Showing posts with label fascism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fascism. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 21, 2019

The Slow Violence of American Fascism: Candace Owens at University of Pennsylvania



 
It’s hard to imagine a better example of just how far the far right will go to weaponize the first amendment to the ultimate ends of repressing dissident voices than Candace Owens’ appearance at University of Pennsylvania (UPenn), April 2019. While we might be tempted to merely point out that her race-baiting name-calling of ANTIFA as “the new KKK” is as historically false as it is morally obscene, the issues are actually far greater and they begin with University of Pennsylvania’s administration. I’d like to make an argument that may be as unpopular on the left as it plainly is on the right (despite the latter’s patent mendacity on this point) that I think makes clear some of the real issues with the presence of Turning Point USA (TPUSA) on college campuses—including my own—but also reveals something far larger and more menacing in scope, namely, the face of contemporary American fascism on the battleground of the university.

First, Candace Owens has a right to be invited and to speak at UPenn. And at any university campus. 

Second, university administrations have the crucial responsibility not merely to vet speakers, but to advertise for them honestly and forthrightly. I don’t know with what due diligence university decision-makers approached the possibility of Owens’ visit to U. Penn, but what I do know is that, if they’re like my own university when TPUSA tried to establish a chapter here, it didn’t extend much beyond a gander at the TPUSA website mission statement. UPenn’s advertising of the event suggests something less than what a cursory vetting would require. As I’ve shown, TPUSA’s mission statement is profoundly deceptive; it’s aim is to provide cover for university administrations who can use it to claim innocence if things go bad. It allows for universities to claim they’re giving equal time to conservative voices. The problem is that Candace Owens is not a conservative—not, at least, unless “conservative” now means “racist,” “anti-Semitic,” “misogynist,” and rabidly anti-Islam.

To invite Owens on the basis of the TPUSA mission statement is thus manifestly dishonest. Owens is not merely a “controversial” figure, and she is not a conservative. If UPenn wants to invite an Alt-Righter applauded by Paul Joseph Watson, Alex Jones, Tucker Carlson, and Jeanine Pirro (less loved now by Ye), who actively promotes conspiracy theories, grotesquely distorts the history of slavery in America, claims that the Democratic Party is actually worse for African Americans than being commodified as human chattel, and is, according to Joshua Shanes of Haaretz, beloved by the Trump GOP because she “sells their brand of fascism,” fine. But UPenn has a critically important duty to tell us who Owens is, and advertise her appearance with the facts. They didn’t. 

Here are the facts. Candace Owens:
·     Is cited as the primary inspiration for a terrorist massacre of Muslims. 
·     Feels comfortable making an approving claim about Hitler’s “if he’d just remained with Germany” intentions. 
·     Is affiliated with a host of conspiracy theories whose ideological agendas are white nationalist, ethnostate racist, and nativist—including the absurd view that the Christchurch, New Zealand terrorist attack on a mosque was motivated by the “Left.”
·     Has tweeted images that include white genocide conspiracy theorists. 
·     Denies the historical reality of the Southern Strategy.
·     Promotes the “Democrat Party Plantation” conspiracy theory and the view that being a black Democrat is tantamount to selling oneself into slavery.

It’s no accident that Owens would come to U. Penn ready to take advantage of the opportunity to call ANTIFA the new KKK—however laughably contrary to fact and a text-book example of the fallacy of projection. Moreover, it takes little more than a perfunctory Google search to locate every bit of this list and so much more.  It’s simply morally incumbentof UPenn administration to inform its campus community what exactly “controversial” means, and to direct the sponsoring student organization, the College Republicans, to do the same. 

There are, in fact, two critical questions here:
1.    Did decision-makers at U. Penn perform their due diligence vetting Owens and TPUSA? If so, what governed their decision to give the green light to the College Republicans?  The right answer is “respect for first amendment rights.” But that respect absolutely is not permission to engage in false or misleading advertising. And that suggests that UPenn administration did not perform their due diligence, or at least that they didn’t follow up with council to the College Republicans about what honest advertising requires.

