truthout--2020-09-23--Trump Is Losing Farmer Support in Climate Crisis. Will They Swing the Election?

In a push to capture the rural vote , 62 percent of which went to Trump in 2016 , both the Trump and Biden campaigns are ramping up efforts to appeal to farmers and ranchers .
On September 22 , the Biden campaign launched a new radio ad blitz in eight battleground states , in which Biden appeals to older voters whose families have lived in rural areas for generations .
“ No longer are we going to be faced with children or grandchildren believing that the only way they can make it is to leave home and go somewhere @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Biden ’ s voice assures .
“ There ’ s no reason why it can ’ t happen here.
” In a contrasting approach , at a rally in North Carolina , just a few hours ahead of the opening of the Republican National Convention in August , Trump claimed that , under his administration , “ The American farmer has done very well .
I never hear any complaints from the American farmer.
” Remarks later that week during the convention followed suit .
“ The economy is coming up very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because I got China to give them $ 28 billion because they were targeted by China , ” Trump said on the first night of the convention .
But that assessment doesn ’ t square with the hardship many U.S. farmers are facing — particularly small farmers .
U.S. farm bankruptcies increased 20 percent in 2019 , reaching an eight-year high , on account of factors like the trade war , increasing costs of production and crop loss related to the climate crisis .
Since April 2020 , farmer support for the incumbent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 71 percent , according to an August 2020 survey by DTN/The Progressive Farmer .
A recent report by the Government Accountability Office revealed that under the Trump administration , the United States Department of Agriculture ( USDA ) Market Facilitation Program payments to farmers harmed by the trade war went disproportionately to large-scale cotton and soybean farmers , ignoring the needs of small farmers who grow food .
On account of Trump administration changes in payment maximums for the USDA ’ s Market Facilitation Program , the top 1.3 percent of payment recipients @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while the average individual farmer in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania got $ 11,829 and $ 8,661 , respectively .
The finding is in line with earlier analyses revealing Trump ’ s disproportionate financial support for the largest capitalist farmers .
According to the USDA , more than half of the 2 million farms in the United States are “ very small farms , ” grossing less than $ 10,000 annually .
When asked what political capital this group could hold , Wingate University Assistant Professor of Political Science Chelsea Kaufman told Truthout that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like the overlapping COVID-19 pandemic and climate crisis could make them a “ relatively unique ” political force , as has been the case with farmers experiencing economic shocks during past election cycles .
In 1932 , incumbent President Herbert Hoover lost votes from normally Republican-voting northern farmers , and the same happened for Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1956 .
Academics attribute this to low crop prices during election years .
According to the Cook Political Report , many of what are expected to be key battleground states in 2020 , like Michigan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ top agricultural producers .
The majority of the smaller farmers Truthout spoke with for this story want to see a federal government that tackles climate change head-on and restructures agriculture to be a solution by encouraging diversified farming that stores ( rather than releases ) carbon .
Industrial agriculture is a major contributor to climate change , through its reliance on chemical fertilizers , the manufacturing of which releases carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide , and depletes the soil of nutrients .
It ’ s a system that farmers are “ stuck in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grows apples , blueberries , strawberries and peaches on 120 acres of farmland in southwest Michigan .
Rosenfeld purchased a conventional orchard in 2005 and has been converting it to organic ever since , which he says has been a challenge in a system that prioritizes conventional practices .
Dealing with climate change has made it even more difficult , a sentiment that reflects a wider experience among farmers .
In 2018 , 75 percent of Farm Aid hotline calls were related to extreme weather and weather-related crises like wildfires .
Rosenfeld says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ change have been all but impossible to bounce back from .
After temperatures dropped to 25 degrees Fahrenheit in May 2020 , he lost 65 percent of his strawberries , 40 percent of his blueberries and all of his Red Delicious , Gala , Empire and McIntosh apples .
On top of that , the changing climate has brought new pests to the region , like the apple flea weevil , which destroyed a full season ’ s worth of crops when it first appeared in 2010 .
“ Every year I keep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he tells Truthout .
“ I can ’ t afford this financially ; I can ’ t afford the time and energy and it doesn ’ t seem to be getting to any kind of manageable place.
” In 2018 , when President Trump signed the latest Farm Bill , he reauthorized the Environmental Quality Incentives Program ( EQIP ) , which provides financial and technical assistance to farmers who implement certain conservation practices like mulching to protect soil , or “ karst sinkhole treatment ” to protect runoff from reaching groundwater supply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the midst of transitioning all 110 acres from conventional to organic , says the program doesn ’ t offer the kind of assistance he needs .
When government representatives paid his farm a visit to assess what kind of EQIP program they might support , Rosenfeld says they proposed he build a retention wall near where he fills his sprayer , to help catch runoff .
“ But what good does that do ?
” he said , referring to his ultimate goal of moving away from using any kind of hazardous material @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re not offering the types of programs that are relevant to me as an organic grower.
” Rosenfeld says he wants to shift away from using diesel and gas-fueled tractors and to have on-site renewable energy to power his farm .
But no existing government programs make that financially feasible .
When he considered investing in solar panels a few years ago , he found one program that would have cost him around $ 30,000 , but with the kind of crop loss he has experienced , he couldn ’ t afford it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s farm , in White Cloud , Michigan , Luke Eising is a farmer who uses silvopasture techniques , letting cows , pigs and chickens graze together amid integrated forest and plant landscapes .
Rotating the animals to different pastures encourages plants to develop more robust root systems , which returns carbon to the soil and improves soil quality .
In addition to producing food for his community , Eising says , being able to help sequester carbon and rebuild degraded soil is a major reason he chose to be a farmer .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Panel on Climate Change report , sequestering carbon in the soil is the most cost-effective option for economic activity generating “ negative emissions.
” “ I very much see it as a solution for food systems , ” Eising told Truthout .
Eising would like to see subsidies for corn and soy cut , because he thinks regenerative practices like his would become competitive .
“ We ’ re fighting an uphill battle when I can see chicken breasts or pork chops in the store for less than I pay to process [ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , referring to animals raised in confinement and fed monoculture corn and soy feed the federal government subsidizes .
Another issue the current administration hasn ’ t helped with , Eising says , is a major meat processing backlog .
Whereas Eising can usually get a date within six to eight weeks at a meat processing plant , given meat plant shutdowns amid COVID-19 , leading to short supply of meat processing facilities , it ’ s been hard to find a date any time before 2022 .
“ This is not okay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ready to process , I have customers lining up because they ’ re hungry and I have a freezer that ’ s empty , ” he says .
Existing laws prohibit small , local butchers from processing meat headed for market .
Eising tends to vote for conservative or libertarian candidates in local and national elections .
In 2016 , he voted for libertarian candidate Gary Johnson .
But Eising says he ’ ll likely vote for Biden if polling remains close in Michigan .
“ Nobody else is at all interested in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country , ” he says .
Biden has recently talked about paying farmers for “ planting certain crops that in fact absorb carbon from the air , ” but his climate plan makes no mention of organic , diversified or regenerative farming .
According to a report by Data For Progress , conventional farming practices that rely on pesticides and monoculture practices are linked to $ 44 billion in annual damage related to soil erosion in the United States , which is perhaps felt most acutely in areas where soil can no longer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heavy rain , leading to catastrophic flooding .
Ecologically minded farmers in swing states outside of Michigan similarly reflect a desire for leadership that addresses climate through agricultural reform .
Kemper Burt began farming 40 years ago in California .
He now lives in Arizona , where he grows lettuce and other produce on a 40-acre farm powered by solar energy .
Burt points out that tackling climate change will entail decolonizing the way we produce food , in direct contrast with the “ feed the world ” mentality behind the so-called “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which led to the fertilizer and pesticide-heavy monoculture farming he and other small-scale farmers want to break away from .
“ Let ’ s just try feeding our community , then let ’ s just try feeding our state , and then let ’ s just try feeding other states , ” Burt says .
Burt is registered as an independent , though he wouldn ’ t say exactly how he ’ ll vote in November .
“ I look to what people are doing to help protect nature , which then in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he said .
Many small farmers say they ’ ve yet to see a presidential candidate or down-ballot candidate fully address their needs in this election cycle .
President Trump ’ s reelection campaign has not yet put out a climate plan .
