Evelyn Reynolds

More stories

  • 150 Shares119 Views

    in US Politics

    Wide Awakes: the young Americans who marched the north to civil war

    History is really the only thing I can do,” Jon Grinspan says, smiling. “I worked in restaurant kitchens, I did other things, but really history is it. If I ever have to stop, I don’t know what I could do. I got straight As in history and straight Ds and Fs and every other topic. It’s like I’m a one-use tool.”He’s being modest. But he definitely does history. A Philadelphia native who studied at Sarah Lawrence in New York and got his PhD from the University of Virginia, Grinspan is now a curator of political history at the National Museum of American History in Washington DC.He’s also the author of a new book, Wide Awake: The Forgotten Force That Elected Lincoln and Spurred the Civil War, which casts a bright torchlight on to a fascinating if brief episode in 1860s America with strong echoes in the divided nation of today.The Wide Awakes were a political movement, begun in Hartford, Connecticut, around the elections of 1860, growing spontaneously and nationally as a way for young men to publicly support Republican anti-slavery candidates, most prominently Abraham Lincoln. Members wore capes, often bearing a painted eye, carried flaming torches and wore military hats and approximations of uniform as they marched in opposition to the slave-holding south.In his small Smithsonian office, after a trip to the museum stores to see a Wide Awake torch, the last coffee cup used by Abraham Lincoln and other precious relics, Grinspan describes how he found his way to the Wide Awakes.“I always looked down on the civil war as a teenager, because it seemed so cookie-cutter and kind of hokey, very un-human and dry. And then in college we started reading Eric Foner” – the dean of civil war-era scholars – “and he made the factions in 19th-century America look human, kind of tribal. I got into it from there.”As a curator, Grinspan is responsible for telling the story of US democracy – hence the giant cardboard pencil in the corner, emblazoned with the words “Write In Ralph Nader”. As it happens, the evocation of the third-party candidate who maybe cost Al Gore the presidency in 2000 points to one of Grinspan’s driving interests: turnout.When he learned how many Americans voted in 19th-century elections, particularly around the civil war, “that made me want to find more. Turnout over 80%? What’s the story behind it? And that kind of guided me into trying to find the human stories, and from there it just seemed so exciting.View image in fullscreen“Also, growing up in the 1990s and early 2000s, politics seemed so dry and tame in America. Turnout was lower in the 90s than at any time since the 1920s. So looking back to the 19th century, when democracy seems so much more vibrant and engaging and conflicted, I got into this world that was completely different. And then over the last 20 years, our world has come to look much more heated, for mostly negative reasons, so it feels like I got into something really niche that has become somehow relevant.”‘Guys with torches in the night’Grinspan found the Wide Awakes “at grad school, in need of an idea for my thesis. I got so into it I essentially failed all my classes the first year. They threatened to throw me out, but I just felt the Wide Awake story wasn’t being told and I wanted to tell it.“So I got pretty fixated on it and I submitted a piece to the Journal of American History. And then, right when I was on the cusp of being kicked out, the Journal said, ‘We’re gonna run this in our Lincoln Bicentennial, which is 2009.’ From there, I had some great professors who said, ‘Just be ruthless in doing the work you want to do.’ And, pat myself on the back, it turned into a career, right?”Right. The Wide Awakes are known but they flourished briefly, before a civil war in which most were subsumed by the Union army. Grinspan has room to move.“There’s a little scene in the preface of this book where a professor turns to his computer, goes on a newspaper database, plugs in ‘Wide Awake’ and gets 15,000 hits for 1860,” Grinspan says. “And yet the group had been so neglected.“It usually gets a paragraph in good books on 1860. They’ll describe Wide Awake marches somewhere, maybe around the Chicago Republican convention in May. They’re outside. But then you’ll get 35 pages on the fight for the Republican nomination and you’ll get a biography of Edward Bates [Lincoln’s attorney general] at 15 pages. But you have this mass movement, hundreds of thousands of people? And I’m gonna get a paragraph?”Grinspan thinks some neglect of the Wide Awakes comes from “a little bit of elitism”, history focused on great leaders. But “the Wide Awakes aren’t entirely a pretty story. And after the war, it’s much easier to valorise Lincoln than to focus on the guys with torches in the night.”After the war, and Lincoln’s assassination, the Reconstruction years saw Ulysses S Grant, the general who became president, face down the Ku Klux Klan, torch-bearing night-raiders who terrorised Black people in the southern states.But the Wide Awakes had a dark side of their own. Like the Republican party, they emerged from a primordial soup of anti-immigrant feeling.“These white Anglo-Saxon Protestant Republicans were pretty hostile to the Irish Democrats and specifically Catholics,” Grinspan says. “The Wide Awakes in the 1850s are a nativist club. They are in nativist fights in Brooklyn, in Boston. You see accounts from Irish immigrants saying, ‘We stayed away from that group over there wearing the white hats.’ Because a ‘wide awake’ hat was the symbol of the group. And then the Wide Awakes in 1860, they take the same name just four or five years later. If you had started a movement called the Tea Party in 2015, people would have had associations. It’s a lot of the same people. They’re cheered on by the same newspapers like the Hartford Courant, which is massively anti-Irish.“But they grow out of it. I think they find a better conspiracy to fight.”By 1860, the southern grip on Washington was strong. The slave-owning states resisted change through an unrepresentative Congress and a supreme court tilted their way. The parallels with Washington today are strong, though labels have changed and it is Republicans who now pursue minority rule.“You look at the behavior of the slave-owning elites and they are doing everything they can to control Congress and control the supreme court, to determine the future of the nation,” Grinspan says. “It’s kind of funny that we hate conspiracy theories, but every once in a while one is accurate.”Another feature of Grinspan’s book that echoes strongly today concerns southern reactions to the Wide Awakes, which ranged from dismissive to angry to frightened. Particularly scarifying was the presence – remarkable enough in the segregated north – of Black men among the torch-bearing marchers.“John Mercer Langston was as far as I know the first Black Wide Awake. He starts the club in Oberlin, Ohio, then later becomes a Reconstruction congressman, a really prominent figure. I knew when I started work on the Wide Awakes there were Black men involved, but I didn’t realise how compelling this story was.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“A lot were fugitives from slavery. They connect the dots to underground abolitionists in Boston, who were fighting slave catchers in the 1850s. They come out publicly with the Wide Awakes, marching in uniform, 144 African Americans with 10,000 white Wide Awakes. They’re not just claiming public space or claiming partisan identity: they’re in military uniforms, a tiny minority in a sea of white people. It’s a bold move.“And those same guys, when the war breaks out, they organise the home guard and then they organise the 54th Massachusetts Regiment, the most prominent African American fighting force in the war. I see the Wide Awakes at a turning point there.“And in the south and the Democratic north, people go crazy when they learn about Black Wide Awakes. They start posting disinformation broadsides for Black Wide Awake events, real events in Pittsburgh and Chicago where we know there were no African Americans, just to gin up anger and get people to vote Democratic.”It all sounds familiar, evocative of rightwing fear and anger in summer 2020, when protests for racial justice spread and Trumpists insisted shadowy, black-clad anti-fascists, “Antifa”, threatened chaos and bloodshed.Rightly, Grinspan is wary of pat journalistic comparisons. Generously, he says the Wide Awakes were alarming to many.“After the 1850s, when there’s so much chaos in America, so much street fighting and Bleeding Kansas and the Know Nothing gangs, people marching in order, in silence, sends a political message. It’s saying, ‘We actually are the people in this republic right now who can organise things. The Democrats can’t even stay together as a party and we have matching uniforms.’ They’re not armed but it’s not a big jump from torches to muskets, as they always say.”View image in fullscreenLincoln’s victory in 1860 was followed by civil war but it also caused the Wide Awakes to fade from the scene. Members wanted to escort the new president to Washington but despite knowing of threats to his life, Lincoln turned down the offer.“If he brings a bodyguard to Washington,” Grinspan says, “if he has 5,000 or 100,000 Republicans in uniform come with him, he drives away Democrats, he drives away Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, slave-owning border states.”Prompted, Grinspan makes an apt comparison.“I mean, January 6, you can see how you can rile up your supporters,” he says, of the day in 2021 when Donald Trump sent supporters, most in what passed for Maga uniform, some in tactical gear, to attack Congress itself.“When Mussolini marches on Rome, he brings his blackshirts with him. There are so many examples of a leader mobilising people this way. And Lincoln has the self-restraint not to do that. He puts it out through John Hay, his young secretary, to the young Wide Awakes in Springfield, Illinois: ‘Go to Washington as individuals. Don’t come as a company. If you want to come to the inauguration, that’s fine.’“But there are still secret Wide Awakes in the crowd and they have the uniforms on.”‘People keep finding objects’Grinspan has ideas for his next book – which will be his fourth – and will continue to engage the public at the Smithsonian. Nonetheless, the publication of Wide Awake is a culmination, of sorts, of 17 years of consuming work.“At first I felt I discovered something no one else knew about,” he says. “And then I thought, ‘I’m done.’ But people kept coming to me with more Wide Awakes stuff. I wouldn’t have written this book five or 10 years ago but people keep finding objects. I still find references in diaries I read. And there was a sort of neo-Wide Awake movement in 2020,” around protests for racial justice.It seems Grinspan will never truly let go of the Wide Awakes. They’re part of his job, after all. Downstairs, in the conservation department, we approach another relic, spread out to be viewed with care.View image in fullscreenIt is a Wide Awake cape, owned and used by George P Holt of New Hampshire then stored in an attic for 100 years or more. Originally bright white with violet lettering, it has faded and frayed with time. But the painted eye, arranged to stare from the wearer’s breast, is as piercing as on the day it was made.
    Wide Awake is published in the US and in the UK by Bloomsbury More

