moment, I am also thinking about Layleen Polanco, who died at Rikers, in the women’s facility, where the carceral liberals and carceral feminists would have imagined her to be safe. As CeCe McDonald reminds us, prisons are safe for no one.
The premature death of Black trans women continues now in the middle of the COVID-19 epidemic. I went to a powerful protest here in New York City over the summer for Black trans life, which was modeled after the 1917 Silent Parade. The march this summer was a powerful surge of rage and mourning where an estimated 15,000 people attended. This felt like a seismic shift. Black trans demands continue and there’s dedicated mutual aid and organizing happening that made that moment possible. The Brooklyn Liberation, The Okra Project, Marsha P. Johnson Institute, For the Gworls, GLITS and Black Trans Femmes in the Arts have all been doing incredible work at this historical juncture. GLITS just opened the first by and for trans housing complex, and all of these organizations and formations center formerly incarcerated trans people and sex workers.
Black trans women and femmes have been at the epicenter of the struggle against racial patriarchy.
Black trans women and femmes have not only been at the epicenter of the struggle against racial patriarchy — even while being exiled from and unthought of by feminism — but also there’s an analysis, a study of racial patriarchy that is made available to us through the 1970s political formations: an archive of zines and political grammar (fag, non-men, street queen, etc.) that continues and that is essential to and indispensable for the struggle against racial patriarchy and carceral violence in the present tense.
How do we creatively cultivate spaces that exist outside of carceral logics and anti-Black logics?
I’m not sure that we can ever fully in this “world” create spaces that exist entirely outside of anti-Blackness and its carceral technologies, since we are always under duress. I think one of the incredible lessons of the abolitionist movement, which is a form of critique and praxis, is that abolition is both an interior and external practice. I think of Jared Sexton’s brilliant synopsis: “Slavery is the threshold of the political world, abolition the interminable radicalization of every radical movement.” The radicalization is perennial. And rather than falling for the ruse of political immunity to carceral logics and anti-Blackness, perhaps knowing that this protracted struggle is one that preceded us, and will continue after, can sustain us.
There’s a powerful line in Frantz Fanon’s The Wretched of the Earth that speaks to contamination and the illusion of purity and the need for an entangled effort: “everyone must be involved in the struggle for the sake of the common salvation. There are no clean hands, no innocent bystanders. We are all in the process of dirtying our hands in the quagmire of our soil and the terrifying void of our minds.”
Black thought has always been “thought of the outside” (to repurpose Maurice Blanchot). Part of this thinking of the outside is the project of moving against and beyond the coordinates of what Sylvia Wynter termed “our narratively condemned status” in her incredible essay “No Human Involved,” which she wrote following the brutal assault and viral circulation (the digital afterlife of slavery) on Rodney King.
Wynter’s “Towards the Sociogenic Principle” holds out a theoretical and political horizon for life beyond/against the racial and colonial figure of the Human, which she so brilliantly terms a genre. In this pathbreaking essay, Wynter parts ways with functionalism — the theory that the mind is what it does — and argues for sociogenesis: “if the mind is what the brain does, what the brain does, is itself culturally determined through the mediation of the socialized sense of self, as well as of the ‘social’ situation in which this self is placed.” For Wynter, not only is Man a genre but so too is (the theory of) Mind. Within a context where the mind-body problem is maintained, with its positing of an a priori universalized consciousness, the phylogenetic/ontogenetic dyad is a symptom of whiteness in that it ignores sociogeny and it can take that position of epistemic pseudo- or quasi-ignorance as a result of not experiencing racialization. In this sense, mind is seen as universal and given, as opposed to constructed.
One of the incredible lessons of the abolitionist movement is that abolition is both an interior and external practice.
To modify and repurpose theories of mind that posit underlying laws that determine the necessity for consciousness in the face of the question as to why living creatures, humans in particular, require conscious experience at all, Wynter extends Fanon’s theorization of sociogeny. She brilliantly shows how thinking with Fanon opens up “insights into the laws which govern the realm of lived subjective experience, human and nonhuman, which govern therefore, the interrelated phenomena of identity, mind and/or consciousness.”
Wynter makes a lateral move and offers, via her theorization of the Human as a genre, a de-hierarchization of life/subjectivities. This to me, especially in this moment of what anti-Black capitalist planetary destruction might look like, speaks to other formations and orchestrations of life that work toward new iterations of livability and inhabitability of this planet.
I have written about how cisgender Black men have suffered under the gaze of whiteness, how they have been rendered both invisible and hyper-visible. Within the context of the U.S.’s anti-Black imaginary, Black men are deemed criminals, thugs and brutal animals. My work here presupposes a gender binary that I leave untroubled. Could you speak to how violence operates precisely at the site of the gender binary?
