US politics

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares156 Views

      in US Politics

      John Oliver on Signal leak: ‘Deeply unserious people doing deeply stupid things’

      by

      John Oliver ripped Donald Trump’s White House for the ongoing scandal of Signalgate, in which high-level administration officials used the messaging app for military strikes in Yemen, accidentally including the Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg in the chat.“The White House tried to do damage control all this week, from playing semantic games of whether they were technically war plans to hinting Goldberg somehow got himself onto the chat, something undercut by literally showing Michael Waltz, the US national security adviser, adding Goldberg in,” the Last Week Tonight host explained on Sunday evening. “And by the way, all of this was in the run up to airstrikes that are estimated to have killed up to 46 civilians on one day, which should be a scandal in and of itself.“And it’s grotesque to see the glib response in the chat afterward,” he added, noting that one official responded to the news of a collapsed building – and civilian death – with a fist emoji, American flag emoji and fire emoji.“And look, those clearly aren’t the right emojis to send after a bombing because the right emojis are no emojis,” Oliver said.“This is something of a motif for this administration: deeply unserious people doing deeply stupid things with massively serious consequence,” he added.Oliver encouraged others to “push back hard” against the administration’s behavior, translating the sentiment into “the language that they seem to prefer” – the middle finger emoji, peach, heart and American flag. Or as Oliver put it: “Go fuck yourselves, assholes. Love, America.”In his main segment, Oliver looked into the history and use of Taser stun guns by US law enforcement. The weapon is as ubiquitous in cop shows as in real life – they are now carried by an estimated 400,000 American patrol officers. “Which is obviously great news for the company that makes them,” said Oliver. That would be Axon, which has a market cap of over $40bn.Axon representatives describe the weapon as “about as non-violent as you can get”, which Oliver disputed. “I’m not sure I would describe getting shocked with 50,000 volts is as non-violent as you can get,” he said. “It certainly doesn’t sound that relaxing. There’s a reason people unwind by taking a bath with lit candles or a book instead of with a toaster.”“The reality of Tasers just isn’t that simple,” he explained. There have been multiple instances of people dying after being tased; according to a 2017 investigations, at least 1,000 people died after police used Tasers on them.But the company has worked to obscure that fact by avoiding regulation. The Taser was first invented in the 1970s using gunpowder. When the Smith brothers bought the tech in the early 1990s, they changed the prototype to use compressed nitrogen instead, thus avoiding firearm regulations. By the end of 2003, more than 4,300 police agencies were using Tasers, with plenty of positive news coverage.The company rebranded as Axon in the early 2000s and began selling police bodycams, as well, becoming what Oliver called “the TMZ of state-sanctioned violence”.Oliver broke down two of the company’s main claims: that Tasers are effective and safe. Though Axon says the Taser is effective at subduing a suspect about 90% of the time, some studies found its effectiveness rate as low as 55%, though the company complained that the study did not take into account instances when a suspect was subdued after an officer merely displayed or threatened to use a Taser. “And at that point, that’s not really about their device, is it?” said Oliver. “You could presumably get that result with a gun, a flamethrower or a magic fucking wand.”“Also when we talk about Tasers being effective – at what, exactly?” he continued. “Because it’s often a Taser being used instead of a more lethal option like a gun, and more a Taser being used instead of a less lethal option like talking to someone.”That could make the difference between life and death, as hundreds of people have died after being tased by law enforcement. The company has attributed those deaths to a condition called “excited delirium” unrelated to the weapon. And because Tasers are “virtually unregulated” by any agency, “what that means is, you basically have to take the company’s word for it,” said Oliver.Even some police officers have decried the company’s line that Tasers are safe. After a 16-year-old in Warren, Michigan, died from the use of a Taser, one officer blamed Axon for not accurately marketing the risks: “You swore that this was a statistically normal thing, that these people were not dying at any more of an unusual rate than they would have absent the Taser, you know?”“I get why he’s upset,” said Oliver. “Axon told him the Taser was basically harmless, and the truth is it’s just not. It’s like finding out that a Nerf gun was used to assassinate JFK. I don’t care if Nerf says that was a statistical anomaly, I’m not handling it the same way anymore!”As for what to do about Tasers, “it’s complicated,” said Oliver. “I don’t hate that there’s at least a theoretical alternative to guns, and I guess I’d much rather police tase people than shoot them, although my ultimate preference would be for them to do neither of those and be much more aware of the actual risks involved.”He encouraged regulatory agencies to track stun gun usage more than we already do, and noted that certain states have banned “excited delirium” as a permissible cause of death. In sum, “we shouldn’t keep using Tasers like they’re magic wands, because they’re not,” Oliver concluded, “or pretending deaths that occur after they’re used don’t happen, because they do.” More