  • 200 Shares109 Views

    in US Politics

    Could new US sanctions threaten future of West Bank settlements? | Emma Graham-Harrison and Quique Kierszenbaum

    Escalating US sanctions on violent settlers, initially taken as a mostly political rebuke to extremists, are now seen by some inside Israel as a potential threat to the financial viability of all Israeli settlements and companies in the occupied West Bank.The Biden administration’s new controls on a handful of men and organisations linked to attacks on Palestinian civilians, first announced in February then expanded twice in March and April, have generally been treated in Israel and beyond more as a humiliating public censure of a close ally than as a major political shift.But experts from across Israel’s political spectrum say this underestimates the ferocity with which the US implements its financial controls and the scope of the new sanctions framework.They told the Observer that the relatively small list of sanctions targets in West Bank settlements could still prompt financial institutions to draw back from offering services to any people or companies based there, because of fears they could accidentally facilitate illegal transactions.And while sanctions so far have focused only on violent individuals and small groups, a new executive order gives the US a very broad remit to target any person or entity “responsible for or complicit in … threaten[ing] the peace, security, or stability of the West Bank”.That explicitly includes politicians who support or enable them, stating actions subject to sanctions include “directing, enacting, implementing, enforcing or failing to enforce policies”, wording that could be used to target people at the heart of Israel’s government.“Israel must do more to stop violence against civilians in the West Bank and hold accountable those responsible,” US secretary of state Antony Blinken said in a statement that linked the sanctions to supporting the creation of a Palestinian state.“The United States will continue to take actions to advance [its] foreign policy objectives … including the viability of a two-state solution.”Many banks are already re-assessing their dealings with the West Bank after a warning from FinCEN, the US government’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, said Shuki Friedman, a law scholar, global sanctions consultant and former head of Israel’s Iran sanctions programme.“Even though the [US executive] order is sanctioning only few individuals, in practice it’s actually casting a shadow on all activities that come through the West Bank,” he said.“It delegitimises them in a way that if you’re a financial institution, insurance company, institutional investor, hedge fund, anything to do with these activities, you will be cautious about it. You take a step back. This is the real meaning of this order.”Michael Sfard, one of Israel’s leading human rights lawyers, initially saw the order as a “political message” from the Biden administration as it tried to respond to voter pressure over its support for Israel as the war in Gaza raged. Nearly three months on, he believes the sanctions are potentially the most consequential shift in US policy for many years, one that could even halt the creeping annexation of the West Bank.“The sanction regime could redraw the Green Line,” Sfard said, referring to Israel’s internationally recognised boundaries from the end of the 1948 Arab-Israeli war.The Yesha Council, which lobbies the government on behalf of settlers, effectively acknowledged the sanctions reflected a policy shift which could threaten their future, even as it dismissed the bans as “absurd” and said they had “zero impact”.“This isn’t truly about a few individuals,” a spokeswoman said. “This is about foreign governments, led by the Biden administration, sanctioning and potentially sanctioning any Israeli who doesn’t share their vision of a so-called ‘two-state solution’.”The settlement movement began soon after the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem were seized in the six-day war in 1967. Its goal is to take areas officially under temporary occupation, which were supposed to form the heart of an independent Palestine, and build communities and roads that would weave them irrevocably into the fabric of Israel.View image in fullscreenAlthough illegal under international law, there are now 500,000 Israelis living in West Bank settlements, about 5% of the population.“The Green Line doesn’t exist in the Israeli political system, in Israeli economic life, in transportation and infrastructure. You can live and do business in the settlements without any disruption,” Sfard said.But if the US expands the list of sanctions targets to include businesses linked to violent settlers it could become impossible for Israeli banks to keep serving businesses and communities in the West Bank.In the wake of the first wave of sanctions, Israeli institutions came under domestic pressure to keep serving the targets. The public that didn’t understand that if the banks wanted to operate in a global system that runs on dollars, they had no choice about complying with American orders.Other countries like Russia and Iran have partially shifted their trade to other allies and rebuilt finance systems after coming under US sanctions, but Israel has no real alternatives.“These sanctions could potentially force Israelis to make a choice, between supporting settler extremists and keeping a connection to the international financial system,” Sfard said. “If they have to chose between a weekend in Rome or shopping in Oxford Street and supporting settlers, I know what many will chose.”Key to the potential impact of the new US regime are “secondary sanctions”, which are imposed not for doing things the US considers criminal – in the case of the initial sanctions list, attacking Palestinian civilians – but for helping people and companies on that list evade the bans.Anyone who makes a transaction for someone under sanctions, on purpose or unintentionally, could join them on the US blacklist.“Very quickly once you have a scattered number of designated individuals and entities the whole West Bank settlement world becomes a minefield,” said Sfard. “The banking system doesn’t want to risk being charged with providing any kind of support to designated individuals. So every attempt to do business means reviewing whether you might stumble on a risk of secondary sanctions.”Not everyone in Israel thinks the sanctions are a game changer. Human rights activist Yehuda Shaul welcomed the executive order but said if the US wants to halt violence it needs to target funding more directly.“One shouldn’t only go after violent individuals,” he said, pointing out that young men attacking Palestinians are not managing the broader political project. “At 25 I didn’t have the financial capacity to build a house on hilltop with road and utilities and 500 cows. Someone is funding them.”Others including Yehuda Shaffer, former deputy state attorney and head of Israel’s financial intelligence unit, believe Israeli banks can stick to very targeted enforcement that will have few wider repercussions.He described the sanctions as “lip service” from a US administration under pressure. “It looks to me like an attempt to give a sense of even-handed policy, even though to be truthful, the Americans are very much supporting Israel in this war.”In putting Israel in company with rogue states like North Korea, and some of America’s most bitter international enemies, the sanctions are humiliating.“It is embarrassing and somewhat disappointing,” said Shaffer. “The sanctions suggest somehow that the Israeli rule of law is not up to American expectations.”But he thinks the impact will be limited with banks strictly enforcing controls on the individuals and organisations named by the US, while continuing to serve the West Bank more broadly.Even as he sees cause for hope in tempering violence, Sfard, says it is early days for the programme. “Even if the US means business on sanctions now, it might not stay the course,” he said.“When trying to introduce new measures to pressure Israel on this issue, it is better not to introduce them than to do it and fail to have any impact, as that gives a sense of power to settlers.” More