The violent figuration of Black people as criminals, thugs and brutal animals — “beasts,” since they are imagined creatures, not actual animals — is also sexualized and gendered against Black trans, queer and gender nonconforming people. This can be seen with the anti-Black and anti-trans viral lithograph of Black trans sex worker Mary Jones in 1836. She was demonized as “monstrous” as she testified that she had “always dressed this way amongst people of my own colour.” Or, think about the news media referring to the Black, gender-nonconforming queer young people known as the NJ4 — whose struggle was the center of the documentary Out in the Night — who defended themselves against patriarchal and homophobic attacks and were prosecuted as a result, and referred to as a “wolf pack.” It is this aestheticization of anti-Blackness that we face in trying either to force us to be “normal” or in figuring us as disposable. Again, this is the discursive violence of what Wynter calls “our narratively condemned status.”
Blackness is gender trouble. The etymology of cisgender itself presumes a correspondence between assigned sex and gender, which fails to account for Blackness. Thinking here of Black feminist and Black trans studies’ deconstruction of sex and gender, of Spillers’s “ungendering” and also the work of Riley Snorton and also Zakiyyah Imani Jackson on the anti-Black logic of binary sexuation. As Snorton argues, “captive flesh figures a critical genealogy for modern transness, as chattel persons gave rise to an understanding of gender as mutable and as an amenable form of being” — this happens through fungibility. The slave is the ground for “modern” gender and sexuality.
In her writing on fungibility in Scenes of Subjection, Saidiya Hartman expands the conceptualization of the commodity form by showing how the figure of the slave as commodity is situated not only in the political but also within a libidinal economy of what Frank Wilderson calls “gratuitous violence.” Hartman and Fred Moten think of the commodity that speaks (which Marx only imagines) and, moreover, the commodity that screams. Black thought begins with the un-apprehension of being. Marx beyond Marx (to sabotage Antonio Negri). Hartman writes about the relationship between libidinal economy and political economy that is consecrated in the commodity form and its fungibility and trans-positionality. In a paragraph worth quoting at length, she argues:
The relation between pleasure and the possession of slave property, in both the figurative and literal senses, can be explained in part by the fungibility of the slave — that is, the joy made possible by virtue of the replaceability and interchangeability endemic to the commodity — and by the extensive capacities of property — that is, the augmentation of the master subject through his embodiment in external objects and persons. Put differently, the fungibility of the commodity makes the captive body an abstract and empty vessel vulnerable to the projection of others’ feelings, ideas, desires, and values.
Black queer and trans and feminist thought provide an arsenal of critique and praxis that allows us to think rigorously both about violence, and to think again alongside Frank Wilderson’s brilliant grammar, the demand for “gratuitous freedom.” The violence that you are describing is part of a broader matrix of the gender binary that constantly seeks to imperil and outlaw Blackness, despite the failed optimism of appeals to what Jared Sexton calls “borrowed institutionality.”
How might the discourse and praxis of Trans Studies help us to move forward, to a world where justice and radical love prevails?
Blackness is gender trouble.
One of the problems of the heralded moment of “trans visibility” is the assumption that trans is perceptible and knowable, that you can visually isolate trans or that there are more authentic versions of trans than others, which implies a kind of hierarchical and vertical visual economy. Trans visibility so often means surveillance, especially by non-trans people and also by the security state — from TSA at airports to the welfare line. This is rigorously studied and dismantled by Toby Beauchamp in Going Stealth: Transgender Politics and U.S. Surveillance Practices and in Eric Stanley’s brilliant essay on visibility as an anti-trans optic (and operation). I’m interested in how trans artists through their visual theorizing are subverting that order through iterations of trans “opacity” and troubling aesthetics as a racial and patriarchal regime. For example, Ser Serpas, who in a show in 2017 at the gallery Current Projects exhibited as “self- portrait,” undercuts the autobiographical notion of the self and its portrait, titled penultimate warrior. The “self-portrait” was an incinerated armchair that she had lit on fire after throwing estradiol on it. The armchair isn’t an armchair anymore; rather than perfected, it is undone. Trans as gender in ruins.
Thinking about another intervention and troubling of trans linearity and visibility within the frame of trans studies is Eva Hayward’s “More Lessons from a Starfish: Prefixial Flesh and Transspeciated Selves.” Hayward presents an alternative to the medical linear narrative of trans women and femme embodiment as ontological insufficiency and corporeal lack — the idea that to transition requires a supplement to an originary lack that is then solved by reassignment surgery that would make one into a “real” woman. Instead, Hayward shows how every cut is a fold, how there’s no lack but instead a transition of body from itself to itself.