    • 175 Shares165 Views

      in US Politics

      Americans are beginning to fear dissent. That’s exactly what Trump wants | Robert Reich

      by

      I was talking recently to a friend who’s a professor at Columbia University about what’s been happening there. He had a lot to say.When he needed to run off to an appointment, I asked him if he’d text or email me the rest of his thoughts.His response worried me. “No,” he said. “I better not. They may be reviewing it.”“Who’s ‘they’?” I asked.“They! The university. The government. Gotta go!” He was off.My friend has never shown signs of paranoia.I relay this to you because the Donald Trump regime is starting to have a chilling effect on what and how Americans communicate with each other. It is beginning to deter open dissent, which is exactly what the US president intends.The chill affects all five major pillars of civil society – universities, science, the media, the law and the arts.In Columbia University’s capitulation to Trump, it agreed to require demonstrators to identify themselves when asked and put its department of Middle Eastern studies under “receivership”, lest it lose $400m in government funding.The agreement is already chilling dissent there, as my conversation with my friend revealed.The Trump regime also “detained” a Columbia University graduate student and green card holder who participated in protests at the school. The administration’s agents have also entered dorms with search warrants and targeted two other students who participated in such protests.On Tuesday, an international student in a graduate program at Tufts University was taken into custody outside her off-campus apartment building by plainclothes homeland security agents, handcuffed and whisked away to a prison in Louisiana. She has a valid student visa. Her apparent offense? Putting her name to an opinion piece in the Tufts student newspaper that was critical of how the Tufts administration handled protests.Scores of other major universities are on Trump’s target list.Trump’s attack on science has involved threats to three of the largest funders of American science – the Centers for Disease Control, National Institutes of Health and National Science Foundation.Tens of thousands of researchers are worried about how to continue their research. Many have decided to hunker down and not criticize the Trump administration for fear of losing their funding.Philippe Baptiste, the French minister for higher education, has charged that a French scientist traveling to a conference near Houston earlier this month was denied entry into the US because his phone contained message exchanges with colleagues and friends in which he gave a negative “personal opinion” about Trump’s scientific and research policies. The US Department of Homeland Security denies this was the reason the scientist wasn’t admitted into the country.Meanwhile, America’s major media fear more lawsuits from Trump and his political allies in the wake of ABC’s surrender to Trump in December, agreeing to pay him $15m to settle a defamation suit he filed against the network.Journalists who cover the White House are reeling from Trump’s decision to bar those he deems unfriendly from major events where space is limited.The media chill is palpable. Jeff Bezos, the owner of the Washington Post, has openly restricted the kinds of op-eds appearing in its editorial pages.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe latest example of Trump’s use of executive orders to target powerful law firms that have challenged him came on Tuesday, against Jenner & Block.The firm employed the attorney Andrew Weissmann after he worked as a prosecutor in the special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of Trump during his first term.The White House charged that the firm “participated in the weaponization of the legal system against American principles and values”, and an official specifically called out Weissmann.Last month, Trump removed the security clearances of lawyers at Covington & Burling who represented the former special counsel Jack Smith following his investigation of Trump’s role in the January 6 Capitol attack.Trump has also targeted Perkins Coie, a firm linked to opposition research against Trump in 2016. His order banned Perkins Coie lawyers from federal buildings and halted its federal contracts.Another executive order took aim at Paul Weiss, who employed the lawyer Mark Pomerantz before he helped prosecute Trump over hush money payments to Stormy Daniels.Last Thursday, Trump withdrew the executive order against Paul Weiss because, he said, the firm had “acknowledged the wrongdoing” of Pomerantz and pledged $40m in free legal work to support the Trump administration.Non-profits tell the Washington Post that law firms that once might have helped them fight Trump’s orders now fear Trump will pursue them if they do.Trump is even intimidating the arts by taking over the Kennedy Center, firing board members, ousting its president and making himself chairman.The comedian Nikki Glaser, one of the few celebrities to walk the red carpet at this year’s Kennedy Center Mark Twain Prizes, now thinks twice before doing political jokes directed at Trump.“Like, you just are scared that you’re gonna get doxxed and death threats or who knows where this leads, like, detained. Honestly, that’s not even like a joke. It’s like a real fear,” she told Deadline.Every tyrant in history has sought to stifle criticism of himself and his regime.But America was founded on criticism. American democracy was built on dissent. We conducted a revolution against tyranny.This moment calls for courage and collective action rather than capitulation – resolve by universities, researchers, journalists, the legal community, and the arts to stand up to Trump.Anyone holding responsible positions in these five pillars of civil society must reject Trump’s attempts at intimidation and condemn what he is trying to do.Those who surrender to Trump’s tyranny invite more of it.

      Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is a professor of public policy emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley. He is a Guardian US columnist. His newsletter is at robertreich.substack.com More

    • 250 Shares100 Views

      in US Politics

      As Trump rewrites even America’s history, institutions have two choices – submit or find ways to resist | Charlotte Higgins