And Biden ’ s climate plan does not yet spell out what small-scale farmers say they want , like a return to the New Deal-era concept of “ parity , ” a supply-management strategy designed to prevent the kind of wasteful over-production of soybeans and corn that wipes the land @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Rosenfeld wants to see a shift away from crop insurance , which comprised one-third of farmers ’ income in 2019 , toward income insurance , which would provide financial support for people growing food , rather than cash crops .
As long as agriculture is considered a solution to the climate crisis , whether in a Green New Deal or as part of another climate plan , says Maine farmer Craig Hickman , he ’ d consider it a step forward , noting that he thinks his neighbors in Maine , many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Investing in food infrastructure is as important as roads and bridges , ” he told Truthout .
In 2019 , Maine , a “ purple ” state , passed the first state-level Green New Deal backed by labor unions .
Facing increased pressure from forces like climate change , the potential “ farm vote ” could build swing power , “ although it is not clear whether that would happen in 2020 or a later election year , ” Kaufman said .
“ We can look to the lessons of history @ @ @ @ @ @ @ points in time where they faced economic instability , which led them to support candidates and parties that addressed these issues .
”

Part of the Series Covering Climate Now
This story is part of Covering Climate Now , a global journalism collaboration strengthening coverage of the climate story.
In a push to capture the rural vote, 62 percent of which went to Trump in 2016, both the Trump and Biden campaigns are ramping up efforts to appeal to farmers and ranchers.
On September 22, the Biden campaign launched a new radio ad blitz in eight battleground states, in which Biden appeals to older voters whose families have lived in rural areas for generations. “No longer are we going to be faced with children or grandchildren believing that the only way they can make it is to leave home and go somewhere else to get that good job,” Biden’s voice assures. “There’s no reason why it can’t happen here.”
In a contrasting approach, at a rally in North Carolina, just a few hours ahead of the opening of the Republican National Convention in August, Trump claimed that, under his administration, “The American farmer has done very well. I never hear any complaints from the American farmer.” Remarks later that week during the convention followed suit. “The economy is coming up very rapidly, our farmers are doing well because I got China to give them $28 billion because they were targeted by China,” Trump said on the first night of the convention.
But that assessment doesn’t square with the hardship many U.S. farmers are facing — particularly small farmers. U.S. farm bankruptcies increased 20 percent in 2019, reaching an eight-year high, on account of factors like the trade war, increasing costs of production and crop loss related to the climate crisis.
Since April 2020, farmer support for the incumbent president has fallen from 89 percent to 71 percent, according to an August 2020 survey by DTN/The Progressive Farmer. A recent report by the Government Accountability Office revealed that under the Trump administration, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Market Facilitation Program payments to farmers harmed by the trade war went disproportionately to large-scale cotton and soybean farmers, ignoring the needs of small farmers who grow food. On account of Trump administration changes in payment maximums for the USDA’s Market Facilitation Program, the top 1.3 percent of payment recipients received an additional $519 million, while the average individual farmer in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania got $11,829 and $8,661, respectively. The finding is in line with earlier analyses revealing Trump’s disproportionate financial support for the largest capitalist farmers.
According to the USDA, more than half of the 2 million farms in the United States are “very small farms,” grossing less than $10,000 annually. When asked what political capital this group could hold, Wingate University Assistant Professor of Political Science Chelsea Kaufman told Truthout that the increased pressure small farmers face from forces like the overlapping COVID-19 pandemic and climate crisis could make them a “relatively unique” political force, as has been the case with farmers experiencing economic shocks during past election cycles.
In 1932, incumbent President Herbert Hoover lost votes from normally Republican-voting northern farmers, and the same happened for Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1956. Academics attribute this to low crop prices during election years. According to the Cook Political Report, many of what are expected to be key battleground states in 2020, like Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, are also top agricultural producers.
The majority of the smaller farmers Truthout spoke with for this story want to see a federal government that tackles climate change head-on and restructures agriculture to be a solution by encouraging diversified farming that stores (rather than releases) carbon. Industrial agriculture is a major contributor to climate change, through its reliance on chemical fertilizers, the manufacturing of which releases carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide, and depletes the soil of nutrients. It’s a system that farmers are “stuck in,” says Tom Rosenfeld, who grows apples, blueberries, strawberries and peaches on 120 acres of farmland in southwest Michigan. Rosenfeld purchased a conventional orchard in 2005 and has been converting it to organic ever since, which he says has been a challenge in a system that prioritizes conventional practices. Dealing with climate change has made it even more difficult, a sentiment that reflects a wider experience among farmers. In 2018, 75 percent of Farm Aid hotline calls were related to extreme weather and weather-related crises like wildfires.
Rosenfeld says more frequent late freezes due to climate change have been all but impossible to bounce back from. After temperatures dropped to 25 degrees Fahrenheit in May 2020, he lost 65 percent of his strawberries, 40 percent of his blueberries and all of his Red Delicious, Gala, Empire and McIntosh apples. On top of that, the changing climate has brought new pests to the region, like the apple flea weevil, which destroyed a full season’s worth of crops when it first appeared in 2010. “Every year I keep thinking, is this it?” he tells Truthout. “I can’t afford this financially; I can’t afford the time and energy and it doesn’t seem to be getting to any kind of manageable place.”
In 2018, when President Trump signed the latest Farm Bill, he reauthorized the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), which provides financial and technical assistance to farmers who implement certain conservation practices like mulching to protect soil, or “karst sinkhole treatment” to protect runoff from reaching groundwater supply.
But Rosenfeld, who is in the midst of transitioning all 110 acres from conventional to organic, says the program doesn’t offer the kind of assistance he needs. When government representatives paid his farm a visit to assess what kind of EQIP program they might support, Rosenfeld says they proposed he build a retention wall near where he fills his sprayer, to help catch runoff. “But what good does that do?” he said, referring to his ultimate goal of moving away from using any kind of hazardous material on his land. “They’re not offering the types of programs that are relevant to me as an organic grower.”
Rosenfeld says he wants to shift away from using diesel and gas-fueled tractors and to have on-site renewable energy to power his farm. But no existing government programs make that financially feasible. When he considered investing in solar panels a few years ago, he found one program that would have cost him around $30,000, but with the kind of crop loss he has experienced, he couldn’t afford it.
Two hours north of Rosenfeld’s farm, in White Cloud, Michigan, Luke Eising is a farmer who uses silvopasture techniques, letting cows, pigs and chickens graze together amid integrated forest and plant landscapes. Rotating the animals to different pastures encourages plants to develop more robust root systems, which returns carbon to the soil and improves soil quality. In addition to producing food for his community, Eising says, being able to help sequester carbon and rebuild degraded soil is a major reason he chose to be a farmer. According to the 2018 United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, sequestering carbon in the soil is the most cost-effective option for economic activity generating “negative emissions.” “I very much see it as a solution for food systems,” Eising told Truthout.
Eising would like to see subsidies for corn and soy cut, because he thinks regenerative practices like his would become competitive. “We’re fighting an uphill battle when I can see chicken breasts or pork chops in the store for less than I pay to process [my product],” he says, referring to animals raised in confinement and fed monoculture corn and soy feed the federal government subsidizes. Another issue the current administration hasn’t helped with, Eising says, is a major meat processing backlog. Whereas Eising can usually get a date within six to eight weeks at a meat processing plant, given meat plant shutdowns amid COVID-19, leading to short supply of meat processing facilities, it’s been hard to find a date any time before 2022. “This is not okay. I have animals outside that are ready to process, I have customers lining up because they’re hungry and I have a freezer that’s empty,” he says. Existing laws prohibit small, local butchers from processing meat headed for market.
Eising tends to vote for conservative or libertarian candidates in local and national elections. In 2016, he voted for libertarian candidate Gary Johnson. But Eising says he’ll likely vote for Biden if polling remains close in Michigan. “Nobody else is at all interested in what regenerative farming could do for this country,” he says. Biden has recently talked about paying farmers for “planting certain crops that in fact absorb carbon from the air,” but his climate plan makes no mention of organic, diversified or regenerative farming. According to a report by Data For Progress, conventional farming practices that rely on pesticides and monoculture practices are linked to $44 billion in annual damage related to soil erosion in the United States, which is perhaps felt most acutely in areas where soil can no longer retain moisture in the advent of a heavy rain, leading to catastrophic flooding.