Finally, in thinking about Black trans art and the afterlife of slavery, it’s important to bring attention to the incredible aesthetic, cinematic and archival labor of the filmmaker and artist Tourmaline. Hartman argues that the afterlife of slavery is an aesthetic problem and I see the work of Tourmaline as both an inhabitation of that problem, through speculative cinematography and what Hartman terms “critical fabulation.” Tourmaline’s film Salacia , which is now in the permanent collection of both the Museum of Modern Art and the Tate in London, as well as her films Happy Birthday Marsha and Atlantic is a Sea of Bones helps us imagine the Black trans aesthetics of abolition, as well as think of the historical temporality of Blackness and transness beyond the limits to and effacements of the archive of slavery.
This interview has been lightly edited for clarity.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-12-10--Columbia University Students Are Preparing to Launch a Tuition Strike

At the end of November , members of the Columbia University-Barnard College chapter of Young Democratic Socialists of America ( YDSA ) launched a tuition strike campaign against  “ exorbitant tuition rates ” which , they say ,  “ constitute a significant source of financial hardship ” during the pandemic .
Student demands are wide-ranging and include a 10 % reduction in the cost of attendance , 10 % increase in financial aid , and an amalgamation of demands from disparate student campaigns , many of which were set in motion long before the pandemic began .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ petition to withhold tuition for the Spring 2021 semester and any future donations to the university after graduating .
Columbia has consistently topped charts as the most expensive private university in the country , charging over $ 61,000 a year in tuition and fees , which accounts for nearly a quarter of the school ’ s revenue .
“ We just felt like the only way to pressure a university that is structured around the profit motive would be to directly impact their bottom line , ” says Emmaline Bennett , a student @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one of the founding members of Columbia-Barnard YDSA , which she co-chairs .
Since the pandemic began , the university ’ s $ 11 billion endowment has seen a $ 310 million increase while the response from administration , Bennett says ,  “ has been mostly empty rhetoric around shared sacrifice.
” In These Times reached out to the university administration and did not hear back by the time of publication .
In a December 1 article in Patch , a university spokesperson said ,  “ Throughout this difficult year , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health and safety of our community , fulfilling our commitment to anti-racism , providing the education sought by our students , and continuing the scientific and other research needed to overcome society ’ s serious challenges.
” Becca Roskill , a junior in Columbia ’ s school of engineering and secretary of Columbia-Barnard YDSA , says that the campaign has been careful to frame the tuition strike as a means of addressing the ongoing student debt crisis and not just worsening conditions under Covid-19 .
 “ We wanted to shift the conversation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ classes and shift the conversation toward a crisis that ’ s emerged from the fact that we ’ re treating education as a commodity in the first place.
” Leading up to the strike ’ s announcement , students organized a petition for partial tuition reimbursement ( different from the one listed above ) , an email campaign and phone zaps , a pressure tactic used to flood office lines , to impress upon administrators the burdens of the university ’ s excessive costs .
Before the start of the Fall semester , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ university ’ s two main undergraduate schools , Columbia College and the Fu Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Science — concessions that Bennett believes were a direct response to student organizing over the summer .
But support for students and workers across campus , Bennett says , has been uneven , and the tuition strike is aimed at much more than just high tuition .
In addition to lowering the cost of attendance and increasing financial aid , the tuition strike has included demands to put an end to campus expansion , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , defund the university ’ s Department of Public Safety ( the campus law enforcement body ) , commit to transparency around the university ’ s financial investments , and bargain in good faith with unions on campus .
“ The students organizing the tuition strike view it as a last-resort tactic to compel the university to listen to demands that students have been organizing around for the past few years , ” reads a statement released Monday .
The tuition strike has received wide support in part by building coalitions with other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their own demands in the past .
This includes referendums voted on by the student body , which the demands letter says should be respected and enforced .
A referendum that was passed in September demanding the university divest from companies that profit from or support Israel ’ s human rights abuses against Palestinians was the culmination of years of organizing from members of Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voice for Peace .
The referendum has been all but dismissed by the administration despite being passed by the student body .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ respond to student demands to divest the school ’ s endowment from fossil fuels , a campaign that has been waged on campus since 2015 .
YDSA has been busy building ties with the campus chapters of Extinction Rebellion and the Sunrise Movement .
The tuition strike has also included demands from Mobilized African Diaspora ( MAD ) , a coalition of Black student activists on campus that sent its own detailed list of demands to Columbia President Lee Bollinger .
After spending the summer mobilizing against police violence , MAD called for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provide employment and affordable housing to the surrounding Harlem community , end the university ’ s relationship with the New York Police Department , cut funding from the university ’ s Department of Public Safety and increase support for Black students .