2.    If due diligence by UPenn was conducted, why do the College Republican advertising posters make it appear as if Owens is a conservative—that is, just another Republican sponsored by college Republicans? Why don’t they reflect some semblance of in just what “controversial” in her case actually consists? This Campus Reform (a far right hit machine whose raison d’etreis to harass, vilify, and silence professors) copy of the poster implies Owens is a patriot, and presumably a Republican. It quotes Kanye West’s earlier tweet, but it offers not even a hint of what a “conversation” with Owens might be about, or that some of the possibilities of that conversation may involve precisely the racist, misogynist, anti-Semitic, and anti-Muslim rhetoric for which she is known. Students becoming acquainted with Owens and TPUSA for the first time would have no idea from this misleading poster what #BLEXIT is really about. They might not be aware of Owens’s Tweet about Cesar Sayoc insisting that his multiple package bomb threat was a leftist conspiracy. They might not know about the McCarthy-esque Professor Watchlist.

Members of Philadelphia ANTIFA, of course, know exactly what Candace Owens is all about, and their protest was to make sure the public knew what Candace Owens and TPUSA is about. I do not condone the use of violence under any circumstances. Full stop. And ANTIFA committed no act of violence. To thus accuse ANTIFA of violence in this instance—to claim that that they’re the new KKK—is absurd not merely because they’rethe anti-fascists, but because the worldview actively promoted by Owens is both violent and fascist—indeed, violent precisely becauseit is so profoundly fascist.

Any rational person living through these dark times in the land of the free, home of the brave must recognize that the prohibition against violence does notmean that we’re not well over-due for a profoundly important discussion about what constitutes “violence.” About one thing I am perfectly clear: violence is not reducible to the street brawls of which Owens, standing high up on a park bench to make her #Blexit pitch over the ANTIFA gaggle, had not the slightest fear at UPenn—but which she’d apparently solicit to distract us from the violence to which she is a party:

Violence is a planet suffocated by toxic waste.Violence is a woman forced to carry to term the fetus of the father who raped her.Violence is the police brutality routinely condoned by the far-right.Violence is a white-supremacist terrorist massacre at a mosque, a church, a synagogue.Violence is a country that values its guns over its people.Violence is the wrenching of children away from their refugee parents.Violence is a million species on the brink of extinction.Violence is dying from treatable disease because of lack of access to health care.Violence is a president who actively solicits praise and approval from autocrats and butchers.Violence is a country whose institutions have been expropriated by kleptocrats.Violence is a future of a planet burnt down to the ground by unrelenting human excess and greed.Violence is the worldview personified by Owens, by Charlie Kirk, by Stephen Miller, by Sean Hannity, by Alex Jones, by Donald Trump.

Such a worldview is, in short, fascist: an ideologically informed essentially kleptocratic ideology that utilizes a wide array of violence “justified” to carry out an array of “theories”—conspiracy, eugenicist, patriarchal, “free market”—that insure the maintenance of a hegemonic class of beneficiaries defined by race, class, sex, and access to wealth and weapons. The goal of its mercenaries is to subvert democratic institutions and practices through the union of corporate ambition and state power. In its current incarnation in the United States, we’re witness to the institutionalization of fascist objectives both as de-regulative, for example, the gutting of environmental protections, and regulative—for example, the obscenely repressive “fetal heartbeat” laws recently passed in Georgia and Alabama, apparently endorsed by Owens: “Pro-choice = Murdering your offspring.” (Tweet, 5.12.19)

Violence does not characterize the small cadre of ANTIFA activists on scene at Owens’ arrival at UPenn. They yelled at her, in some cases obscenities. They filmed her. Some folks—don’t know whether they were with ANTIFA or not—filmed her and tried to ask her questions about the infiltration of TPUSA by KKK operatives. The video Owens provides does not include the leveling of any audible threats, nor does anyone accost her in any fashion.1In fact, Owens obviously feels perfectly safe. How do I know? She climbs on top of a park bench, presumably, to be able to garner greater attention. Had she felt in any way threatened, she would certainly not have made her person so fully vulnerable. But she did. She remains there for more than a full minute. Then she gets down, and walks slowly, chatting along the way, into the building, calling out ANTIFA as the new KKK. She’s clearly afraid of no one.

These facts, of course, in no way prevent the white nationalist website Breitbart from running an inflammatory headline “ANTIFA threatens Candace Owens event at University of Pennsylvania,” or from posting ANTIFA tweets aimed at “shutting down” the event.2Someone even tweeted something about throwing a tomato at her. We don’t see that in the video. But if so, is that OK? No.Candace Owens has the same right to safety we all do. The incalculable irony is that the worldview Owens actively espouses is guaranteed to insure a world—in fact, a planet—vastly less safethan the one where she feels secure enough to climb up on a park bench and chat with those closest to her instead of answering tough questions. But answering tough questions would require courage and honesty—not qualities Owens is known for, although she does have the “guts” to blame African Americans for slavery.3

The Breitbart click-bait piece also cites an incident from last Summer where Owens and fellow TPUSA chief Charlie Kirk were allegedly harassed out of a restaurant because, claims Owens, she is black. The point, of course, was to bolster the demonizing of ANTIFA as the new KKK. The problem is that it’s groundless. ANTIFA’s protest of Owens is because she promotes a worldview that’s consistent with conspiracy theory driven white nationalism—that she is in fact the racist, and nothing supports the claim that ANTIFA promotes a racist ideology. Quite to the contrary, in fact.