Ecologically minded farmers in swing states outside of Michigan similarly reflect a desire for leadership that addresses climate through agricultural reform. Kemper Burt began farming 40 years ago in California. He now lives in Arizona, where he grows lettuce and other produce on a 40-acre farm powered by solar energy. Burt points out that tackling climate change will entail decolonizing the way we produce food, in direct contrast with the “feed the world” mentality behind the so-called “Green Revolution” of the 1970s, which led to the fertilizer and pesticide-heavy monoculture farming he and other small-scale farmers want to break away from. “Let’s just try feeding our community, then let’s just try feeding our state, and then let’s just try feeding other states,” Burt says. Burt is registered as an independent, though he wouldn’t say exactly how he’ll vote in November. “I look to what people are doing to help protect nature, which then in turn protects you and I,” he said.
Many small farmers say they’ve yet to see a presidential candidate or down-ballot candidate fully address their needs in this election cycle. President Trump’s reelection campaign has not yet put out a climate plan. And Biden’s climate plan does not yet spell out what small-scale farmers say they want, like a return to the New Deal-era concept of “parity,” a supply-management strategy designed to prevent the kind of wasteful over-production of soybeans and corn that wipes the land of biodiversity and results in unstable prices. Rosenfeld wants to see a shift away from crop insurance, which comprised one-third of farmers’ income in 2019, toward income insurance, which would provide financial support for people growing food, rather than cash crops.
As long as agriculture is considered a solution to the climate crisis, whether in a Green New Deal or as part of another climate plan, says Maine farmer Craig Hickman, he’d consider it a step forward, noting that he thinks his neighbors in Maine, many of whom are libertarians, would agree. “Investing in food infrastructure is as important as roads and bridges,” he told Truthout.
In 2019, Maine, a “purple” state, passed the first state-level Green New Deal backed by labor unions. Facing increased pressure from forces like climate change, the potential “farm vote” could build swing power, “although it is not clear whether that would happen in 2020 or a later election year,” Kaufman said. “We can look to the lessons of history: Farmers had quite unique behavior at points in time where they faced economic instability, which led them to support candidates and parties that addressed these issues.”
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--2020-09-24--Crowd Boos, Chants “Vote Him Out” After Trump Appears at Ginsburg Memorial

President Trump was booed by a crowd gathered at the Supreme Court building on Thursday while paying respects to late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg .
Ginsburg ’ s body is currently lying in repose on the steps of the high court .
The late justice passed away last Friday at the age of 87 due to complications from pancreatic cancer .
Trump arrived at the Supreme Court building on Thursday and appeared at the top of the steps near where Ginsburg ’ s body was placed .
After the crowd noticed his presence there , they began to loudly boo @ @ @ @ @ @ @ toward chants of “ vote him out , ” which continued until the president and First Lady Melania Trump departed .
While Trump came to the Supreme Court to ostensibly pay his respects to Ginsburg , he didn ’ t appear to show much respect to her family members earlier in the week .
During an interview on Fox News ’ s “ Fox & Friends ” program on Monday morning , the president was asked to comment on Ginsburg ’ s dying wish — that the next president select her successor , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of his own , without providing evidence to support it , that Democratic lawmakers had probably written and made up the story of Ginsburg ’ s last wish .
“ I don ’ t know that she said that , or was that written out by Adam Schiff and [ Senate Minority Leader Chuck ] Schumer and [ House Speaker Nancy ] Pelosi ?
” Trump said .
“ I would be more inclined to say the second , okay ?
” Trump also announced earlier this week that he would name a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Saturday , a mere eight days after she had died , in order to begin the process of confirming a new justice to the Supreme Court before or shortly after Election Day later this year .
Many have criticized Republicans in the Senate for agreeing to the president ’ s quick timeframe , as they had previously blocked former President Barack Obama from naming a new justice in 2016 , arguing that a departing president should not name someone new to the court during an election year .
Obama waited a full month @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before announcing the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to fill his seat .
GOP senators refused to even hold hearings for Garland .
After Trump was elected the following November , he nominated Justice Neil Gorsuch to the seat .
Gorsuch was confirmed in April 2017 .
Voters agree that Trump and Republicans should be consistent on the matter of replacing Ginsburg .
A Reuters/Ipsos poll published earlier this week found that 62 percent of Americans want the winner of the presidential race to decide who the next Supreme Court justice should be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should name someone now or during the lame duck session .

President Trump was booed by a crowd gathered at the Supreme Court building on Thursday while paying respects to late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Ginsburg’s body is currently lying in repose on the steps of the high court. The late justice passed away last Friday at the age of 87 due to complications from pancreatic cancer.
Trump arrived at the Supreme Court building on Thursday and appeared at the top of the steps near where Ginsburg’s body was placed. After the crowd noticed his presence there, they began to loudly boo the president.
The booing soon shifted toward chants of “vote him out,” which continued until the president and First Lady Melania Trump departed.
While Trump came to the Supreme Court to ostensibly pay his respects to Ginsburg, he didn’t appear to show much respect to her family members earlier in the week. During an interview on Fox News’s “Fox & Friends” program on Monday morning, the president was asked to comment on Ginsburg’s dying wish — that the next president select her successor, not Trump.
Trump offered a theory of his own, without providing evidence to support it, that Democratic lawmakers had probably written and made up the story of Ginsburg’s last wish.
“I don’t know that she said that, or was that written out by Adam Schiff and [Senate Minority Leader Chuck] Schumer and [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi?” Trump said. “I would be more inclined to say the second, okay?”
Trump also announced earlier this week that he would name a successor to Ginsburg’s seat this Saturday, a mere eight days after she had died, in order to begin the process of confirming a new justice to the Supreme Court before or shortly after Election Day later this year.
Many have criticized Republicans in the Senate for agreeing to the president’s quick timeframe, as they had previously blocked former President Barack Obama from naming a new justice in 2016, arguing that a departing president should not name someone new to the court during an election year.
Obama waited a full month after Justice Antonin Scalia had passed away before announcing the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to fill his seat. GOP senators refused to even hold hearings for Garland. After Trump was elected the following November, he nominated Justice Neil Gorsuch to the seat. Gorsuch was confirmed in April 2017.
Voters agree that Trump and Republicans should be consistent on the matter of replacing Ginsburg. A Reuters/Ipsos poll published earlier this week found that 62 percent of Americans want the winner of the presidential race to decide who the next Supreme Court justice should be, with only 23 percent saying Trump should name someone now or during the lame duck session.
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--2020-09-24--Youth Action Gives Me Hope Amid Climate Crisis and Trump’s Totalitarian Threat

The sun peeked over the rim of the trees here in my little corner of New Hampshire last week like a dusky gold coin , no shine , no glare , easy enough to look straight at .
My daughter in the back seat rolled down her window and said , “ Daddy , it smells like the beach !
” when the air hit her face .
The sky stayed eggshell white all day long though the forecast had called for straight blue , and my lungs — always a martyr to the allergens of the season — felt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like the beach to my daughter because “ the beach ” for her is campfires on the sand , and the smell of woodsmoke in your clothes when the day is done .
It smelled like the beach because the apocalyptic climate fires 3,000 miles to the West had found the slipstream of the Eastern winds and gone for a ride around the world .
The Creek Fire in California , the largest single wildfire in the state ’ s history , continues to burn today .
It has devoured nearly 300,000 acres @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
At present , it is only 36 percent contained .
The Bobcat Fire near Los Angeles , the third-largest ever recorded in that region , was 38 percent contained on Wednesday .
There are 50 other fires burning from Washington State to southern California , and at least 26 lives have been lost to the conflagration .
“ Oregon , Washington and other areas of the West will get a welcome break from dry weather Thursday and Friday , with some rain in the forecast , ” reports CNN .
“ But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dry weather returns this weekend and could last weeks .
Along with already dry fuel on the ground , the forecast will mean more hazardous fire conditions in a season that has already broken records.
” I lack the adequate vocabulary to describe my sorrow and horror at what has unfolded in Oregon , Colorado and California .
For myself , and for so many , the places charred to ash by these climate-fueled conflagrations are holy in a way beyond any church , mosque or temple .