On December 3 , mere days after the strike ’ s announcement , Barnard College canceled its search for a new executive director of Public Safety and announced it would restructure the office to focus on community safety under the new Community Accountability , Response , and Emergency Services office .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ coalition partner , and the group ’ s demands to repair harm to the surrounding community and invest in community safety solutions are reflected in the tuition strike .
YDSA ’ s letter to the administration also includes a demand to bargain in good faith with unions on campus for increased benefits and compensation in addition to protections for international students .
Statements from the tuition strike campaign have emphasized that cuts to cost of attendance  “ should not come at the expense of instructor or worker pay , but rather at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expansion projects , and other expenses that don ’ t benefit students and workers.
” The Graduate Workers of Columbia-United Auto Workers Local 2110 ( GWC-UAW ) , which has been the recipient of strike support and solidarity from YDSA , will be asking its membership to pledge their support for the strike .
This would include distributing tuition strike materials to students and continuing to teach students who plan on withholding tuition even if told not to by university officials .
Susannah Glickman , a fifth year PhD student in history at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Sciences and a member of GWC ’ s bargaining committee , says YDSA and the union have been working closely to support each other .
 “ It ’ s good that students recognize that they have some power to influence the conversation [ around corporate governance ] , even if they ’ re not employees , ” Glickman said .
 “ They probably have more [ power ] because they ’ re the financial base of the university.
” Tuition strike organizers say the idea for a tuition strike preceded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inspired by the University of Chicago where 200 students withheld payments in late April with a number of demands , including a 50 % reduction in tuition .
By the end of their tuition strike in mid-May , University of Chicago students had won a freeze on tuition , which is now over $ 57,000 a year — second only to Columbia .
Today , the total cost of attendance at the University of Chicago is estimated to be upwards of $ 80,000 a year when including fees , room and board , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1,700 students signed on , Columbia ’ s tuition strike next spring could represent the largest tuition strike since 1973 , when students at the University of Michigan withheld payments in opposition to a 24 % increase in tuition from the year before .
About 2,500 signed up for a tuition strike which coincided with a wave of labor organizing on the part of teaching fellows and other graduate employees .
While the student tuition strike alone was not enough to win concessions from the University of Michigan ’ s administration , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which represents graduate workers on campus , was ultimately able to win a tuition reduction and increased pay and benefits through contract negotiations after more than half of undergraduate students joined GEO members in a picket line in February 1975 .
As students continue to mobilize toward next semester ’ s tuition strike , YDSA organizers report an increase in membership and participation within their chapter , which some believe has been strengthened by their ability to organize digitally .
“ I think we ’ ve seen a strengthening in our community @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be able to cater to over Zoom , ” says Roskill .
 ” And we ’ re really hopeful that socialist politics will provide an answer to the political questions that weren ’ t being answered by Biden or Trump , particularly on student debt advocacy .
”

Students at the most expensive U.S. university were inspired by the successful action at the University of Chicago.
At the end of November, members of the Columbia University-Barnard College chapter of Young Democratic Socialists of America (YDSA) launched a tuition strike campaign against “exorbitant tuition rates” which, they say, “constitute a significant source of financial hardship” during the pandemic. Student demands are wide-ranging and include a 10% reduction in the cost of attendance, 10% increase in financial aid, and an amalgamation of demands from disparate student campaigns, many of which were set in motion long before the pandemic began. So far over 1,700 students have signed a petition to withhold tuition for the Spring 2021 semester and any future donations to the university after graduating.
Columbia has consistently topped charts as the most expensive private university in the country, charging over $61,000 a year in tuition and fees, which accounts for nearly a quarter of the school’s revenue. “We just felt like the only way to pressure a university that is structured around the profit motive would be to directly impact their bottom line,” says Emmaline Bennett, a student at Columbia’s Teachers College and one of the founding members of Columbia-Barnard YDSA, which she co-chairs.
Since the pandemic began, the university’s $11 billion endowment has seen a $310 million increase while the response from administration, Bennett says, “has been mostly empty rhetoric around shared sacrifice.”
In These Times reached out to the university administration and did not hear back by the time of publication. In a December 1 article in Patch, a university spokesperson said, “Throughout this difficult year, Columbia has remained focused on preserving the health and safety of our community, fulfilling our commitment to anti-racism, providing the education sought by our students, and continuing the scientific and other research needed to overcome society’s serious challenges.”
Becca Roskill, a junior in Columbia’s school of engineering and secretary of Columbia-Barnard YDSA, says that the campaign has been careful to frame the tuition strike as a means of addressing the ongoing student debt crisis and not just worsening conditions under Covid-19. “We wanted to shift the conversation away from paying less because of online classes and shift the conversation toward a crisis that’s emerged from the fact that we’re treating education as a commodity in the first place.”
