As Katydid commented when I posted John Oliver’s video on farm workers, child labor isn’t exactly new in the United States. That said, there seems to be a coordinated effort to roll back child labor protections across multiple states, at the same time as we’re seeing corporate child labor violations across multiple states. We were very, very far from perfect before, but now the US seems to be moving rapidly in the wrong direction on this, as the crew at Left Reckoning discuss:
Chile has been on an interesting and positive arc in recent years. Left-wing politician Gabriel Boric won the presidency there, representing the first big shift to the left since the fascist Pinochet took over in a US-backed coup in 1973. They’re currently working on a number of reforms, and are trying to negotiate a new constitution, to replace the one from the Pinochet era. One big change that was just announced was a plan to gradually nationalize Chile’s lithium industry. They intend to honor existing contracts, but to have more direct government involvement in new ones, with the intent of bringing more of the profits to the Chilean people, and eventually producing lithium-based products in Chile, rather than only selling raw lithium. From the Associated Press:
Boric, who spoke Thursday on a national media network, said the state will participate in the entire lithium production cycle in a “public-private collaboration” that the government will control.
“Any private company, whether foreign or local, that wants to exploit lithium in Chile must partner with the state,” he said.
Chile has the world’s third largest lithium reserves, at 9.6 million tons, behind Bolivia with 21 million and Argentina with 19.3 million, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. But Chile was the world’s second largest producer last year with an estimated 39,000 metric tons, after Australia, with 61,000 tons.
Boric wants to create a National Lithium Company to partner with private companies, but he conceded that likely will not happen quickly because it would require support from an absolute majority in both houses of Congress, which is fragmented among a variety of parties.
In the meantime, he said, the state National Copper Corporation will sign agreements with private parties for lithium extraction.
Currently, there are two companies that mine lithium in Chile: the U.S. company Albemarle and Chile’s Chemical and Mining Society (Soquimich), which has been controlled for three decades by Julio Ponce, whose father-in-law was the late dictator Augusto Pinochet. Boric said Ponce’s contracts will be respected.
Boric said that in addition to being involved in mining, the government will promote the development of lithium products with added value, with the goal of becoming the world’s leading lithium producer.
The minister of mining, Marcela Hernando, recently told Congress that the government cannot advance alone in the exploitation of lithium because “technology and knowledge are in private industry.”
A public-private partnership is needed, Hernando said, though he added that “the state is the owner of lithium,” which is an “uncompromisable” position of the government.
This seems like a pretty generous arrangement, to me. As the AP mentioned, the existing situation gives the profits from Chile’s lithium to a US company, and the son-in-law of a murderous, fascist dictator installed by the US. I’m underscoring that, because there’s a long history of colonial powers – especially the US – violently installing governments that will give them favorable deals on natural resources. If a nation manages to re-assert sovereignty and self-governance, they’re then faced with the existence of these exploitative deals that might as well be designed to keep that nation in poverty. If they say, rightly, that the existing contracts lack validity because of how they came to be, well, that’s an excuse for the US to come in with assassins, death squads, and coups.
To me, it appears that Boric is trying to thread that needle by carrying the burden of enriching a dictator’s relative and a corporation from North Carolina for many years to come. This plan lays out a slow path to a better arrangement that may avoid US interference, by indulging Ponce and Albemarle far more than they deserve. Even so, I think it’s pretty much certain that both will view this as a plan to steal from them, and will do everything they can to block this policy from going through, and to replace Boric with some flavor of neoliberal.
Chile’s congress still needs to approve this, and to me that says it’s far too soon to celebrate. Some of you may recall that I posted about the effort to draft a new constitution, last year. The first draft was shot down, and so they’re trying again this year, with a more conservative rewrite. Boric campaigned on ending the era of neoliberalism that was imposed by Pinochet and the United States, but unfortunately winning the presidency doesn’t mean he has the power to do that. It is good that one person can’t just force through whatever they want, but placing limits on an individual’s political power can only do so much if there are no limits on an individual’s economic power. I think the situation in Chile is nowhere near as dire as the United States, but it’s clear that the capitalist class still has power to wield, to undermine efforts to move Chile to the left, even discounting the threat of less legal interference.