I looked at that dull @ @ @ @ @ @ @ within myself .
That , at least , was familiar after so many months of sorrow .
“ What strikes me is that the future we were really worried about and that us climate scientists talked about for decades , we ’ re living through that now , ” Susan Prichard , a University of Washington research scientist , told NBC News .
Looking at that soot-stained sun , I was reminded that , in the beginning and the end , we all share a collective fate .
President Kennedy said in his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ We all inhabit this small planet , we all breathe the same air , we all cherish our children ’ s future , and we are all mortal.
” Today , we all breathe the same smoke , and in the face of climate disaster , are perhaps more mortal than ever before .
The current president of the United States and his allies still refuse to acknowledge the common doom awaiting us all , because there is profit in that ignorance , and there are always people who will listen to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ frightening truth .
An exchange between climate scientists captured by MIT Technology Review is telling : After years of watching the administration unravel climate policies , subvert the rule of law , stack courts , politicize a pandemic , undermine the election process , and hint about third and fourth terms , the people I asked are terrified of what the president may do if he remains in office for another four years or more .
Ken Caldeira , a climate scientist at the Carnegie Institution , said : “ Well , first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ question of ‘ Will the US become a dictatorial , totalitarian regime ?
’ ” Danny Cullenward , a lecturer at Stanford ’ s law school , replied : “ There ’ s no climate policy angle to that story .
The United States is then a failed state.
” Indeed , today ’ s heated academic debates among climate experts over the most effective mix of US policies and technologies could soon seem quaint , and beside the point .
New policies are effectively off the table .
Old ones are very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will only continue to accelerate as the time left to avoid extremely dangerous levels of warming ticks away .
The frightening truth towers before us like a fast-rushing wall of drought-fed flames , like a monster hurricane born of the super-heated waters of the BP-sullied Gulf of Mexico , like failed crops stretching as far as the eye can see , like a still pool of murky floodwater where a town square used to be .
The frightening truth is no longer a theoretical model that will play out on some socially distanced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and storm have combined simultaneously today in ways many climate scientists had anticipated , but not so soon , and certainly not with a democracy-destroying rogue president at the helm of the country .
And yet here we are , inhabiting this small planet and breathing the same air as those who whistle past our collective graveyard with crumpled bills stuffed in their pockets .
My daughter does not deserve this future , nor do her peers , and many of them have begun to push back hard .
“ Consider the meteoric @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” reports Brian Khan for Gizmodo , “ and the fact that we ’ re even talking about if they could influence a presidential election .
Sunrise and nearly the entire youth climate movement ecosystem didn ’ t really exist during the 2016 presidential election and was nascent at best during the 2018 midterms .
But in the two years since , it has exploded into a force with real political power.
” None too soon , and hopefully not too late .
Keep breathing .

Part of the Series Covering Climate Now
This story is part of Covering Climate Now, a global journalism collaboration strengthening coverage of the climate story.
The sun peeked over the rim of the trees here in my little corner of New Hampshire last week like a dusky gold coin, no shine, no glare, easy enough to look straight at. My daughter in the back seat rolled down her window and said, “Daddy, it smells like the beach!” when the air hit her face. The sky stayed eggshell white all day long though the forecast had called for straight blue, and my lungs — always a martyr to the allergens of the season — felt slightly heavier than usual.
It smelled like the beach to my daughter because “the beach” for her is campfires on the sand and the smell of woodsmoke in her clothes when the night is done. It smelled like the beach because the apocalyptic climate fires 3,000 miles to the West had found the slipstream of the Eastern winds and gone for a ride around the world.
The Creek Fire in California, the largest single wildfire in the state’s history, continues to burn today. It has devoured nearly 300,000 acres in and around Madera and Fresno counties. At present, it is only 36 percent contained. The Bobcat Fire near Los Angeles, the third-largest ever recorded in that region, was 38 percent contained on Wednesday. There are 50 other fires burning from Washington State to southern California, and at least 26 lives have been lost to the conflagration.
“Oregon, Washington and other areas of the West will get a welcome break from dry weather Thursday and Friday, with some rain in the forecast,” reports CNN. “But for the wildfire-weary, another bout of dry weather returns this weekend and could last weeks. Along with already dry fuel on the ground, the forecast will mean more hazardous fire conditions in a season that has already broken records.”
I lack the adequate vocabulary to describe my sorrow and horror at what has unfolded in Oregon, Colorado and California. For myself, and for so many, the places charred to ash by these climate-fueled conflagrations are holy in a way beyond any church, mosque or temple. I looked at that dull gold coin in the sky and wept within myself. That, at least, was familiar after so many months of sorrow.
The frightening truth is no longer a theoretical model that will play out on some socially distanced tomorrow.
“What strikes me is that the future we were really worried about and that us climate scientists talked about for decades, we’re living through that now,” Susan Prichard, a University of Washington research scientist, told NBC News.
Looking at that soot-stained sun, I was reminded that, in the beginning and the end, we all share a collective fate. President Kennedy said in his 1963 “Peace speech” that, “We all inhabit this small planet, we all breathe the same air, we all cherish our children’s future, and we are all mortal.”
Today, we all breathe the same smoke, and in the face of climate disaster, are perhaps more mortal than ever before. The current president of the United States and his allies still refuse to acknowledge the common doom awaiting us all, because there is profit in that ignorance, and there are always people who will listen to ignorance if it lets them avoid the frightening truth.
An exchange between climate scientists captured by MIT Technology Review is telling:
After years of watching the administration unravel climate policies, subvert the rule of law, stack courts, politicize a pandemic, undermine the election process, and hint about third and fourth terms, the people I asked are terrified of what the president may do if he remains in office for another four years or more. Ken Caldeira, a climate scientist at the Carnegie Institution, said: “Well, first of all, there’s the question of ‘Will the US become a dictatorial, totalitarian regime?’” Danny Cullenward, a lecturer at Stanford’s law school, replied: “There’s no climate policy angle to that story. The United States is then a failed state.” Indeed, today’s heated academic debates among climate experts over the most effective mix of US policies and technologies could soon seem quaint, and beside the point. New policies are effectively off the table. Old ones are very likely doomed. And climate change itself will only continue to accelerate as the time left to avoid extremely dangerous levels of warming ticks away.
The frightening truth towers before us like a fast-rushing wall of drought-fed flames, like a monster hurricane born of the super-heated waters of the BP-sullied Gulf of Mexico, like failed crops stretching as far as the eye can see, like a still pool of murky floodwater where a town square used to be.
The frightening truth is no longer a theoretical model that will play out on some socially distanced tomorrow. Fire, flood, drought and storm have combined simultaneously today in ways many climate scientists had anticipated, but not so soon, and certainly not with a democracy-destroying rogue president at the helm of the country.
And yet here we are, inhabiting this small planet and breathing the same air as those who whistle past our collective graveyard with crumpled bills stuffed in their pockets. My daughter does not deserve this future, nor do her peers, and many of them have begun to push back hard.
“Consider the meteoric rise of groups like the Sunrise Movement,” reports Brian Khan for Gizmodo, “and the fact that we’re even talking about if they could influence a presidential election. Sunrise and nearly the entire youth climate movement ecosystem didn’t really exist during the 2016 presidential election and was nascent at best during the 2018 midterms. But in the two years since, it has exploded into a force with real political power.”
None too soon, and hopefully not too late. Keep breathing.
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--2020-09-24--We Are Closer to Nuclear Annihilation Than We Have Ever Been

Whether you ’ re reading this with your morning coffee , just after lunch , or on the late shift in the wee small hours of the morning , it ’ s 100 seconds to midnight .
That ’ s just over a minute and a half .
And that should be completely unnerving .
It ’ s the closest to that witching hour we ’ ve ever been .
Since 1947 , the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has adjusted its Doomsday Clock to provide humanity with an expert estimate of just how close all of us are to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is , nuclear annihilation .
A century ago , there was , of course , no need for such a measure .
Back then , the largest explosion ever caused by humans had likely occurred in Halifax , Canada , in 1917 , when a munitions ship collided with another vessel , in that city ’ s harbor .
That tragic blast killed nearly 2,000 , wounded another 9,000 , and left 6,000 homeless , but it didn ’ t imperil the planet .
