thenation--2020-06-15--We’ve Protested for Black Lives Before—and We’ll Have to Protest Again

Like all black parents , I believe that talking to my children about the protests surrounding the death of George Floyd also involves contextualizing the current struggle against police brutality within the generations-long struggle for equal rights .
I need my sons to know that the fight they see on television is part of a larger struggle that started long before they were born and that they must take up after I am gone .
This week I told my older son , a sensitive 7-year-old , that his grandmother participated in protests when she was not much older than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that she , too , faced police brutality and that one day it would be his turn to fight this battle .
But my kid is just a kid .
He listened to my family history lesson , yet when thinking about his role in this story , he was optimistic as only a child can be .
He told me cheerfully , “ Maybe this time will be the last time.
” This time will not be the last time .
This will not be the last time the police brutally murder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not be the last time that murder is captured on camera .
It will not be the last time that black people take to the streets to demand justice or that cops respond to those demands with even more violence and brutality .
It will not be the last time that mayors and other local officials make excuses for police violence .
The past few weeks have opened some eyes to the systemic brutality faced by black people .
But for things to get better for my kids , people will have to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ police reform over the next few weeks .
And months .
And years .
The system of white supremacy enforced and protected by the American police was not built in a day , and it will not be dismantled in a day .
What will people be prepared to do two weeks from now to make the world safer for black people than it was two weeks ago ?
What will they be prepared to do in two months ?
In two years ?
Already , the infrastructure is in place for this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everybody stops shouting about it .
Despite the general unrest , politicians from both parties have offered a steady stream of excuses for the police brutality being inflicted , ironically , on people demonstrating against police brutality .
There is not enough space to list all the atrocities we ’ ve seen on video in just the past few weeks , but they include cops driving cars into people , cops beating nonviolent protesters with sticks , cops firing tear gas canisters and rubber bullets at protesters at point-blank range , military units @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can do a photo op , and cops pushing an elderly man to the ground and stepping past his body as he bled from his skull .
The media , too , is laying the groundwork to ignore police brutality as soon as possible .
Despite video evidence that directly contradicts police reports , the media still presents the official justifications for police violence in order to offer “ both sides ” of the story .
News anchors still manage to generate more outrage over property destruction than they do over the teargassing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still print op-eds calling for the armed forces to be deployed against US citizens .
The current scrutiny has produced some accountability .
The cops in Buffalo who assaulted the elderly man have been charged .
The editor who headed the section and defended the op-ed threatening Americans with military violence has resigned .
When everybody is watching , some people can do the right thing .
But 57 other cops in Buffalo resigned from that special unit ( though not from the police force ) to protest those two officers being held @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lost his job , many , many more remain committed to the idea that white supremacist logic should be given equal time and legitimacy in the marketplace of ideas .
A few weeks from now , those officers and that editor will have melted back into the establishment .
Will a cop think twice about killing an unarmed black man in the future ?
Will a reporter think twice before uncritically quoting a police report about that murder ?
The protests have raised awareness , but will new allies maintain the vigilance needed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Or will people get distracted ?
After all , we ’ re in the midst of a pandemic , with unemployment approaching Great Depression levels , while being led by a racist authoritarian liar in an election year .
In a few weeks , those issues will be back at the forefront of American consciousness .
Until the next time an unarmed black person is killed by police on camera .
And the time after that .
And the time after that .
Eventually , it will be my sons ’ turn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everybody is aware of still hasn ’ t been solved .
All I can hope is that when it ’ s my sons ’ turn to take to the streets and demand justice for a victim of police brutality , the name that he ’ s chanting isn ’ t mine .

This article appears in the June 29/July 6, 2020 issue.
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?
Like all black parents, I believe that talking to my children about the protests surrounding the death of George Floyd also involves contextualizing the current struggle against police brutality within the generations-long struggle for equal rights. I need my sons to know that the fight they see on television is part of a larger struggle that started long before they were born and that they must take up after I am gone.
This week I told my older son, a sensitive 7-year-old, that his grandmother participated in protests when she was not much older than he is now. I told him that she, too, faced police brutality and that one day it would be his turn to fight this battle.
But my kid is just a kid. He listened to my family history lesson, yet when thinking about his role in this story, he was optimistic as only a child can be. He told me cheerfully, “Maybe this time will be the last time.”
This time will not be the last time. This will not be the last time the police brutally murder an unarmed black civilian. This will not be the last time that murder is captured on camera. It will not be the last time that black people take to the streets to demand justice or that cops respond to those demands with even more violence and brutality. It will not be the last time that mayors and other local officials make excuses for police violence.
The past few weeks have opened some eyes to the systemic brutality faced by black people. But for things to get better for my kids, people will have to maintain their energy and their demands for police reform over the next few weeks. And months. And years. The system of white supremacy enforced and protected by the American police was not built in a day, and it will not be dismantled in a day. What will people be prepared to do two weeks from now to make the world safer for black people than it was two weeks ago? What will they be prepared to do in two months? In two years?
Already, the infrastructure is in place for this country to ignore police brutality the moment everybody stops shouting about it. Despite the general unrest, politicians from both parties have offered a steady stream of excuses for the police brutality being inflicted, ironically, on people demonstrating against police brutality. There is not enough space to list all the atrocities we’ve seen on video in just the past few weeks, but they include cops driving cars into people, cops beating nonviolent protesters with sticks, cops firing tear gas canisters and rubber bullets at protesters at point-blank range, military units galloping at unarmed civilians so the president can do a photo op, and cops pushing an elderly man to the ground and stepping past his body as he bled from his skull.
The media, too, is laying the groundwork to ignore police brutality as soon as possible. Despite video evidence that directly contradicts police reports, the media still presents the official justifications for police violence in order to offer “both sides” of the story. News anchors still manage to generate more outrage over property destruction than they do over the teargassing and arrest of journalists. And publications still print op-eds calling for the armed forces to be deployed against US citizens. Current Issue View our current issue
The current scrutiny has produced some accountability. The cops in Buffalo who assaulted the elderly man have been charged. The editor who headed the section and defended the op-ed threatening Americans with military violence has resigned. When everybody is watching, some people can do the right thing.
But 57 other cops in Buffalo resigned from that special unit (though not from the police force) to protest those two officers being held to account. And while one editor lost his job, many, many more remain committed to the idea that white supremacist logic should be given equal time and legitimacy in the marketplace of ideas.
A few weeks from now, those officers and that editor will have melted back into the establishment. Will a cop think twice about killing an unarmed black man in the future? Will a reporter think twice before uncritically quoting a police report about that murder? The protests have raised awareness, but will new allies maintain the vigilance needed to see systemic change come to fruition?
Or will people get distracted? After all, we’re in the midst of a pandemic, with unemployment approaching Great Depression levels, while being led by a racist authoritarian liar in an election year. In a few weeks, those issues will be back at the forefront of American consciousness.
Until the next time an unarmed black person is killed by police on camera. And the time after that. And the time after that. Eventually, it will be my sons’ turn to protest the fact that this problem everybody is aware of still hasn’t been solved.
All I can hope is that when it’s my sons’ turn to take to the streets and demand justice for a victim of police brutality, the name that they’re chanting isn’t mine.


thenation--2020-06-15--Now More Than Ever, We Need Images of Black Dignity and Resistance