I’m worried, obviously, but I absolutely think this is a good thing for Boric to be attempting, and I hope he keeps trying even if this attempt is blocked. Learning the history of this sort of thing can, quite naturally, lead one to be pessimistic about how a situation like this will play out. It’s good to be on the alert about this sort of thing, and reasonable to worry, but never forget that our whole project, on the left, is all about breaking from historical patterns. Victory is by no means guaranteed. The losses of the past and the horrors of the present make it very clear that we are fighting against the odds. In our current divided state, the aristocracy has far, far more power than the working class, and a lot of that time, that does mean that we will lose. We should keep fighting anyway, because the alternative is to accept misery and servitude for most of us, followed shortly by likely destruction for all of us.
“I do not fight fascists because I will win. I fight fascists because they are fascists.”
–Chris Hedges
This past January, I wrote briefly about the police killing of a forest defender named Manuel “Tortuguita” Terán . When I posted that, we didn’t know much, including who the victim was, but I pointed out that the story given by the cops – that Tortuguita had fired on them first – was probably a lie. The primary reason for that assumption was the simple fact that cops lie all the time, about pretty much everything. The secondary reason is that while there probably are activists out there who would feel justified in attacking police, I cannot believe that they’d go about it by facing an advancing wall of armed cops head-on, without any cover. My assumption seems to be well-founded, and I think I should provide a content warning for descriptions of gunshot wounds going forward.
The people who knew Tortuguita said that they were a pacifist, and as far as anyone knew, they were unarmed. Then came the body cam footage from cops who were nearby, saying that the gunfire they heard sounded suppressed (some of the cops’ weapons had silencers) and responding to someone on the radio implying that the cop who did get shot was the victim of “friendly fire”. Then came the autopsy commissioned by Tortuguita’s family, which indicated that they’d been hit by dozens of bullets – so many that their paths through their body frequently intersected.
And now, we have the official autopsy, revealing, in addition to the horrifying damage to their body, zero gunpowder residue on Tortuguita’s hands, meaning zero evidence that they had fired a gun.
DeKalb county’s autopsy, released to the media through open records requests on Wednesday, offers no support for the notion that Paez Terán fired a weapon, stating that “gunpowder residue is not seen on the hands” or clothes of Paez Terán. Residue on the hands might indicate that a person fired a gun, but neither this analysis nor a test known as the GSR kit is foolproof, according to experts.
Patrick Bailey, director of the DeKalb county medical examiner’s office, told the Guardian that the county forwarded evidence to the GBI for them to perform the GSR kit, or gunshot residue test.
Nonetheless, the autopsy report does little to clarify what actually happened that day, except for noting in 19 pages of clinical detail the 57 gunshot wounds that Paez Terán received, employing every letter of the alphabet more than once to label the injuries.
“I tried to read the whole thing – in the end it was a little too much,” said Daniel Paez, Manuel’s older brother, reached at his home in Texas. “The very fact that they’re talking about Manny, and how they died – I didn’t even want to share it with our mother, since the pain of losing Manny continues to haunt us; it doesn’t seem to get better.”
“It’s just brutal,” said Wingo Smith, one of the team of attorneys representing the Paez Terán family. “It’s just gruesome, the effect of the shots on their body, the actual devastation.” Smith and his colleagues received the autopsy results and met with staff at the DeKalb medical examiner’s office last week, and shared the report with the Paez Terán family.
I want to note, here, that we don’t seem to have any body cam footage from the officers that killed Tortuguita. It’s almost like there’s either something to hide so they won’t release it, or the cops went in with an intent to kill, and so turned of the cameras. I have no evidence for this, of course, other than the fact that they apparently lied about what happened, and the fact that, once again, body cam footage of the event is either being held back, or doesn’t exist. According to the Intercept article I linked earlier, the cops initially lied by saying there wasn’t any footage at all, then walked that back partially, saying there was footage of the aftermath (which they’re not releasing).
I’ve felt this way for a while, but I think there’s ample reason to view this killing as an extrajudicial execution for the crime of opposing them. They went in ready to kill, and that’s exactly what they did. That would explain the inconsistencies in the story, it would fit what everyone around Tortuguita had to say about who they were, and it would explain why there’s no footage of the shooting – because the cops didn’t want there to be.