Fact is, Owen’s characterization of ANTIFA’S motives as racist is false, but it’s also simply mercenary. That the protesters at UPenn were pelleting her with questions about her support for white supremacist conspiracy theories makes pretty clear where they stand. I’m sure Owens isn’t deaf. In fact, I’m sure she knows that calling ANTIFA the new KKK is intended to distract us from Owens’ own courting of white nationalist figures. It affords her the opportunity to make the racist politics of TPUSA appear rational by comparison; it makes her the victim—a theater performance she has perfected and knows will be filmed. She knows her faux-martyrdom will be front-page at outlets like Breitbart. The irony, again, is that if Owens seems to be just fine standing up on that park bench, it’s not only because she knows she’s safe, but because she knows she’s staged an incident to promote a political agenda that, given its own dangerously faulty or false premises, will make the world profoundly unsafe for the very people she’s chatting with at that moment—especially young black men. That is violence.

And it’s no wonder at all that it’s not only Breitbart, but the full weight of the white supremacist blogosphere that exploits the UPenn event, including Campus Reform,4Powerline,5and One American News,just for example. 

What’s most disappointing, however, isn’t that far right conspiracy theory machines would come out swinging in defense of Owens. It’s not that Owens uses her TPUSA platform to demonize whatever gets in the way of her Alt-Right propaganda program. She not only calls ANTIFA the new KKK, The Democrat party a “plantation,” she also heaps scorn on sexual assault survivors like Christine Blasey Ford (“Lock her up”), says the Me Too movement “makes women look stupid,” calls feminist “manhaters,”7and supports criminalizing the constitutionally protected right to abortion, yet calls president Trump “the savior of the West,”8itself a dog whistle to white supremacists.

What’s most disappointing—and laughable—is that the UPenn College Republicans, smart young adults who should know better, defend her as “a clear pro-black figure,” “a powerful Republican voice that advocates for the black community,” and as a victim of “social ostracization because of different political beliefs,”9She is none of these. That Owens legitimately bemoans fatherlessness and the educational achievement gap in the black community as issues that need to be addressed more effectively is undermined (for anyone who does the research) not only by her support for a president whose policies are patently racist, but by her flatly false claim that affirmative action programs have not benefitted African Americans. Such a claim does, of course, support the far-right call to abolish such programs.10Let’s not be fools. Owens mixes in just enough legitimate argument to make her appear credible so that when she begins to roll out the bullshit, the conspiracy theories, and the patent lies, we’re already suckered. 

The UPenn College Republicans also applaud Owens for calling out “politicians who use fears of racism and exacerbate racial hatred for political gain” not apparently realizing that this is precisely the card Owens attempts to play against ANTIFA, or that it’s consistent with her particularly absurd CPAC claim that “racism doesn’t exist in America,” (although apparently an ANTIFA KKK does)—yet another otherwise incoherent position that supports the Alt-Right worldview with which she’s consistently associated.11Although the UPenn College Republicans insist that “a rudimentary knowledge of her [Owens’] personal history and #BLEXIT advocacy work reveals the ridiculousness” of claims that associate her with white supremacism, they neither bother to directly confront the mountainous evidence to the contrary, nor do they acknowledge that #BLEXIT is built on the unsteady sand of conspiracy theory and fear-mongering. 

None of this, however, is surprising given that the Breitbart piece aims to sucker its readers from the outset by comparing an incident that specifically demonizes a Democrat with Antifa, referring to the latter as a hoard. The Young Republicans don’t apparently get it that Owens deploys a strategy in her public speeches (well, not CPAC) similar to that of Charlie Kirk: in order to effectively utilize public presentation as a vehicle for recruitment, reserve it to topics and arguments that preserve the veneer (however thin) of conservatism, all the while sprinkling in dog whistles (ANTIFA is the new KKK) aimed at confirming the worldview of your Alt-Right base, and making sure to craft a carefully-coifed public persona that makes you look like the victim.  