Leading up to the strike’s announcement, students organized a petition for partial tuition reimbursement (different from the one listed above), an email campaign and phone zaps, a pressure tactic used to flood office lines, to impress upon administrators the burdens of the university’s excessive costs. Before the start of the Fall semester, a tuition freeze was issued for the university’s two main undergraduate schools, Columbia College and the Fu Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Science — concessions that Bennett believes were a direct response to student organizing over the summer. But support for students and workers across campus, Bennett says, has been uneven, and the tuition strike is aimed at much more than just high tuition.
In addition to lowering the cost of attendance and increasing financial aid, the tuition strike has included demands to put an end to campus expansion, invest in the surrounding West Harlem community, defund the university’s Department of Public Safety (the campus law enforcement body), commit to transparency around the university’s financial investments, and bargain in good faith with unions on campus.
“ We just felt like the only way to pressure a university that is structured around the profit motive would be to directly impact their bottom line.”
“The students organizing the tuition strike view it as a last-resort tactic to compel the university to listen to demands that students have been organizing around for the past few years,” reads a statement released Monday. The tuition strike has received wide support in part by building coalitions with other groups on campus that have put forward their own demands in the past. This includes referendums voted on by the student body, which the demands letter says should be respected and enforced.
A referendum that was passed in September demanding the university divest from companies that profit from or support Israel’s human rights abuses against Palestinians was the culmination of years of organizing from members of Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voice for Peace. The referendum has been all but dismissed by the administration despite being passed by the student body. Similarly, administrators have been slow to respond to student demands to divest the school’s endowment from fossil fuels, a campaign that has been waged on campus since 2015. YDSA has been busy building ties with the campus chapters of Extinction Rebellion and the Sunrise Movement.
The tuition strike has also included demands from Mobilized African Diaspora (MAD), a coalition of Black student activists on campus that sent its own detailed list of demands to Columbia President Lee Bollinger. After spending the summer mobilizing against police violence, MAD called for the university to commit to anti-racism and provide employment and affordable housing to the surrounding Harlem community, end the university’s relationship with the New York Police Department, cut funding from the university’s Department of Public Safety and increase support for Black students.
On December 3, mere days after the strike’s announcement, Barnard College canceled its search for a new executive director of Public Safety and announced it would restructure the office to focus on community safety under the new Community Accountability, Response, and Emergency Services office. Bennett says MAD has been a major coalition partner, and the group’s demands to repair harm to the surrounding community and invest in community safety solutions are reflected in the tuition strike.
YDSA’s letter to the administration also includes a demand to bargain in good faith with unions on campus for increased benefits and compensation in addition to protections for international students. Statements from the tuition strike campaign have emphasized that cuts to cost of attendance “should not come at the expense of instructor or worker pay, but rather at the expense of bloated administrative salaries, expansion projects, and other expenses that don’t benefit students and workers.”
The Graduate Workers of Columbia-United Auto Workers Local 2110 (GWC-UAW), which has been the recipient of strike support and solidarity from YDSA, will be asking its membership to pledge their support for the strike. This would include distributing tuition strike materials to students and continuing to teach students who plan on withholding tuition even if told not to by university officials.
Susannah Glickman, a fifth year PhD student in history at Columbia’s Graduate School of Arts and Sciences and a member of GWC’s bargaining committee, says YDSA and the union have been working closely to support each other. “It’s good that students recognize that they have some power to influence the conversation [around corporate governance], even if they’re not employees,” Glickman said. “They probably have more [power] because they’re the financial base of the university.”
Tuition strike organizers say the idea for a tuition strike preceded the pandemic, but was in part inspired by the University of Chicago where 200 students withheld payments in late April with a number of demands, including a 50% reduction in tuition. By the end of their tuition strike in mid-May, University of Chicago students had won a freeze on tuition, which is now over $57,000 a year — second only to Columbia. Today, the total cost of attendance at the University of Chicago is estimated to be upwards of $80,000 a year when including fees, room and board, personal expenses and books.
With over 1,700 students signed on, Columbia’s tuition strike next spring could represent the largest tuition strike since 1973, when students at the University of Michigan withheld payments in opposition to a 24% increase in tuition from the year before. About 2,500 signed up for a tuition strike which coincided with a wave of labor organizing on the part of teaching fellows and other graduate employees. While the student tuition strike alone was not enough to win concessions from the University of Michigan’s administration, the Graduate Employees’ Organization (GEO), which represents graduate workers on campus, was ultimately able to win a tuition reduction and increased pay and benefits through contract negotiations after more than half of undergraduate students joined GEO members in a picket line in February 1975.
As students continue to mobilize toward next semester’s tuition strike, YDSA organizers report an increase in membership and participation within their chapter, which some believe has been strengthened by their ability to organize digitally.