The Nation and Magnum Foundation are partnering on a visual chronicle of untold stories as the coronavirus continues to spread across the United States and the rest of the world—read more from The Invisible Front Line.—The Editors Images have power .
The strongest images have the ability to communicate a message that is more convincing , more believable than any written word .
It was images—videos of young black men being killed by police , by vigilantes—that has motivated so many people to take to the streets in protest these past few weeks .
It has been images that are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protests are bringing about .
I ’ ve been making images most of my adult life , and have always been driven by a desire to document black culture , my culture .
I started photographing for my own personal purposes in the 1980s , but as time progressed , and when the crack and AIDS epidemic hit , the image of the black man and woman in America started to shift , and I wasn ’ t happy with what I saw .
I was seeing images that painted the spirit of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ realized that I had a responsibility to provide a counternarrative .
I believe in balance .
I felt it was necessary for me to go out and document the love of family , the mothers and fathers , the children , the hope , and the promise .
For me , it was a mission to do that .
I was inspired by what W.E.B .
Du Bois did in the Paris exposition of 1900—he brought images of black life to the public , beyond the sensationalism .
I wanted to focus on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ career as a corrections officer at New York ’ s Rikers Island jail in the 1980s .
Every day I went to work and looked in that pen to see who I could pull out , to see who I knew from the community .
I always brought newspapers and extra magazines to encourage young men to read .
I went to work looking for Malcolm ; I went there looking for Mandela .
I knew there were a lot of men who were incarcerated and didn ’ t need to be in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many young men as I could .
One of the ways I used my camera as a tool for black liberation was by simply recognizing the inner beauty that my subjects possess .
In photographing , I always tried to impart knowledge .
All my work was really about just reaching the people—photography was secondary .
The primary aim was to talk to people about what was going on in America and how we needed to wake up .
The camera was the master key that allowed me entry into the hearts and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ photographed .
We grew up with a mantra , and it stayed with me for many years , even to this very day : I want for my brothers what I want for myself .
I went out there with that passion and a duty .
The camera became a compass to help guide me .
I carried two things with me at all times : my camera and my chessboard .
I started to teach a lot of young men chess , because chess to me was teaching the science of conflict @ @ @ @ @ @ @ patience .
I would say : This is the game of life .
If you understand this game—and beyond the physical game , if you understand how it ’ s related to life—it will carry you on through a lot of difficult times .
Before you make a choice , you take time to look at your mental chessboard .
You analyze it .
You look at the sacrifices .
You make hard decisions , and you make your move .
In the 1990s I began working at the 100 Center Street Supreme @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the city .
Police brutality was at an all-time high , and protests filled the streets .
Giuliani was the mayor .
The Rodney King verdict , O.J .
Simpson , all these major racial incidents affected me .
As a black man in America , I was always looked upon as a suspect , an enemy of the state .
But in my job , I enforced the law .
It was a kind of double consciousness .
On my lunch breaks I would photograph , feeling a sense of freedom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ great opportunity to meet a number of up-and-coming visionaries and artists .
That was the joy and one of the greatest blessings of my books ’ being published .
I had an opportunity to meet a lot of young people who look to me as a mentor for the type of work I ’ ve done .
Elders like Gordon Parks and James Van Der Zee weren ’ t around , so I was someone in the flesh that had created something that served as a beacon to a lot of young people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that was open and available , approachable .
The coronavirus pandemic has changed so much about how we do things in terms of greeting each other , in the handshake , the hug .
With that being gone now , I don ’ t know how that ’ s going to impact people on an emotional level , especially during a time of tremendous loss , when a hug serves as a form of reassurance , assurance .
And now it ’ s gone .
I ’ m not one to shoot from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rooted in having conversations with people , and now there is an element of apprehension and fear in everyday connections .
How are we going to grow as a society when everyone is wearing a mask , when we can no longer interact the way we once did ?
Right now , we need all hands on deck to produce a counterbalance to all this negativity in hopes of making not only this country a better place , but the world a better place .
We ’ ve shown our power in using @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Let ’ s continue to use that same energy to address other issues , and prove that we are truly concerned about injustice at a global scale .
We are living in some very troubling times when hatred and division are on the rise , but the youth are in the streets , struggling to bring about long-overdue change .
In order to make a better world for our children and loved ones , we must come together as concerned citizens and use our individual platforms to spread messages of empathy and justice @ @ @

This article appears in the July 13/20, 2020 issue.
The Nation and Magnum Foundation are partnering on a visual chronicle of untold stories as the coronavirus continues to spread across the United States and the rest of the world—read more from The Invisible Front Line.—The Editors
Images have power. The strongest images have the ability to communicate a message that is more convincing, more believable than any written word. It was images—videos of young Black men being killed by police, by vigilantes—that has motivated so many people to take to the streets in protest these past few weeks. It has been images that are driving so many of the changes these protests are bringing about.
I’ve been making images most of my adult life, and have always been driven by a desire to document Black culture, my culture. I started photographing for my own personal purposes in the 1980s, but as time progressed, and when the crack and AIDS epidemic hit, the image of the Black man and woman in America started to shift, and I wasn’t happy with what I saw. I was seeing images that painted the spirit of addiction and mass incarceration, and I realized that I had a responsibility to provide a counternarrative. I believe in balance. I felt it was necessary for me to go out and document the love of family, the mothers and fathers, the children, the hope, and the promise. For me, it was a mission to do that. I was inspired by what W.E.B. Du Bois did in the Paris exposition of 1900—he brought images of Black life to the public, beyond the sensationalism. I wanted to focus on honor and dignity.
I started my career as a corrections officer at New York’s Rikers Island jail in the 1980s. Every day I went to work and looked in that pen to see who I could pull out, to see who I knew from the community. I always brought newspapers and extra magazines to encourage young men to read. I went to work looking for Malcolm; I went there looking for Mandela. I knew there were a lot of men who were incarcerated and didn’t need to be in there. I tried to guide as many young men as I could.
One of the ways I used my camera as a tool for Black liberation was by simply recognizing the inner beauty that my subjects possess. In photographing, I always tried to impart knowledge. All my work was really about just reaching the people—photography was secondary. The primary aim was to talk to people about what was going on in America and how we needed to wake up. The camera was the master key that allowed me entry into the hearts and minds of the men and women I photographed. We grew up with a mantra, and it stayed with me for many years, even to this very day: I want for my brothers what I want for myself. I went out there with that passion and a duty. The camera became a compass to help guide me.
Remembering a King. Washington, D.C., 1983.
I carried two things with me at all times: my camera and my chessboard. I started to teach a lot of young men chess, because chess to me was teaching the science of conflict resolution, decision-making, strategy, and patience. I would say: This is the game of life. If you understand this game—and beyond the physical game, if you understand how it’s related to life—it will carry you on through a lot of difficult times. Before you make a choice, you take time to look at your mental chessboard. You analyze it. You look at the sacrifices. You make hard decisions, and you make your move.
In the 1990s I began working at the 100 Center Street Supreme Court in Manhattan, in the heart of the city. Police brutality was at an all-time high, and protests filled the streets. Giuliani was the mayor. The Rodney King verdict, O.J. Simpson, all these major racial incidents affected me. As a Black man in America, I was always looked upon as a suspect, an enemy of the state. But in my job, I enforced the law. It was a kind of double consciousness. On my lunch breaks I would photograph, feeling a sense of freedom.
The 2000s provided me with a great opportunity to meet a number of up-and-coming visionaries and artists. That was the joy and one of the greatest blessings of my books’ being published. I had an opportunity to meet a lot of young people who look to me as a mentor for the type of work I’ve done. Elders like Gordon Parks and James Van Der Zee weren’t around, so I was someone in the flesh that had created something that served as a beacon to a lot of young people. I always wanted to be one that was open and available, approachable.
No Disrespect. Supreme Court, New York City, 1997.
Giuliani Time. New York City, 1997.
SHOT IN THE BACK. New York City, 1997.
The coronavirus pandemic has changed so much about how we do things in terms of greeting each other, in the handshake, the hug. With that being gone now, I don’t know how that’s going to impact people on an emotional level, especially during a time of tremendous loss, when a hug serves as a form of reassurance, assurance. And now it’s gone. I’m not one to shoot from afar. Most of my photography is rooted in having conversations with people, and now there is an element of apprehension and fear in everyday connections. How are we going to grow as a society when everyone is wearing a mask, when we can no longer interact the way we once did?
Right now, we need all hands on deck to produce a counterbalance to all this negativity in hopes of making not only this country a better place, but the world a better place. We’ve shown our power in using our cameras to address police brutality. Let’s continue to use that same energy to address other issues, and prove that we are truly concerned about injustice at a global scale. We are living in some very troubling times when hatred and division are on the rise, but the youth are in the streets, struggling to bring about long-overdue change. In order to make a better world for our children and loved ones, we must come together as concerned citizens and use our individual platforms to spread messages of empathy and justice for all.