  • 138 Shares119 Views

    in US Politics

    Katie Britt proposes federal database to collect data on pregnant people

    Katie Britt, the Republican US senator from Alabama best known for delivering a widely ridiculed State of the Union speech in March, marked the run-up to Mother’s Day on Sunday by introducing a bill to create a federal database to collect data on pregnant people.The More Opportunities for Moms to Succeed (Moms) act proposes to establish an online government database called “pregnancy.gov” listing resources related to pregnancy, including information about adoption agencies and pregnancy care providers, except for those that provide abortion-related services.The bill specifically forbids any entity that “performs, induces, refers for, or counsels in favor of abortions” from being listed in the database, which would in effect eliminate swaths of OB-GYN services and sexual health clinics across the country.The website would direct users to enter their personal data and contact information, which government officials may then “use to conduct outreach via phone or email” for additional resources.Britt introduced the legislation on Thursday alongside two co-sponsors: fellow Republican senators Marco Rubio of Florida and Kevin Cramer of North Dakota.In a statement, Britt said the bill was proof that “you can absolutely be pro-life, pro-woman, and pro-family at the same time”, adding that the legislation “advances a comprehensive culture of life” for mothers and children to “live their American Dreams”.Critics have noted that the database of “pregnancy support centers” would provide misleading information in an effort to dissuade women from seeking abortions. Axios noted that the bill would also provide grants to anti-abortion non-profit organizations.The state of Alabama, which Britt represents, already has one of the strictest abortion bans in the country. After the US supreme court eliminated federal abortion rights by overturning Roe v Wade in 2022, the state banned abortion except in cases where there is a serious health risk to the mother.Britt’s party is in the minority in the US Senate and has only a slim majority in the House. Her bill would need to be approved in both chambers and then be signed by Democratic president Joe Biden to become law, giving her proposal virtually no chance of making meaningful progress in the legislative process as-is.The speech Britt gave to rebut Biden’s State of the Union was panned by both parties after she invoked a story about child rape that she implied had resulted from the president’s handling of immigration at the US’s southern border. The abuse actually occurred years earlier in Mexico while a Republican was president, George W Bush.Britt’s delivery – which oscillated between smiling and sounding as if she were on the verge of tears – was also a target of ridicule, though she defended her performance. More

  • 138 Shares159 Views

    in US Politics

    Clarence Thomas: Washington is a ‘hideous place’ of ‘nastiness and lies’