“I think we’ve seen a strengthening in our community that we didn’t expect to be able to cater to over Zoom,” says Roskill. ”And we’re really hopeful that socialist politics will provide an answer to the political questions that weren’t being answered by Biden or Trump, particularly on student debt advocacy.”
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Originally published at In These Times.


truthout--2020-12-10--Biden’s Victory Was Hardly a Win for “Democracy.” It Was Another Win for the 1%.

In light of a newly elected Biden administration , many have proclaimed that a triumph of democracy has taken place .
But was Joe Biden ’ s win really a victory for democracy ?
The evidence suggests otherwise , by a wide margin .
The 2020 election was the most expensive election on record , with Democrats outspending Republicans in both congressional and federal contests .
Spending was just shy of $ 14 billion in total , an unprecedented record and double the amount of 2016 .
In fact , the Biden campaign broke monthly and online campaign funding contributions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part by Wall Street donors .
Biden ’ s campaign , in fact , became the first ever to raise over $ 1 billion in campaign donations .
Donald Trump , on the other hand , finished second in total campaign contributions by a presidential candidate , beating out Obama ’ s 2008 record-shattering numbers .
In fact , this characterizes the overall trends .
The Financial Times writes that listed companies increased their donations to Democratic groups this year over the Republicans , noting that this was “ a sign that executives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on expectations of conservative defeats nationwide in the November elections.
” Furthermore , both presidential campaigns were “ boosted by unprecedented outside spending by big-money super PACs and ‘ dark money ’ groups ” that were bolstered by ultra-wealthy individuals .
In fact , the greater the contributions , the less transparent the Biden campaign became with records , even going as far as declining to disclose the names of its most prominent fundraisers .
If we take an even closer look , the picture becomes even bleaker , revealing how undemocratic the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Thomas Ferguson , an authoritative scholar on money and electoral politics , has a valuable and established political science theory called “ the investment theory of politics.
” He demonstrates that the U.S. is essentially controlled by coalitions of investors who come together around some mutual interest .
Thus , “ to participate in the political arena , you must have enough resources and private power to become part of such a coalition.
” He argues that since the early 19th century , there has been a persistent struggle for power among these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come along when groups of investors have differing points of view on public policy , while on policies where large investors are in agreement , no party struggle takes place .
Importantly , parties attempt to change the public ’ s opinion to match those of its investors .
These findings are applicable elsewhere .
In fact , further research by Ferguson and his colleagues on the effect of wealthy investors and money on election outcomes has shown that campaign expenditures are an excellent predictor of U.S. congressional races : “ Money in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the American political system should begin by looking closely at money politics when they attempt to understand political change , especially political system ’ s steady shift to the right since the late nineteen sixties .
Our tentative conclusion … is that seeing should , after all , be believing : the case in favor of the proposition that money drives US elections is significantly strengthened.
” Ferguson ’ s research on the political power of the rich is no outlier , either .
A major study by Princeton scholar Martin Gilens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the vast majority of the population — 70 percent on the lower end of the wealth and income scale — is essentially excluded from policy decisions and effectively unrepresented .
They conclude that as you move up the scale , influence gradually increases .
More importantly , when you reach the very top of the scale , these affluent groups essentially determine policy .
The authors reveal that regardless of a Republican or Democratic head of government , the government follows the policy preferences of major lobbying or business groups rather than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They determine that , “ if policymaking is dominated by powerful business organizations and a small number of affluent Americans , then America ’ s claims to being a democratic society are seriously threatened.
” Yet , even with these stark conclusions , the study had its limitations .
One is that it didn ’ t show who among the rich and wealthy has the greatest influence .
Additionally , it excluded major business groups such as the Business Council and the Committee for Economic Development , and neglected to note the importance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ latest research published this year by two analysts , Shawn McGuire and Charles Delahunt , fills these gaps and builds upon this work , reinforcing the observations even further .
Utilizing artificial intelligence and machine learning , McGuire and Delahunt advance the thesis by showing it is actually worse than what others have found .
Their study reveals and confirms that the top wealthiest 10 percent ultimately always win on policy — effectively showing that anyone else ’ s opinion outside of the top 10 percent rarely matters .
Thus , the preferences @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the opinions of certain interest groups can effectively explain and determine how policy is hammered out with remarkable accuracy .
As such , the opinions of those in the lower scale of income reduces the accuracy of prediction in accordance with Gilens and Page ’ s similar findings .
McGuire and Delahunt ’ s objective was to examine to what degree legislative outcomes could be predicted based on the preferences of the rich , and to a lesser extent , business interest groups , by applying a machine learning tool to Gilens and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. federal government policies , policy opinions of the top 10 richest in income percentile , and interest group preferences , to build a predictive model of U.S. policy .