thenation--2020-06-15--Tom Cotton Is Not a Free Speech Martyr

Tom Cotton Is Not a Free Speech Martyr

Just as generals are sometimes guilty of fighting the last war , pundits frequently fight the last culture war .
The world is on fire with global protests over police violence , the continued spread of Covid-19 , and the ripple effects of the most severe economic crisis in nearly a century .
But to judge by some of America ’ s best-known political columnists , the true danger is still political correctness destroying free speech , especially in the media .
The immediate occasion for these complaints was the resignation of James Bennet as New York Times opinion editor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Senator Tom Cotton published on June 3 , which called for the use of military force to suppress “ looters and rioters.
” But the broader context for the renewed debate over political correctness is a series of newsroom revolts in many media outlets , ranging from The Intercept to Vogue to The Philadelphia Inquirer , all involving vocal complaints about racism leveled against either staff or ( more commonly ) management .
Ross Douthat in The New York Times complained about a “ successor ideology ” that threatens to bring about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ traditional liberal ideas of free speech .
Douthat ’ s colleague Bret Stephens argued that “ last week ’ s decision by this newspaper to disavow an Op-Ed by Senator Tom Cotton is a gift to the enemies of a free press—free in the sense of one that doesn ’ t quiver and cave in the face of an outrage mob.
” Bemoaning PC is , of course , old hat for Douthat and Stephens .
They ’ ve both been doing it for decades .
What is notable is that they were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a talented leftist journalist who is a contributing editor at Rolling Stone .
Taibbi wrote a long essay arguing that “ the American left has lost its mind .
It ’ s become a cowardly mob of upper-class social media addicts , Twitter Robespierres who move from discipline to discipline torching reputations and jobs with breathtaking casualness.
” America Is Fracturing—and So Is ‘ The New York Times ’ One might question the characterization “ upper-class social media addicts.
” In general , the newsroom revolt is coming from working reporters , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , those resisting the uprising—notably , New York Times publisher A.G. Sulzberger , who was reluctant to accept the need for Bennet to leave—are definitely in the plutocratic class .
Taibbi added , “ The leaders of this new movement are replacing traditional liberal beliefs about tolerance , free inquiry , and even racial harmony with ideas so toxic and unattractive that they eschew debate , moving straight to shaming , threats , and intimidation.
” Taibbi made many of the same arguments about the Cotton op-ed that Douthat and Stephens did , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So his essay can stand as representative .
Remarkably for someone who has written well in the past about the dangers of police violence , Taibbi contended that Cotton ’ s plan was being misrepresented and that it was a reasonable proposal that deserved to be debated .
Like Douthat and Stephens , Taibbi is presenting a debate club theory of public discourse .
The goal is to let all sides present their arguments in the marketplace of ideas and let the best argument win .
The premise is that life can work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ life , as we ’ ve seen in recent decades , bad actors committed to lying can manipulate the rules of free debate .
Climate denial is one obvious example , a wholly manufactured body of thought that used the vulnerability of the media rules of balance to present itself as legitimate .
Donald Trump himself is a colorful example of how shameless lying can easily overwhelm the marketplace of ideas .
The public lacks the time , energy , and patience to even keep track of untruths that are diligently fact-checked by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all the public even objects to being lied to .
Cotton ’ s dishonesty is slyer than Trump ’ s—but all the more dangerous for that reason .
In his op-ed , Cotton put in enough provisos that even Taibbi was convinced the senator didn ’ t want to harm peaceful protesters .
But those provisos were only in the argument Cotton presented for Times readers .
On Twitter , two days before the Times piece ran , Cotton responded to an earlier tweet in which he had suggested calling in the 101st @ @ @ @ @ @ @ necessary , the 10th Mountain , 82nd Airborne , 1st Cav , 3rd Infantry—whatever it takes to restore order .
No quarter for insurrectionists , anarchists , rioters , and looters.
” The phrase “ no quarter ” is a military term of art .
On a literal level , it means that no prisoners are to be taken and all enemy combatants are to be killed .
Even on a more metaphorical level , it still means enemy combatants are to be treated with utmost harshness .
The use of the phrase @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since it was preceded by “ whatever it takes to restore order.
” You Don ’ t Have to Publish Both Sides When One Side Is Fascism Even in the most generous interpretation , Cotton is calling for American troops on American soil to use rules of engagement against American citizens that would permit massive causalities .
And if we take Cotton literally ( as perhaps we should given his military background and familiarity with technical terminology ) , then he was calling for war crimes .
Nor is it clear what Cotton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ implies that the army would go after not just lawbreakers but also those guilty of ideological offenses .
In his op-ed , Cotton conjures up the dangers of “ cadres of left-wing radicals like antifa.
” There is no evidence of any antifa involvement in violence during the protests .
Cotton is presenting a two-faced argument .
On Twitter , we see the full violence of his proposal laid out .
In his Times op-ed , a more restrained version of his argument is presented , one that effectively helps whitewash Cotton .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ s op-ed doesn ’ t help create a marketplace of ideas where issues are debated .
Instead , it helps a dishonest political figure sell himself to a broader public .
A far better procedure would have been for the Times to have published news articles examining Cotton ’ s ideas .
In that format , his dishonesty would have been easier to grasp .
Stephens , Douthat , and Taibbi were all taken in by Cotton ’ s deception .
They all treated the op-ed as if it summed up Cotton ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more incendiary tweets .
They were so obsessed with fighting a culture war that they let themselves become de facto apologists for a reactionary politician who used eliminationist rhetoric in advocating a military response to a political problem .
As with so many other arguments over political correctness , the controversy over Cotton ’ s op-ed involves treating ideas as if they exist only in the abstract and don ’ t have real-world consequences .
That ’ s a beguiling conceit for a certain type of pundit , who can enjoy the play @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In a debate club , it might be possible as a forensic exercise to argue over the merits of Cotton ’ s op-ed in its own terms , while ignoring his other political activities .
But life is not a debate club .

