thenation--2020-06-08--America Is Fracturing—and So Is ‘The New York Times’

The global uprising against racist policing is unsettling many institutions , perhaps most surprisingly The New York Times .
On Sunday , James Bennet , editor of the opinion section , resigned his post .
His departure was a messy one .
Since Wednesday , the newspaper had been rocked by an internal staff revolt against a controversial op-ed by Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton arguing for the use of military troops to quell the uprising , which the lawmaker portrayed as legitimate protests hijacked by nihilistic , violent rioters .
The op-ed was inflammatory , demagogic , and contained major @ @ @ @ @ @ @ employees signed a letter complaining that Cotton ’ s “ message undermines the work we do , in the newsroom and in opinion , and is an affront to our standards for ethical and accurate reporting for the public ’ s interest.
” The push against the op-ed was spearheaded by African American journalists , who had justifiable grounds for arguing that the article “ puts Black @ nytimes staff in danger ” in any escalation of conflict between the government and the protesters .
The intense reaction to the op-ed was , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the very real threat to American democracy .
The idea of using troops was no mere theoretical suggestion .
On Monday , Trump met with Secretary of Defense Mark Esper and Chairman of the Joint of Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley and requested that 10,000 active-duty troops be deployed inside America .
Esper and Milley resisted the request , but did join Trump in a photo op at St. John ’ s Church that took place after protesters had been dispersed by federal law enforcement officers .
Milley appeared in uniform in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military sanction to the treatment of protesters .
His actions appear to have sent shock waves through the Pentagon , causing an intense pushback in the form of retired military officers , notably former secretary of defense James Mattis , condemning Trump ’ s handling of the protests .
Active-duty military personnel are prevented by custom and regulation from commenting on partisan matters .
But it ’ s reasonable to infer that the Pentagon was using Mattis and other retired soldiers to make its displeasure felt .
Tom Cotton Is Preparing to Be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Hide His Weakness The staffers at the Times who organized against the op-ed were motivated by the same fears that seem to have animated the Pentagon : the worry that the military might be drawn into a domestic political conflict .
But beyond the panic at Trump ’ s threat to democracy , the actions of the staff of the Times were also a reflection of a changing approach to journalism in the face of a breakdown in the political consensus .
This change has been felt in both the newsroom and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The divergent approach to what James Bennet has called “ the crackup of ideologies ” is the true source of the conflict between the newsroom and the opinion section .
For most of its history , The New York Times has been not a paper of the left or of the right but rather of the establishment .
It might have leaned in recent decades toward the Democratic Party , but its preeminent goal has been to win the trust of well-to-do readers of both the center left and the center right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as much as substance : Unlike tabloids with screaming headlines about murder and corruption , the Times has presented the news in a tactful , restrained , and cool fashion .
This has led to a preference for neutral , colorless , depersonalized prose that conveys a feeling of objectivity : a view from nowhere .
The polarization of America since the end of the Cold War has made this faux-objectivity increasingly obsolete .
A shared consensus that all elite readers can be assumed to agree with no longer exists .
In an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ben Smith argued that the Ferguson uprising of 2014 was pivotal in undermining the older consensus journalism .
A cohort of young African American journalists covering Ferguson came to realize that the rules of faux-objectivity prevented them from accurately describing the police violence they witnessed .
According to Smith , “ Seeing the brutality of a white power structure toward its poor black citizens up close , and at its rawest , helped shape the way a generation of reporters , most of them black , looked at their jobs when they returned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ covering Ferguson , Smith notes , “ carried over into the next challenging era : the arrival of Mr. Trump , whose bigoted language and tactics shattered norms .
Black reporters were joined by other journalists in pushing , inside newsrooms and on Twitter , for more direct language—and less deference—in covering the president.
” If the breakdown of consensus journalism has led newsrooms , and particularly African American reporters , to be more blunt , it has also led opinion pages to expand the spectrum of opinion .
When James Bennet was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he seemed to be well situated to oversee an opinion section confronting a fracturing political spectrum .
He had previously edited The Atlantic , where he had a reputation for cultivating a diversity of viewpoints ranging from the radical Ta-Nehisi Coates to the conservative David Frum .
Tom Cotton Is Preparing to Be Trump 2.0 In a memo he sent to Times staff on February 15 , 2017 , Bennet eloquently argued that diversity of viewpoint in the op-ed page was essential for bringing together a divided America : He added , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recruiting voices that are new to The Times and publishing pieces that press against our traditional boundaries.
” In some ways , Bennet ’ s opinion section lived up to these ideals .
Prior to his arrival , it ’ s fair to say that the political spectrum at the Times ran from Clintonian liberalism on the left ( embodied by Paul Krugman ) to moderate neoconservatism on the right ( voiced by David Brooks ) .
This hardly exhausted the political spectrum in the age of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Times voices much further to the left , notably Jamelle Bouie .
Recently , the paper ran an excerpt of Vincent Bevins ’ s new book on the 1965 anti-communist massacre in Indonesia .
Bevins argued , “ We need to understand that the United States is not , in fact , beloved as a beacon of freedom , democracy and human rights .
From Argentina to the Democratic Republic of Congo , East Timor to Iran , millions of people are skeptical of Washington ’ s intentions.
” This was far @ @ @ @ @ @ @ usually provides .
Bringing in voices on the right has proved more difficult for Bennet .
Trumpism may be the order of the day in Washington , but literate and plausible Trumpists who can write convincing op-eds are rare ( although Bennet did manage to find one in Daniel McCarthy ) .
So instead of Trumpists , Bennet had to settle for a stable of three Never Trump conservatives , two inherited ( David Brooks , Ross Douthat ) and one brought on board ( Bret Stephens ) .
But Stephens himself has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ glib contrarianism on climate change , Woody Allen , and other issues .
Stephens ’ s column is symptomatic of a larger problem with Bennet ’ s opinion section .
In his search for diversity , Bennet too often settles for hot takes and clickbait .
As one Times staffer complained to Vox , “ Does op-ed care at all about how its actions affect the newsroom whose legitimacy and sweat it trades on in order to sling hot takes ?
It ’ s not clear that they do.
” Bennet ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during his tenure at The Atlantic , seemed to be based on the following premise : We are too divided to convince each other of the truth , so all we can do is entertain each other with outrageous opinions .
In the light of the current crisis , soliciting a column from Tom Cotton asking for Trump to send in the troops is irresponsible trolling .
The idea is actually being taken seriously in Washington , so it deserves to be investigated as a news story .
But to bring it up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a dangerous gesture by a besieged administration as if it were merely an intellectual exercise , a novel idea worth debating .
It ’ s the equivalent of running op-eds during Watergate asking if Nixon should in fact firebomb the Brookings Institution or assassinate whistle-blowers .
America is fracturing—and so is The New York Times .
The newsroom has adjusted to the crisis by allowing journalists to write more forthrightly and honestly about politics .
The opinion page has taken a different tack by elevating extreme voices .
It ’ s hardly surprising @ @ @ @ @ @