This is exactly the shit that the movement to defend the Atlanta forest is trying to stop. A huge facility for cops to train in urban warfare is just another level of militarization, on top of the harm done to the community by destroying the forest. Tortuguita was killed for trying to stop that. Crimethinc goes into more detail in their post Atlanta Police and Georgia State Patrol are Guilty of Murder: The Evidence and the Motive:
Gunshot residue tests are held to be reliable indicators of whether a person has fired a gun, scientifically and legally speaking. Gunshot residue can wear off over a period of four to six hours, but as mentioned in the autopsy, Tortuguita’s hands were bagged shortly after the murder, in order that if there was any gunshot residue on their hands, it would be preserved. According to the “Investigator Narrative” included in the autopsy, the official who prepared that narrative reported to the scene of the murder within two and a half hours and “covered the hands with white handbags to preserve any trace evidence.”
We can be sure that Atlanta authorities missed no opportunity to secure and publicize any evidence that could corroborate their narrative that Tortuguita shot first. Instead, because the autopsy showed that Tortuguita did not fire a gun at all, the results of the Dekalb County autopsy were suppressed for months.
Is it possible that Tortuguita somehow fired a gun while wearing gloves, or fired a gun and then cleaned their hands? According to the Dekalb County autopsy, Tortuguita experienced at least 57 gunshot wounds; this video shows that all of the gunfire occurred in less than eleven seconds.1 That means that Tortuguita died within a few seconds of the first shot, whoever fired it. In the instants between the first couple shots and their death, there was no time for Tortuguita to remove and conceal gloves, nor to clean gunshot residue off their hands.
To all that evidence, we must add the findings of the second autopsy, the one that Tortuguita’s family commissioned, which found that Tortuguita was “likely sitting cross-legged with their hands up” when they were killed.
This is consistent with the gunshot wounds described in the autopsy conducted by the Dekalb County Medical Examiner:
• Right Forearm and Hand—fractures of the index finger and thumb metacarpal. […]
• Left Forearm and Hand—fracture of the middle finger proximal phalange.
The image is a diagram of the locations of gunshot wounds on Tortuguita’s body. A majority of them seem to be on their legs, with several on their hands and arms, two in their gut, two in the collarbone region, and one through the eye.
As can be seen in the diagram included in the Dekalb County autopsy, bullets struck Tortuguita in both their left hand and their right hand. If they had been holding a gun in either of those hands, the gun would have been struck by a bullet, leaving evidence that Tortuguita had been holding the gun when police opened fire. Atlanta authorities would have eagerly released that evidence in order to corroborate their narrative.
They have done no such thing. They did release a photograph of the gun that they allege was in Tortuguita’s possession—but in the photograph, the gun does not show any sign of having been struck by a bullet.
It follows that Tortuguita did not fire a gun on the morning of January 18, 2023.2
In that case, how did it occur that an officer was shot that day, and with a bullet allegedly matching a handgun registered to Tortuguita that was found on the scene?
According to an early Georgia Bureau of Investigation press release,
The handgun is described as a Smith & Wesson M&P Shield 9mm. Forensic ballistic analysis has confirmed that the projectile recovered from the trooper’s wound matches Teran’s handgun.
In fact, Georgia State Patrol—the officers who murdered Tortuguita—are all standard-issued firearms that use 9mm ammunition. According to the “Investigator Narrative” included in the Dekalb County autopsy, during the killing of Tortuguita,
“The uniformed officers reportedly discharged their service weapons, to include a .223 caliber rifle and 9mm handguns.”
So the fact that the gun apparently registered to Tortuguita used 9mm ammunition proves nothing, considering that Georgia State Patrol officers were shooting 9mm ammunition that day.
If exculpatory “forensic ballistic analysis” existed confirming that the bullet that struck the officer was fired from the specific handgun registered to Tortuguita, the authorities would surely have released that by now. The fact that they have not done so suggests that the GBI statement that “the projectile recovered from the trooper’s wound matches Teran’s handgun” means simply that it was 9mm ammunition, like all the bullets that the Georgia State Patrol officers were firing.
Tortuguita experienced at least 57 gunshot woulds within a period of eleven seconds. That offers a hint of how many bullets were in the air during the murder. We don’t know how many rounds Georgia State Patrol officers fired off, but it may have been considerably more than that.