The largest explosions after that occurred on July 16 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a new type of weapon , an atomic bomb , in New Mexico and then on August 6 , 1945 , when the United States unleashed such a bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima .
Since then , our species has been precariously perched at the edge of auto-extermination .
No one knows precisely how many people were killed by the world ’ s first nuclear attack .
Around 70,000 , nearly all of them civilians , were vaporized , crushed , burned , or irradiated to death almost immediately .
Another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many as 280,000 were dead , many of radiation sickness , by the end of the year .
( An atomic strike on the city of Nagasaki , three days later , is thought to have killed as many as 70,000 . )
In the wake of the first nuclear attack , little was clear .
“ What happened at Hiroshima is not yet known , ” the New York Times reported that August 7th and the U.S. government sought to keep it that way , portraying nuclear weapons as nothing more than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ horrifying effects of radiation .
Despite the heroic efforts of several reporters just after the blast , it wasn ’ t until a year later that Americans — and then the rest of the world — began to truly grasp the effects of such new weaponry and what it would mean for humanity from that moment onward .
We know about what happened at Hiroshima largely thanks to one man , John Hersey .
He was a Pulitzer Prize-winning novelist and former correspondent for TIME and LIFE magazines .
He had covered World @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , where he was commended by the secretary of the Navy for helping evacuate wounded American troops on the Japanese-held island of Guadalcanal .
And we now know just how Hersey got the story of Hiroshima — a 30,000-word reportorial masterpiece that appeared in the August 1946 issue of the New Yorker magazine , describing the experiences of six survivors of that atomic blast — thanks to a meticulously researched and elegantly written new book by Lesley Blume , Fallout : The Hiroshima Cover-Up and the Reporter Who Revealed It to the World @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a war zone , I carry what I consider to be the essentials for someone reporting on an armed conflict .
A water bottle with a built-in filter .
Trauma packs with a blood-clotting agent .
A first-aid kit .
A multitool .
A satellite phone .
Sometimes I forgo one or more of these items , but there ’ s always been a single , solitary staple , a necessity whose appearance has changed over the years , but whose presence in my rucksack has not .
Once , this item @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after the better part of a decade covering conflicts in South Sudan , the Democratic Republic of Congo , Libya , and Burkina Faso , it ’ s a complete wreck .
Still , I carry it .
In part , it ’ s become ( and I ’ m only slightly embarrassed to say it ) something of a talisman for me .
But mostly , it ’ s because what ’ s between the figurative covers of that now-coverless , thoroughly mutilated copy of John Hersey ’ s Hiroshima — the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is as terrifyingly brilliant as the day I bought it at the Strand bookstore in New York City for 48 cents .
I know Hiroshima well .
I ’ ve read it cover-to-cover dozens of times .
Or sometimes on a plane or a helicopter or a river barge , in a hotel room or sitting by the side of a road , I ’ ll flip it open and take in a random 10 or 20 pages .
I always marveled at how skillfully Hersey constructed the narrative with overlapping personal accounts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weapon with the power of the gods accessible on a human level ; how he explained something new to this world , atomic terror , in terms that readers could immediately grasp ; how he translated destruction on a previously unimaginable scale into a cautionary tale as old as the genre itself , but with an urgency that hasn ’ t faded or been matched .
I simply never knew how he did it until Lesley Blume pulled back the curtain .
Fallout , which was published last month — the 75th anniversary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — offers a behind-the-scenes glimpse of just how Hersey and William Shawn , then the managing editor of the New Yorker , were able to truly break the story of an attack that had been covered on the front pages of the world ’ s leading newspapers a year earlier and , in the process , produced one of the all-time great pieces of journalism .
It ’ s an important reminder that the biggest stories may be hiding in plain sight ; that breaking news coverage is essential but may not convey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and that a writer may be far better served by laying out a detailed , chronological account in spartan prose , even when the story is so horrific it seems to demand a polemic .
Hersey begins Hiroshima in an understated fashion , noting exactly what each of the six survivors he chronicles was doing at the moment their lives changed forever .
“ Not everyone could comprehend how the atomic bomb worked or visualize an all-out , end-of-days nuclear world war , ” Blume observes .
“ But practically anyone could comprehend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people — mothers , fathers , grade school children , doctors , clerks — going about their daily routines when catastrophe struck.
” As she points out , Hersey ’ s authorial voice is never raised and so the atomic horrors — victims whose eyeballs had melted and run down their cheeks , others whose skin hung from their bodies or slipped off their hands like gloves — speak for themselves .
It ’ s a feat made all the more astonishing when one considers , as Blume reveals , that its author @ @ @ @ @ @ @ devastation from conventional bombing during World War II , was so terrified and tormented by what he saw in Hiroshima months after the attack that he feared he would be unable to complete his assignment .
Incredibly , Hersey got the story of Hiroshima with official sanction , reporting under the scrutiny of the office of the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers , General Douglas MacArthur , the head of the American occupation of defeated Japan .
His prior reportage on the U.S. military , including a book focused on MacArthur that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” helped secure his access .
More amazing still , the New Yorker — fearing possible repercussions under the recently passed Atomic Energy Act — submitted a final draft of the article for review to Lieutenant General Lesley Groves , who had overseen the Manhattan Project that created the atomic bomb , served as its chief booster , and went so far as to claim that radiation poisoning “ is a very pleasant way to die.
” Whatever concessions the New Yorker may have made to him have been lost in the sands @ @ @ @ @ @ @ off on the article , overlooking , as Blume notes , “ Hersey ’ s most unsettling revelations : the fact that the United States had unleashed destruction and suffering upon a largely civilian population on a scale unprecedented in human history and then tried to cover up the human cost of its new weapon.
” The impact on the U.S. government would be swift .
The article was a sensation and immediately lauded as the best reporting to come out of World War II .
It quickly became one of the most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ led to widespread reappraisals by newspapers and readers alike of just what America had done to Japanese civilians at Hiroshima and Nagasaki .
It also managed to shine a remarkably bright light on the perils of nuclear weapons , writ large .
“ Hersey ’ s story , ” as Blume astutely notes , “ was the first truly effective , internationally heeded warning about the existential threat that nuclear arms posed to civilization.
” It ’ s been 74 years since Hiroshima hit the newsstands .
A Cold War and nuclear arms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the planet .
And this January , as a devastating pandemic was beginning to follow suit , all of us found ourselves just 100 seconds away from total annihilation due to the plethora of nuclear weapons on this earth , failures of U.S.-Russian cooperation on arms control and disarmament , the Trump administration ’ s trashing of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal , and America ’ s efforts to develop and deploy yet more advanced nukes , as well as two other factors that have sped up that apocalyptic Doomsday Clock : climate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , according to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists , is corrupting our “ information ecosphere , ” undermining democracy as well as trust among nations , and so creating hair-trigger conditions in international relations .
The former is transforming the planet ’ s actual ecosystem and placing humanity in another kind of ultimate peril .
“ Dangerous rivalry and hostility among the superpowers increases the likelihood of nuclear blunder , ” former California Governor Jerry Brown , the executive chair of the Bulletin , said earlier this year .
“ Climate change @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s ever a time to wake up , it ’ s now.
” Over the last three-plus years , however , President Donald Trump has seemingly threatened at least three nations with nuclear annihilation , including a U.S. ally .
In addition to menacing North Korea with the possibility of unleashing “ fire and fury ” and his talk of ushering in “ the end ” of Iran , he even claimed to have “ plans ” to exterminate most of the population of Afghanistan .
The “ method of war ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 20 million or more Afghans , almost all of them civilians .
John Hersey , who died in 1993 at the age of 78 , wouldn ’ t have had a moment ’ s doubt about what he meant .
Trump ’ s nuclear threats may never come to fruition , but his administration , while putting significant effort into deep-sixing nuclear pacts , has also more than done its part to accelerate climate change , thinning rules designed to keep the planet as habitable as possible for humans .
A recent New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tallied almost 70 environmental rules and regulations — governing planet-warming carbon dioxide and methane emissions , clean air , water , and toxic chemicals — that have been rescinded , reversed , or revoked , with more than 30 additional rollbacks still in progress .
President Trump has not , however , been a total outlier when it comes to promoting environmental degradation .
American presidents have been presiding over the destruction of the natural environment since the founding of the republic .