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
The global uprising against racist policing is unsettling many institutions, perhaps most surprisingly The New York Times. On Sunday, James Bennet, editor of the opinion section, resigned his post. His departure was a messy one. Since Wednesday, the newspaper had been rocked by an internal staff revolt against a controversial op-ed by Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton arguing for the use of military troops to quell the uprising, which the lawmaker portrayed as legitimate protests hijacked by nihilistic, violent rioters. The op-ed was inflammatory, demagogic, and contained major factual errors.
More than 1,000 Times employees signed a letter complaining that Cotton’s “message undermines the work we do, in the newsroom and in opinion, and is an affront to our standards for ethical and accurate reporting for the public’s interest.” The push against the op-ed was spearheaded by African American journalists, who had justifiable grounds for arguing that the article “puts Black @nytimes staff in danger” in any escalation of conflict between the government and the protesters.
The intense reaction to the op-ed was, first and foremost, a reflection of the very real threat to American democracy. The idea of using troops was no mere theoretical suggestion. On Monday, Trump met with Secretary of Defense Mark Esper and Chairman of the Joint of Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley and requested that 10,000 active-duty troops be deployed inside America. Esper and Milley resisted the request, but did join Trump in a photo op at St. John’s Church that took place after protesters had been dispersed by federal law enforcement officers.
Milley appeared in uniform in the photo op, thus seemingly giving military sanction to the treatment of protesters. His actions appear to have sent shock waves through the Pentagon, causing an intense pushback in the form of retired military officers, notably former secretary of defense James Mattis, condemning Trump’s handling of the protests. Active-duty military personnel are prevented by custom and regulation from commenting on partisan matters. But it’s reasonable to infer that the Pentagon was using Mattis and other retired soldiers to make its displeasure felt. More From Jeet Heer The Indigenous Roots of Robbie Robertson’s Rock and Roll Revolution August 14, 2023 Why Does This Racist Keep Getting Silicon Valley Money? August 11, 2023 When Phallocrats Go Limp August 4, 2023
The staffers at the Times who organized against the op-ed were motivated by the same fears that seem to have animated the Pentagon: the worry that the military might be drawn into a domestic political conflict.
But beyond the panic at Trump’s threat to democracy, the actions of the staff of the Times were also a reflection of a changing approach to journalism in the face of a breakdown in the political consensus. This change has been felt in both the newsroom and the opinion section—but in very different ways. The divergent approach to what James Bennet has called “the crackup of ideologies” is the true source of the conflict between the newsroom and the opinion section. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann
For most of its history, The New York Times has been not a paper of the left or of the right but rather of the establishment. It might have leaned in recent decades toward the Democratic Party, but its preeminent goal has been to win the trust of well-to-do readers of both the center left and the center right. It achieved this goal through style as much as substance: Unlike tabloids with screaming headlines about murder and corruption, the Times has presented the news in a tactful, restrained, and cool fashion. This has led to a preference for neutral, colorless, depersonalized prose that conveys a feeling of objectivity: a view from nowhere. Current Issue View our current issue
The polarization of America since the end of the Cold War has made this faux-objectivity increasingly obsolete. A shared consensus that all elite readers can be assumed to agree with no longer exists.
In an important essay on Sunday, Times reporter Ben Smith argued that the Ferguson uprising of 2014 was pivotal in undermining the older consensus journalism. A cohort of young African American journalists covering Ferguson came to realize that the rules of faux-objectivity prevented them from accurately describing the police violence they witnessed.
According to Smith, “Seeing the brutality of a white power structure toward its poor black citizens up close, and at its rawest, helped shape the way a generation of reporters, most of them black, looked at their jobs when they returned to their newsrooms.” The experience of covering Ferguson, Smith notes, “carried over into the next challenging era: the arrival of Mr. Trump, whose bigoted language and tactics shattered norms. Black reporters were joined by other journalists in pushing, inside newsrooms and on Twitter, for more direct language—and less deference—in covering the president.”
If the breakdown of consensus journalism has led newsrooms, and particularly African American reporters, to be more blunt, it has also led opinion pages to expand the spectrum of opinion.
When James Bennet was hired by the Times in 2016, he seemed to be well situated to oversee an opinion section confronting a fracturing political spectrum. He had previously edited The Atlantic, where he had a reputation for cultivating a diversity of viewpoints ranging from the radical Ta-Nehisi Coates to the conservative David Frum.
In a memo he sent to Times staff on February 15, 2017, Bennet eloquently argued that diversity of viewpoint in the op-ed page was essential for bringing together a divided America:
It’s a commonplace borne out by social science that Americans are sorting themselves by party or convictions and losing the ability to engage respectfully—even if only to disagree—across those tribal lines. Most people seem to think this is a bad thing, but very few institutions are trying seriously to do anything about it. We are trying. It’s what The Times is supposed to do, and it’s what democracy needs.
He added, “We’re taking some chances, recruiting voices that are new to The Times and publishing pieces that press against our traditional boundaries.” Trump 2.0 Tom Cotton Is Preparing to Be Trump 2.0 Jeet Heer
In some ways, Bennet’s opinion section lived up to these ideals. Prior to his arrival, it’s fair to say that the political spectrum at the Times ran from Clintonian liberalism on the left (embodied by Paul Krugman) to moderate neoconservatism on the right (voiced by David Brooks). This hardly exhausted the political spectrum in the age of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. To his credit, Bennet brought to the Times voices much further to the left, notably Jamelle Bouie. Recently, the paper ran an excerpt of Vincent Bevins’s new book on the 1965 anti-communist massacre in Indonesia. Bevins argued, “We need to understand that the United States is not, in fact, beloved as a beacon of freedom, democracy and human rights. From Argentina to the Democratic Republic of Congo, East Timor to Iran, millions of people are skeptical of Washington’s intentions.” This was far more radical fare than the Times menu usually provides.
Bringing in voices on the right has proved more difficult for Bennet. Trumpism may be the order of the day in Washington, but literate and plausible Trumpists who can write convincing op-eds are rare (although Bennet did manage to find one in Daniel McCarthy). So instead of Trumpists, Bennet had to settle for a stable of three Never Trump conservatives, two inherited (David Brooks, Ross Douthat) and one brought on board (Bret Stephens).
But Stephens himself has proven a problem with his penchant for glib contrarianism on climate change, Woody Allen, and other issues. Stephens’s column is symptomatic of a larger problem with Bennet’s opinion section. In his search for diversity, Bennet too often settles for hot takes and clickbait. As one Times staffer complained to Vox, “Does op-ed care at all about how its actions affect the newsroom whose legitimacy and sweat it trades on in order to sling hot takes? It’s not clear that they do.” Bennet’s propensity toward trolling, which was noticed during his tenure at The Atlantic, seemed to be based on the following premise: We are too divided to convince each other of the truth, so all we can do is entertain each other with outrageous opinions. Related Article Jim Mattis vs. Tom Cotton: No Contest Joan Walsh
In the light of the current crisis, soliciting a column from Tom Cotton asking for Trump to send in the troops is irresponsible trolling. The idea is actually being taken seriously in Washington, so it deserves to be investigated as a news story. But to bring it up in the op-ed section is to treat a dangerous gesture by a besieged administration as if it were merely an intellectual exercise, a novel idea worth debating. It’s the equivalent of running op-eds during Watergate asking if Nixon should in fact firebomb the Brookings Institution or assassinate whistle-blowers.
America is fracturing—and so is The New York Times. The newsroom has adjusted to the crisis by allowing journalists to write more forthrightly and honestly about politics. The opinion page has taken a different tack by elevating extreme voices. It’s hardly surprising that these two approaches collided.


thenation--2020-06-09--Trump Wants to ‘Dominate’ but Can’t Take the Backlash

Donald Trump has spent the start of June trying on crowd-crushing jackboots .
One might expect these to fit as tightly as possible around the feet and ankles .
But no matter how many variants on the theme Trump models , the footwear simply doesn ’ t fit : Sweating profusely , he can ’ t stop squelching around in them .
After Trump called for “ dominating ” the protesters last week , the mayor of Washington , D.C. , responded by having the street leading up to his home painted with huge yellow letters spelling “ Black Lives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can apparently be seen from space .
For a man as preoccupied by size ( and space ) as Trump is , that fact alone must surely be driving him mad ; perhaps that ’ s why he spent last Friday huddled in his social-media alternate reality , sending out 200 tweets and retweets—a new record for him .
Last week he also urged use of the armed forces to take back America ’ s streets from the protesters he has called “ terrorists.
” ( CBS later reported that he wanted to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Daily Beast noted that he asked about tanks . )
Instead of supporting that idea , the current secretary of defense and many other top military figures—including several who worked directly for Trump—pushed back in memos , press conferences , and op-eds , calling the president out as a threat to the constitutional order , a man who views the military as his personal property .
In a statement sent to reporters , James Mattis even seemed to draw a comparison with the Nazis .
When The New York Times published an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ acolyte Senator Tom Cotton and calling for “ a display of overwhelming force ” against protesters , it provoked an all-out revolt among Times staff and led to the resignation Sunday of editorial page editor James Bennet .
In practically every city in the country , huge numbers of nonviolent protesters have continued to take to the streets , expressing their contempt for Trump ’ s cowardice .
By Saturday night—when almost every major city in the United States was experiencing massive demonstrations—Trump himself was , once more , barricaded behind an extraordinary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House from the thousands of protesters outside on 16th Street .
The protests have also gone global , with people around the world demonstrating outside of US embassies and consulates .
International leaders haven ’ t responded to Trump ’ s recent performance much more favorably : During a recent press conference , Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau took so long to decide how to answer a question about Trump ’ s actions and police brutality in the United States that video footage of his silence went viral .
In a phone call @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump out regarding his pandemic response and other issues—which apparently so enraged him that a few days later , he suddenly announced that the number of US troops stationed in Germany would be cut by a quarter .
Wherever Trump turns at the moment , he hits a brick wall of opposition and contempt .
It turns out that it ’ s hard to stomp on a vast protest movement when your jackboots fit as poorly as Trump ’ s .
In calling for troops to be used against US civilians , Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fury against ongoing police racism and police killings into a far more general pro-democracy movement—perhaps one with the revolutionary potential to turn Trump ’ s corrupt and crude status quo on its head .
What ’ s happening on the streets of America ’ s cities is starting to look rather similar to the outpouring of fury against Erich Honecker ’ s East German leadership in the autumn of 1989 , after he called for security forces to put down pro-democracy protesters and was met with a rebuff .
Mikhail Gorbachev reportedly told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reform instead , saying , “ He who is late is punished.
” The reality-TV president would do well to heed Gorbachev ’ s words .
It ’ s a fair bet that he will face regular , if not daily , protests for the remainder of his time in office—and not just outside the White House but wherever he alights .
This is a man who , on Friday , refused to wear a mask while touring a factory in Maine that makes swabs for coronavirus tests .
Because of that refusal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everything that was made during his visit .
Trump ’ s presence really is toxic .
This is also a man whose craving for unmasked , undistanced , indoor adulation during the GOP convention this summer brought him up against the Democratic governor of North Carolina .
The city of Charlotte was originally scheduled to host the event , but it turns out that no one wants tens of thousands of Trump ’ s unmasked zealots to descend on their convention center and hotels and other indoor venues .
Instead of working out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pique—announced that he would pull the convention out of Charlotte .
Now all he has to do is find another city willing to host his MAGA warriors and the thousands who will likely dog his every step this summer with raucous protest .
Good luck on that quest !
Trump committed an unpardonable sin in trying to escalate an already combustible situation on America ’ s streets into all-out armed conflict .
That ’ s the unequivocal Signal this week .
And the Noise ?
That squishing sound , as Trump finds that—despite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t quite fit .