I would say it’s almost guaranteed that there were more bullets than that. It’s been shown that cops tend to miss more often than they hit their targets, so there were probably at least 100 9mm bullets in the air during those 11 seconds. The article goes on to discuss the body cam footage I mentioned earlier, with an officer apparently believing the police shot one of their own. More than that, the police “evidence” doesn’t fit with the video footage we do have:
One more detail remains to be accounted for. According to the “Investigator Narrative” included in the Dekalb County autopsy, “Two empty 9mm shell casings were located under the decedent’s body” by the investigator who arrived on the scene after the shooting. Did Tortuguita fire those shells?
Video footage distinctly shows that the first three shots were fired in a steady, practiced rhythm, followed an instant later by a fourth shot, after which all the other shots began. It seems most likely that an edgy officer—not Tortuguita—fired those four shots, after which all the other officers began firing. If Tortuguita had fired those first shots, there would presumably have been three or four shell casings around Tortuguita’s body—and more to the point, there would have been gunshot residue on Tortuguita’s hands.
Have I mentioned that cops lie, yet? I feel like I might have forgotten to mention that. Cops lie a lot, which makes it hard to believe anything they say, especially since they also have a habit of planting evidence. The Crimethinc article goes on to discuss motive, and some other factors – it’s worth a read.
Environmental activists are murdered with shocking regularity around the world, where activists – often Indigenous people – are pushing back against environmental destruction that is almost universally driven by greed. According to The Guardian, Tortuguita was the first such killing in the US. The biggest driving factor in Atlanta, while greed is certainly involved in the Cop City project, seems to be the degree to which USian cops hate being told “no”. They want their new playground, they want unchallenged authority, and they are clearly willing to kill to get their way.
I believe I’ve said before that I have a great deal of respect for the people on the front lines of this fight, and I hope it’s clear to all of you that using that “military” terminology is important. These activists are not trying to wage war, but a a war is being waged against them, and their lives are very much in danger.
If you want to help, Defend the Atlanta Forest has a few suggestions, most of which don’t involve putting your body on the line:
There are many ways to get involved. You can support online, help organize your community, show up for actions, or any other number of activities depending on your availability and comfort level. The movement appreciates the need for diverse tactics, meaning many forms of struggle that move towards a common goal. Here’s some more ideas:
- You can sign up for sporadic text alerts here: 470.606.1212
- You can Visit the forest at 3251 W Side Place, Atlanta GA 30316.
- You can donate to on-the-ground forest defense and community groups.
- You can donate to legal & bail support fund for protestors.
- You can donate to the lawsuit challenging the Dekalb County movie studio land swap.
- You can organize protests, send phone calls or emails, or help with direct actions of different kinds to encourage contractors of the various projects to stop the destruction. You can find some of the contractors here: stopreevesyoung.com
- Call Brasfield & Gorrie (678.581.6400), the Atlanta Police Foundation (770.354.3392), and the City of Atlanta (404.330.6100) and ask them to cancel the project and to remain peaceful with tree-sitters and other on-the-ground protesters.
- You can form an Action Group in your community, neighborhood, town, city, college, or scene. Together, you can host information nights, movie screenings, potluck dinners, and protests at the offices of contractors, at the homes of the board members, on campus, or elsewhere. You can post and pass out fliers at public places and shows, knock on doors to talk to neighbors and sign them up for text alerts, fundraisers, or actions, or you can innovate new activities altogether.
- You can conduct independent research about the destruction of the forest, construction projects, their funders, their contractors, or lesser-known details about the project using public records searches or other open source investigation techniques and send your findings to us at defendtheatlantaforest[at]protonmail[dot]com.
- You can organize to join or create a camp in the South River/Weelaunee Forest. Respect people’s space and try to be friendly.
- Finally, you and friends or your group could organize to caravan down to the forest from near or far during weeks of action.
Obviously, this fight is ongoing. The twitter account associated with this list has announced a week of action from June 24th to July 1st of this year (2023, for people reading this in the future). As they said, how you go about helping is up to you. Any help is better than none, and it takes a village to raze and empire. Tortuguita’s cause was just, and it’s one that we should carry on, be it in their name, or just because it is necessary. Climate change, bigotry, capitalism, authoritarianism – they’re all different fronts on the same war, and sitting out the fight simply isn’t an option.