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?
Just as generals are sometimes guilty of fighting the last war, pundits frequently fight the last culture war. The world is on fire with global protests over police violence, the continued spread of Covid-19, and the ripple effects of the most severe economic crisis in nearly a century. But to judge by some of America’s best-known political columnists, the true danger is still political correctness destroying free speech, especially in the media.
The immediate occasion for these complaints was the resignation of James Bennet as New York Times opinion editor after a newsroom uprising against an op-ed by Senator Tom Cotton published on June 3, which called for the use of military force to suppress “looters and rioters.” But the broader context for the renewed debate over political correctness is a series of newsroom revolts in many media outlets, ranging from The Intercept to Vogue to The Philadelphia Inquirer, all involving vocal complaints about racism leveled against either staff or (more commonly) management.
Ross Douthat in The New York Times complained about a “successor ideology” that threatens to bring about a “cultural revolution” and replace traditional liberal ideas of free speech. Douthat’s colleague Bret Stephens argued that “last week’s decision by this newspaper to disavow an Op-Ed by Senator Tom Cotton is a gift to the enemies of a free press—free in the sense of one that doesn’t quiver and cave in the face of an outrage mob.”
Bemoaning PC is, of course, old hat for Douthat and Stephens. They’ve both been doing it for decades. What is notable is that they were echoed at length by Matt Taibbi, a talented leftist journalist who is a contributing editor at Rolling Stone. Taibbi wrote a long essay arguing that “the American left has lost its mind. It’s become a cowardly mob of upper-class social media addicts, Twitter Robespierres who move from discipline to discipline torching reputations and jobs with breathtaking casualness.” 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
One might question the characterization “upper-class social media addicts.” In general, the newsroom revolt is coming from working reporters, who are distinctly not upper class. Conversely, those resisting the uprising—notably, New York Times publisher A.G. Sulzberger, who was reluctant to accept the need for Bennet to leave—are definitely in the plutocratic class.
Taibbi added, “The leaders of this new movement are replacing traditional liberal beliefs about tolerance, free inquiry, and even racial harmony with ideas so toxic and unattractive that they eschew debate, moving straight to shaming, threats, and intimidation.” 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
Taibbi made many of the same arguments about the Cotton op-ed that Douthat and Stephens did, but in a more forceful manner. So his essay can stand as representative. Remarkably for someone who has written well in the past about the dangers of police violence, Taibbi contended that Cotton’s plan was being misrepresented and that it was a reasonable proposal that deserved to be debated. Current Issue View our current issue
According to Taibbi,
Cotton did not call for “military force against protesters in American cities.” He spoke of a “show of force,” to rectify a situation a significant portion of the country saw as spiraling out of control. It’s an important distinction. Cotton was presenting one side of the most important question on the most important issue of a critically important day in American history.
Like Douthat and Stephens, Taibbi is presenting a debate club theory of public discourse. The goal is to let all sides present their arguments in the marketplace of ideas and let the best argument win.
The premise is that life can work like a debate club. In real life, as we’ve seen in recent decades, bad actors committed to lying can manipulate the rules of free debate. Climate denial is one obvious example, a wholly manufactured body of thought that used the vulnerability of the media rules of balance to present itself as legitimate.
Donald Trump himself is a colorful example of how shameless lying can easily overwhelm the marketplace of ideas. The public lacks the time, energy, and patience to even keep track of untruths that are diligently fact-checked by the media. And of course not all the public even objects to being lied to.
Cotton’s dishonesty is slyer than Trump’s—but all the more dangerous for that reason. In his op-ed, Cotton put in enough provisos that even Taibbi was convinced the senator didn’t want to harm peaceful protesters. But those provisos were only in the argument Cotton presented for Times readers.
On Twitter, two days before the Times piece ran, Cotton responded to an earlier tweet in which he had suggested calling in the 101st Airborne Division, “And, if necessary, the 10th Mountain, 82nd Airborne, 1st Cav, 3rd Infantry—whatever it takes to restore order. No quarter for insurrectionists, anarchists, rioters, and looters.”
The phrase “no quarter” is a military term of art. On a literal level, it means that no prisoners are to be taken and all enemy combatants are to be killed. Even on a more metaphorical level, it still means enemy combatants are to be treated with utmost harshness. The use of the phrase “no quarter” is especially ominous since it was preceded by “whatever it takes to restore order.” Related Article You Don’t Have to Publish Both Sides When One Side Is Fascism Eric Alterman
Even in the most generous interpretation, Cotton is calling for American troops on American soil to use rules of engagement against American citizens that would permit massive causalities. And if we take Cotton literally (as perhaps we should given his military background and familiarity with technical terminology), then he was calling for war crimes.
Nor is it clear what Cotton means by “insurrectionists.” The phrase implies that the army would go after not just lawbreakers but also those guilty of ideological offenses. In his op-ed, Cotton conjures up the dangers of “cadres of left-wing radicals like antifa.” There is no evidence of any antifa involvement in violence during the protests.
Cotton is presenting a two-faced argument. On Twitter, we see the full violence of his proposal laid out. In his Times op-ed, a more restrained version of his argument is presented, one that effectively helps whitewash Cotton. In other words, publishing Cotton’s op-ed doesn’t help create a marketplace of ideas where issues are debated. Instead, it helps a dishonest political figure sell himself to a broader public. A far better procedure would have been for the Times to have published news articles examining Cotton’s ideas. In that format, his dishonesty would have been easier to grasp.
Stephens, Douthat, and Taibbi were all taken in by Cotton’s deception. They all treated the op-ed as if it summed up Cotton’s viewpoint, utterly ignoring the much more incendiary tweets. They were so obsessed with fighting a culture war that they let themselves become de facto apologists for a reactionary politician who used eliminationist rhetoric in advocating a military response to a political problem.
As with so many other arguments over political correctness, the controversy over Cotton’s op-ed involves treating ideas as if they exist only in the abstract and don’t have real-world consequences. That’s a beguiling conceit for a certain type of pundit, who can enjoy the play of ideas as a form of entertainment. In a debate club, it might be possible as a forensic exercise to argue over the merits of Cotton’s op-ed in its own terms, while ignoring his other political activities. But life is not a debate club.


thenation--2020-06-15--Interview: Stacey Abrams Breaks Down Georgia’s (Latest) Election Meltdown