Donald Trump has spent the start of June trying on crowd-crushing jackboots. One might expect these to fit as tightly as possible around the feet and ankles. But no matter how many variants on the theme Trump models, the footwear simply doesn’t fit: Sweating profusely, he can’t stop squelching around in them.
After Trump called for “dominating” the protesters last week, the mayor of Washington, D.C., responded by having the street leading up to his home painted with huge yellow letters spelling “Black Lives Matter,” lettering so big it can apparently be seen from space. For a man as preoccupied by size (and space) as Trump is, that fact alone must surely be driving him mad; perhaps that’s why he spent last Friday huddled in his social-media alternate reality, sending out 200 tweets and retweets—a new record for him.
Last week he also urged use of the armed forces to take back America’s streets from the protesters he has called “terrorists.” (CBS later reported that he wanted to deploy 10,000 troops around the country; The Daily Beast noted that he asked about tanks.) Instead of supporting that idea, the current secretary of defense and many other top military figures—including several who worked directly for Trump—pushed back in memos, press conferences, and op-eds, calling the president out as a threat to the constitutional order, a man who views the military as his personal property. In a statement sent to reporters, James Mattis even seemed to draw a comparison with the Nazis. When The New York Times published an op-ed written by Trump’s lickspittle acolyte Senator Tom Cotton and calling for “a display of overwhelming force” against protesters, it provoked an all-out revolt among Times staff and led to the resignation Sunday of editorial page editor James Bennet. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann
In practically every city in the country, huge numbers of nonviolent protesters have continued to take to the streets, expressing their contempt for Trump’s cowardice. By Saturday night—when almost every major city in the United States was experiencing massive demonstrations—Trump himself was, once more, barricaded behind an extraordinary series of security layers separating the White House from the thousands of protesters outside on 16th Street. Related Article A Vast Array of Emergency Powers. Zero Self-Control. Sasha Abramsky
The protests have also gone global, with people around the world demonstrating outside of US embassies and consulates. International leaders haven’t responded to Trump’s recent performance much more favorably: During a recent press conference, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau took so long to decide how to answer a question about Trump’s actions and police brutality in the United States that video footage of his silence went viral. In a phone call, German Chancellor Angela Merkel reportedly chewed Trump out regarding his pandemic response and other issues—which apparently so enraged him that a few days later, he suddenly announced that the number of US troops stationed in Germany would be cut by a quarter.
Wherever Trump turns at the moment, he hits a brick wall of opposition and contempt. It turns out that it’s hard to stomp on a vast protest movement when your jackboots fit as poorly as Trump’s. In calling for troops to be used against US civilians, Trump has managed to turn a spasm of fury against ongoing police racism and police killings into a far more general pro-democracy movement—perhaps one with the revolutionary potential to turn Trump’s corrupt and crude status quo on its head.
What’s happening on the streets of America’s cities is starting to look rather similar to the outpouring of fury against Erich Honecker’s East German leadership in the autumn of 1989, after he called for security forces to put down pro-democracy protesters and was met with a rebuff. Mikhail Gorbachev reportedly told Honecker to go down the route of reform instead, saying, “He who is late is punished.” Current Issue View our current issue
The reality-TV president would do well to heed Gorbachev’s words. It’s a fair bet that he will face regular, if not daily, protests for the remainder of his time in office—and not just outside the White House but wherever he alights.
This is a man who, on Friday, refused to wear a mask while touring a factory in Maine that makes swabs for coronavirus tests. Because of that refusal, the factory had to throw away everything that was made during his visit. Trump’s presence really is toxic.
This is also a man whose craving for unmasked, undistanced, indoor adulation during the GOP convention this summer brought him up against the Democratic governor of North Carolina. The city of Charlotte was originally scheduled to host the event, but it turns out that no one wants tens of thousands of Trump’s unmasked zealots to descend on their convention center and hotels and other indoor venues. Instead of working out a compromise, Trump—in a fit of pique—announced that he would pull the convention out of Charlotte. Now all he has to do is find another city willing to host his MAGA warriors and the thousands who will likely dog his every step this summer with raucous protest. Good luck on that quest!
Trump committed an unpardonable sin in trying to escalate an already combustible situation on America’s streets into all-out armed conflict. That’s the unequivocal Signal this week.
And the Noise? That squishing sound, as Trump finds that—despite his haute couture fascist fantasies—the jackboots don’t quite fit.


thenation--2020-06-09--Jamaal Bowman Wants to Spend Less on the Pentagon and More on the Bronx