      by

      It has come to this: we are now in Ministry of Truth territory. In Washington DC, the Smithsonian Institution, the US’s ensemble of 21 great national museums, last week became the subject of an executive order by President Donald Trump. “Distorted narratives” are to be rooted out. There will be no more of the “corrosive ideology” that has fostered a “sense of national shame”. The institution has, reads the order, “come under the influence of a divisive, race-centered ideology” that portrays “American and Western values as inherently harmful and oppressive”. The vice-president, JD Vance, is, by virtue of his office, on the museum’s board. He is charged by Trump to “prohibit expenditure” on programmes that “divide Americans based on race”. He is to remove “improper ideology”. The order is titled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History”. George Orwell lived too soon.The move is deeply shocking, but predictable. After Trump’s insertion of himself as chair of the John F Kennedy Center and his railing against the supposed wokeness of the national performing arts venue, the federally funded Smithsonian was bound to be next in line. Those who imagined the Kennedy Center was a one-off, attracting the president’s ire for personal reasons, were deluding themselves about the scale of Trump’s ideological ambition. Picked out for opprobrium in the executive order are the Smithsonian American Women’s History Museum for celebrating transgender women (the museum, it should be pointed out, has yet to be built); the National Museum of African American History and Culture; and an exhibition titled The Shape of Power: Stories of Race and American Sculpture at the American Art Museum.I visited the Museum of African American History for the first time a couple of weeks ago. It is a vast book of a museum, heavy with text. It was full, when I visited, of mostly Black families seeking out an encounter with a narrative that has long been a footnote to, or erased completely from, the main national story. You could spend days absorbing the web of stories that the museum offers, beginning in its basements with the transatlantic slave trade, where one of the most moving objects is, unexpectedly and profoundly, a piece of iron ballast that took the place of a human body after a ship’s cargo of enslaved people had been disgorged on the triangular route between Africa, the Americas and Europe. The whole strikes a fascinating balance between an unflinching gaze on systems of oppression, and a sense of Black achievement and cultural richness that has nevertheless effloresced.Lonnie Bunch, the founding director of the museum, gave a talk at the House of Lords in 2011 about the institution, which was still in the planning, and would open five years later. I can still recall how moving it was to hear about the difficulties of making a museum – a place where a story is told through objects – from communities traditionally poor in material things. The institution had put out a call for loans and donations. Precious, carefully treasured objects – a bonnet embroidered by someone’s enslaved grandmother, for example – were arriving into the new collection.Fast forward to the present, and Bunch is in charge of the entire Smithsonian Institution. This is a man who believes, as he told Queen’s University Belfast last year, that history can be used to “understand the tensions that have divided us. And those tensions are really where the learning is where the growth is, where the opportunities to transform are.” That compassionate vision of the past, as a means through which the citizens of the present can better understand each other, is completely opposed to the monolithically triumphalist spirit of Trump’s executive order, in which history is reduced to “our Nation’s unparalleled legacy of advancing liberty, individual rights, and human happiness”. How much easier it is, to sink into this pillowy, comforting notion of glorious progress than to grapple with the kind of knotty, often upsetting and confronting history that the Museum of African American History offers its visitors. But it makes me wonder: can the museum survive this government?I visited, too, the American Art Museum, whose show The Shape of Power is targeted in the executive order as emblematic of the Smithsonian’s decline into “divisive, race-centered ideology”. The exhibition, which was years in the careful making, points out what is surely obvious, once it has been given a moment’s thought: that race is not an inherent and prepolitical category, but rather a constructed set of ideologies that served (and still serve) a set of economic and political interests. (One way to tell that race is a socially constructed category, in fact, is by looking to the Greeks and the Romans – the people who established, in the minds of many on the US right, “western civilisation”. They were xenophobic in their own way, and enslavement was a fact of their societies. But as is obvious from their literature, whiteness and Blackness were for them simply not operative categories.) The exhibition is an eye- and mind-opening look at how race ideology has translated into and been reinforced, or deconstructed, by sculpture – that peculiarly lifelike and thus “truthful”-seeming artform.The catalogue quotes Toni Morrison, who once wrote that “I want to draw a map, so to speak, of a critical geography and use that map to open as much space for discovery, intellectual adventure, and close exploration as did the original charting of the New World.” Such intellectual adventuring is not what is wanted by the White House now. Trump’s world is more like Viktor Orbán’s, under whose government the school history curriculum has been rewritten to glorify Hungary, or Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s Turkey, where the novelist Elif Shafak, as she recalled in a Guardian Live event last week, was prosecuted for “insulting Turkishness”, her lawyer obliged to defend in court the views of her fictional characters. The Smithsonian and all who work there have an unenviable choice, one that has already been put before other great or formerly great institutions such as Columbia University: to comply with Trump’s dark demands; or to find ways to defy them.

      Charlotte Higgins is the Guardian’s chief culture writer More

    • 188 Shares147 Views

      in US Politics

      Clean energy spending boosts GOP districts. But lawmakers are keeping quiet as Trump targets incentives