Thank you for reading! If you liked this post, please share it around. If you read this blog regularly, please consider joining my small but wonderful group of patrons. Because of my immigration status, I’m not allowed to get a normal job, so my writing is all I have for the foreseeable future, and I’d love for it to be a viable career long-term. As part of that goal, I’m currently working on a young adult fantasy series, so if supporting this blog isn’t enough inducement by itself, for just $5/month you can work with me to name a place or character in that series!
A few months back, I wrote about how (poor, mostly black) children were being coerced into joining JROTC. Armies in general have a long history of preying on the young and the poor, and the United States is no exception. The government-enforced poverty, the obscene costs of education and healthcare – so much about how the country is set up can make enlistment seem like the best shot at a decent life, even without the predatory tactics of recruiters. Unfortunately, recruiters are predatory, and are naturally updating their tools and tactics to be as effective as possible at feeding young people to the US war machine:
The federal contract materials outline plans by the Georgia Army National Guard to geofence 67 different public high schools throughout the state, targeting phones found within a one-mile boundary of their campuses with recruiting advertisements “with the intent of generating qualified leads of potential applicants for enlistment while also raising awareness of the Georgia Army National Guard.” Geofencing refers generally to the practice of drawing a virtual border around a real-world area and is often used in the context of surveillance-based advertising as well as more traditional law enforcement and intelligence surveillance. The Department of Defense expects interested vendors to deliver a minimum of 3.5 million ad views and 250,000 clicks, according to the contract paperwork.
While the deadline for vendors attempting to win the contract was the end of this past February, no public winner has been announced.
The ad campaign will make use of a variety of surveillance advertising techniques, including capturing the unique device IDs of student phones, tracking pixels, and IP address tracking. It will also plaster recruiting solicitations across Instagram, Snapchat, streaming television, and music apps. The documents note that “TikTok is banned for official DOD use (to include advertising),” owing to allegations that the app is a manipulative, dangerous conduit for hypothetical Chinese government propaganda.
The Georgia Army National Guard did not respond to a request for comment.
I bet they didn’t. Why would they bother? It’s not like there’s much chance of a Lever article stopping this.
I also love the irony of hand-wringing over “hypothetical Chinese government propaganda”, in a document outlining the use of a host of apps as conduits for US government propaganda. This is a good time to remind you, once again, that the US government does not care about human rights, privacy, or tyranny. It only pretends otherwise when it needs a cover for starting another war.
And while I do think military recruitment is absolutely a form of propaganda, they’re not just aiming this at the kids they’re trying to enlist, but also planning to send ads to parents, teachers, and other “centers of influence”, all aimed at pushing kids to sign up. It’s chilling to see it all laid out like this:
While the planned campaign appears primarily aimed at persuading high school students to sign up, the Guard is also asking potential vendors to also target “parents or centers of influence (i.e. coaches, school counselors, etc.)” with recruiting ads. The campaign plans not only call for broadcasting recruitment ads to kids at school, but also for pro-Guard ads to follow these students around as they continue using the internet and other apps, a practice known as retargeting. And while the digital campaign may begin within the confines of the classroom, it won’t remain there: One procurement document states the Guard is interested in “retargeting to high school students after school hours when they are at home,” as well as “after school hours. … This will allow us to capture potential leads while at after-school events.”
Although it’s possible that children caught in the geofence might have encountered a recruiter anyway — the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act mandated providing military recruiters with students’ contact information — critics of the plan say the use of geolocational data is an inherently invasive act. “Location based tracking is not legitimate,” said Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst with the American Civil Liberties Union. “It’s largely based on the collecting of people’s location data that they’re not aware of and haven’t given meaningful permission for.” The complex technology underpinning a practice like geofencing can obscure what it’s really accomplishing, argues Benjamin Lynde, an attorney with the ACLU of Georgia. “I think we have to start putting electronic surveillance in the context of what we would accept if it weren’t electronic,” Lynde told The Intercept. “If there were military recruiters taking pictures of students and trying to identify them that way, parents wouldn’t think that conduct is acceptable.” Lynde added that the ACLU of Georgia did not believe there were any state laws constraining geofence surveillance.