    Clarence Thomas told attendees at a judicial conference Friday that he and his wife have faced “nastiness” and “lies” over the last several years and decried Washington DC as a “hideous place”.The US supreme court justice spoke at a conference attended by judges, attorneys and other court personnel in the 11th circuit judicial conference, which hears federal cases from Alabama, Florida and Georgia. He made the comments pushing back on his critics in response to a question about working in a world that seems mean-spirited.“I think there’s challenges to that,” Thomas said. “We’re in a world and we – certainly my wife and I the last two or three years it’s been – just the nastiness and the lies, it’s just incredible.“But you have some choices. You don’t get to prevent people from doing horrible things or saying horrible things. But one, you have to understand and accept the fact that they can’t change you, unless you permit that.”Thomas has faced criticisms about accepting luxury trips from a Republican donor without reporting them. Last year, he maintained that he didn’t have to report the trips paid for by one of “our dearest friends”.His wife, conservative activist Ginni Thomas, has faced criticism for using her Facebook page to amplify unsubstantiated claims of corruption by Joe Biden as the Democrat seeks a second term as president.He did not discuss the content of the criticisms directly, but said that “reckless” people in Washington will “bomb your reputation”.“They don’t bomb you necessarily, but they bomb your reputation or your good name or your honor,” Thomas said. “And that’s not a crime. But they can do as much harm that way.”During the appearance, Thomas was asked questions by US district judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, one of his former law clerks, who was later appointed to the federal bench. During his hour-long appearance, the longest-serving justice on the court discussed a wide range of topics including the lessons of his grandfather, his friendship with former colleagues, and his belief that court writings and discussions should be more accessible for “regular people”.Thomas, who has spent most of his working life in Washington DC, also discussed his dislike of it.“I think what you are going to find, and especially in Washington, people pride themselves on being awful. It is a hideous place as far as I’m concerned,” Thomas said.Thomas said that it is one of the reasons he and his wife enjoy traveling in their recreational vehicle.“You get to be around regular people who don’t pride themselves in doing harmful things, merely because they have the capacity to do it or because they disagree,” Thomas said.An RV used by Thomas has also become a source of controversy. Senate Democrats in October issued a report saying that most of the $267,000 loan obtained by Thomas to buy a high-end motorcoach appears to have been forgiven.Thomas did not discuss the court’s high-profile caseload.The justice said he believed it is important to use language in court rulings so the law is accessible to the average person.“The regular people I think are being disenfranchised sometimes by the way that we talk about cases,” Thomas said.He wasn’t the only justice making a speaking appearance on Friday.Brett Kavanaugh said on Friday that US history shows court decisions unpopular in their time later can become part of the “fabric of American constitutional law”.The justice was speaking at a conference attended by judges, attorneys and other court personnel in the fifth US circuit court of appeals, which covers Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi and is one of the most conservative circuits. More

  • 163 Shares109 Views

    in US Politics

    Barron Trump will not be a delegate at Republican National Convention after all

    Donald Trump’s youngest son, Barron Trump, won’t be serving as a Florida delegate to the Republican National Convention after all, his mother’s office said on Friday.“While Barron is honored to have been chosen as a delegate by the Florida Republican party, he regretfully declines to participate due to prior commitments,” Melania Trump’s office said.The chair of the Republican party of Florida, Evan Power, had said on Wednesday that the 18-year-old high school senior would serve as one of 41 at-large delegates from Florida to the national gathering, where the GOP is set to officially nominate his father as its presidential candidate for the November general election.Power did not respond to a request for comment on Friday.In an interview earlier on Friday on Kayal and Company on Philadelphia’s Talk Radio 1210 WPHT, Donald Trump was asked about Barron joining the Florida delegation. “He’s really been a great student. And he does like politics,” Trump said. “It’s sort of funny. He’ll tell me sometimes: ‘Dad, this is what you have to do.’”Barron Trump has been largely kept out of the public eye, but he turned 18 on March and is graduating from high school next week. The judge overseeing Donald Trump’s hush-money trial in New York said there would be no court on 17 May so that the former president could attend his son’s graduation.Donald Trump Jr, Eric Trump and Trump’s youngest daughter, Tiffany, are part of the Florida delegation to the convention taking place in Milwaukee from 15 July to 18 July. More