      by

      Billions of dollars in clean energy spending and jobs have overwhelmingly flowed to parts of the US represented by Republican lawmakers. But these members of Congress are still largely reticent to break with Donald Trump’s demands to kill off key incentives for renewables, even as their districts bask in the rewards.The president has called for the dismantling of the Inflation Reduction Act – a sweeping bill passed by Democrats that has helped turbocharge investments in wind, solar, nuclear, batteries and electric vehicle manufacturing in the US – calling it a “giant scam”. Trump froze funding allocated under the act and has vowed to claw back grants aimed at reducing planet-heating pollution.Republicans who now control Congress have to decide if they will eliminate the IRA’s grants and, more crucially, the tax credits that have spurred a boom in clean energy activity in their own districts. A total of 78% of this spending has gone to Republican-held suburban and rural districts across the US, according to data from Atlas Public Policy.Of the 20 congressional districts that have attracted the most clean energy manufacturing investment since the IRA passed in 2022, 18 are represented by Republicans, according to Atlas. The top three districts, in North Carolina, Georgia and Nevada, represented by Richard Hudson, Earl Carter and Mark Amodei, respectively, have collectively seen nearly $30bn in new investments since the legislation.Despite this, none of the 18 Republican representatives contacted by the Guardian would comment on whether they agree with Trump that clean energy incentives should be scrapped.“Members aren’t necessarily looking for opportunities to disagree with the White House at the moment,” said Heather Reams, the president of Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions, a center-right group that advocates in favor of clean energy.The Atlas data set is the newest in a series of reports showing the IRA benefitted Republican-led districts the most. And the largest individual pools of money from the bill also went to projects in red communities, according to a separate data set shared with the Guardian by an anonymous source at the Department of Energy (DoE).The top grant from the IRA, worth $500m, went to a General Motors plant in Lansing, Michigan – represented by Republican Tom Barrett – the DoE data shows. And though the biggest loan of $15bn went to California’s Pacific Gas and Electric Company utility to expand clean power and modernize infrastructure, the second and third largest went to battery plants in Glendale, Kentucky, and Kokomo, Indiana, represented by conservatives Brett Guthrie and Victoria Spartz, respectively. Hageman, Guthrie and Spartz did not respond to requests for comment.Some Republicans have publicly lauded the tax credits’ impacts on their districts even as they have attacked the IRA. The ultraconservative Georgia representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, for instance, praised the IRA-funded expansion of solar manufacturing in her district but called the bill itself “dangerous”, winning her scrutiny from Joe Biden in 2023. Her district saw more investment than all but 14 others, the Atlas data shows.In a sign of private nervousness among conservatives about a repeal of the tax credits, though, a group of 21 Republican lawmakers, including Carter and Amodei, signed a letter to colleagues warning that axing the IRA risks planned projects and would escalate energy bills. Some conservatives made similar calls during a January hearing in the House ways and means committee.But these voices have gotten quieter in recent weeks, with some Republicans who privately supported the letter refusing to sign it for strategic reasons, and some letter signatories saying the IRA tax credits should not necessarily be a major priority.Ongoing budget concerns have made it especially difficult for conservatives to defend the credits. Republicans’ fiscal year 2025 proposal authorized $4.5tn in tax cuts through 2034 and called on committees to partially offset the cost with $2tn in spending reductions. A full repeal of the IRA’s green energy tax credits would slash about $850bn in spending the Tax Foundation thinktank recently found.“They’re trying to kind of balance finding the money so that they’re not adding to the federal debt, while also trying to protect these beneficial and popular tax credits and provisions,” said Dana Nuccitelli, the research coordinator at the non-partisan advocacy group Citizens’ Climate Lobby. “It’s not easy.”Reams, of the Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions thinktank, said that as the realities of lost jobs and increasing energy costs become clear, Trump may change his mind about the need to repeal the credits. “There’s what Donald Trump says – remember, he hated EVs, but he just bought a Tesla – and what he does,” she said. “You’ve got to not take it all so literally and bide some time to get a sense of what really is going on.”Still, there are already signs that Trump’s hostile stance towards renewables – he has halted approvals of wind and solar projects on federal land and waters – – is starting to dampen clean energy activity in the US.Approximately $8bn in clean energy manufacturing activity has been canceled so far this year, Atlas has calculated, with a separate analysis by Climate Power finding that 50,000 jobs have been lost or are threatened.A full repeal of the IRA would hike energy bills for households and imperil a further 1.5m jobs in the US, according to yet another recent report, by Energy Innovation. “Many of those jobs will be at risk if the IRA is repealed,” Jim Farley, the chief executive of Ford, warned recently about the company’s plans to expand its electric vehicle factories.“The Trump administration aims to restore US manufacturing jobs, but cutting existing federal energy incentives could really undermine that goal,” said Tom Taylor, a senior policy analyst at Atlas.It’s a message some climate advocates have been bringing to Republican lawmakers in recent weeks in an attempt to save the tax credits. Citizens’ Climate Lobby, for instance, this month lobbied 47 Republicans on Capitol Hill calling on them to protect the tax credits, and is now asking its members to call their Republican representatives, focusing not on their climate benefits but on their potential to spur economic growth.“Everybody loves manufacturing jobs,” Nuccitelli said.In their lobbying, Citizens Climate Lobby is also highlighting the low price of building clean power, the need for abundant energy amid forecasted spikes in energy from the artificial intelligence boom, and the fact that repealing the incentives could cause household electricity bills to increase by about 10% over the next decade.Despite the lack of public support for the tax credits from GOP lawmakers, the organization said they enjoy significant support on Capitol Hill, with some GOP lawmakers calling to protect them in private meetings and personal phone calls with other congressional colleagues.Only two Democratic-led districts were on the list provided by the Atlas Public Policy. One was Arizona’s Raúl Grijalva, who was a strong advocate for the IRA’s green incentives before he died this month.“The Inflation Reduction Act is a vital investment in the future stability of the planet,” his office wrote in a statement to the Guardian before his passing. “As a self-proclaimed business genius, Trump should easily be able to understand the high financial and humanitarian costs of increasing climate catastrophes.” More