New York educator Jamaal Bowman ’ s Democratic primary challenge to 16-term Representative Eliot Engel is a fight over the direction of the party that has the potential to upend another veteran congressman , just as Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez did two years ago when she defeated New York Democrat Joe Crowley .
AOC is backing Bowman ’ s bid , as are a growing number of progressive elected officials , such as New York Public Advocate Jumanne Williams , and groups such as the Working Families Party and Justice Democrats , which are highlighting their support for Bowman ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ police brutality to enacting Medicare for All health care reform and developing a Green New Deal .
Bowman is running a grassroots campaign that speaks to the issues on the ground in New York ’ s 16th congressional district , which includes parts of the Bronx and Westchester , and that challenges Engel ’ s much-discussed neglect of the district as the senior Democrat has concentrated on his role as chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee .
“ My opponent accepts donations from corporations and arms manufacturers like Lockheed Martin , Northrop @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a hawkish and costly foreign policy agenda instead of focusing on the communities in our district that have been neglected for far too long , ” says the middle school principal , who frequently mentions that the incumbent has “ taken more money from weapons manufacturers than 144 Republicans in the House.
” Shouldn ’ t Congressional Approval Be Required to Deploy Troops at Home Too ?
Democratic Candidates Should Be Campaigning to End Toxic Policing D.C. Statehood Is the Answer to Trump ’ s Abuse of Washington Bowman ’ s campaign has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the authorization of the use of military force that empowered George W. Bush and Dick Cheney to launch the Iraq War , and for initially opposing Barack Obama ’ s nuclear deal with Iran .
“ My opponent , Representative Eliot Engel , and I do not share the same foreign policy vision , ” explains Bowman , who observers suggest is closing the gap in his race against the incumbent , especially since a third candidate who also differed with the incumbent on domestic and foreign policy issues , Andom Ghebreghiorgis , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bowman .
From the beginning of his bid , Bowman has integrated into his campaigning a message about the need for a progressive foreign policy .
In doing so , he has distinguished himself from Engel .
“ He went on CNN this past year and said he didn ’ t want to tie Trump ’ s hands when it came to strikes on Iran .
He was one of only 16 House Democrats in 2016 to vote against an amendment that blocked the transfer of cluster bombs to Saudi Arabia , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ civilians.
” Primary challengers to D.C.-bound incumbents don ’ t always place a big emphasis on foreign policy .
They tend to amplify grievances that are closer to home .
Bowman has done that , with a campaign that has kept a steady focus on education , hunger , housing , and health care issues .
He ’ s come up with specific proposals that respond to the crises of the moment , such as his call for “ a new non-police first responder agency to respond to issues of mental illness or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the connection between the deference of hawkish Democrats such as Engel to the Pentagon and military contractors with the neglect of human needs at home .
As part of a campaign that has placed a heavy emphasis on policy , the challenger has outlined support for a host of proposals to restructure trade policy to support workers , not CEOs and Wall Street ; to reform the World Bank and the IMF “ to address the ways many nations around the world , particularly in Africa , Asia , and Latin America , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unfair debt arrangements ” ; to open up “ honest conversations about our government ’ s role in enabling the continued occupation of the Palestinian people ” ; and to “ dramatically reduce the Pentagon ’ s budget over the next ten years , end the forever wars , and rebuild a diplomacy-first approach through the State Department.
” Anti-War Groups Push Biden and the Democrats to Rethink Foreign Policy Engel has pushed back , arguing that he has adjusted his policies over the years .
But Bowman argues that what ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ things right from the start .
“ In our district , we need someone focused not on finding money for bombs and bullets , but for schools , health care , and jobs .
Some politicians want to cut our spending on schools , health care , and social services , ” he explains .
“ Our nation will spend more than $ 700 billion on defense spending just this year .
That doesn ’ t align with the values of our district , especially when we have so many in need.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ politics , which savvy candidates have begun to recognize .
Even if you are not running against the chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee , it ’ s important to talk about getting budget priorities right .
When your primary opponent is the hawkish chairman of that particular committee , it ’ s essential—because if Democrats don ’ t focus on “ building a progressive foreign policy vision based on our common humanity and shared aspirations , ” as Jamaal Bowman does , then change will never come .

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
New York educator Jamaal Bowman’s Democratic primary challenge to 16-term Representative Eliot Engel is a fight over the direction of the party that has the potential to upend another veteran congressman, just as Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez did two years ago when she defeated New York Democrat Joe Crowley.
AOC is backing Bowman’s bid, as is Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, who endorsed the challenger on Tuesday. Bowman has also attracted support from a number of progressive elected officials in New York, such as New York Public Advocate Jumanne Williams and state Senator Alessandra Biaggi, and groups such as the Working Families Party and Justice Democrats, which are highlighting their support for Bowman’s progressive message on issues ranging from ending police brutality to enacting Medicare for All health care reform and developing a Green New Deal.
Bowman is running a grassroots campaign that speaks to the issues on the ground in New York’s 16th congressional district, which includes parts of the Bronx and Westchester, and that challenges Engel’s much-discussed neglect of the district as the senior Democrat has concentrated on his role as chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
“My opponent accepts donations from corporations and arms manufacturers like Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Raytheon. He supports a hawkish and costly foreign policy agenda instead of focusing on the communities in our district that have been neglected for far too long,” says the middle school principal, who frequently mentions that the incumbent has “taken more money from weapons manufacturers than 144 Republicans in the House.” More From John Nichols A GOP Debate Without Trump Is the Definition of Pointlessness August 11, 2023 A Win for Abortion Rights, a Win for Democracy: Ohio Voters Reject Issue 1 August 9, 2023 The Biggest Threat to Donald Trump Could Be the Constitution Itself August 4, 2023
Bowman’s campaign has called out the 16-term incumbent for supporting the authorization of the use of military force that empowered George W. Bush and Dick Cheney to launch the Iraq War, and for initially opposing Barack Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann
“My opponent, Representative Eliot Engel, and I do not share the same foreign policy vision,” explains Bowman, who observers suggest is closing the gap in his race against the incumbent, especially since a third candidate who also differed with the incumbent on domestic and foreign policy issues, Andom Ghebreghiorgis, quit the competition last week and endorsed Bowman.
From the beginning of his bid, Bowman has integrated into his campaigning a message about the need for a progressive foreign policy. In doing so, he has distinguished himself from Engel. “He went on CNN this past year and said he didn’t want to tie Trump’s hands when it came to strikes on Iran,” Bowman says of the incumbent. “He was one of only 16 House Democrats in 2016 to vote against an amendment that blocked the transfer of cluster bombs to Saudi Arabia, which has been relentlessly dropping them on Yemeni civilians.” Current Issue View our current issue
Primary challengers to D.C.-bound incumbents don’t always place a big emphasis on foreign policy. They tend to amplify grievances that are closer to home. Bowman has done that, with a campaign that has kept a steady focus on education, hunger, housing, and health care issues. He’s come up with specific proposals that respond to the crises of the moment, such as his call for “a new non-police first responder agency to respond to issues of mental illness or addiction.”
Yet Bowman has also made the connection between the deference of hawkish Democrats such as Engel to the Pentagon and military contractors with the neglect of human needs at home. As part of a campaign that has placed a heavy emphasis on policy, the challenger has outlined support for a host of proposals to restructure trade policy to support workers, not CEOs and Wall Street; to reform the World Bank and the IMF “to address the ways many nations around the world, particularly in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, have faced disinvestment, exploitation, and unfair debt arrangements”; to open up “honest conversations about our government’s role in enabling the continued occupation of the Palestinian people”; and to “dramatically reduce the Pentagon’s budget over the next ten years, end the forever wars, and rebuild a diplomacy-first approach through the State Department.” Progressive Foreign Policy Anti-War Groups Push Biden and the Democrats to Rethink Foreign Policy John Nichols
Engel has pushed back, arguing that he has adjusted his policies over the years. But Bowman argues that what’s needed is a clear vision that gets things right from the start. “In our district, we need someone focused not on finding money for bombs and bullets, but for schools, health care, and jobs. Some politicians want to cut our spending on schools, health care, and social services,” he explains. “Our nation will spend more than $700 billion on defense spending just this year. That doesn’t align with the values of our district, especially when we have so many in need.”
That’s a potent political message, which savvy candidates have begun to recognize. Even if you are not running against the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, it’s important to talk about getting budget priorities right. When your primary opponent is the hawkish chairman of that particular committee, it’s essential—because if Democrats don’t focus on “building a progressive foreign policy vision based on our common humanity and shared aspirations,” as Jamaal Bowman does, then change will never come.
This article has been updated to include new endorsements of Jamaal Bowman, including Bernie Sanders’s.