And this all brings me back to where this essay began—with the right to free speech; with a right absolutely critical to a healthy democratic republic, a right that President Trump’s Trojan Horse of a free speech executive order would seek to quash. Candace Owens has a right to free speech. TPUSA should not be barred from giving speeches at universities. But university administrations have a solemn responsibility to be forthright with the campus community and the public about the violent worldview espoused by the speakers their student organizations sponsor. It seems this didn’t happen here. Indeed, had University of Pennsylvania or the UPenn College Republicans taken their responsibilities seriously, the non-violent protest would have been far greater—and the turnout of those ready to be suckered by Owens far fewer. And that would have been a first amendment success story.

Notes:

2.    Mastrangelo, Alana. “Report: ANTIFA threatens Candace Owens at University of Pennsylvania,” Breitbarthttps://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/04/15/report-antifa-threatens-candace-owens-tpusa-event-at-university-of-pennsylvania/
4.    Aminov, Joshua. “Philly ANTIFA promotes “shutting down” Candace Owens event.” Campus Reformhttps://www.campusreform.org/?ID=12110.
5.    Hinderaker, John. “Candace Owens fights the new KKK.” Powerline,https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/04/candace-owens-fights-the-new-kkk.php.
6.    One American News, “ANTIFA targets college guest speaking event featuring conservative activist Candace Owens,” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8ze6ooie_w.
8.    Young, Cathy. “The trouble with Candace Owens,” The Bulwarkhttps://thebulwark.com/the-trouble-with-candace-owens/.
9.    University of Pennsylvania College Republicans. The Daily Pennsylvanian, “Why we invited Candace Owens to campus,” https://www.thedp.com/article/2019/04/candace-owens-conservative-turning-point-usa-antifa-ivy-league-upenn-philadelphia.
10.Richman, Jackson. “No, Candace Owens” blacks are actually better off today than in the 1940’s.” The Washington Examinerhttps://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/no-candace-owens-blacks-are-actually-better-off-today-than-in-the-1940s
11.Judge, Monique. “Candace Owens thinks racism is over because she has ‘never been a slave’.” https://www.theroot.com/candace-owens-thinks-racism-is-over-because-she-has-1833034080.



Sunday, April 30, 2017

100 Days of Trump, A Thousand More Days of Resistance: Who Will Define What Counts As Protest?





Photo Wendy Lynne Lee, Harrisburg, 4.29.17
Yesterday signaled the 100th day of the Trump regime. 

And while he celebrated at the Pennsylvania Farm Show Complex with a crowd of 7000, hundreds of thousands more from Harrisburg and across the country took to the streets to signal their enduring resistance to The Donald's erratic autocratic kleptocracy. 

Inside the Pennsylvania Farm Show Complex, Trump returned to performing the only stunts he knows: campaigning for an ego whose voracious appetite demands countless fawning acolytes and supplicants.

Photo Wendy Lynne Lee, 4.29.17
But while Trump is busy ravaging the media, promising the wall, lying about healthcare, refusing to hand over his tax returns, playing loads of golf at our direct expense, whining about how hard it is to be president, smooching it up with Vladimir Putin, and wallowing in the blind veneration of followers apparently prepared to follow him down the rabbit hole of poverty wages, rejected health insurance claims, a decimated environment, potential nuclear war, and climate change, millions of others are right outside protesting--every single day. 

And every day includes Trump's 100th day.

Indeed, I was very proud to march with the several hundred resistance fighters along the "free speech" zone on Forster Street in Harrisburg yesterday--an unusually hot day, and a long one. Many of these intrepid patriots had already spent their day protesting The Donald at the People's Climate march in Washington DC. 
Photo Wendy Lynne Lee, Harrisburg, 4.29.17

But we made the trek to Harrisburg because we know that our presence must be as relentless as our message: 

Photo Wendy Lynne Lee, Harrisburg, 4.29.17
Resign Mr. Trump. Take your entire incompetent, corrupt, anti-democratic cabinet with you. Do it for your country. Do it for your self-respect. Do it for your friends.

The likelihood, of course, is that Mr. Trump won't take our advice. Why would he when he and his children stand to profit to the tune of millions upon millions of dollars so long as he can keep just enough of us bamboozled for the next four years--minus 100 days?

It is, however, this prospect--the unimaginable damage this administration could create--that must inform the resistance.


Photo Wendy Lynne Lee, Harrisburg, 4.29.17
While I applaud the endurance and commitment of my fellows yesterday and everyday in what has now become the permanent protest, we must also muster equally resolute resistance to the Trump regime's readiness to criminalize civil disobedience.