  • 113 Shares199 Views

    in US Politics

    Poor reviews, missing product: firms’ anti-woke offerings soak consumers

    Rightwing companies are attempting to “bilk” conservative Americans by pushing “anti-woke” products including razors, chocolate and floor cleaner, an analyst said, as the Daily Wire news outlet launched a “reclaim masculinity” multivitamin.The launch of the “manly green vitamin capsules”, which cost 10 times more than Centrum-branded multivitamins, fits into an emerging pattern of companies selling what they claim are masculine products in reaction to big brands allegedly embracing liberal values.In an article announcing its multivitamin, the Daily Wire asked readers if they wanted to “buy your men’s health products from a company that partners with drag queens and supports radical organizations that push gender procedures on children”. It did not name any particular company, but the “us v them” dynamic used by the Daily Wire and others is clear.Buying and consuming the multivitamin will help with that, the Responsible Man website says. It adds that the product, which comes in “manly green vitamin capsules”, “may be the finest Men’s Multivitamin on the market”.One of the best-known of the rightwing products, Jeremy’s Razors, was launched by the Daily Wire, a rightwing news operation, in 2022, while last year a Georgia man launched Ultra Right Beer, a rightwing alternative to Bud Light, after the latter ran a limited ad campaign with Dylan Mulvaney, a trans activist.Both products have received poor reviews, but that hasn’t stopped the Daily Wire from entering into the world of vitamins.“As a man, you have people relying on you and the world conspires to see you fail,” claims the Responsible Man multivitamin website, which was launched by the Daily Wire at the start of May.“With so much chaos and uncertainty, it’s crucial to take charge of your life and responsibilities.”As Media Matters reported, the site is promoting its multivitamin as a response to what it calls a “woke mind virus”, which it vaguely claims is infecting US corporations.This isn’t the Daily Wire’s first foray into selling rightwing products. Its co-founder and co-CEO Jeremy Boreing launched Jeremy’s Razors in 2022, after the razor company Harry’s said it would stop advertising on the Daily Wire.Going back further, brands such as Black Rifle Coffee have championed their conservative leanings to appeal to Republican-supporting consumers, while PublicSquare – like Amazon, but for people who “respect traditional American values” – has been backed by Donald Trump Jr.“What’s newer, I think, is we’ve seen from the Daily Wire in particular a sort of range of issues in which the media outlet side is kind of creating demand for particular products by tearing down particular companies,” said Matt Gertz, senior fellow at Media Matters, a progressive watchdog group.“And then on the business side, they’re creating a supply of products that they can endorse and sell, so that people can buy them instead.”Jeremy’s Razors has continually received poor reviews – “Absolutely terrible … Would rather use products from a woke company than rip my skin off with Jeremy’s Razors,” one person wrote on the company’s Facebook page in March – but that hasn’t stopped the company, and what seemingly began as a fit of pique has since evolved into a whole range of Jeremy’s products.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThere’s an all-purpose cleaner: “Sure to wipe out woke,” the blurb says; a shampoo: “Softens hair, not masculinity”; and a hand soap: “You’re not responsible for woke culture, and you don’t have to participate in it either. Wash your hands of it all.”“They’re attacking existing men’s health companies, saying that they can’t be trusted and are bad. And then they are providing you instead with an alternative,” Gertz said.“You just have to give them money and they will give you a product that I guess you can feel more politically comfortable with. Effectively what we see on the right is they create a very dedicated audience and then they bilk them for all they’re worth.”Notably, with many of the rightwing companies, commitment to non-woke causes comes at a price. Ultra Right beer retails at $45 for 24 beers, about twice the price of the liberal Bud Light. The Daily Wire’s multivitamin costs $39.99 for a 30-day supply – about 10 times the price of Centrum multivitamins.There’s a risk for the customer, too, even aside from the irritation allegedly caused by Jeremy’s Razors.Ultra Right Beer earned an F rating from the Better Business Bureau in January, after it received 175 complaints in six months – mostly for not delivering beer people had paid for.“​​Ordered 6 months ago. Tried to call no answer, emailed several times, no reply. Complete disgraceful fraud,” one person wrote on the Ultra Right Beer Facebook page.“I was duped!” More

  • 138 Shares189 Views

    in US Politics

    Morning After the Revolution review: a bad faith attack on ‘woke’