As the article goes on to say, a lot of this is allowed because of the way the US government ensures that basically anything rich people want to do is allowed by default. Corporations make money off of our data, and so their right to do so is protected. Children, on the other hand, should absolutely not expect protection:
It’s doubtful that potential vendors for the Georgia Guard have data accurate enough to avoid targeting kids under 17, according to Zach Edwards, a cybersecurity researcher who closely tracks the surveillance advertising sector. “It would also sweep up plenty of families with young kids who gave them phones before they turned 16 and who were using networks that had location-targetable ads,” he explained in a message to The Intercept. “Very, very few advertising networks track the age of kids under 18. It’s one giant bucket.”
In-school recruiting been hotly debated for decades, both defended as a necessary means of maintaining an all-volunteer military and condemned as a coercive practice that exploits the immaturity of young students. While the state’s plan specifies targeting only high school juniors and seniors ages 17 and above, demographic ad targeting is known to be error prone, and experts told The Intercept it’s possible the recruiting messages could reach the phones of younger children. “Generally, commercial databases aren’t known for their high levels of accuracy,” explained the ACLU’s Stanley. “If you have some incorrect ages in there, it’s really not a big deal [to the broker].” The accuracy of demographic targeting aside, there’s also a problem of geographic reality: “There are middle schools within a mile of those high schools,” according to Lynde of the ACLU of Georgia. “There’s no way there can be a specific delineation of who they’re targeting in that geofence.”
Indeed, dozens of the schools pegged for geotargeting have middle schools, elementary schools, parks, churches, and other sites where children may congregate within a mile radius, according to Google Maps. A geofence containing Hillgrove High School in Powder Springs, Georgia, would also snare phone-toting students at Still Elementary School and Lovinggood Middle School, the latter a mere thousand feet away. A mile-radius around Collins Hill High School in Suwanee, Georgia, would also include the Walnut Grove Elementary School, along with the nearby Oak Meadow Montessori School, a community swim club, a public park, and an aquatic center. Lynde, who himself enlisted with the Georgia National Guard in 2005, added that he’s concerned beaming recruiting ads directly to kids’ phones “could be a means to bypass parental involvement in the recruiting process,” allowing the state to circumvent the scrutiny adults might bring to traditional military recruiting methods like brochures and phone calls to a child’s house. “Parents should be involved from the onset
They only want parental involvement if it’ll increase recruitment, I guess. The US makes extensive use of its armed forces to impose its will around the world, and members of the National Guard are a part of that, with the added bonus that they can be deployed within the US to “keep order”, and for political stunts. Given my overall views, it probably won’t surprise you that I don’t think this new program is in any way acceptable. More than that, I think that the people pushing it should be barred from holding power or influence, because they are pushing it.
It feels as though it becomes clearer every day that the US government does not serve the USian people. Just as we and our data are the products of big tech companies, our government cares for us only to the extend that we are needed to work for the rich and powerful. Not only are they cyber-stalking teenagers to recruit them into an institution that serves private interests, they’re going to do it by paying a for-profit corporation, because what really matters is that more money goes to those who’re already rolling in it.
The image shows Captain Barbossa from Pirates of the Caribbean, with a glowing hat brim and collar, and some kind of augmented reality visor over his eyes, with a modern city in the background. The text reads, “You best start believing in cyberpunk dystopias – you’re in one
Which political party came to mind when you saw the title for this post?
If you’re in the United States, and you’re honest, it’s the Republican Party. They’ve got a long history of opposing efforts to make various forms of child marriage illegal, because evangelical Christians tend to view children as the property of their parents, and they tend to have an archaic view of marriage. Personally, I can’t think of a circumstance in which it would be OK for children to get married, and I’m deeply suspicious of any parents who are on board with such a thing. It reminds me strongly of “purity culture“, in which girls are pushed to pledge their virginity to their fathers, to be handed over, with the daughter, on her day of marriage. It’s just another part of the disturbing obsession that conservative Christians have with sex and children. The grim reality is that child marriage is legal in the vast majority of U.S. states, and it’s Republicans who’re working to keep it that way, as demonstrated by state senator Mike Moon of Missouri, the “destination wedding spot for 15 year old child brides“:
Moon later clarified that the person he knew who got married at 12 was actually a couple of twelve-year-olds, one of whom got the other one pregnant. Apparently the correct response to that, according to him and whatever weird subculture created him, is to force the children to marry, and presumably to force the girl – a literal child – to go through pregnancy and childbirth.