Indeed, if we allow the Trumpsters to convince us that refusing to follow a police command to disperse is an act of violence--when it is not-- we will neither be taken seriously when we insist we've had enough of the administration's fascism, nor will we be able to recruit other citizens to our cause.

Refusing to move--sitting down and locking arms--is not an act of violence.

It is an act of solidarity--en masse, protecting one another, in justice.

It is a recognition that the violence is all on the other side.


Photo Wendy Lynne Lee

The denial of healthcare is an act of violence.

Bombing Yemeni children is an act of violence.

Vomiting greenhouse gases into the atmosphere is an act of violence.

Refusing to move is an act of courageous commitment to justice, to the future, and to each other. 

And the fact that the police are just doing their job is irrelevant. Of course they are. This is what they do in a police state. Fact is, our refusal to acquiesce to the violence that's becoming institutionalized as the Trump kleptocracy is a moral duty, and that is what we must say to the police as they mace us, tear gas us, arrest us, and carry us away.


Photo Wendy Lynne Lee, 4.29.17
To be clear, I'm not suggesting that yesterday's event in Harrisburg was that day.

To be even clearer in the interest of thwarting those who seek to use any excuse they can find to criminalize dissent, I do  not advocate violence--or even the appearance of it.

Photo Wendy Lynne Lee, 4.29.17
We cannot afford that. What we must keep at the forefront of our resolve is that when the police tear gas us, rubber bullet us, arrest us, and haul us away, we are simply choosing to absorb and thereby make absolutely public the violence of this fascist state. 

We symbolize the turn to tyranny of the Trump regime simply by refusing to accede to it.

And that day must come, and it must come soon. The day when we decide collectively, deliberately, and without flinching to refuse to move

That day where we must sit down, lock arms, and refuse to move. 

Where we sit down in order to stand up.

That is the moment when we personify a democracy.

That is the moment where the freedom Trump so blithely debauches as an advertising strategy becomes real and unimpeachable.

That is the moment we liberate our children.

That is the moment where we become "The People."

Wendy Lynne Lee

Photo Wendy Lynne Lee, 4.29.17

For the full set of photographs, please see: 

 https://www.flickr.com/photos/wendylynnelee/sets/72157680071230173/with/33540382533/

Wednesday, February 8, 2017

A Short Course in the "Logic" of Bigotry--And the Indivisible Will to Take a Stand Against it




Photo, Wendy Lynne Lee, 2.3.17


The following is a comment posted in the regional newspaper, The Press Enterprise, call-in feature "30 Seconds." The caller identifies herself as Evy Lysk--a frequent flier whose anti-Islamic, racist, misogynist bigotry has a long and well-established history:


"Travel ban motovates BU protest. Student calls Trump moves "reminiscent of Nazi Germany." Save yourself and drop out of college Jessa Wood. You have been brain-washed by your liberal professors. I'll tell you who's moves reminiscent of Nazi Germany. It's ISIS. To Professor M. Safa I asked you way back. "Do you support sharia law?" I never did get an answer. Miss Wood ask him is he for Sharia Law. If you don't get an answer then that should tell you he is for it. Sharia law does not give women rights--that law kills women. Miss Wendy, yes wear a hijab, but have it cover you whole face and make America beautiful again. Go Trump!"


Let's analyze Ms. Lysk's comment:


Setting aside the poor grammar, misspellings, and the fact that she does not know Professor Saracoglu's name, Ms. Lysk does offer us an opportunity to sharpen our capacity to detect fallacies, unwarranted assumptions, and very poor logic.


1. Lysk claims that BU Professors are "liberal." But she neither defines what "liberal" means, nor does she offer any evidence other than that BU community members orchestrated a very successful protest, one, in fact, whose numbers were significantly under-reported by the Press Enterprise at 100, when the actual number was far close to 300. She appears to assume that BU professors organized the protest--flatly false--and that BECAUSE they did so, BU students must be "brain-washed." This assumes, of course that BU students are children. False, and that BU professors have some sort of magical "brain-washing" power. False. BU students organized this action--with very little time and to very powerful effect. They should be applauded for their initiative and discipline. BU is fortunate indeed to have such thoughtful and committed student citizens.

Photo, Wendy Lynne Lee, 2.3.17


2. While not bothering to check his correct name, Lysk refers to BU history Professor Safa Saracoglu as a defender of Sharia Law. But like "liberal," she fails to define what that means---she simply assumes we all know it's bad. To be clear, I am neither defending nor decrying Sharia Law--but it is question-begging to assume your audience knows and understands to what you're referring without any additional definition or clarification. The overwhelming likelihood is that, given Ms. Lysk's past history and references, she is appealing to a far right wing website like Infowars or NewsMax--neither of which are remotely credible sources for, well, anything.