    Writing on Substack in 2021, Nellie Bowles described some of the less attractive qualities that motivated her work as a reporter: “I love the warm embrace of the social media scrum. One easy path toward the top of the list … is communal outrage. Toss something (someone) into that maw, and it’s like fireworks. I have mastered that game. For a couple of years, that desire for attention … propelled me more than almost anything else. I began to see myself less as a mirror and more as a weapon.”Bowles is married to Bari Weiss, a former editor on the opinion section of the New York Times whose furious resignation letter earned her encomiums from Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and Donald Trump Jr.But Bowles wrote that her decision to convert to the faith of her Jewish wife had actually softened her approach to journalism: “I want to cultivate my empathy not my cruelty. I am trying to go back to being closer to the mirror than the knife.”However, her new book, Morning After the Revolution: Dispatches from the Wrong Side of History, is dazzling proof she is completely incapable of changing her approach to her profession.Bowles is a former tech reporter for outlets including the Guardian and the New York Times. For many reporters, the decision to write a book comes from wanting to dig deeper into a particular subject, or a desire for freedom from the restrictions of one’s former employer. For Bowles, longform turns out to be the chance to jettison the standards of accuracy of her previous employers in favor of the wildest possible generalizations.Here are a few fine examples: “The best feminists of my generation were born with dicks.” This is the author’s jaunty description of trans women, who, she informs us, are “the best, boldest” and “fiercest feminists”, who unfortunately – according to her – have concluded “that to be a woman is, in general, disgusting”.On the ninth page of Bowles’s introduction, meanwhile, readers realize how much we must have underestimated the universal impact of the movement to Defund the Police. Did you know, for example, that “if you want to be part of the movement for universal healthcare … you cannot report critically on #DefundThePolice”?Bowles identifies a similar problem with marriage equality: “If you want to be part of a movement that supports gay marriage … then you can’t question whatever disinformation is spread that week.”The wilder the idea, the more likely Bowles is to include it, almost always in a way that can never be checked. To prove the vile effect of wokeness on the entire news business, she informs us that colleagues “at major news organizations” have “told me roads and birds are racist. Voting is racist. Exercise is super-racist. Worrying about plastic in the water is transphobic.” And a “cohort” took it “as gospel when a nice white lady said that being on time and objectivity were white values, and this was a progressive belief”.Writing about a tent city in Echo Park, Los Angeles, Bowles explains why nobody living there was interested in a free hotel room: “Residents could not do drugs in the rooms. And the rooms were, of course, indoors. People high on meth and fentanyl prefer being outdoors, with no rules, with their friends.”Predictably, the book reaches a whole new level of viciousness when it reveals Bowles’ attitude toward trans people.Intelligent people know three essential facts about the debate over whether children under 18 should have access to hormones or surgery to make their bodies conform to the gender in which they think they belong.First, a large majority of trans people of all ages never take hormones or get surgery. Second, nearly all of those who do choose to use medicine to alter their bodies report a dramatic improvement in personal happiness. Third, a very small number of those who have undergone surgery or taken hormones to block puberty do change their minds and opt for de-transition.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionNaturally, Bowles mentions none of those facts. According to her narrative, “the transition from Black Lives Matter to Trans Lives Matter was seamless … I don’t think this was planned or orchestrated. The movement simply pivoted.”No mention, of course, of polls conducted by Christian nationalists and their allies which determined that the best new fundraising tool would be an all-out attack on trans people, including the denial of their very existence, as well as the introduction of hundreds of bills in state legislatures across the country to make this tiny minority as miserable as possible.Instead, Bowles wants us to believe the debate is dominated by websites you might not have heard of, like Fatherly, which asserts: “All kids, regardless of their gender identity, start to understand their own gender typically by the age of 18 to 24 months.” One parent who appeared on PBS in 2023 is equally important in Bowles’s book, because she said her child started to let her parents know “she was transgender really before she could even speak”.Needless to say, Bowles is horrified that as America became more aware of the existence of trans people, the number of clinics available to treat them grew to 60 by 2023. Then she makes another remarkable claim: “If a parent resists” medical changes requested by a child, “they can and do lose custody of their child.”Is that true? I have no idea. If Bowles had written that sentence in the Times or the Guardian, her editor would most certainly have requested some sort of proof. Fortunately for her – but unfortunately for us – her publisher, a new Penguin Random House imprint, Thesis, does not appear to impose any outdated fact-checking requirements. The only visible standard here is, if it’s shocking, we’ll print it.
    Morning After the Revolution is published in the US by Thesis More

  • 150 Shares169 Views

    in US Politics

    Kerry Kennedy on the family political split: ‘There’s so much at stake’