thenation--2020-06-09--We Need an Academic New Deal

We Need an Academic New Deal

Higher education has been in a state of crisis for more than a decade .
Student loan debt has more than doubled since the Great Recession to $ 1.5 trillion in 2018 .
Coupled with a massive decline in tuition revenues , many colleges and universities are on the verge of collapse .
In response to the financial hardship that forced tuition down and debt to rise , university administrators cut costs .
They did this by hiring part-time instructors without benefits and subcontracting staff positions to push down wages and to save the university money .
Now , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ colleges and universities to the brink of bankruptcy , they face billions in lost revenue from tuition and rent reimbursements—as well as further state divestment—this academic year .
When enrollments decline in 2020–21 , it will only get worse .
But the institutions most at risk are not elite institutions with massive endowments—they are historically black colleges and universities , community colleges , and already vulnerable universities that disproportionately serve and offer economic mobility to black and brown , immigrant , and working-class students .
We ’ re already seeing the beginning of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crisis , hundreds of universities have announced hiring freezes , furloughs , and wage cuts .
As they did following the Great Recession , administrators are expected to pass these cuts on to the most vulnerable workers .
Bailing out universities as a way to “ save ” higher education will only further disempower the contingent faculty , graduate workers , staff , and campus workers who give life to college and university communities .
Academia is at a breaking point , and the path forward is perilous .
Funding the existing profit-driven @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and racial disparities within higher education and society at large .
This story was produced for Student Nation , a section devoted to highlighting campus activism and student movements from students in their own words .
For more Student Nation , check out our archive .
Are you a student with a campus activism story ?
Send questions and pitches to Samantha Schuyler at samantha @ thenation.com .
The Student Nation program is made possible through generous funding from The Puffin Foundation .
This leaves us with little choice .
We university workers—graduate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and untenured professors ; postdoctoral fellows ; staff and other campus workers—must come together to demand a better deal .
As scholars and editors , we regularly work with folks from across the university ’ s power structure .
We see how university administrators ’ efforts to increase revenue have come at the expense of academic and campus workers at all levels .
Yet austerity measures serve to pit these workers against one another in the battle for dwindling funds .
To preserve the financial well-being and cooperative environment of higher education @ @ @ @ @ @ @ benevolence of university administrators .
Instead , Congress must fund the salaries of all higher education workers for the foreseeable future .
Although Congress has already set aside $ 14 billion for US colleges as part of a multitrillion-dollar economic relief plan , there is little hope that campus workers will see much benefit from this sum .
In fact , Congress stipulated that half of the money must go to emergency aid for students and allowed university administrators much flexibility in deciding how to use the remainder .
The congressional plan requires @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the “ maximum extent practicable , ” but such vague limitations provide little assurance to the people who make the university function .
Contingent workers rightly worry that administrators , working within the existing profit-driven university system , will continue “ cost-saving ” subcontracting and adjunctification strategies , instead of dealing equitably with workers .
Meanwhile , people of color , particularly black people , within the academic community will continue to be policed on campus to the detriment of their safety .
We must circumvent the administrations that gave us increased @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Band-Aid of diversity and inclusion committees , rather than true racial equity .
It is also clear what will be lost if university administrators get to decide which academic disciplines are disposable .
Ohio University announced a major round of layoffs in early May , along with the non-renewal of academic instructors within the women and gender studies and the African American studies programs .
We must ensure that disciplines less valued by donors , but essential for a race- and gender-based accounting of the world , can continue to do that work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rampant and white nationalism is on the rise , undermining evidence-based knowledge and gutting disciplines that foster critical thinking skills will compound our current political , health , and environmental crises .
The New Deal of the 1930s offers a historical precedent for funding intellectuals in precarious positions during a national crisis .
In the midst of the Great Depression , after unemployment peaked at nearly 25 percent , the Roosevelt administration created the Federal Writers ’ Project and the Federal Art Project to provide direct support to out-of-work thinkers , creators , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thousands of historians , writers , librarians , and artists to catalogue existing resources and create new works for the public good .
The results preserved a generation of intellectual laborers , facilitating the postwar education boom under the GI Bill , while creating resources and public works still used and enjoyed today .
Together , the FWP and FAP , as well as related programs under the Works Progress Administration , provide a model for funding knowledge as a public good .
Rather than bailing out universities , as we did with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and hoping they pay their workers , we can directly fund the work that we value .
This will save universities money by eliminating payroll costs , create long-term human investment in the university , and preserve the livelihoods of the people fighting to provide opportunities for the next generation .
We need an Academic New Deal .
As part of the Academic New Deal , we demand that Congress : • Fully fund the health care and salaries of all higher education workers—contracted or not , faculty , staff , and campus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ local cost of living .
This includes workers whose contracts were set to expire this academic year but who are facing a nonexistent job market .
• Immediately provide student loan forgiveness .
As student debt disproportionately impacts black Americans , loan forgiveness will offer a small step in addressing racial economic gaps .
While we understand that this will primarily help the students of yesterday , we believe that education should be a right , not a privilege , as it is essential to a functional and vibrant society .
• Immediately @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and graduate levels .
We are witnessing a massive collapse of existing opportunities under Covid-19 , especially for Americans from underprivileged communities .
We must not mortgage our future by foreclosing the possibility of an educated , innovative , and equitable nation .
We historians understand that the powerful rarely make concessions unless they are forced to .
Like the exploited laborers of the Depression era , academic workers have increasingly organized for better pay and labor conditions , and the strike is spreading .
The corporatization of higher education over the last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clear that we must make strong demands with the weight of a unified labor force—from campus workers to tenured faculty—behind us .
We call on Congress to fund higher education work because we believe it is a public good , and with the knowledge that we university workers are prepared to fight to make it better for all .
Education is an important tool of socioeconomic mobility that if eliminated , degraded , or made inaccessible , will compound the existing downward mobility of already marginalized communities .
We can not leave the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shareholders or shrug it off as a luxury .
We must pass an Academic New Deal .

Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
Higher education has been in a state of crisis for more than a decade. Student loan debt has more than doubled since the Great Recession to $1.5 trillion in 2018. Coupled with a massive decline in tuition revenues, many colleges and universities are on the verge of collapse. In response to the financial hardship that forced tuition down and debt to rise, university administrators cut costs. They did this by hiring part-time instructors without benefits and subcontracting staff positions to push down wages and to save the university money.
Now, as the recent Covid-19 crisis has driven many colleges and universities to the brink of bankruptcy, they face billions in lost revenue from tuition and rent reimbursements—as well as further state divestment—this academic year. When enrollments decline in 2020–21, it will only get worse. But the institutions most at risk are not elite institutions with massive endowments—they are historically black colleges and universities, community colleges, and already vulnerable universities that disproportionately serve and offer economic mobility to black and brown, immigrant, and working-class students.
We’re already seeing the beginning of this process: In response to the crisis, hundreds of universities have announced hiring freezes, furloughs, and wage cuts. As they did following the Great Recession, administrators are expected to pass these cuts on to the most vulnerable workers. Bailing out universities as a way to “save” higher education will only further disempower the contingent faculty, graduate workers, staff, and campus workers who give life to college and university communities.
Academia is at a breaking point, and the path forward is perilous. Funding the existing profit-driven university model will only exacerbate existing socioeconomic and racial disparities within higher education and society at large. This story was produced for Student Nation, a section devoted to highlighting campus activism and student movements from students in their own words. For more Student Nation, check out our archive. Are you a student with a campus activism story? Send questions and pitches to Samantha Schuyler at [email protected]. The Student Nation program is made possible through generous funding from The Puffin Foundation.
This leaves us with little choice. We university workers—graduate students; adjunct, visiting, tenured, and untenured professors; postdoctoral fellows; staff and other campus workers—must come together to demand a better deal.
As scholars and editors, we regularly work with folks from across the university’s power structure. We see how university administrators’ efforts to increase revenue have come at the expense of academic and campus workers at all levels. Yet austerity measures serve to pit these workers against one another in the battle for dwindling funds. To preserve the financial well-being and cooperative environment of higher education, we cannot rely on the benevolence of university administrators. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann
Instead, Congress must fund the salaries of all higher education workers for the foreseeable future. Although Congress has already set aside $14 billion for US colleges as part of a multitrillion-dollar economic relief plan, there is little hope that campus workers will see much benefit from this sum. In fact, Congress stipulated that half of the money must go to emergency aid for students and allowed university administrators much flexibility in deciding how to use the remainder. Current Issue View our current issue
The congressional plan requires that university-grant recipients must retain current employees to the “maximum extent practicable,” but such vague limitations provide little assurance to the people who make the university function. Contingent workers rightly worry that administrators, working within the existing profit-driven university system, will continue “cost-saving” subcontracting and adjunctification strategies, instead of dealing equitably with workers.
Meanwhile, people of color, particularly black people, within the academic community will continue to be policed on campus to the detriment of their safety. We must circumvent the administrations that gave us increased and increasingly deadly campus police with the Band-Aid of diversity and inclusion committees, rather than true racial equity.
It is also clear what will be lost if university administrators get to decide which academic disciplines are disposable. Ohio University announced a major round of layoffs in early May, along with the non-renewal of academic instructors within the women and gender studies and the African American studies programs. We must ensure that disciplines less valued by donors, but essential for a race- and gender-based accounting of the world, can continue to do that work. At a time when misinformation is rampant and white nationalism is on the rise, undermining evidence-based knowledge and gutting disciplines that foster critical thinking skills will compound our current political, health, and environmental crises.
The New Deal of the 1930s offers a historical precedent for funding intellectuals in precarious positions during a national crisis. In the midst of the Great Depression, after unemployment peaked at nearly 25 percent, the Roosevelt administration created the Federal Writers’ Project and the Federal Art Project to provide direct support to out-of-work thinkers, creators, and innovators. The two programs employed thousands of historians, writers, librarians, and artists to catalogue existing resources and create new works for the public good. The results preserved a generation of intellectual laborers, facilitating the postwar education boom under the GI Bill, while creating resources and public works still used and enjoyed today.
Together, the FWP and FAP, as well as related programs under the Works Progress Administration, provide a model for funding knowledge as a public good. Rather than bailing out universities, as we did with banks and brokerage firms in 2008, and hoping they pay their workers, we can directly fund the work that we value. This will save universities money by eliminating payroll costs, create long-term human investment in the university, and preserve the livelihoods of the people fighting to provide opportunities for the next generation.
We need an Academic New Deal.
As part of the Academic New Deal, we demand that Congress:
Fully fund the health care and salaries of all higher education workers—contracted or not, faculty, staff, and campus workers—at a living wage indexed to the local cost of living. This includes workers whose contracts were set to expire this academic year but who are facing a nonexistent job market. Immediately provide student loan forgiveness. As student debt disproportionately impacts black Americans, loan forgiveness will offer a small step in addressing racial economic gaps. While we understand that this will primarily help the students of yesterday, we believe that education should be a right, not a privilege, as it is essential to a functional and vibrant society. Immediately subsidize student tuition at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. We are witnessing a massive collapse of existing opportunities under Covid-19, especially for Americans from underprivileged communities. We must not mortgage our future by foreclosing the possibility of an educated, innovative, and equitable nation.
We historians understand that the powerful rarely make concessions unless they are forced to. Like the exploited laborers of the Depression era, academic workers have increasingly organized for better pay and labor conditions, and the strike is spreading. The corporatization of higher education over the last decade and now the pandemic cutbacks make clear that we must make strong demands with the weight of a unified labor force—from campus workers to tenured faculty—behind us. We call on Congress to fund higher education work because we believe it is a public good, and with the knowledge that we university workers are prepared to fight to make it better for all.
Education is an important tool of socioeconomic mobility that if eliminated, degraded, or made inaccessible, will compound the existing downward mobility of already marginalized communities. We cannot leave the future of higher education up to university shareholders or shrug it off as a luxury. We must pass an Academic New Deal.