3. Lysk commits fallacy of appeal to ignorance: She claims that because professor Safa Saracogluu did not answer her very likely loaded question about Sharia Law, that this means he supports it. But no such conclusion follows--and absence of evidence (his not providing an answer) is NOT EVER evidence for some other claim (such as, he supports Sharia Law). This is simply Lysk's way of making an accusation for which she has no evidence whatever--and it assumes a definition of Sharia she has not provided. In short: Lysk set a trap, and Professor Saracoglu didn't take her bait.
4. She then claims that Sharia Law "does not give women rights." But rights are NOT given. Rights are recognized, and Ms Lysk's own view of women's rights is made clear in the very next line where she refuses to address me as Professor Lee--a fact she has been aware of for at least 15 years. Indeed she does refer to "Professor Safa," but not to "Professor Lee." This makes very clear her own patent sexism, a fact confirmed by her claim that I should wear a hijab to cover my "whole face." In other words, I'm a legitimate target for ridicule because, according to Lysk, I'm an ugly woman--one not deserving of the recognition of human rights. This, of course, is ad hominem: attack the person instead of their argument--and it is the common recourse of the assailant who has nothing else to offer in defense of their claim.
Photo, Wendy Lynne Lee 1.3.17


Lastly, it's very unclear what Lysk's claim is other than "Go Trump!" But that's not a claim--it's just an exclamation, one as groundless as her comment.


Nonetheless, this is precisely the kind of frenzied, irrational, and bigoted fodder that far right supremacist groups like this one feeds on. 

White Nationalist Recruitment Posters Reported on Kutztown University Campus as Part of National Campaign | Raging Chicken Press

The point is not merely that Lysk is a racist and sexist bigot--she makes that clear on many occasions in 30 Seconds. The point is that she knows she has an audience for this horse-pucky--and that audience put a fascist into the White House.

That audience would ban Muslims from entering the United States because they are Muslims--and it has a president who will utilize every nefarious means at his disposal to fulfill that promise.

That audience holds that the drowned child of the Syrian refugee is less valuable than the child of a wealthy white real estate mogul.

That audience will remain silent as the new president makes it impossible for citizens to know whether their new puppies came from puppy mills.

That audience will allow the president to sell off the country's national parks as private drilling sites to his cronies.

That audience thinks reservations are the natural condition of Native Americans, and would just as soon see the bravery and citizenship personified in the siege at Standing Rock crushed as give up driving their Jimmies.

That audience confirmed the far-right charlatan and donor Betsy DeVos for education czar, a religious ideologue poised to destroy public education and use tax dollars to rape the separation of church and state. DeVos is more concerned about Grizzlies attacking classrooms than she is about whether children become literate. Come to think of it--far better for the Trumpledites that we remain illiterate and ignorant. That's what makes DeVos perfect for education secretary.


That audience celebrates ignorance as a virtue.
That audience silenced Elizabeth Warren for daring to read a letter written by Coretta Scott King that lays out the bigotry of Jeff Sessions who, if confirmed as Attorney General of the United States, is likely to preside over the most racist and repressive voting restrictions the country has ever seen.

That audience would foul its water and air beyond reclamation in order to deny climate change.

That audience mouths "Energy Independence" and "jobs" as if these were magic-bean words--even after the evidence is made clear to them that hydrocarbon exports will weaken national security.

That audience made a CEO of Exxon-Mobil and "Friend of Putin" its Secretary of State.

That audience would rather be ruled by the autocracy/kleptocracy of a psycho-maniacal child-king via Twitter than do the hard work of actually being citizens.

That audience would allow the complete militarization of the police--making our communities effective fiefdoms of martial law.
That audience mistakes power for justice--at the absolute peril of the latter and the ultimate self-defeat of the former.

I could of course go on. But this is surely sufficient to show how important it is we remain not merely vigilant but insurgent against this tyranny.

Perhaps Lysk thinks a desiccated environment dominated by uber-wealthy white guys is a suitable life.

I do not.

And I will resist the violent illogic of the Trumpledite Autocracy until that moment sanity returns to our civic discourse and to our country.


Wendy Lynne Lee


For more photographs of the inaugural Indivisible action at Bloomsburg University, please see:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/wendylynnelee/albums/72157679824860996