    • 150 Shares183 Views

      in US Politics

      Palestinians must have the final say in Gaza’s reconstruction | Ahmad Ibsais

      by

      On the 17th night of Ramadan – a time meant for prayer, reflection and mercy – Gaza burned. Once again, our screens fill with images too harrowing to describe: tiny bodies wrapped in bloodstained cloth, fathers carrying their children’s remains in plastic bags, mothers screaming into skies that rain death instead of mercy. In less than an hour, Israeli airstrikes killed more than 350 Palestinians, including 90 children. Entire families wiped out as bombs fell on areas Israel itself had designated as “safe zones”, turning supposed sanctuaries into mass graves.This was not merely a resumption of violence. This is the continuation of a genocide that never truly paused, only ebbed enough to vanish from headlines while Palestinians continued to die by the dozens daily. The heaviness of this moment is unbearable, bringing back the brokenness of the past year that has not yet healed. For this slaughter to continue while the world watches reveals how deeply indifferent global powers have become to Palestinian suffering, how thoroughly dehumanized an entire people must be for their massacre to be debated as a matter of “security concerns”.These newest atrocities underscore the ongoing reality that Palestinians have faced for months now. In the ruins of Gaza, amid the countlessly violated “ceasefire”, Palestinians confront not only the monumental task of rebuilding but also a struggle for who will control their future. Since 2 March, Israel has not allowed in any aid, most importantly food and reconstruction resources, while Palestinians starve through Ramadan. As families return to find neighborhoods reduced to rubble, they face competing visions for Gaza’s reconstruction – including proposals that threaten their very existence on the land.Donald Trump recently suggested transforming Gaza into a “riviera of the Middle East” by resettling its 1.8 million Palestinian residents elsewhere. This proposal reveals a profound misunderstanding of our connection to our homeland, a connection that transcends mere residence and forms the core of Palestinian identity.When outsiders ask why Palestinians don’t leave Gaza, or the increasingly genocidal violence in the West Bank, they fail to grasp that this land isn’t just where we live – it’s who we are. Our relationship with this soil has been cultivated through generations. Since 1967, Israel has systematically uprooted at least 2.5m trees in the occupied Palestinian territory, including nearly 1m olive trees. The olive trees that dot our landscape embody our history, resilience and indigeneity to the land – cultivated over generations of displacement.The question isn’t why Palestinians return to destroyed neighborhoods – it’s why anyone would expect us not to. Palestinians return because Gaza is home. The rubble beneath their feet isn’t debris; it contains memories, histories and the foundations of homes where generations were born and buried. Where the rubble has become a mass grave for 50,000 Palestinians.According to the UN’s latest assessment, rebuilding Gaza and the West Bank will require $53.2bn over the next decade: $29.9bn for physical infrastructure and $19.1bn for economic and social losses. These reconstruction efforts the result of 85,000 tons of bombs being indiscriminately dropped over the total area of Gaza. Behind these staggering figures lies a more fundamental question: will Palestinians be allowed to rebuild, or will they be rebuilt over?The answer must be Palestinians themselves. The future of Palestine will be determined by, with, and for Palestinians – no matter the form we choose. It is not for the United States, Israel, or the Arab states, who stood by as our people died, to decide what is best for us. Without Palestinians, rebuilding efforts merely perpetuate the cycle of violence and dispossession. We are not pieces on their geopolitical chessboard. We are a people with an inalienable right to self-determination, and reconstruction must serve that right – not subvert it.The immediate challenges are overwhelming. Over 80% of Gaza’s physical infrastructure has been decimated – roads, power plants, water facilities, schools, universities and every hospital, in contravention of international law and basic morality. The removal of more than 50m tons of rubble and unexploded ordnance will require decades to clear and restore semblance of normalcy.Yet amid this devastation, Palestinians demonstrate remarkable resilience. Journalists have documented people returning to northern Gaza, setting up tents in demolition sites, and even beginning construction work on new buildings. The “ceasefire” stipulated that 60,000 trailers and 200,000 tents should have entered Gaza to help house the forcibly displaced Palestinians – only 20,000 tents and no trailers have entered as Israel obstructs aid. However, Israel did deliver bombs as children slept; 70% of those murdered since Israel resumed its violence have been women and children. In Jabalia, men were seen building the walls of their destroyed home – a powerful symbol of determination to remain. There has been total destruction, but Palestinians remain steadfast like firm mountains. Palestinians are rooted in the land, there is no alternative.Does Israel think when it destroyed the stones, Palestinians will leave? As if their cities were not already built on the bones of our ancestors.This determination isn’t naive optimism, it is a recognition that to exist is to resist. We will not ask permission to narrate our pain. We will not wait for perfect victimhood to earn our humanity. Gaza is the site of resistance, rooted in every olive tree, every seed, every grave. We don’t build because we’re certain our homes will stand forever; we build because to stop building is to surrender. After previous bombardments, Gazans would collect concrete from destroyed houses to be crushed into gravel for new structures. Others extracted rebar from damaged walls to reinforce new construction.In the same interview, Trump also suggested Palestinians should leave so they no longer have to be “worried about dying”. Palestinians aren’t afraid of death – we’re afraid of being killed systematically. The solution isn’t removing the victims but stopping those doing the killing. Gaza doesn’t need redesigning as if it were an empty hotel room; it needs an end to the cycle of destruction.When I think about what Palestinians hope for, I’m struck by how basic their dreams are. Palestinians want to get jobs, build homes, visit the beach, perhaps travel knowing they can return. Palestinians dream of an airport, a seaport, welcoming tourists, praying at Al-Aqsa mosque, and returning to villages where their grandparents lived.What Gaza needs now is immediate: it needs life restored, urgently and unapologetically. It needs teachers for children who have been denied not just classrooms, but childhood itself. It needs dignified burials for the dead, those whose names are scribbled on their limbs so they might be recognized beneath the rubble. It needs seeds and soil, not just to replant crops, but feed those forcibly starved. It needs hospitals where women are not forced to give birth without anesthetics, where the wounded are not condemned to die for lack of electricity.And above all, Gaza needs the world to see Palestinians as people – people deserving of life, freedom and solidarity.While international support is crucial, it cannot come with strings that undermine Palestinian sovereignty. Foreign aid should not be conditioned on accepting foreign control. It should not be leveraged to force political concessions or normalize relations with an occupying power. True solidarity means supporting Palestinian-led reconstruction without imposing external agendas.The February letter from Arab foreign ministers to the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, speaks of implementing “a plan to realize the two-state solution”. However, any plan must begin with recognizing Palestinian agency. Without meaningful Palestinian participation, without respecting our right to choose our own political future, such plans remain hollow gestures. And expecting Palestinians to accept a solution from those who attempted to erase them completely is like asking the wounded to trust the hand that still holds the bloody knife.The challenges ahead are enormous, but so is Palestinian determination. As Israel continues to bomb starving Palestinians, their refusal to abandon our land isn’t stubbornness but existence itself. As Israel continues to murder Palestinian journalists, like Hossam Shabat, we will make sure the world not only sees their crimes, but remembers them. In the face of those who would make our lives impossible, we will continue to find ways to remain. We will rebuild not according to someone else’s vision but according to our own needs and aspirations.This rebuilding is more than reconstruction – it is resistance. It is our refusal to be erased, our determination to remain and our unwavering belief in our right to exist on our land. Nothing is more important than staying. Nothing is more revolutionary than returning. And nothing is more certain than that we will rebuild Palestine with our own hands, for our own people, on our own terms.