thenation--2020-06-09--One Week in Trump’s America

One Week in Trump’s America

Support independent cartooning : join Sparky ’ s List—and don ’ t forget to visit TT ’ s Emporium of @ @ @ @ @ book and plush Sparky !

Support independent cartooning: join Sparky’s List—and don’t forget to visit TT’s Emporium of Fun, featuring the new book and plush Sparky!


thenation--2020-06-09--Police Violence Has Brought America’s Forever Wars Home

From their front porches , regular citizens watched a cordon of cops sweep down their peaceful street in Minneapolis , Minn. Rankled at being filmed , the cops exceeded their authority and demanded that people go inside their houses .
When some of them didn ’ t obey quickly enough , the order—one heard so many times in the streets of Iraqi cities and in the villages of Afghanistan—was issued : “ Light ’ em up.
” And so “ disobedient ” Americans found themselves on the receiving end of non-lethal rounds for the “ crime ” of watching the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s taken years from Ferguson to this moment , but America ’ s cops have now officially joined the military as “ professional ” warriors .
In the wake of George Floyd ’ s murder on May 25 , those warrior-cops have taken to the streets across the country wearing combat gear and with attitudes to match .
They see protesters , as well as the reporters covering them , as the enemy and themselves as the “ thin blue line ” of law and order .
The police take to bashing heads @ @ @ @ @ @ @ generously funded by the American taxpayer : rubber bullets , pepper spray ( as Representative Joyce Beatty of Ohio experienced at a protest ) , tear gas ( as Episcopal clergy experienced at a demonstration in Washington , D.C. ) , paint canisters , and similar “ non-lethal ” munitions , together with flash-bang grenades , standard-issue batons , and Tasers , even as they drive military-surplus equipment like Humvees and MRAPs .
( Note that such munitions blinded an eye of one photo-journalist . )
A Predator drone even hovered over at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military parade , President Trump ?
Americans are witnessing militarized “ parades ” across the USA .
Their theme : violent force .
The result : plenty of wounded and otherwise damaged Americans left in their wake .
The detritus of America ’ s foreign wars has finally well and truly found its place on Main Street , USA .
Cops are to blame for much of this mayhem .
Video clips show them wildly out of control , inciting violence and inflicting it , instead of defusing and preventing it .
Far @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protect ” has become “ to shoot and smack down.
” It suggests the character of Eric Cartman from the cartoon South Park , a boy inflamed by a badge and a chance to inflict physical violence without accountability .
“ Respect my authoritah !
” cries Cartman as he beats an innocent man for no reason .
So , let ’ s point cameras—and fingers—at these bully-boy cops , let ’ s document their crimes , but let ’ s also state a fact with courage : It ’ s not just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blame ?
Well , so many of us .
How stupid have we been to celebrate cops as heroes , just as we ’ ve been foolishly doing for so long with the US military ?
Few people are heroes and fewer still deserve “ hero ” status while wearing uniforms and shooting bullets , rubber or otherwise , at citizens .
Answer me this : Who granted cops a specially modified US flag to celebrate “ blue lives matter , ” and when exactly did that happen , and why the hell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ substitute US flags ?
Has everyone forgotten American history and the use of police ( as well as National Guard units ) to suppress organized labor , keep black people and other minorities in their place , intimidate ordinary citizens protesting for a cleaner environment , or whack hippies and anti-war liberals during the Vietnam War protests ?
Or think of what ’ s happening this way : America ’ s violent overseas wars , thriving for almost two decades despite their emptiness , their lack of meaning , have finally and truly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in which violence and disease are endemic , is collapsing before our eyes .
“ When the looting starts , the shooting starts , ” America ’ s self-styled wartime president promised , channeling a racist Miami police chief from 1967 .
It was a declaration meant to turn any American who happened to be near a protest into a potential victim .
As such demonstrations proliferate , Americans now face a grim prospect : the chance to be wounded or killed , then dismissed as “ collateral damage.
” In these years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ applied so thoughtlessly to innumerable innocents who have suffered grievously from our unending foreign wars and now it ’ s coming home .
How does it feel , America ?
The End of Citizen-Soldiers , the End of Citizen-Cops I joined the military in 1981 , signing up in college for the Reserve Officer Training Corps , or ROTC .
I went on active duty in 1985 and served for 20 years , retiring as a lieutenant colonel .
I come from a family of firefighters and cops .
My dad and older @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brother-in-law and nephew .
My niece and her husband are cops , and my sister worked for her local police department for years .
My oldest friend , a great guy I ’ ve known for half a century , recently retired as a deputy sheriff .
I know these people because they ’ re my people .
Many cops—I ’ d say most—are decent people .
But dress almost any cop in combat gear , cover him or her in armor like a storm trooper out of Star Wars , then set @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with a mandate to restore “ LAW & ORDER , ” as our president tweeted , and you ’ re going to get storm trooper–like behavior .
Sure , I ’ d wager that more than a few cops enjoy it , or at least it seems that way in the videos captured by so many .
But let ’ s remind ourselves that the cops , like the rest of America ’ s systems of authority , are a product of a sociopolitical structure that ’ s inherently violent , openly racist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by money , power , greed , and privilege .
In such a system , why should we expect them to be paragons of virtue and restraint ?
We don ’ t recruit them that way .
We don ’ t train them that way .
Indeed , we salute them as “ warriors ” when they respond to risky situations in aggressive ways .
Here ’ s my point : When I put on a military uniform in 1985 , I underwent a subtle but meaningful change from a citizen to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” still came first then . )
Soon after , however , the US military began telling me I was something more than that : I was a warrior .
And that was a distinct and new identity for me , evidently a tougher , more worthy one than simply being a citizen-airman .
That new “ warrior ” image and the mystique that grew up around it was integral to , and illustrative of , the beginning of a wider militarization of American culture and society , which exploded after the 9/11 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ braggadocio of the administration of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney as they set out to remake the world as an American possession .
Why all the “ warrior ” BS ?
Why “ Generation Kill ” ( one of those memorable phrases of the post-9/11 era ) ?
Was it to give us a bit more spine or something to rally around after the calamity of those attacks on iconic American targets , or perhaps something to take pride in after so many disastrous wars over the last 75 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to answer such questions .
Indeed , it took me a while to grasp that such questions were almost beside the point .
Because all this warrior talk , whether applied to the military or the cops , is truly meant to separate us from the American people , to link us instead to wider systems of impersonal authority , such as the military-industrial-congressional complex .
By “ elevating ” us as warriors , the elites conspired to reduce us as citizens , detaching us from a citizen ’ s code of civics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conceit of such an identity , we warriors and former warriors became , in a sense , foreign to democracy and ever more divorced from the citizenry .
We came to form foreign legions , readily exploitable in America ’ s endless imperial-corporate wars , whether overseas or now here .
In 2009 , I first asked if the US military had become an imperial police force .
In 2020 , we need to ask if our police are now just another branch of that military , with our “ homeland ” serving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exploited .
That said , let ’ s turn to America ’ s cops .
They ’ re now likely to identify as warriors , too , and indeed many of them have served in America ’ s violent and endless wars in Afghanistan , Iraq , and elsewhere .
These days , they ’ re ever more likely to identify as well with authority , as defined and exercised by the elites for whom they serve as hired guns .
In the aftermath of George Floyd ’ s murder , the warrior-mercenary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exposed .
For what was Floyd ’ s great “ crime ” ?
At worst , if true , an attempt at petty theft through forgery .
He ’ d lost his job because of the Covid-19 crisis and , like most of us , was lucky if he saw a one-time check for $ 1,200 , even as the rich and powerful enjoyed trillions of dollars in relief .
Rarely are the police sent to prosecute scofflaws in high places .
I haven ’ t seen any bankers being choked to death @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s knee .
Nor have I seen any corporate “ citizens ” being choked to death by cops .
It ’ s so much easier to hassle and arrest the little people for whom , if they ’ re black or otherwise vulnerable , arrest may even end in death .
By standing apart from us , militarized , a thin blue line , the police no longer stand with us .
A friend of mine , an Air Force retired colonel , nailed it in a recent e-mail to me : “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ talking to the police .
It was the whole ‘ community partners ’ thing .
Growing up and through college , you just waved at cops on patrol ( they ’ d wave back ! )
.
Over the last five years , all I get is cops staring back in what I imagine they think is an intimidating grimace .
They say nothing when you say hello .
They are all in full ‘ battle rattle ’ even when directing traffic.
” When military “ battle rattle ” becomes the standard gear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that surprised to hear the death rattle of black men like George Floyd ?
Speaking Truth to Power Isn ’ t Nearly Enough Perhaps you ’ ve heard the saying “ speaking truth to power.
” It ’ s meant as a form of praise .
But a rejoinder I once read captures its inherent limitations : Power already knows the truth—and I ’ d add that the powerful are all too happy with their monopoly on their version of the truth , thank you very much .
It ’ s not enough @ @ @ @ @ @ @ violent , or racist , or detached from society .
Powerful people already know this perfectly well .
Indeed , they ’ re counting on it .
They ’ re counting on cops ’ being violent to protect elite interests ; nor is racism the worst thing in the world , they believe , as long as it ’ s not hurting their financial bottom lines .
If it divides people , making them all the more exploitable , so much the better .
And who cares if cops are detached from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ classes from which they ’ ve come ?
Again , all the better , since that means they can be sicced on protesters and , if things get out of hand , those very protesters can then be blamed .
If push comes to shove , a few cops might have to be fired , or prosecuted , or otherwise sacrificed , but that hardly matters as long as the powerful get off scot-free .
President Trump knows this .
He talks about “ dominating ” the protesters .
He insists that they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ periods of time .
After all , they are the “ other , ” the enemy .
He ’ s willing to have them teargassed and shot with rubber bullets just so he can pose in front of a church holding a Bible .
Amazingly , the one amendment he mentioned defending in his “ law and order ” speech just before he walked to that church was the Second Amendment .
And this highlights Trump ’ s skill as a wall-builder .
No , I don ’ t mean that “ big @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the US border with Mexico .
He ’ s proven himself a master at building walls to divide people within America—to separate Republicans from Democrats , black people and other people of color from whites , Christians from non-Christians , fervid gun owners from gun-control advocates , and cops from the little people .
Divide and conquer , the oldest trick in the authoritarian handbook , and Donald Trump is good at it .
But he ’ s also a dangerous fool in a moment when we need bridges , not walls , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And that starts with the cops .
We need to change the way many of them think .
No more “ thin blue line ” BS .
No more cops as warriors .
No more special flags for how much their lives matter .
We need but a single flag for how much all our lives matter , black or white , rich or poor , the powerless as well as the powerful .
How about that old-fashioned American flag I served under as a military officer for 20 years ?
How @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my father ’ s casket after his more than 30 years of fighting fires , whether in the forests of Oregon or the urban tenements of Massachusetts ?
It was good enough for him and me ( and untold millions of others ) .
It should still be good enough for everyone .
But let me be clear : My dad knew how to put out fires , but once a house was “ fully involved , ” he used to tell me , there ’ s little you can do but stand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fire from spreading .
America ’ s forever wars in distant lands have now come home big-time .
Our house is lit up and on fire .
Alarms are being sounded over and over again .
If we fail to come together to fight the fire until our house is fully involved , we will find ourselves—and what ’ s left of our democracy—burning with it .