Against the backdrop of a months-long pandemic and weeks-long uprising against police violence , Tuesday ’ s Georgia election debacle felt comparably apocalyptic .
‘ complete meltdown ’ screamed a banner headline in the The Atlanta Journal-Constitution .
Social media was littered with photos of long lines , tales of broken voting machines , and complaints of citizens prevented from exercising their legal right .
I found myself wondering : Would the televised suppression galvanize action on voting access , even among white people , as police violence had hiked support for police “ reform , ” at minimum—because we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Or would it serve to discourage the mainly black and brown people denied access from even trying to vote in November , since , despite years of activism , we haven ’ t cleaned up our broken voting system , desecrating this sacred right ?
Naturally , I turned for answers to the nation ’ s most prominent expert on the way Georgia disenfranchises its voters : 2018 gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams , who came within 57,000 votes of winning her race , and who many believe would have won without the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , then–Secretary of State Brian Kemp , who is now the governor .
Abrams ’ s new book , Our Time Is Now : Power , Purpose and the Fight for a Fair America , is a personal look at the obstacles she faced—the AJC estimates that Kemp ’ s decision to close many polling places and move others cost as many as 85,000 Georgians their ability to cast a ballot , more than his margin of victory—as well as a guide to mobilizing the new American electorate nationwide in November and beyond @ @ @ @ @ @ @ founded last year , Fair Fight Action and Fair Fight PAC .
While current Secretary of State Brad Raffensparger is blaming mismanagement by urban counties for last Tuesday ’ s election meltdown , Abrams notes that his and Kemp ’ s chicanery has begun to hurt white suburban voters too , as some of them also suffered endless lines and ballot screwups .
A GOP official in suburban Cobb County has even called on Raffensparger to resign over the debacle .
“ I have no confidence in this system , nor the leaders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ retired Marine Col. Mike Boyce .
“ And in my world , in the military , when you lose confidence in somebody , you replace them.
” So far , Boyce doesn ’ t have a lot of Republican company , but Abrams believes he should .
Liberals : Don ’ t Be Afraid of Calls to Defund the Police How White People Can Step Up—and Step Back—Right Now “ I want to frame it this way : When you break the machinery of democracy for some , you break it for everyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we saw.
” Our conversation has been lightly edited for clarity .
oan alsh : In the book , you describe modern GOP voter suppression as “ a nearly seamless operation.
” But in Georgia last Tuesday , we saw all the seams—and worse !
With so many people paying attention , how did so much go so wrong ?
tacey brams : What happened on Tuesday for Georgia was a combination of malice and incompetence .
The malice has underpinned so many of the rules passed in Georgia in recent years and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well as the disregard for the impact closing precincts would have , the disregard for proper staffing , the disregard for communities that need additional resources .
So in the midst of a pandemic where we knew that people were going to need to use vote-by-mail , the secretary of state rightly , and in cooperation with Democrats , sent out 6.9 million applications .
But knowing that would dramatically increase the number of people who would take advantage , he did not concomitantly increase the resources to process that number of applications @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to a third party in Arizona , which meant there wasn ’ t a direct contact for , say , a citizen like myself , who got an absentee ballot with a sealed return envelope—I had no ability to request a new one .
JW : Even you didn ’ t know how to fix that !
SA : I know a lot , and I know a lot of people , and I couldn ’ t get this solved .
I could not solve the simple challenge of a sealed envelope .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the thousands of Georgians who never even received a ballot .
Or take my parents , who registered to vote when they moved to Georgia .
Before the election , I couldn ’ t find my father in the system , even though I had a photo of his registration card .
The database was flawed ; it had his birth date wrong .
I knew who to call to get that changed , but imagine if you ’ re a first-time voter who is told you don ’ t exist , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go vote without losing your pay ?
Stacey Abrams : How We Fight for the Right to Vote So there were database issues and absentee ballot issues , including sending , processing , and making sure that they are counted .
In fact , there is an ongoing challenge to make sure all the absentee ballots are going to get counted in the state of Georgia .
We are still counting ballots in some congressional races to see if there will need to be a runoff .
Which is not necessarily a bad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ballots had problems , and won ’ t be counted unless they fix the problems—and the “ cure ” period [ during which a voter can do that ] is so short , and many weren ’ t even notified , so they can ’ t fix it .
So we ’ re working on what the remedy could be there as well .
Then you have the incompetence writ large .
The secretary of state insisted on purchasing machines that he knew were questionable at the time he made the decision .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in cooperation with Freedom Works—yes , the Koch organization—we both lobbied against implementation of such a massive change in our election structure : Freedom Works because they didn ’ t like the cost , us because we didn ’ t like the process .
Also : The increased costs to counties would come without increased state investment .
Despite knowing that it was going to be problematic , the secretary of state deployed these machines to the counties , but the counties didn ’ t receive adequate training or investment to staff up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ [ to address problems with the machines ] in a state that has upwards of 2,000 polling locations .
He seems to fundamentally misunderstand his job or not care about his job .
The last time Georgia had a wholesale change in voting machines , 2002 , that secretary of state made sure there was adequate training and staffing .
They mailed instructions to every single voter .
They were prepared for failure .
Raffensperger didn ’ t prepare for any contingency .
So 20 counties—Republican and Democrat , urban and rural , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ court orders to extend their elections , by hours .
People were not able to vote in a reasonable amount of time .
That ’ s why it ’ s so critical that people understand secretaries of state have the responsibility to ensure that elections happen , and what is so frustrating and angering is that Brad Raffensperger has showed an indifference to the needs of voters .
When called on this , he has disavowed any responsibility .
And on top of that , this is a man who spent $ 400,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the new machines he purchased .
He could have deployed that money to hire 1,600 poll workers , paid them $ 20 an hour for 12-hour shifts , including the 250 poll workers that Fulton County , the most populated county in the state , told them that they needed .
But instead of poll workers , there was an ad : “ Look at Brad Raffensperger : He bought a lot of stuff !
” JW : And so now he ’ s blaming the counties , and especially the urban @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saying , “ Oh , these Democratic counties are the problem , they ’ re the ones screwing it up for their voters… ” SA : Part of the reason you have a statewide official in charge of elections is that the quality of your democracy shouldn ’ t differ based on your ZIP Code .
The reason the secretary of state in Georgia has the ability to purchase machines for every county—as opposed to what happens in Mississippi , where every county is on its own and does have to make do—Georgia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this a statewide obligation and we ’ re going to put a person in charge .
But what ’ s happened with Raffensperger and before him Brian Kemp is a refusal to acknowledge the variance of need you have in counties like Fulton or DeKalb .
But interestingly , he leaves out Gwinnett County , which is another one of the largest counties in Georgia that had to have extended hours—and Gwinnett is run by Republicans !
He ’ s singling out the two majority-black counties that are run by Democrats and ignoring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republicans .
The same set of problems occurred .
There is a benefit to be able to point fingers , but Raffensperger can not abdicate that responsibility .
JW : The good news is , they seem to be a little bit afraid that they screwed up too publicly .
A column in the Washington Examiner Friday said Republicans are worried that “ Democrats could wield voting rights like a cudgel ” in November .
Let me just read you one line from a Republican operative in Atlanta : “ It gives Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials as backwoods racists to large swaths of independent-minded suburban voters .
They skew younger and are often transplants .
Thus , they would tend to be prone to vote against a ‘ good ole boy ’ system.
” It made me laugh , but you ’ re making me realize some of those suburban voters were affected , too .
They ’ re not just looking on at other counties ’ problems .
SA : Absolutely !
I mean , he ’ s right .
No matter what your target , everybody @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s the problem with trying to break democracy .
It doesn ’ t necessarily just affect your target .
[ Since the Voting Rights Act ] , they can ’ t do anything that is clearly racially intended , and so they ’ ve had to manipulate the rules .
But when you manipulate rules that apply to everyone , you ’ re going to affect more than the people you ’ re targeting , and that ’ s the consequence of what they ’ ve done .
JW : I learned so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thing I didn ’ t know is that Georgia ’ s former Secretary of State Karen Handel tried to implement the “ exact match ” system [ purging voters whose names vary slightly in the registration database ] , but the Obama Justice Department stopped her .
Once we lost Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act , though , Brian Kemp was able to do it , and disenfranchise tens of thousands of voters that way .
SA : Right , he didn ’ t have to get it “ pre-cleared ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ One point you make repeatedly , that I hadn ’ t really thought about this way , is the fact that the old forms of voter suppression were systemic , systemically excluding groups of people : black people , poor black people , rural black people .
The new forms are also systemic , but they can seem personal .
They put the onus on the individual : It ’ s your fault that you couldn ’ t vote because you didn ’ t include your middle initial when you registered .
Or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clearly .
Or you didn ’ t find out that your polling place had changed .
Or maybe you didn ’ t vote for a while , so you got purged from the rolls .
All those things put the burden on the individual voter—who may not even know what ’ s happening , or if you do , you can feel a kind of shame .
I screwed up !
SA : With the Voting Rights Act , the United States decided that facially racist behaviors were no longer permitted .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get them through , they could exist .
And one of the ways we know that breaks down , these rules do not say : Black people who live in poor communities shall not be allowed to vote .
What we see instead is the under-resourcing of their precincts , and these rules that say if you move , you have to change your address in a certain number of days .
Most lawyers don ’ t know that rule .
If you ’ re a Latino who ’ s had to move @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last address you used to register .
You ’ re trying to feed your family , but because you didn ’ t commit to memory the litany of rules and regulations , when you try to exercise your right to vote , you are shamed out of the process .
It ’ s all about what you didn ’ t do .
And in the United States , we ’ ve taken this for granted , we ’ ve never questioned : Why would that be the responsibility , of every person , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cross a state line , and the rules are now completely different ?
In almost every other industrial democracy , these rules don ’ t exist .
This was designed to push people out of the system .
And it works .
And this is why voter suppression in the 21st century is so insidious .
It ’ s all about “ I made a mistake , I didn ’ t know , I should have done , ” instead of “ This is absurd and why is it my job ?
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are frequently mentioned as a possible running mate for Joe Biden .
But you told Stephen Colbert the other night that you have not been contacted by the Biden people in their vice presidential search ?
SA : That is not what I said .
Watch the segment .
JW : I ’ m sorry : That was the headline .
SA : I know it was , but watch the segment .
What I responded to was a question about whether I had heard from the people who had spoken to April @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know who April is speaking to , I answered a very specific question .
The Biden campaign is going to run its process—it ’ s going to run its vetting ; it ’ s going to pick a vice presidential nominee—and I don ’ t comment on that process !