      Ahmad Ibsais is a first-generation Palestinian American, law student and poet who writes the newsletter State of Siege More

    • 150 Shares156 Views

      in US Politics

      Republicans are quietly trying to disenfranchise millions of voters | Alexis Anderson-Reed

      by

      The first months of the new Trump administration have been dizzying with the breadth of executive actions to slash the social safety net, further enrich the wealthy, and inflame division based on outdated notions about culture and identity. While White House policy pronouncements have come with flair and political theater – such as the president signing orders on a Jumbotron – in Congress there are quieter but equally pernicious efforts aimed at silencing the votes and voices of communities across the country.One such piece of legislation is the so-called Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, or Save Act, which would require Americans seeking to register or re-register to vote to prove US citizenship. This dangerous bill would in effect strip millions of Americans of their access to the vote, while making the voting process more difficult and burdensome for everyone else. Rather than make our elections more secure, the Save Act would disenfranchise millions based on nothing but a series of debunked conspiracy theories.Last week, meanwhile, the White House issued an executive order that would upend voter registration and our elections – requiring additional proof of citizenship on federal voting forms; seeking to block states from from processing mail-in ballots after election day; paving the way for funding cuts to states that refuse to fall in line; and directing Elon Musk and his so-called “department of government efficiency” to review voter information. It’s a blatant, brazen and unlawful attempt to try to remake our election system by fiat that represents a direct attack on the checks and balances that have secured our elections for generations. The order is sure to face legal hurdles and should not stand up to scrutiny by the courts or the American people. Now, at the same time as we are calling out this attempted power grab by the Trump administration, we must also prevent Congress from making the mistake of disenfranchising millions of voters.According to research by the Brennan Center for Justice, more than 21 million US citizens of voting age don’t have easy access to proof of citizenship documents, and only about half of American adults have a passport, while millions do not have access to paper copies of their birth certificates. Married women whose legal names do not match their birth certificates could be disenfranchised by the Save Act, and folks looking to obtain lost or misplaced birth certificates would face financial and logistical hurdles.The Save Act would restrict voters’ ability to register to vote online and through the mail while also severely limiting the ability of non-partisan civic organizations to conduct voter registration drives, which have been crucial to civic engagement for more than a century. That’s because, despite voters’ ability to register to vote at the DMV and registration efforts by political parties, data shows that voter registration drives from non-partisan organizations can account for about one-fifth of voter registration applicants – roughly equal to the political power of California, Florida and Texas combined. We simply cannot sit back and allow Congress or the White House to destroy the infrastructure of our elections by disenfranchising so many voters.Voter registration drives by non-profits have a rich and powerful history, dating back to the League of Women Voters and other civic groups encouraging women to register in the 1920s after the passage of the 19th amendment. During the Freedom Summer of 1964 in Mississippi, students from northern states traveled to Mississippi to canvass the state and register Black people to vote as the civil rights movement pushed back on centuries of racist voter suppression. And in more modern elections, voter registration drives have become a critical vehicle for driving community engagement among communities of color and marginalized groups that the traditional political system has left behind. Historically, political parties categorize voters based on their likelihood to vote, and “low propensity” voters are sometimes considered unworthy of political candidates’ time and resources. Without non-profit organizations and civic groups stepping in to spur engagement, we risk a vicious cycle in which marginalized communities are completely ignored.At State Voices, the nation’s largest non-partisan civic engagement network responsible for collecting more than 840,000 voter registration applications and contacting more than 66 million voters in 2024, we see first-hand the impact of voter registration drives to reach communities that are overlooked and underserved. Last year, our affiliate in Nevada, Silver State Voices, sent staff to help register tribal members from the Duck Valley and Pine Nut Reservations – carrying downloaded maps to register applicants who live in rural areas without a street address. In Wyoming, a network of civic organizations helped a county clerk to register hundreds of high school seniors. And in Nebraska, the Nebraska Voting Rights Coalition helps register newly eligible voters who have completed probation and parole requirements due to past felony convictions. These stories represent only a tiny fraction of the impact of nonpartisan voter registration efforts in communities across the country – and they’re all under threat should the Save Act become law.Our nation faces huge questions in the coming elections about the future of our economy, our healthcare system, our children’s education, the environment and more. For our democracy to thrive, we must allow voters to have their say – not restrict who has a voice based on logistical hurdles. As this bill moves forward, it is imperative for people to make clear to their members of Congress that they must reject the Save Act permanently.