EDITOR’S NOTE: This article originally appeared at TomDispatch.com. To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up to receive the latest updates from TomDispatch.
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Get The Nation’s Weekly Newsletter Fridays. The best of the week. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here. Fridays. The best of the week.
Thank you for signing up for The Nation’s weekly newsletter.
Repro Nation A monthly newsletter on the global fight for reproductive freedom. Email By signing up, you confirm that you are over the age of 16 and agree to receive occasional promotional offers for programs that support The Nation’s journalism. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for signing up. For more from The Nation, check out our latest issue
Subscribe to The Nation Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month! Subscribe now for as little as $2 a month!
Support Progressive Journalism The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us continue to write about the issues that matter.
Sign up for our Wine Club today. Did you know you can support The Nation by drinking wine?
From their front porches, regular citizens watched a cordon of cops sweep down their peaceful street in Minneapolis, Minn. Rankled at being filmed, the cops exceeded their authority and demanded that people go inside their houses. When some of them didn’t obey quickly enough, the order—one heard so many times in the streets of Iraqi cities and in the villages of Afghanistan—was issued: “Light ’em up.” And so “disobedient” Americans found themselves on the receiving end of non-lethal rounds for the “crime” of watching the police from those porches.
It’s taken years from Ferguson to this moment, but America’s cops have now officially joined the military as “professional” warriors. In the wake of George Floyd’s murder on May 25, those warrior-cops have taken to the streets across the country wearing combat gear and with attitudes to match. They see protesters, as well as the reporters covering them, as the enemy and themselves as the “thin blue line” of law and order.
The police take to bashing heads and thrashing bodies, using weaponry so generously funded by the American taxpayer: rubber bullets, pepper spray (as Representative Joyce Beatty of Ohio experienced at a protest), tear gas (as Episcopal clergy experienced at a demonstration in Washington, D.C.), paint canisters, and similar “non-lethal” munitions, together with flash-bang grenades, standard-issue batons, and Tasers, even as they drive military-surplus equipment like Humvees and MRAPs. (Note that such munitions blinded an eye of one photo-journalist.) A Predator drone even hovered over at least one protest. Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann Popular "swipe left below to view more authors"Swipe → The Evisceration of a Public University The Evisceration of a Public University Lisa M. Corrigan The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks The Patronizing Moralism of David Brooks Chris Lehmann “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash “The Blind Side” Was Always Trash Dave Zirin A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life A Grim Chronicle of Trump’s Corrupt Public Life Chris Lehmann
Who needs a military parade, President Trump? Americans are witnessing militarized “parades” across the USA. Their theme: violent force. The result: plenty of wounded and otherwise damaged Americans left in their wake. The detritus of America’s foreign wars has finally well and truly found its place on Main Street, USA.
Cops are to blame for much of this mayhem. Video clips show them wildly out of control, inciting violence and inflicting it, instead of defusing and preventing it. Far too often, “to serve and protect” has become “to shoot and smack down.” It suggests the character of Eric Cartman from the cartoon South Park, a boy inflamed by a badge and a chance to inflict physical violence without accountability. “Respect my authoritah!” cries Cartman as he beats an innocent man for no reason.
So, let’s point cameras—and fingers—at these bully-boy cops, let’s document their crimes, but let’s also state a fact with courage: It’s not just their fault.
Who else is to blame? Well, so many of us. How stupid have we been to celebrate cops as heroes, just as we’ve been foolishly doing for so long with the US military? Few people are heroes and fewer still deserve “hero” status while wearing uniforms and shooting bullets, rubber or otherwise, at citizens. Current Issue View our current issue
Answer me this: Who granted cops a specially modified US flag to celebrate “blue lives matter,” and when exactly did that happen, and why the hell do so many people fly these as substitute US flags? Has everyone forgotten American history and the use of police (as well as National Guard units) to suppress organized labor, keep black people and other minorities in their place, intimidate ordinary citizens protesting for a cleaner environment, or whack hippies and anti-war liberals during the Vietnam War protests?
Or think of what’s happening this way: America’s violent overseas wars, thriving for almost two decades despite their emptiness, their lack of meaning, have finally and truly come home. An impoverished empire, in which violence and disease are endemic, is collapsing before our eyes. “When the looting starts, the shooting starts,” America’s self-styled wartime president promised, channeling a racist Miami police chief from 1967. It was a declaration meant to turn any American who happened to be near a protest into a potential victim.
As such demonstrations proliferate, Americans now face a grim prospect: the chance to be wounded or killed, then dismissed as “collateral damage.” In these years, that tried-and-false military euphemism has been applied so thoughtlessly to innumerable innocents who have suffered grievously from our unending foreign wars and now it’s coming home.
How does it feel, America?
The End of Citizen-Soldiers, the End of Citizen-Cops
I joined the military in 1981, signing up in college for the Reserve Officer Training Corps, or ROTC. I went on active duty in 1985 and served for 20 years, retiring as a lieutenant colonel. I come from a family of firefighters and cops. My dad and older brother were firefighters, together with my brother-in-law and nephew. My niece and her husband are cops, and my sister worked for her local police department for years. My oldest friend, a great guy I’ve known for half a century, recently retired as a deputy sheriff. I know these people because they’re my people.
Many cops—I’d say most—are decent people. But dress almost any cop in combat gear, cover him or her in armor like a storm trooper out of Star Wars, then set all of them loose on the streets with a mandate to restore “LAW & ORDER,” as our president tweeted, and you’re going to get storm trooper–like behavior.
Sure, I’d wager that more than a few cops enjoy it, or at least it seems that way in the videos captured by so many. But let’s remind ourselves that the cops, like the rest of America’s systems of authority, are a product of a sociopolitical structure that’s inherently violent, openly racist, deeply flawed, and thoroughly corrupted by money, power, greed, and privilege. In such a system, why should we expect them to be paragons of virtue and restraint? We don’t recruit them that way. We don’t train them that way. Indeed, we salute them as “warriors” when they respond to risky situations in aggressive ways.