Their conclusion was strong : policy outcomes were predictable with a 70 percent degree accuracy utilizing the policy preferences of those in the 90th income percentile , showing the rich speak with their wallets .
In fact , they even note that while the 90th income percentile functions as a proxy for the opinions of elites , their results would probably fare even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opinions of the top 1 percent .
They conclude what is generally suspected : The “ likely lodestar variable affecting policy outcomes … is the transfer of large amounts of money to policy makers from the wealthiest sources focused intensely on particular policies.
” Every new study that concerns the power of the rich on U.S. democracy is more striking than the last .
Biden ’ s election victory only adds more evidence to these overall trends .
In fact , as we have seen , this isn ’ t at all surprising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rich , who have the ultimate say on public policy and elections .
If one wants to understand how policy is determined in our country , one will need to look at the opinions of the wealthy and how they invest their money .
Our political system features inauthentic political parties that lack organized public participation , and where elite-run candidate selection institutions reflect the opinions and interests of the rich .
As a result , the feelings of discontent are clear through the gradual rise of conspiracy theories , the rise of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the rise of religious fundamentalism and other social ills .
( Yet , it is important to note that 82 percent of us , not unrealistically , hold the opinion that the rich have too much influence in politics .
A majority of the population favor a wealth tax on the rich ) .
Thus , recent proclamations of a “ restoration of democracy ” are nothing more than fallacy , contrary to recent mainstream pronouncements .
In light of all of this , McGuire and Delahunt comment that it is “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ democracy ’ currently playing out on screens across the country , ” yet “ the underlying disease — money-driven policy outcomes — leading to present-day symptoms goes mostly unspoken.
” Additionally , “ the current election is of critical importance , but a society that pins its hopes for democracy on quadrennial extravaganzas heavily funded by wealthy interests will be disappointed , as these players will perpetually win the game.
” It is very important to note that this doesn ’ t mean that all is lost .
In order for the general @ @ @ @ @ @ @ affairs , they would need , as Page and Gilens advocate , a “ social movement for democracy ” to counter the extraordinary power of the wealthiest of society .
This movement , they note , should be similar to the civil rights and New Deal-era movements .
To this end , if the Biden administration were to cancel student and medical debt or pass extremely popular policies like Medicare for All , an authentic and organized mass movement is the only way to make progressive policies possible .

Biden’s campaign became the first ever to raise over $1 billion in donations, much of it from super PACs and dark money.
In light of a newly elected Biden administration, many have proclaimed that a triumph of democracy has taken place. But was Joe Biden’s win really a victory for democracy? The evidence suggests otherwise, by a wide margin.
The 2020 election was the most expensive election on record, with Democrats outspending Republicans in both congressional and federal contests. Spending was just shy of $14 billion in total, an unprecedented record and double the amount of 2016. In fact, the Biden campaign broke monthly and online campaign funding contributions of all time — boosted in large part by Wall Street donors. Biden’s campaign, in fact, became the first ever to raise over $1 billion in campaign donations. Donald Trump, on the other hand, finished second in total campaign contributions by a presidential candidate, beating out Obama’s 2008 record-shattering numbers. In fact, this characterizes the overall trends.
The Financial Times writes that listed companies increased their donations to Democratic groups this year over the Republicans, noting that this was “a sign that executives are trying to win favour with liberals on expectations of conservative defeats nationwide in the November elections.” Furthermore, both presidential campaigns were “boosted by unprecedented outside spending by big-money super PACs and ‘dark money’ groups” that were bolstered by ultra-wealthy individuals. In fact, the greater the contributions, the less transparent the Biden campaign became with records, even going as far as declining to disclose the names of its most prominent fundraisers.
If we take an even closer look, the picture becomes even bleaker, revealing how undemocratic the United States really is. Political scientist Thomas Ferguson, an authoritative scholar on money and electoral politics, has a valuable and established political science theory called “the investment theory of politics.” He demonstrates that the U.S. is essentially controlled by coalitions of investors who come together around some mutual interest. Thus, “to participate in the political arena, you must have enough resources and private power to become part of such a coalition.”
He argues that since the early 19th century, there has been a persistent struggle for power among these groups of investors. Moments of conflict come along when groups of investors have differing points of view on public policy, while on policies where large investors are in agreement, no party struggle takes place. Importantly, parties attempt to change the public’s opinion to match those of its investors.
These findings are applicable elsewhere. In fact, further research by Ferguson and his colleagues on the effect of wealthy investors and money on election outcomes has shown that campaign expenditures are an excellent predictor of U.S. congressional races: “Money in American politics … suggests that analyses … of the American political system should begin by looking closely at money politics when they attempt to understand political change, especially political system’s steady shift to the right since the late nineteen sixties. Our tentative conclusion … is that seeing should, after all, be believing: the case in favor of the proposition that money drives US elections is significantly strengthened.”