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?
Against the backdrop of a months-long pandemic and weeks-long uprising against police violence, Tuesday’s Georgia election debacle felt comparably apocalyptic. ‘complete meltdown’ screamed a banner headline in the The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Social media was littered with photos of long lines, tales of broken voting machines, and complaints of citizens prevented from exercising their legal right.
I found myself wondering: Would the televised suppression galvanize action on voting access, even among white people, as police violence had hiked support for police “reform,” at minimum—because we could see it on television and Twitter? Or would it serve to discourage the mainly black and brown people denied access from even trying to vote in November, since, despite years of activism, we haven’t cleaned up our broken voting system, desecrating this sacred right?
Naturally, I turned for answers to the nation’s most prominent expert on the way Georgia disenfranchises its voters: 2018 gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, who came within 57,000 votes of winning her race, and who many believe would have won without the voter suppression perfected by her GOP opponent, then–Secretary of State Brian Kemp, who is now the governor. Abrams’s new book, Our Time Is Now: Power, Purpose and the Fight for a Fair America, is a personal look at the obstacles she faced—the AJC estimates that Kemp’s decision to close many polling places and move others cost as many as 85,000 Georgians their ability to cast a ballot, more than his margin of victory—as well as a guide to mobilizing the new American electorate nationwide in November and beyond, the goal of the groups she founded last year, Fair Fight Action and Fair Fight PAC.
While current Secretary of State Brad Raffensparger is blaming mismanagement by urban counties for last Tuesday’s election meltdown, Abrams notes that his and Kemp’s chicanery has begun to hurt white suburban voters too, as some of them also suffered endless lines and ballot screwups. A GOP official in suburban Cobb County has even called on Raffensparger to resign over the debacle. “I have no confidence in this system, nor the leaders that are behind it,” said retired Marine Col. Mike Boyce. “And in my world, in the military, when you lose confidence in somebody, you replace them.” So far, Boyce doesn’t have a lot of Republican company, but Abrams believes he should. More From Joan Walsh The Promise of Justice in Fani Willis’s Indictment August 15, 2023 Please, Please Stop Blaming “Progressives” for Donald Trump’s Fascism August 11, 2023 The Ron-mentum Continues… Circling the Drain August 9, 2023
“I want to frame it this way: When you break the machinery of democracy for some, you break it for everyone, and that’s really what we saw.”
Our conversation has been lightly edited for clarity.
J oan W alsh: In the book, you describe modern GOP voter suppression as “a nearly seamless operation.” But in Georgia last Tuesday, we saw all the seams—and worse! With so many people paying attention, how did so much go so wrong? 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
S tacey A brams: What happened on Tuesday for Georgia was a combination of malice and incompetence. The malice has underpinned so many of the rules passed in Georgia in recent years and the application of those rules. As well as the disregard for the impact closing precincts would have, the disregard for proper staffing, the disregard for communities that need additional resources. So in the midst of a pandemic where we knew that people were going to need to use vote-by-mail, the secretary of state rightly, and in cooperation with Democrats, sent out 6.9 million applications. But knowing that would dramatically increase the number of people who would take advantage, he did not concomitantly increase the resources to process that number of applications. He then vended out the program to a third party in Arizona, which meant there wasn’t a direct contact for, say, a citizen like myself, who got an absentee ballot with a sealed return envelope—I had no ability to request a new one.
JW: Even you didn’t know how to fix that!
SA: I know a lot, and I know a lot of people, and I couldn’t get this solved. I could not solve the simple challenge of a sealed envelope. And that doesn’t account for the thousands of Georgians who never even received a ballot. Or take my parents, who registered to vote when they moved to Georgia. Before the election, I couldn’t find my father in the system, even though I had a photo of his registration card. The database was flawed; it had his birth date wrong. I knew who to call to get that changed, but imagine if you’re a first-time voter who is told you don’t exist, and who only has an hour off to go vote without losing your pay? Related Article Stacey Abrams: How We Fight for the Right to Vote Start Making Sense and Jon Wiener
So there were database issues and absentee ballot issues, including sending, processing, and making sure that they are counted. In fact, there is an ongoing challenge to make sure all the absentee ballots are going to get counted in the state of Georgia. We are still counting ballots in some congressional races to see if there will need to be a runoff. Which is not necessarily a bad thing. But there are people whose ballots had problems, and won’t be counted unless they fix the problems—and the “cure” period [during which a voter can do that] is so short, and many weren’t even notified, so they can’t fix it. So we’re working on what the remedy could be there as well.
Then you have the incompetence writ large. The secretary of state insisted on purchasing machines that he knew were questionable at the time he made the decision. Fair Fight Action, our group, in cooperation with Freedom Works—yes, the Koch organization—we both lobbied against implementation of such a massive change in our election structure: Freedom Works because they didn’t like the cost, us because we didn’t like the process. Also: The increased costs to counties would come without increased state investment. Despite knowing that it was going to be problematic, the secretary of state deployed these machines to the counties, but the counties didn’t receive adequate training or investment to staff up. You had roughly 175 technicians available [to address problems with the machines] in a state that has upwards of 2,000 polling locations. He seems to fundamentally misunderstand his job or not care about his job.
The last time Georgia had a wholesale change in voting machines, 2002, that secretary of state made sure there was adequate training and staffing. They mailed instructions to every single voter. They were prepared for failure. Raffensperger didn’t prepare for any contingency. So 20 counties—Republican and Democrat, urban and rural, predominantly white and predominantly black—had to get court orders to extend their elections, by hours. People were not able to vote in a reasonable amount of time. That’s why it’s so critical that people understand secretaries of state have the responsibility to ensure that elections happen, and what is so frustrating and angering is that Brad Raffensperger has showed an indifference to the needs of voters. When called on this, he has disavowed any responsibility. And on top of that, this is a man who spent $400,000 in federal election resources to run advertisements about the new machines he purchased. He could have deployed that money to hire 1,600 poll workers, paid them $20 an hour for 12-hour shifts, including the 250 poll workers that Fulton County, the most populated county in the state, told them that they needed. But instead of poll workers, there was an ad: “Look at Brad Raffensperger: He bought a lot of stuff!”
JW: And so now he’s blaming the counties, and especially the urban counties, like Fulton and DeKalb, saying, “Oh, these Democratic counties are the problem, they’re the ones screwing it up for their voters…”
SA: Part of the reason you have a statewide official in charge of elections is that the quality of your democracy shouldn’t differ based on your ZIP Code. The reason the secretary of state in Georgia has the ability to purchase machines for every county—as opposed to what happens in Mississippi, where every county is on its own and does have to make do—Georgia said we’re going to make this a statewide obligation and we’re going to put a person in charge. But what’s happened with Raffensperger and before him Brian Kemp is a refusal to acknowledge the variance of need you have in counties like Fulton or DeKalb. But interestingly, he leaves out Gwinnett County, which is another one of the largest counties in Georgia that had to have extended hours—and Gwinnett is run by Republicans! He’s singling out the two majority-black counties that are run by Democrats and ignoring the majority-minority county that is run by Republicans. The same set of problems occurred. There is a benefit to be able to point fingers, but Raffensperger cannot abdicate that responsibility.
JW: The good news is, they seem to be a little bit afraid that they screwed up too publicly. A column in the Washington Examiner Friday said Republicans are worried that “Democrats could wield voting rights like a cudgel” in November. Let me just read you one line from a Republican operative in Atlanta: “It gives Democrats a rallying cry by painting GOP elected officials as backwoods racists to large swaths of independent-minded suburban voters. They skew younger and are often transplants. Thus, they would tend to be prone to vote against a ‘good ole boy’ system.” It made me laugh, but you’re making me realize some of those suburban voters were affected, too. They’re not just looking on at other counties’ problems.
SA: Absolutely! I mean, he’s right. No matter what your target, everybody has to use the machinery—and that’s the problem with trying to break democracy. It doesn’t necessarily just affect your target. [Since the Voting Rights Act], they can’t do anything that is clearly racially intended, and so they’ve had to manipulate the rules. But when you manipulate rules that apply to everyone, you’re going to affect more than the people you’re targeting, and that’s the consequence of what they’ve done.
JW: I learned so much from your book. One interesting thing I didn’t know is that Georgia’s former Secretary of State Karen Handel tried to implement the “exact match” system [purging voters whose names vary slightly in the registration database], but the Obama Justice Department stopped her. Once we lost Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, though, Brian Kemp was able to do it, and disenfranchise tens of thousands of voters that way.
SA: Right, he didn’t have to get it “pre-cleared” with the Justice Department.
JW: One point you make repeatedly, that I hadn’t really thought about this way, is the fact that the old forms of voter suppression were systemic, systemically excluding groups of people: black people, poor black people, rural black people. The new forms are also systemic, but they can seem personal. They put the onus on the individual: It’s your fault that you couldn’t vote because you didn’t include your middle initial when you registered. Or you didn’t sign your name clearly. Or you didn’t find out that your polling place had changed. Or maybe you didn’t vote for a while, so you got purged from the rolls. All those things put the burden on the individual voter—who may not even know what’s happening, or if you do, you can feel a kind of shame. I screwed up!
SA: With the Voting Rights Act, the United States decided that facially racist behaviors were no longer permitted. But facially neutral behaviors, if you could get them through, they could exist. And one of the ways we know that breaks down, these rules do not say: Black people who live in poor communities shall not be allowed to vote. What we see instead is the under-resourcing of their precincts, and these rules that say if you move, you have to change your address in a certain number of days. Most lawyers don’t know that rule. If you’re a Latino who’s had to move often, you might not remember the last address you used to register. You’re trying to feed your family, but because you didn’t commit to memory the litany of rules and regulations, when you try to exercise your right to vote, you are shamed out of the process.
It’s all about what you didn’t do. And in the United States, we’ve taken this for granted, we’ve never questioned: Why would that be the responsibility, of every person, to know all the rules—especially if you cross a state line, and the rules are now completely different? In almost every other industrial democracy, these rules don’t exist. This was designed to push people out of the system. And it works. And this is why voter suppression in the 21st century is so insidious. It’s all about “I made a mistake, I didn’t know, I should have done,” instead of “This is absurd and why is it my job?”
JW: Speaking of jobs: You are frequently mentioned as a possible running mate for Joe Biden. But you told Stephen Colbert the other night that you have not been contacted by the Biden people in their vice presidential search?
SA: That is not what I said. Watch the segment.
JW: I’m sorry: That was the headline.
SA: I know it was, but watch the segment. What I responded to was a question about whether I had heard from the people who had spoken to April Ryan. Since I don’t know who April is speaking to, I answered a very specific question. The Biden campaign is going to run its process—it’s going to run its vetting; it’s going to pick a vice presidential nominee—and I don’t comment on that process!