Signed into law in 1862 by Abraham Lincoln , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ countless American lives , providing free land for the masses .
But it also transferred 270 million acres of wilderness , or 10 % of the United States , into private hands for “ improvements.
” More recently , Ronald Reagan launched attacks on the Environmental Protection Agency through deregulation and budget cuts , while George W. Bush ’ s administration worked to undermine science-based policies , specifically through the denial of anthropogenic climate change .
The difference , of course , was that Lincoln couldn ’ t have conceptualized the effects of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ study of the “ greenhouse effect ” was published during his lifetime ) , whereas the science was already clear enough in the Reagan and Bush years , and brutally self-apparent in the age of Trump , as each of them pursued policies that would push us precious seconds closer to Armageddon .
The tale of how John Hersey got his story is a great triumph of Lesley Blume ’ s Fallout , but what came after may be an even more compelling facet of the book .
Hersey gave the United States @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ The transition from global savior to genocidal superpower was an unwelcome reversal , ” she observes .
Worse yet for the U.S. government , the article left many Americans reevaluating their country and themselves .
It ’ s beyond rare for a journalist to prompt true soul-searching or provide a moral mirror for a nation .
In an interview in his later years , Hersey , who generally avoided publicity , suggested that the testimony of survivors of the atomic blasts — like those he spotlighted — had helped to prevent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an atomic apocalypse would look like because John Hersey showed us , ” writes Blume .
Unfortunately , while there have been many noteworthy , powerful works on climate change , we ’ re still waiting for the one that packs the punch of “ Hiroshima.
” And so , humanity awaits that once-in-a-century article , as nuclear weapons , climate change , and cyber-based disinformation keep us just 100 clicks short of doomsday .
Hersey provided a template .
Blume has lifted the veil on how he did it .
Now someone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world-changing piece of reportage that will shock our consciences and provide a little more breathing room between this vanishing moment and our ever-looming midnight .

Whether you’re reading this with your morning coffee, just after lunch, or on the late shift in the wee small hours of the morning, it’s 100 seconds to midnight. That’s just over a minute and a half. And that should be completely unnerving. It’s the closest to that witching hour we’ve ever been.
Since 1947, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has adjusted its Doomsday Clock to provide humanity with an expert estimate of just how close all of us are to an apocalyptic “midnight” — that is, nuclear annihilation. A century ago, there was, of course, no need for such a measure. Back then, the largest explosion ever caused by humans had likely occurred in Halifax, Canada, in 1917, when a munitions ship collided with another vessel, in that city’s harbor. That tragic blast killed nearly 2,000, wounded another 9,000, and left 6,000 homeless, but it didn’t imperil the planet. The largest explosions after that occurred on July 16, 1945, in a test of a new type of weapon, an atomic bomb, in New Mexico and then on August 6, 1945, when the United States unleashed such a bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima. Since then, our species has been precariously perched at the edge of auto-extermination.
No one knows precisely how many people were killed by the world’s first nuclear attack. Around 70,000, nearly all of them civilians, were vaporized, crushed, burned, or irradiated to death almost immediately. Another 50,000 probably died soon after. As many as 280,000 were dead, many of radiation sickness, by the end of the year. (An atomic strike on the city of Nagasaki, three days later, is thought to have killed as many as 70,000.) In the wake of the first nuclear attack, little was clear. “What happened at Hiroshima is not yet known,” the New York Times reported that August 7th and the U.S. government sought to keep it that way, portraying nuclear weapons as nothing more than super-charged conventional munitions, while downplaying the horrifying effects of radiation. Despite the heroic efforts of several reporters just after the blast, it wasn’t until a year later that Americans — and then the rest of the world — began to truly grasp the effects of such new weaponry and what it would mean for humanity from that moment onward.
We know about what happened at Hiroshima largely thanks to one man, John Hersey. He was a Pulitzer Prize-winning novelist and former correspondent for TIME and LIFE magazines. He had covered World War II in Europe and the Pacific, where he was commended by the secretary of the Navy for helping evacuate wounded American troops on the Japanese-held island of Guadalcanal. And we now know just how Hersey got the story of Hiroshima — a 30,000-word reportorial masterpiece that appeared in the August 1946 issue of the New Yorker magazine, describing the experiences of six survivors of that atomic blast — thanks to a meticulously researched and elegantly written new book by Lesley Blume, Fallout: The Hiroshima Cover-Up and the Reporter Who Revealed It to the World.
Only the Essentials
When I pack up my bags for a war zone, I carry what I consider to be the essentials for someone reporting on an armed conflict. A water bottle with a built-in filter. Trauma packs with a blood-clotting agent. A first-aid kit. A multitool. A satellite phone. Sometimes I forgo one or more of these items, but there’s always been a single, solitary staple, a necessity whose appearance has changed over the years, but whose presence in my rucksack has not.
Once, this item was intact, almost pristine. But after the better part of a decade covering conflicts in South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Libya, and Burkina Faso, it’s a complete wreck. Still, I carry it. In part, it’s become (and I’m only slightly embarrassed to say it) something of a talisman for me. But mostly, it’s because what’s between the figurative covers of that now-coverless, thoroughly mutilated copy of John Hersey’s Hiroshima — the New Yorker article in paperback form — is as terrifyingly brilliant as the day I bought it at the Strand bookstore in New York City for 48 cents.
I know Hiroshima well. I’ve read it cover-to-cover dozens of times. Or sometimes on a plane or a helicopter or a river barge, in a hotel room or sitting by the side of a road, I’ll flip it open and take in a random 10 or 20 pages. I always marveled at how skillfully Hersey constructed the narrative with overlapping personal accounts that make the horrific handiwork of that weapon with the power of the gods accessible on a human level; how he explained something new to this world, atomic terror, in terms that readers could immediately grasp; how he translated destruction on a previously unimaginable scale into a cautionary tale as old as the genre itself, but with an urgency that hasn’t faded or been matched. I simply never knew how he did it until Lesley Blume pulled back the curtain.
Fallout, which was published last month — the 75th anniversary of America’s attack on Hiroshima — offers a behind-the-scenes glimpse of just how Hersey and William Shawn, then the managing editor of the New Yorker, were able to truly break the story of an attack that had been covered on the front pages of the world’s leading newspapers a year earlier and, in the process, produced one of the all-time great pieces of journalism. It’s an important reminder that the biggest stories may be hiding in plain sight; that breaking news coverage is essential but may not convey the full magnitude of an event; and that a writer may be far better served by laying out a detailed, chronological account in spartan prose, even when the story is so horrific it seems to demand a polemic.
Hersey begins Hiroshima in an understated fashion, noting exactly what each of the six survivors he chronicles was doing at the moment their lives changed forever. “Not everyone could comprehend how the atomic bomb worked or visualize an all-out, end-of-days nuclear world war,” Blume observes. “But practically anyone could comprehend a story about a handful of regular people — mothers, fathers, grade school children, doctors, clerks — going about their daily routines when catastrophe struck.”
As she points out, Hersey’s authorial voice is never raised and so the atomic horrors — victims whose eyeballs had melted and run down their cheeks, others whose skin hung from their bodies or slipped off their hands like gloves — speak for themselves. It’s a feat made all the more astonishing when one considers, as Blume reveals, that its author, who had witnessed combat and widespread devastation from conventional bombing during World War II, was so terrified and tormented by what he saw in Hiroshima months after the attack that he feared he would be unable to complete his assignment.
Incredibly, Hersey got the story of Hiroshima with official sanction, reporting under the scrutiny of the office of the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers, General Douglas MacArthur, the head of the American occupation of defeated Japan. His prior reportage on the U.S. military, including a book focused on MacArthur that he later called “too adulatory,” helped secure his access. More amazing still, the New Yorker — fearing possible repercussions under the recently passed Atomic Energy Act — submitted a final draft of the article for review to Lieutenant General Lesley Groves, who had overseen the Manhattan Project that created the atomic bomb, served as its chief booster, and went so far as to claim that radiation poisoning “is a very pleasant way to die.”
Whatever concessions the New Yorker may have made to him have been lost in the sands of time, but Groves did sign off on the article, overlooking, as Blume notes, “Hersey’s most unsettling revelations: the fact that the United States had unleashed destruction and suffering upon a largely civilian population on a scale unprecedented in human history and then tried to cover up the human cost of its new weapon.”