    Every Christmas Kerry Kennedy makes a book for her numerous relatives. “It has at least one photograph of every single member of my extremely enormous family,” she says. “And yes, Bobby is in the book.”“Bobby” refers to her brother, Robert Kennedy Jr, a hopeful sign that the sibling bond will survive an oncoming storm. Robert is running as an independent candidate for US president in November’s election. Kerry is one of at least 15 members of the Kennedy clan who recently endorsed Joe Biden instead.Robert’s long history of promoting vaccine conspiracy theories, and associating with racists and antisemites, has been a source of anguish for what was once seen as America’s equivalent of a royal family. They have been at pains to distance themselves from the 70-year-old’s dangerously fringe, anti-scientific views.Last year Jack Schlossberg, the sole grandson of former president John F Kennedy, denounced Robert for “trading in on Camelot, celebrity, conspiracy theories and conflict for personal gain and fame” and described the candidacy as an “embarrassment”.With Robert polling at about 10% with potential to have an impact in crucial swing states, the Kennedy family has closed ranks around Biden, who keeps a bust of one-time presidential hopeful Robert Kennedy Sr in the Oval Office. Last month they joined the president at a campaign stop in Philadelphia to publicly back him against Donald Trump, whom they cast as a dire threat to American democracy.Robert responded on social media that his family was “divided in our opinions but united in our love for each other”.View image in fullscreenKerry, 64, the seventh of Ethel and Robert Kennedy Sr’s 11 children, recalls in an interview that the collective decision involved “a lot of texts and emails and phone calls and ‘let’s do that’”.Several notable members of the dynasty did not endorse, including Caroline Kennedy, the US ambassador to Australia, and the non-profit leader Maria Shriver, which the Biden campaign said was due to their non-political professional roles. Kerry adds: “Then there’s my brother Bobby and one cousin but 100% of everybody else endorsed Joe Biden.”How did it feel to go against her own brother? After a pause, the human rights activist and lawyer says by phone from the family home in Hyannis Port, Massachusetts: “I feel like there’s so much at stake. When Daddy ran for president, in part of his speech he said, ‘I cannot stand aside,’ and that’s how I feel. I just feel there’s so much at stake.“I’ve spent the last 40 years working on civil rights domestically and international human rights and trying to hold governments accountable for abusing people, particularly members of the press, and I can’t let this go. We cannot have Trump in for four more years. And Biden is great. He has accomplished so much more as president, which is wild considering the Congress that he’s had to work with.”She points to historic legislation that Biden signed to tackle the climate crisis and slash child poverty, and to an economy that has made a better post-pandemic recovery than China, Europe or any other major competitor.View image in fullscreen“Most Americans are doing a lot better than they were and Trump would be a disaster for us. I felt, and my siblings and my cousins all felt, that what’s at stake here is our democracy, our freedom. our fight for the middle class and all that means that Joe Biden must be re-elected.”Robert, an environmental lawyer, has pushed bogus assertions about the dangers of vaccines, linked antidepressants to school shootings and claimed last year that the coronavirus was “targeted to attack Caucasians and Black people” and that “the people who are most immune are Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese” (he later said his remarks were misinterpreted).But Kerry, president of the organisation Robert F Kennedy Human Rights, is reluctant to comment on her brother’s public statements or policy agenda, citing the impossibility of an independent candidate breaking Democrats and Republicans’ stranglehold on the electoral college.“I don’t think that matters because he can’t win,” she says matter-of-factly. “It’s irrelevant what he says about any given subject. It’s a nonentity. He can’t get 270 electoral votes. The only question is not where he stands on a particular issue but what’s his impact on the campaign, and that to me is dangerous because this election, just like every other presidential, is going to be razor thin and we can’t afford to lose one vote – not one.“We need every voter who’s thinking of voting for a third party to vote instead for Biden because otherwise it’s like you’re throwing a vote to Trump and that’s a disaster.”View image in fullscreenRobert, initially challenged Biden in the party primary election before running as an independent, could use his last name’s lingering Democratic mystique to siphon support from the president. A super political action committee supporting his campaign produced a TV advert during the Super Bowl that relied heavily on imagery from John F Kennedy’s 1960 presidential run. (Robert apologised if the commercial “caused anyone in my family pain”.)skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBut there is some evidence that he might hurt Trump more. A Quinnipiac survey last month found that Robert drew support from 12% of voters who supported Trump in a two-way contest, compared with 7% from Biden voters. An NBC poll found that Robert attracted 15% of Trump supporters compared with 7% of those of who backed Biden.Kerry, formerly married to the Democrat Andrew Cuomo, an ex-governor of New York, responds: “That’s kind of irrelevant because I’m delighted for him to take every single vote he can from Trump but we want all those votes that would go to Biden to go to Biden because these margins are so close that we can’t afford to lose them to Bobby or anyone else.”Trump has been transparent about his ambitions for an imperial presidency. In a recent Time magazine interview, he said he was open to using the national guard to deport undocumented migrants and allowing states to monitor women’s pregnancies so they know if they receive an abortion.Kerry offers a nightmarish vision of what a second Trump term would look like. “He has said he’ll be dictator on day one, that he’ll suspend the constitution, that he will use the justice department to go after his enemies, that he will have a litmus test for the thousands of government workers on loyalty to Donald Trump and that loyalty test will be: was the election stolen or not? If you say the election was not stolen, you no longer have a government job.“It would be generational bias on courts, not just the supreme court but courts across the board. He’s said he will create massive labour camps and forced detention centres for immigrants and he would put not just the police but the armed forces in our streets in order to enforce that.“A Muslim ban on day one. It would be a disaster for global warming, as he’s indicated. It would be a disaster for women’s rights and women’s control over their bodies. You’d see more librarians going to prison for allowing books to be on bookshelves.”At age 43, Kerry’s uncle was the youngest person ever elected to the presidency. Her father, a former attorney general, was just 42 when he was assassinated while running for the White House in 1968. There could be no greater contrast with Biden, who at 81 is the oldest president in history. Kerry, who has spent time with him twice in the past two months, offers her assessment.View image in fullscreen“He physically does not have the grace of a 20-year-old but in terms of his mind, if you talk to him about any number of issues – and I’m not talking about what do you think about Gaza and the Middle East or Ukraine in general or poverty, I’m talking about what do you think about private prison systems that imprison Black youth in Louisiana? – he will talk to you about that.“And then he’ll tell you about three different bills by name. ‘Well, HR 2732 would address that but the Republicans don’t want it for this reason and they have a congressman in Alabama who’s against it for this reason but there’s a chance of changing it on these two paragraphs.’ I mean, it is unbelievable. That is a guy who knows what’s going on. That is my experience.”That is why, Kerry insists, voters must stay focused on the binary choice before them and not get distracted by third-party candidates: Jill Stein, Cornel West – and Robert Kennedy Jr. “I disagree with him on a range of the issues which I’ve discussed with him and been quite public about,” she says.“But the point here is not a sister and a brother or a family or anything like that. It is what’s the future of our country and what’s the future of our world and do we have a democracy in the United States and do we have a liberal world order or not? That’s what’s going on here. Who cares about two siblings? It’s absurd.” More