thenation--2020-06-15--America’s Racist Police Won’t Be Dismantled by 2 Weeks of Protests

Like all black parents , I believe that talking to my children about the protests surrounding the death of George Floyd also involves contextualizing the current struggle against police brutality within the generations-long struggle for equal rights .
I need my sons to know that the fight they see on television is part of a larger struggle that started long before they were born and that they must take up after I am gone .
This week I told my older son , a sensitive 7-year-old , that his grandmother participated in protests when she was not much older than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that she , too , faced police brutality and that one day it would be his turn to fight this battle .
But my kid is just a kid .
He listened to my family history lesson , yet when thinking about his role in this story , he was optimistic as only a child can be .
He told me cheerfully , “ Maybe this time will be the last time.
” This time will not be the last time .
This will not be the last time the police brutally murder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not be the last time that murder is captured on camera .
It will not be the last time that black people take to the streets to demand justice or that cops respond to those demands with even more violence and brutality .
It will not be the last time that mayors and other local officials make excuses for police violence .
The past few weeks have opened some eyes to the systemic brutality faced by black people .
But for things to get better for my kids , people will have to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ police reform over the next few weeks .
And months .
And years .
The system of white supremacy enforced and protected by the American police was not built in a day , and it will not be dismantled in a day .
What will people be prepared to do two weeks from now to make the world safer for black people than it was two weeks ago ?
What will they be prepared to do in two months ?
In two years ?
Already , the infrastructure is in place for this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everybody stops shouting about it .
Despite the general unrest , politicians from both parties have offered a steady stream of excuses for the police brutality being inflicted , ironically , on people demonstrating against police brutality .
There is not enough space to list all the atrocities we ’ ve seen on video in just the past few weeks , but they include cops driving cars into people , cops beating nonviolent protesters with sticks , cops firing tear gas canisters and rubber bullets at protesters at point-blank range , military units @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can do a photo op , and cops pushing an elderly man to the ground and stepping past his body as he bled from his skull .
The media , too , is laying the groundwork to ignore police brutality as soon as possible .
Despite video evidence that directly contradicts police reports , the media still presents the official justifications for police violence in order to offer “ both sides ” of the story .
News anchors still manage to generate more outrage over property destruction than they do over the teargassing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still print op-eds calling for the armed forces to be deployed against US citizens .
The current scrutiny has produced some accountability .
The cops in Buffalo who assaulted the elderly man have been charged .
The editor who headed the section and defended the op-ed threatening Americans with military violence has resigned .
When everybody is watching , some people can do the right thing .
But 57 other cops in Buffalo resigned from that special unit ( though not from the police force ) to protest those two officers being held @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lost his job , many , many more remain committed to the idea that white supremacist logic should be given equal time and legitimacy in the marketplace of ideas .
A few weeks from now , those officers and that editor will have melted back into the establishment .
Will a cop think twice about killing an unarmed black man in the future ?
Will a reporter think twice before uncritically quoting a police report about that murder ?
The protests have raised awareness , but will new allies maintain the vigilance needed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Or will people get distracted ?
After all , we ’ re in the midst of a pandemic , with unemployment approaching Great Depression levels , while being led by a racist authoritarian liar in an election year .
In a few weeks , those issues will be back at the forefront of American consciousness .
Until the next time an unarmed black person is killed by police on camera .
And the time after that .
And the time after that .
Eventually , it will be my sons ’ turn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everybody is aware of still hasn ’ t been solved .
All I can hope is that when it ’ s my sons ’ turn to take to the streets and demand justice for a victim of police brutality , the name that they ’ re chanting isn ’ t mine .