The impact on the U.S. government would be swift. The article was a sensation and immediately lauded as the best reporting to come out of World War II. It quickly became one of the most reprinted news pieces of all time and led to widespread reappraisals by newspapers and readers alike of just what America had done to Japanese civilians at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It also managed to shine a remarkably bright light on the perils of nuclear weapons, writ large. “Hersey’s story,” as Blume astutely notes, “was the first truly effective, internationally heeded warning about the existential threat that nuclear arms posed to civilization.”
Wanted: A Hersey for Our Time
It’s been 74 years since Hiroshima hit the newsstands. A Cold War and nuclear arms race followed as those weapons spread across the planet. And this January, as a devastating pandemic was beginning to follow suit, all of us found ourselves just 100 seconds away from total annihilation due to the plethora of nuclear weapons on this earth, failures of U.S.-Russian cooperation on arms control and disarmament, the Trump administration’s trashing of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, and America’s efforts to develop and deploy yet more advanced nukes, as well as two other factors that have sped up that apocalyptic Doomsday Clock: climate change and cyber-based disinformation.
The latter, according to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, is corrupting our “information ecosphere,” undermining democracy as well as trust among nations, and so creating hair-trigger conditions in international relations. The former is transforming the planet’s actual ecosystem and placing humanity in another kind of ultimate peril. “Dangerous rivalry and hostility among the superpowers increases the likelihood of nuclear blunder,” former California Governor Jerry Brown, the executive chair of the Bulletin, said earlier this year. “Climate change just compounds the crisis. If there’s ever a time to wake up, it’s now.”
Over the last three-plus years, however, President Donald Trump has seemingly threatened at least three nations with nuclear annihilation, including a U.S. ally. In addition to menacing North Korea with the possibility of unleashing “fire and fury” and his talk of ushering in “the end” of Iran, he even claimed to have “plans” to exterminate most of the population of Afghanistan. The “method of war” he suggested employing could kill an estimated 20 million or more Afghans, almost all of them civilians. John Hersey, who died in 1993 at the age of 78, wouldn’t have had a moment’s doubt about what he meant.
Trump’s nuclear threats may never come to fruition, but his administration, while putting significant effort into deep-sixing nuclear pacts, has also more than done its part to accelerate climate change, thinning rules designed to keep the planet as habitable as possible for humans. A recent New York Times analysis, for example, tallied almost 70 environmental rules and regulations — governing planet-warming carbon dioxide and methane emissions, clean air, water, and toxic chemicals — that have been rescinded, reversed, or revoked, with more than 30 additional rollbacks still in progress.
President Trump has not, however, been a total outlier when it comes to promoting environmental degradation. American presidents have been presiding over the destruction of the natural environment since the founding of the republic. Signed into law in 1862 by Abraham Lincoln, the Homestead Act, for instance, transformed countless American lives, providing free land for the masses. But it also transferred 270 million acres of wilderness, or 10% of the United States, into private hands for “improvements.”
More recently, Ronald Reagan launched attacks on the Environmental Protection Agency through deregulation and budget cuts, while George W. Bush’s administration worked to undermine science-based policies, specifically through the denial of anthropogenic climate change. The difference, of course, was that Lincoln couldn’t have conceptualized the effects of global warming (even if the first study of the “greenhouse effect” was published during his lifetime), whereas the science was already clear enough in the Reagan and Bush years, and brutally self-apparent in the age of Trump, as each of them pursued policies that would push us precious seconds closer to Armageddon.
The tale of how John Hersey got his story is a great triumph of Lesley Blume’s Fallout, but what came after may be an even more compelling facet of the book. Hersey gave the United States an image problem — and far worse. “The transition from global savior to genocidal superpower was an unwelcome reversal,” she observes. Worse yet for the U.S. government, the article left many Americans reevaluating their country and themselves. It’s beyond rare for a journalist to prompt true soul-searching or provide a moral mirror for a nation. In an interview in his later years, Hersey, who generally avoided publicity, suggested that the testimony of survivors of the atomic blasts — like those he spotlighted — had helped to prevent nuclear war.
“We know what an atomic apocalypse would look like because John Hersey showed us,” writes Blume. Unfortunately, while there have been many noteworthy, powerful works on climate change, we’re still waiting for the one that packs the punch of “Hiroshima.” And so, humanity awaits that once-in-a-century article, as nuclear weapons, climate change, and cyber-based disinformation keep us just 100 clicks short of doomsday.
Hersey provided a template. Blume has lifted the veil on how he did it. Now someone needs to step up and write the world-changing piece of reportage that will shock our consciences and provide a little more breathing room between this vanishing moment and our ever-looming midnight.
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.
To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up to receive the latest updates from TomDispatch.com here.


truthout--2020-09-24--Trump’s Vaccine Czar Refuses to Divest From Company Developing COVID Vaccine

The former pharmaceutical executive tapped by President Donald Trump to lead the administration ’ s race to a COVID-19 vaccine is refusing to give up investments that stand to benefit from his work — at least during his lifetime .
The executive , Moncef Slaoui , is the top scientist on Operation Warp Speed , the administration ’ s effort to develop a coronavirus vaccine in record time .
Federal law requires government officials to disclose their personal finances and divest any holdings relating to their work , but Slaoui said he wouldn ’ t take the job under those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s treating him as a contractor .
Contractors aren ’ t bound by the same ethics rules but also aren ’ t supposed to wield as much authority as full employees .
Slaoui agreed to sell stock worth $ 12 million and resign from the board of Moderna , the developer of a leading potential vaccine .
But Slaoui insisted on keeping his roughly $ 10 million stake in his former company , GlaxoSmithKline , another contender in the Operation Warp Speed vaccine race .
“ I won ’ t leave those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” he has said .
GlaxoSmithKline , working with Sanofi , has started human trials for a coronavirus vaccine using similar technology to Sanofi ’ s flu shot .
It is supported by up to $ 2.1 billion from the U.S. government .
As a concession , Slaoui committed to donating any increase in the value of his holdings to the National Institutes of Health .
But Democrats on the House Committee on the Coronavirus called the commitment “ toothless.
” According to newly released records from the committee , Slaoui ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the donation “ may occur on the last death of the employee and his or her spouse.
” Slaoui is 61 and his wife , Kristen Belmonte , is 50 .
“ That means he ’ s going to live out his life with those profits , ” said Craig Holman , a lobbyist with the advocacy group Public Citizen who has filed multiple ethics complaints about Slaoui ’ s service .
“ It ’ s so clearly an all-out evasion ” of the law against conflicts of interest , Holman said .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ requirement is further complicated by measuring the increase in the stock ’ s value against a drug industry index , not the outright change in the stock itself .
As it happens , since Slaoui joined Operation Warp Speed , both GlaxoSmithKline and the specified drug industry index have declined .
Slaoui declined to be interviewed through a spokeswoman .
“ I have a personal compass in ethics and people who know me personally know that , ” Slaoui said in a July podcast interview with Michael Caputo , the Department of Health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the agency after an incendiary Facebook rant accusing government scientists of “ sedition.
” “ It ’ s been extremely painful for me that anybody would even think that I took this job to enrich myself or my former colleagues , ” Slaoui said .
The White House declined to comment .
An HHS spokeswoman said agency ethics officers determined that Slaoui complied with the department ’ s rules through his contractor status , divestiture and board resignations .
“ The American people are fortunate to have him as a leader of President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , therapeutics and diagnostics to defeat the coronavirus , ” the spokeswoman , Natalie Baldassarre , said in an emailed statement .
During his time at GlaxoSmithKline , Slaoui led the development of several new vaccines , including ones to prevent cervical cancer , malaria and shingles .
HHS previously said Slaoui “ does not have any additional stock holdings in any other companies involved in vaccines , therapeutics and diagnostic products developed to combat COVID-19.
” But in addition to Slaoui ’ s retained GlaxoSmithKline shares , the records obtained by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in another biotechnology company , Lonza Group , that wasn ’ t previously disclosed .
The company has a contract with Moderna to manufacture its coronavirus vaccine .
Slaoui resigned from Lonza ’ s board before joining Operation Warp Speed but kept his shares .
The records released by the House committee do not show how much the stake was worth .