      Alexis Anderson-Reed is the president of State Voices, which coordinates hyper-local election registration, education and mobilization across 24 states with 1,200 partners in Bipoc and working-class communities across the country More

    • 163 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Tesla investors brace for global sales data amid consumer backlash over Elon Musk

      by

      Tesla investors are bracing for evidence of declining global demand this week as the electric carmaker battles headwinds including a consumer backlash against its chief executive, Elon Musk.On 2 April, the US company will release data for first-quarter deliveries – a proxy for sales – that is expected to show a dip on the same period last year. The figures follow global protests on Saturday against Musk and Tesla, targeting the carmaker’s showrooms.Analysts have been lowering their forecasts amid evidence that Musk’s senior role in the Trump administration has damaged the Tesla brand.Dan Ives, managing director at the US financial firm Wedbush Securities and a self-avowed Tesla “core bull”, forecast deliveries to come in at between 355,000 and 360,000, a fall of 7% on the same period last year and down from initial predictions across Wall Street of 400,000.View image in fullscreenIves, who recently warned investors that Tesla was facing a “brand tornado crisis moment”, said 30% of the anticipated decline was due to brand damage associated with Musk and his involvement in the so-called department of government efficiency (Doge). The advisory body has targeted federal agencies with cost-cutting policies and redundancies.Other issues affecting Tesla’s figures during the first three months of the year include consumers waiting for an update to the top-selling Model Y. The US is Tesla’s biggest market.In a note to investors last week, Ives said that while “much of this softness is related to customers waiting for Model Y refreshes along with a lower-cost new model set to be launched by the summer … the anti-Musk and brand issues are clearly at play”.Matthias Schmidt, a Berlin-based electric car analyst, said Musk was “hitting his liberal consumer demographic exactly where it hurts”.“He has become the core toxic issue behind the disintegration of the brand and should step-aside before it explodes like one of his rockets,” added Schmidt, who is expecting first-quarter deliveries in western Europe to come in at just under 70,000 for the first time since the end of 2022.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionView image in fullscreenAmong Tesla owners, the Democrat owner group has fallen from 40% during the Biden administration to 29% now, with the Republican group averaging about 30% since 2021, according to market research firm Strategic Vision.Last week, Donald Trump announced a 25% tariff on cars from overseas, with Tesla also expecting to be affected despite making its cars for the US market in America. The company imports some parts for its US-made cars. Last week, Musk wrote on X, his social media platform, that Tesla is “not unscathed” by tariffs. He added: “The tariff impact on Tesla is still significant.”The tariffs threaten to plunge the global auto industry into “pure chaos”, according to Ives. “Every auto maker in the world will have to raise prices in some form selling into the US and the supply chain logistics of this tariff announcement heard around the world is hard to even put our arms around at this moment,” he said in a note to investors last week.However, on Saturday, Trump said he “couldn’t care less” if carmakers raise prices in response to the tariffs on foreign-made vehicles. Indeed, the US president told NBC News that he hoped foreign carmakers raise prices as it means “people are gonna buy American-made cars. We have plenty.” More

    • 188 Shares165 Views

      in US Politics

      Will Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ be the start of a trade war – or another climbdown?