Regardless of a Republican or Democratic head, the government follows the policy preferences of major lobbying or business groups rather than policy preferences of the general population.
Ferguson’s research on the political power of the rich is no outlier, either. A major study by Princeton scholar Martin Gilens and Northwestern University professor Benjamin Page reveals that the vast majority of the population — 70 percent on the lower end of the wealth and income scale — is essentially excluded from policy decisions and effectively unrepresented. They conclude that as you move up the scale, influence gradually increases. More importantly, when you reach the very top of the scale, these affluent groups essentially determine policy.
The authors reveal that regardless of a Republican or Democratic head of government, the government follows the policy preferences of major lobbying or business groups rather than policy preferences of the general population. They determine that, “if policymaking is dominated by powerful business organizations and a small number of affluent Americans, then America’s claims to being a democratic society are seriously threatened.”
Yet, even with these stark conclusions, the study had its limitations. One is that it didn’t show who among the rich and wealthy has the greatest influence. Additionally, it excluded major business groups such as the Business Council and the Committee for Economic Development, and neglected to note the importance of individual firms and investors.
The latest research published this year by two analysts, Shawn McGuire and Charles Delahunt, fills these gaps and builds upon this work, reinforcing the observations even further. Utilizing artificial intelligence and machine learning, McGuire and Delahunt advance the thesis by showing it is actually worse than what others have found. Their study reveals and confirms that the top wealthiest 10 percent ultimately always win on policy — effectively showing that anyone else’s opinion outside of the top 10 percent rarely matters.
Thus, the preferences of the top 10 percent along with the opinions of certain interest groups can effectively explain and determine how policy is hammered out with remarkable accuracy. As such, the opinions of those in the lower scale of income reduces the accuracy of prediction in accordance with Gilens and Page’s similar findings.
McGuire and Delahunt’s objective was to examine to what degree legislative outcomes could be predicted based on the preferences of the rich, and to a lesser extent, business interest groups, by applying a machine learning tool to Gilens and Page’s dataset on 1,836 major U.S. federal government policies, policy opinions of the top 10 richest in income percentile, and interest group preferences, to build a predictive model of U.S. policy. Their conclusion was strong: policy outcomes were predictable with a 70 percent degree accuracy utilizing the policy preferences of those in the 90th income percentile, showing the rich speak with their wallets.
In fact, they even note that while the 90th income percentile functions as a proxy for the opinions of elites, their results would probably fare even better if they had data on the opinions of the top 1 percent. They conclude what is generally suspected: The “likely lodestar variable affecting policy outcomes … is the transfer of large amounts of money to policy makers from the wealthiest sources focused intensely on particular policies.”
An authentic and organized mass movement is the only way to make progressive policies possible.
Every new study that concerns the power of the rich on U.S. democracy is more striking than the last. Biden’s election victory only adds more evidence to these overall trends. In fact, as we have seen, this isn’t at all surprising. U.S. society is dominated by the rich, who have the ultimate say on public policy and elections. If one wants to understand how policy is determined in our country, one will need to look at the opinions of the wealthy and how they invest their money.
Our political system features inauthentic political parties that lack organized public participation, and where elite-run candidate selection institutions reflect the opinions and interests of the rich. As a result, the feelings of discontent are clear through the gradual rise of conspiracy theories, the rise of con artist politicians like Donald Trump, and the rise of religious fundamentalism and other social ills. (Yet, it is important to note that 82 percent of us, not unrealistically, hold the opinion that the rich have too much influence in politics. A majority of the population favor a wealth tax on the rich).
Thus, recent proclamations of a “restoration of democracy” are nothing more than fallacy, contrary to recent mainstream pronouncements. In light of all of this, McGuire and Delahunt comment that it is “strange to observe the fight for ‘democracy’ currently playing out on screens across the country,” yet “the underlying disease — money-driven policy outcomes — leading to present-day symptoms goes mostly unspoken.” Additionally, “the current election is of critical importance, but a society that pins its hopes for democracy on quadrennial extravaganzas heavily funded by wealthy interests will be disappointed, as these players will perpetually win the game.”
It is very important to note that this doesn’t mean that all is lost. In order for the general population to have a say in their affairs, they would need, as Page and Gilens advocate, a “social movement for democracy” to counter the extraordinary power of the wealthiest of society. This movement, they note, should be similar to the civil rights and New Deal-era movements. To this end, if the Biden administration were to cancel student and medical debt or pass extremely popular policies like Medicare for All, an authentic and organized mass movement is the only way to make progressive policies possible.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.