thenation--2020-06-16--Checking Off Stephen Miller’s Wish List

Checking Off Stephen Miller’s Wish List

As the Covid-19 pandemic has picked up steam over the past four months , the Trump administration has used it as cover to implement a wish list of anti-immigration policies .
At this point , pretty much all immigration into the United States is temporarily on hold .
Now , under the iron fist of Trump adviser Stephen Miller , the administration is readying even harsher , potentially more permanent measures : Last week , it proposed a rule that would make it all but impossible for asylum seekers who transit through other countries to claim asylum here .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a range of work visas .
These announcements are expected to be rolled out in the coming weeks .
Before that can happen , Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has already issued an emergency rule that stands out for its sadism , even amid all of the Trump gang ’ s other policies : Building off guidelines issued in April , DeVos ’ s rule would bar colleges and universities from giving any Covid-19-related relief funds to foreign or undocumented students , including those with DACA status .
There could be more coming : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the administration may try to curtail work visas for asylees , refugees , and those holding Temporary Protected Status as well .
This is unconfirmed—although it would certainly be in keeping with the administration ’ s efforts to make it ever harder for immigrants to survive in the United States .
The Wilder the Conspiracy , the More Trump Likes It There ’ s no good reason for any of this .
These new proposals and emergency rules are solely designed to use the might of the federal government to beat up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week ’ s move to put transgender people in danger by stripping anti-discrimination protections from the Affordable Care Act .
There is no economic or medical logic to allowing insurance companies and doctors to deny services to trans Americans .
This is raw bigotry—election-season red meat masquerading as public policy .
It ’ s also about distraction .
In recent weeks , the protests against police brutality that were started by black organizers have expanded to encompass other pro-democracy demands , sparking a vast moral awakening across the country .
That ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ moment .
Meanwhile , Trump ’ s beleaguered team is doubling down on their signature politics of division .
On a near-hourly basis , they are ramping up the Noise , hoping to drown everything else out .
After all , we ’ re also still in the midst of a rampaging pandemic—one that , in this country , has infected more than 2 million people and killed more than 115,000 .
That ’ s the second part of today ’ s Signal .
Nonetheless , Trump is doubling down in pushing for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ speed .
His administration has sided with those who don ’ t want to extend past July the more generous unemployment benefits passed in response to shelter-in-place measures .
This means that those who still can ’ t find a job will be left in the cold , and those who are afraid of contracting the novel coronavirus if they do go back to work will have no choice but to play Russian roulette .
It ’ s no surprise that infection rates are spiking again , as states reopen and the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need to socially distance or wear masks .
As of this past weekend , daily numbers for new diagnoses were climbing in 22 states—and Trump no longer even pretends to care .
In the face of warnings from local public health officials , he is going ahead with plans to hold an indoor rally in Tulsa , Okla. , on Saturday .
After a disagreement with North Carolina ’ s governor over public health concerns around this summer ’ s Republican National Convention , most of the convention events originally scheduled to take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jacksonville , Fla .
There , Trump has been assured by Jacksonville ’ s quiescent politicians that his followers will be allowed to gather indoors with optional masks and no effort to socially distance .
Are these huge indoor gatherings a risk ?
Public health experts say they are .
In a tacit acknowledgment of that reality , Trump ’ s campaign is making all attendees to the upcoming Tulsa rally sign a waiver saying they will not sue the campaign if they become sick from attending .
There are four and a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Expect every day of those long months to be filled with Trumpian distractions and venom , and with policies designed to destroy the lives of those unlucky enough to be pawns in the president ’ s totalitarian games .
Remember that none of these new rules have been codified into law by Congress .
They are hastily constructed , flimsily argued , and legally dubious—ghastly overreaches by an out-of-control executive .
We must keep track of every sadistic executive order , emergency rule , and regulatory change , and demand that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of these awful policies on day one .

As the Covid-19 pandemic has picked up steam over the past four months, the Trump administration has used it as cover to implement a wish list of anti-immigration policies.
At this point, pretty much all immigration into the United States is temporarily on hold. Now, under the iron fist of Trump adviser Stephen Miller, the administration is readying even harsher, potentially more permanent measures: Last week, it proposed a rule that would make it all but impossible for asylum seekers who transit through other countries to claim asylum here. It is also looking to clamp down on a range of work visas. These announcements are expected to be rolled out in the coming weeks.
Before that can happen, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has already issued an emergency rule that stands out for its sadism, even amid all of the Trump gang’s other policies: Building off guidelines issued in April, DeVos’s rule would bar colleges and universities from giving any Covid-19-related relief funds to foreign or undocumented students, including those with DACA status.
There could be more coming: Some immigration attorneys have recently shared rumors that the administration may try to curtail work visas for asylees, refugees, and those holding Temporary Protected Status as well. This is unconfirmed—although it would certainly be in keeping with the administration’s efforts to make it ever harder for immigrants to survive in the United States. Related Article The Wilder the Conspiracy, the More Trump Likes It Sasha Abramsky
There’s no good reason for any of this. These new proposals and emergency rules are solely designed to use the might of the federal government to beat up on vulnerable groups, much like last week’s move to put transgender people in danger by stripping anti-discrimination protections from the Affordable Care Act. There is no economic or medical logic to allowing insurance companies and doctors to deny services to trans Americans. This is raw bigotry—election-season red meat masquerading as public policy. 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
It’s also about distraction. In recent weeks, the protests against police brutality that were started by black organizers have expanded to encompass other pro-democracy demands, sparking a vast moral awakening across the country. That’s one part of the Signal at the moment. Meanwhile, Trump’s beleaguered team is doubling down on their signature politics of division. On a near-hourly basis, they are ramping up the Noise, hoping to drown everything else out.
After all, we’re also still in the midst of a rampaging pandemic—one that, in this country, has infected more than 2 million people and killed more than 115,000. That’s the second part of today’s Signal. Nonetheless, Trump is doubling down in pushing for states to reopen their economies at breakneck speed. His administration has sided with those who don’t want to extend past July the more generous unemployment benefits passed in response to shelter-in-place measures. This means that those who still can’t find a job will be left in the cold, and those who are afraid of contracting the novel coronavirus if they do go back to work will have no choice but to play Russian roulette. Current Issue View our current issue
It’s no surprise that infection rates are spiking again, as states reopen and the president tells followers that they don’t need to socially distance or wear masks. As of this past weekend, daily numbers for new diagnoses were climbing in 22 states—and Trump no longer even pretends to care. In the face of warnings from local public health officials, he is going ahead with plans to hold an indoor rally in Tulsa, Okla., on Saturday. After a disagreement with North Carolina’s governor over public health concerns around this summer’s Republican National Convention, most of the convention events originally scheduled to take place in Charlotte will now move to Jacksonville, Fla. There, Trump has been assured by Jacksonville’s quiescent politicians that his followers will be allowed to gather indoors with optional masks and no effort to socially distance.
Are these huge indoor gatherings a risk? Public health experts say they are. In a tacit acknowledgment of that reality, Trump’s campaign is making all attendees to the upcoming Tulsa rally sign a waiver saying they will not sue the campaign if they become sick from attending.
There are four and a half months to go until the election. Expect every day of those long months to be filled with Trumpian distractions and venom, and with policies designed to destroy the lives of those unlucky enough to be pawns in the president’s totalitarian games. Remember that none of these new rules have been codified into law by Congress. They are hastily constructed, flimsily argued, and legally dubious—ghastly overreaches by an out-of-control executive. We must keep track of every sadistic executive order, emergency rule, and regulatory change, and demand that the next administration roll back every single one of these awful policies on day one.