“ Documents recently obtained by the Select Subcommittee have heightened concerns that these advisors may have significant undisclosed financial conflicts of interest that , contrary to the administration ’ s public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” the committee ’ s chairman , Rep. James E. Clyburn , D-S.C. , said in a Sept. 21 letter to Advanced Decision Vectors LLC , a consulting firm that received the contract for the government ’ s work with Slaoui and other Operation Warp Speed advisers .
Clyburn said the committee will subpoena the company if it doesn ’ t voluntarily provide more documents .
Congress should strengthen the federal ethics laws to root out this kind of corruption , ” Sen. Elizabeth Warren , D-Mass.
, said at a hearing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ person to be fired should be Dr. Slaoui .
The American people deserve to know that COVID-19 decisions are based on science and not on personal greed.
” Clyburn ’ s committee also released records that he said suggested conflicts of interest among three other Operation Warp Speed advisers : William Erhardt , Rachel Harrigan and Carlo de Notaristefani .
According to the documents , HHS certified that the companies in which the advisers have investments “ are not involved in vaccines , therapeutics and diagnostic products developed to combat pandemic COVID-19.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the advisers listed are in companies working on vaccines , treatments and tests for the coronavirus .
According to the records , Erhardt and Harrigan own shares of Pfizer , the current coronavirus vaccine front-runner with a $ 2 billion preorder from the government .
Erhardt also listed holdings in Thermo Fisher Scientific , a diagnostics manufacturer that has received millions from the federal government for coronavirus testing materials ; PhaseBio Pharmaceuticals , which has two clinical trials of drugs that could treat COVID-19 ; and Incyte Pharmaceuticals , which is also studying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , de Notaristefani , reported a financial interest in Teva Pharmaceuticals , a manufacturer of the generic drug hydroxychloroquine touted by Trump as a coronavirus treatment despite lacking scientific support .
“ HHS appears to be permitting these advisors to keep these holdings , along with any profits , by certifying that ‘ the Government has determined ’ the companies ‘ are not involved in vaccines , therapeutics and diagnostic products developed to combat pandemic COVID-19 , ’ ” Clyburn wrote in his letter .
“ These certifications appear to be inaccurate.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or answer other specific questions for this article .
ProPublica ’ s board chairman , Paul Sagan , is a member of Moderna ’ s board and a company stockholder .
Update , Sept. 23 , 2020 : This story was updated to add a comment from Sen. Elizabeth Warren at a hearing on Wednesday .

The former pharmaceutical executive tapped by President Donald Trump to lead the administration’s race to a COVID-19 vaccine is refusing to give up investments that stand to benefit from his work — at least during his lifetime.
The executive, Moncef Slaoui, is the top scientist on Operation Warp Speed, the administration’s effort to develop a coronavirus vaccine in record time. Federal law requires government officials to disclose their personal finances and divest any holdings relating to their work, but Slaoui said he wouldn’t take the job under those conditions. So the administration said it’s treating him as a contractor. Contractors aren’t bound by the same ethics rules but also aren’t supposed to wield as much authority as full employees.
Slaoui agreed to sell stock worth $12 million and resign from the board of Moderna, the developer of a leading potential vaccine. But Slaoui insisted on keeping his roughly $10 million stake in his former company, GlaxoSmithKline, another contender in the Operation Warp Speed vaccine race. “I won’t leave those shares because that’s my retirement,” he has said. GlaxoSmithKline, working with Sanofi, has started human trials for a coronavirus vaccine using similar technology to Sanofi’s flu shot. It is supported by up to $2.1 billion from the U.S. government.
As a concession, Slaoui committed to donating any increase in the value of his holdings to the National Institutes of Health.
But Democrats on the House Committee on the Coronavirus called the commitment “toothless.” According to newly released records from the committee, Slaoui’s contract with the government specifies that the donation “may occur on the last death of the employee and his or her spouse.” Slaoui is 61 and his wife, Kristen Belmonte, is 50.
“That means he’s going to live out his life with those profits,” said Craig Holman, a lobbyist with the advocacy group Public Citizen who has filed multiple ethics complaints about Slaoui’s service. “It’s so clearly an all-out evasion” of the law against conflicts of interest, Holman said.
In addition, the contract’s requirement is further complicated by measuring the increase in the stock’s value against a drug industry index, not the outright change in the stock itself. As it happens, since Slaoui joined Operation Warp Speed, both GlaxoSmithKline and the specified drug industry index have declined.
Slaoui declined to be interviewed through a spokeswoman. “I have a personal compass in ethics and people who know me personally know that,” Slaoui said in a July podcast interview with Michael Caputo, the Department of Health and Human Services spokesman who subsequently left the agency after an incendiary Facebook rant accusing government scientists of “sedition.”
“It’s been extremely painful for me that anybody would even think that I took this job to enrich myself or my former colleagues,” Slaoui said.
The White House declined to comment. An HHS spokeswoman said agency ethics officers determined that Slaoui complied with the department’s rules through his contractor status, divestiture and board resignations.
“The American people are fortunate to have him as a leader of President Trump’s effort to discover vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics to defeat the coronavirus,” the spokeswoman, Natalie Baldassarre, said in an emailed statement. During his time at GlaxoSmithKline, Slaoui led the development of several new vaccines, including ones to prevent cervical cancer, malaria and shingles.
HHS previously said Slaoui “does not have any additional stock holdings in any other companies involved in vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostic products developed to combat COVID-19.” But in addition to Slaoui’s retained GlaxoSmithKline shares, the records obtained by the House Democrats revealed he has a holding in another biotechnology company, Lonza Group, that wasn’t previously disclosed. The company has a contract with Moderna to manufacture its coronavirus vaccine. Slaoui resigned from Lonza’s board before joining Operation Warp Speed but kept his shares. The records released by the House committee do not show how much the stake was worth.
“Documents recently obtained by the Select Subcommittee have heightened concerns that these advisors may have significant undisclosed financial conflicts of interest that, contrary to the administration’s public statements, have not been adequately addressed,” the committee’s chairman, Rep. James E. Clyburn, D-S.C., said in a Sept. 21 letter to Advanced Decision Vectors LLC, a consulting firm that received the contract for the government’s work with Slaoui and other Operation Warp Speed advisers. Clyburn said the committee will subpoena the company if it doesn’t voluntarily provide more documents.
ADV’s CEO, David Harris, didn’t respond to messages seeking comment.
Congress should strengthen the federal ethics laws to root out this kind of corruption,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., said at a hearing on Wednesday. “And the first person to be fired should be Dr. Slaoui. The American people deserve to know that COVID-19 decisions are based on science and not on personal greed.”
Clyburn’s committee also released records that he said suggested conflicts of interest among three other Operation Warp Speed advisers: William Erhardt, Rachel Harrigan and Carlo de Notaristefani. According to the documents, HHS certified that the companies in which the advisers have investments “are not involved in vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostic products developed to combat pandemic COVID-19.” However, several of the holdings that the advisers listed are in companies working on vaccines, treatments and tests for the coronavirus.
According to the records, Erhardt and Harrigan own shares of Pfizer, the current coronavirus vaccine front-runner with a $2 billion preorder from the government. Erhardt also listed holdings in Thermo Fisher Scientific, a diagnostics manufacturer that has received millions from the federal government for coronavirus testing materials; PhaseBio Pharmaceuticals, which has two clinical trials of drugs that could treat COVID-19; and Incyte Pharmaceuticals, which is also studying a possible treatment. The third adviser, de Notaristefani, reported a financial interest in Teva Pharmaceuticals, a manufacturer of the generic drug hydroxychloroquine touted by Trump as a coronavirus treatment despite lacking scientific support.
“HHS appears to be permitting these advisors to keep these holdings, along with any profits, by certifying that ‘the Government has determined’ the companies ‘are not involved in vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostic products developed to combat pandemic COVID-19,’” Clyburn wrote in his letter. “These certifications appear to be inaccurate.”
Baldassarre declined to comment on the certifications or answer other specific questions for this article.
ProPublica’s board chairman, Paul Sagan, is a member of Moderna’s board and a company stockholder.
Update, Sept. 23, 2020: This story was updated to add a comment from Sen. Elizabeth Warren at a hearing on Wednesday.
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.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.