      by

      Donald Trump won back the White House with a promise to transform the US economy. Millions of Americans, struggling with higher prices and bigger bills, elected a president who pledged to revive his country’s industrial heartlands – and leave the rest of the world to pick up the bill.On Wednesday – a day dubbed Liberation Day by the president and his aides – Trump has vowed to pull the trigger and impose an historic barrage of tariffs on goods from overseas he claims will fund an extraordinary revival.Ten weeks after obtaining power, Trump has said he will raise tariffs on all products from countries that charge tariffs on US exports; hit goods from Canada and Mexico with sweeping duties; introduce steep tariffs on foreign cars, computer chips and drugs; and target countries importing oil from Venezuela with duties on their US exports.This is “the big one”, according to the president. Business leaders and economists are certainly worried about the scale of his trade strategy, which the Tax Foundation already estimates could knock US gross domestic product (GDP) by roughly 0.7% and cost about 500,000 US jobs.“The escalating tariffs are a body blow to the global trading system,” said Eswar Prasad, professor of trade policy at Cornell University, and a former official at the International Monetary Fund.Wherever you stand, a move on this scale would constitute a radical shake-up – and set the stage for a fundamental overhaul of the US economy. And yet, even as he ramped up the rhetoric, Trump has appeared to tread carefully.“I will immediately begin the overhaul of our trade system to protect American workers and families,” the president declared at his inauguration in January. “Instead of taxing our citizens to enrich other countries, we will tariff and tax foreign countries to enrich our citizens.”While the threats were immediate, the action was not.Take Canada and Mexico. The administration has adopted a strikingly hardline stance against the US’s largest and nearest trading partners, but its imposition of blanket tariffs has been hit by a dizzying array of shifting deadlines, delays and reversals.An initial pledge to impose tariffs from “day one” shifted, without explanation, to February. When February rolled around, a last-ditch deal kicked the can to March. When the tariffs were finally imposed, it was a little over 24 hours before carmakers were granted a temporary exemption, and 48 hours before all goods covered by an existing trade deal between the US, Mexico and Canada were spared for another month.All the while, Trump and his most senior officials have slowly, but surely, accepted the risks they are raising in pursuit of the rewards they have vowed to obtain.“Tariffs don’t cause inflation,” the president claimed in January. OK, prices “could go up somewhat short term”, he conceded in February. “There’ll be a little disturbance,” he added in March, stressing that he was alright with that.The US treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, acknowledged earlier this month that there may well be a “one-time price adjustment” as a result of Trump’s tariffs. “Access to cheap goods is not the essence of the American dream,” he argued.While Trump predicts that slapping high US tariffs on foreign goods will prompt an influx of international companies to make products inside the US, rather than out, companies and investors worldwide are already struggling to keep up with his administration’s erratic trade policymaking.So far, since his return to office, Trump has hiked tariffs on Chinese exports to the US and raised tariffs on foreign steel and aluminium to 25%.The average US tariff rate has already shot up from 2.5% to 8.4% this year, the highest level since 1946, according to the Tax Foundation.Alex Durante, its senior economist, said the country is “inching towards” the kind of tariffs last seen since the 1930s, when the Smoot-Hawley bill, among the most decried pieces of legislation in US history, introduced tariffs on thousands of goods.“With each tariff action we’re rapidly approaching a universal tariff that would be damaging to the economy,” said Durante. “Behind the scenes, I think there is probably some concern, even among some of [Trump’s] staff, that they’re rapidly approaching the point of no return.”As his administration grappled with the fallout from the inadvertent inclusion of a journalist in a group chat about secret military plans last week, the president summoned reporters to the Oval Office to pre-announce tariffs on foreign cars. “This is very exciting,” he told them.The excitement is far from universal. Prasad, at Cornell, said: “We are shifting to a world where a commonly accepted set of rules is being displaced by unilateral actions that ostensibly promote a fair trading system, but will instead create volatility and uncertainty, inhibiting the free flow of goods and financial capital across national borders.”The car tariffs would be “a hurricane-like headwind to foreign (and many US) automakers”, said Dan Ives, an analyst at Wedbush Securities, who suggested they would push up prices by as much as $10,000 in the US. “We continue to believe this is some form of negotiation and these tariffs could change by the week,” he added, “although this initial 25% tariff on autos from outside the US is almost an untenable head-scratching number for the US consumer”.Such action is also widely expected to prompt retaliation – with US exporters in the firing line.While a spokesperson for the European Commission stressed it was too early to detail the European Union’s response to actions “still not implemented” by the US, they added: “I can assure you that it will be timely, that it will be robust, that it will be well calibrated and that it will achieve the intended impact.”Trump is watching closely. As countries and markets hit by new US tariffs consider how to hit back, the president publicly warned the EU and Canada that he would hit them with “far larger” duties if they worked together on their response.Some doubt whether the federal government has enough capacity to execute the trade onslaught which Trump has said is coming. “I simply just don’t think that [the US Trade Representative] right now has enough staff to even figure out how to implement some of these tariffs,” said Durante.But after myriad false starts and much fluctuation, the lingering question – despite all the shots, warnings and vows – is not how far Trump can take his trade wars, but how far he will.The president is, at heart, a salesman. In business, he sold real estate – with mixed success. In television, and then politics, he sold stories – with extreme success.Millions of Americans bought the image he constructed on The Apprentice of himself as a phenomenally successful entrepreneur. Millions more bought his promise on the campaign trail to share this phenomenal success with the rest of the nation.Trump is no longer selling a promise, but his strategy to deliver it. He won the White House twice by using stories, sometimes unbound by truth, to bend perceptions, break norms and build support. But rhetoric – however bold, and brash – can’t change reality.The president says unleashing a wave of tariffs, and triggering an abrupt surge in costs in the US and across the world, would cause just a “little disturbance”.Should Wednesday’s action prove as drastic as billed, businesses and consumers may struggle to reconcile this description with what they encounter.Liberation Day is the moniker coined by this administration. Liability Day might prove more apt. More