Here’s my point: When I put on a military uniform in 1985, I underwent a subtle but meaningful change from a citizen to a citizen-airman. (Note how “citizen” still came first then.) Soon after, however, the US military began telling me I was something more than that: I was a warrior. And that was a distinct and new identity for me, evidently a tougher, more worthy one than simply being a citizen-airman. That new “warrior” image and the mystique that grew up around it was integral to, and illustrative of, the beginning of a wider militarization of American culture and society, which exploded after the 9/11 attacks amid the “big-boy pants” braggadocio of the administration of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney as they set out to remake the world as an American possession.
Why all the “warrior” BS? Why “Generation Kill” (one of those memorable phrases of the post-9/11 era)? Was it to give us a bit more spine or something to rally around after the calamity of those attacks on iconic American targets, or perhaps something to take pride in after so many disastrous wars over the last 75 years? It took me a while to answer such questions. Indeed, it took me a while to grasp that such questions were almost beside the point. Because all this warrior talk, whether applied to the military or the cops, is truly meant to separate us from the American people, to link us instead to wider systems of impersonal authority, such as the military-industrial-congressional complex.
By “elevating” us as warriors, the elites conspired to reduce us as citizens, detaching us from a citizen’s code of civics and moral behavior. By accepting the conceit of such an identity, we warriors and former warriors became, in a sense, foreign to democracy and ever more divorced from the citizenry. We came to form foreign legions, readily exploitable in America’s endless imperial-corporate wars, whether overseas or now here.
(Notice, by the way, how, in the preceding paragraphs, I use “we” and “us,” continuing to identify with the military, though I’ve been retired for 15 years. On rereading it, I thought about revising that passage, until I realized that was precisely the point: A career military officer is, in some way, always in the military. The ethos is that strong. The same is true of cops.)
In 2009, I first asked if the US military had become an imperial police force. In 2020, we need to ask if our police are now just another branch of that military, with our “homeland” serving as the empire to be conquered and exploited. That said, let’s turn to America’s cops. They’re now likely to identify as warriors, too, and indeed many of them have served in America’s violent and endless wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere. These days, they’re ever more likely to identify as well with authority, as defined and exercised by the elites for whom they serve as hired guns.
In the aftermath of George Floyd’s murder, the warrior-mercenary mindset of the police has been fully exposed. For what was Floyd’s great “crime”? At worst, if true, an attempt at petty theft through forgery. He’d lost his job because of the Covid-19 crisis and, like most of us, was lucky if he saw a one-time check for $1,200, even as the rich and powerful enjoyed trillions of dollars in relief.
Rarely are the police sent to prosecute scofflaws in high places. I haven’t seen any bankers being choked to death on the street under an officer’s knee. Nor have I seen any corporate “citizens” being choked to death by cops. It’s so much easier to hassle and arrest the little people for whom, if they’re black or otherwise vulnerable, arrest may even end in death.
By standing apart from us, militarized, a thin blue line, the police no longer stand with us.
A friend of mine, an Air Force retired colonel, nailed it in a recent e-mail to me: “I used to—maybe not enjoy but—not mind talking to the police. It was the whole ‘community partners’ thing. Growing up and through college, you just waved at cops on patrol (they’d wave back!). Over the last five years, all I get is cops staring back in what I imagine they think is an intimidating grimace. They say nothing when you say hello. They are all in full ‘battle rattle’ even when directing traffic.”
When military “battle rattle” becomes the standard gear for street cops, should we be that surprised to hear the death rattle of black men like George Floyd?
Speaking Truth to Power Isn’t Nearly Enough
Perhaps you’ve heard the saying “speaking truth to power.” It’s meant as a form of praise. But a rejoinder I once read captures its inherent limitations: Power already knows the truth—and I’d add that the powerful are all too happy with their monopoly on their version of the truth, thank you very much.
It’s not enough to say that the police are too violent, or racist, or detached from society. Powerful people already know this perfectly well. Indeed, they’re counting on it. They’re counting on cops’ being violent to protect elite interests; nor is racism the worst thing in the world, they believe, as long as it’s not hurting their financial bottom lines. If it divides people, making them all the more exploitable, so much the better. And who cares if cops are detached from the interests of the working and lower middle classes from which they’ve come? Again, all the better, since that means they can be sicced on protesters and, if things get out of hand, those very protesters can then be blamed. If push comes to shove, a few cops might have to be fired, or prosecuted, or otherwise sacrificed, but that hardly matters as long as the powerful get off scot-free.
President Trump knows this. He talks about “dominating” the protesters. He insists that they must be arrested and jailed for long periods of time. After all, they are the “other,” the enemy. He’s willing to have them teargassed and shot with rubber bullets just so he can pose in front of a church holding a Bible. Amazingly, the one amendment he mentioned defending in his “law and order” speech just before he walked to that church was the Second Amendment.
And this highlights Trump’s skill as a wall-builder. No, I don’t mean that “big, fat, beautiful wall” along the US border with Mexico. He’s proven himself a master at building walls to divide people within America—to separate Republicans from Democrats, black people and other people of color from whites, Christians from non-Christians, fervid gun owners from gun-control advocates, and cops from the little people. Divide and conquer, the oldest trick in the authoritarian handbook, and Donald Trump is good at it.
But he’s also a dangerous fool in a moment when we need bridges, not walls, to unite these divided states of ours. And that starts with the cops. We need to change the way many of them think. No more “thin blue line” BS. No more cops as warriors. No more special flags for how much their lives matter. We need but a single flag for how much all our lives matter, black or white, rich or poor, the powerless as well as the powerful.
How about that old-fashioned American flag I served under as a military officer for 20 years? How about the Stars and Stripes that draped my father’s casket after his more than 30 years of fighting fires, whether in the forests of Oregon or the urban tenements of Massachusetts? It was good enough for him and me (and untold millions of others). It should still be good enough for everyone.
But let me be clear: My dad knew how to put out fires, but once a house was “fully involved,” he used to tell me, there’s little you can do but stand back and watch it burn while keeping the fire from spreading.
America’s forever wars in distant lands have now come home big-time. Our house is lit up and on fire. Alarms are being sounded over and over again. If we fail to come together to fight the fire until our house is fully involved, we will find ourselves—and what’s left of our democracy—burning with it.