These are the same people who’re attempting to eradicate trans people “to protect the children”. This is who they are. This guy, Roy Moore and his defenders, Matt Walsh talking about teenage fertility – the list is far longer than I have the stomach to research. People in general are to be controlled, but children in particular seem to be both property of their parents (if those parents are conservative Christians), and disposable pawns in the culture war. The actual wellbeing of children never enters into the equation, beyond what they believe their tradition and religion say is for the best.
Far too many people are being governed by these gross weirdos, and while I’m aware of all the ways in which the U.S. is not a democracy, it still disturbs me that there’s a real voter base for this. Hopefully, it’s on its way out, but the GOP seems to be making an effort to use the government to impose their bizarre ideology on the country by force.
So, as you may have heard, Bud Light’s new brand representative is a trans woman named Dylan Mulvaney. She’s apparently a big deal on TikTok, but I had honestly never heard of her until the conservative temper tantrum over this brand deal. If you’ve heard about this at all, it’s either because you drink Bud Light, or because you heard about people doing stuff like pouring out their beer, or shooting their beer with guns, or running over their beer with pickup trucks. It’s the most I’ve heard about Bud Light in years, which is the whole point.
You can tell conservatives really love capitalism, because every time a corporation makes a bid for free advertising, the wingnuts fall all over themselves in their rush to oblige. That being the case, I think it’s worth posting this old video from Hbomberguy that explains what’s happening, and why. Bud Light doesn’t give a shit about trans people, they just know that most USians aren’t extremist bigots, which means that this will bring in a lot of profit for relatively little advertising investment.
I’ve never really watched TV news, but I’ve been given to understand that a great deal of attention is paid to crime. Combine this with the ubiquity of “copaganda” in media, and I can understand how people might be misled into thinking that violent crime is out of control. The reality is that all that focus on criminals, and the paranoia about home invaders and muggers – it all seems to be a distraction from the biggest form of theft in the United States: Wage theft.
For those who are unclear on the concept, this is not another way to refer to the portion of wealth created by a worker that is kept by the boss as “profit”. We’ll get to that later. “Wage theft” is when an employer fails to pay workers what they are owed by law. This happens in a variety of ways. My last landlord in the U.S. would delay payment to his workers, and then underpay them when he did pay, forcing them to fight to get even the pittance that he was legally required to give for the work they were doing. This man, to remind you, owns dozens of homes in Somerville. Zooming out, the bulk of wage theft seems to be from paying less than minimum wage, followed by overtime violations, but all together, it adds up to a truly staggering amount of money, mostly stolen from poor people, by rich people.
Wage theft is a nationwide epidemic that costs American workers as much as $50 billion a year, a new Economic Policy Institute report finds. In An Epidemic of Wage Theft Is Costing Workers Hundreds of Millions of Dollars a Year, EPI Vice President Ross Eisenbrey and EPI intern Brady Meixell examine incidences of wage theft—employers’ failure to pay workers money they are legally entitled to—across the country. The total amount of money recovered for the victims of wage theft who retained private lawyers or complained to federal or state agencies was at least $933 million in 2012, almost three times greater than all the money stolen in robberies that year. However, since most victims never report wage theft and never sue, the real cost of wage theft to workers is much greater, and could be closer to $50 billion a year.
“Wage theft affects far more people than more well-known crimes such as bank robberies, convenience store robberies, street and highway robberies, and gas station robberies combined, and can be absolutely devastating for workers living from paycheck to paycheck,” said Eisenbrey. “For low-wage workers, the wages lost from wage theft can total nearly 10 percent of their annual earnings.”
The authors also conducted a study of workers in low-wage industries in New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles and found that in any given week, two-thirds experienced at least one pay-related violation. They estimate that the average loss per worker over the course of a year was $2,634, out of total earnings of $17,616. The total annual wage theft from front-line workers in low-wage industries in the three cities approached $3 billion. If these findings are generalizable to the rest of the U.S. low-wage workforce of 30 million, wage theft is costing workers more than $50 billion a year.
The image is a block chart breaking down the scale of wage theft vs. other forms of theft. The large blue block on the left represents wage theft, broken up into minimum wage violations ($23.2 billion), overtime violations ($8.8 b), rest break violations ($4b), and off the clock violations ($3.2b). The smaller block of “other types of theft” is broken up between larceny at $5.3b, burglary ($4.3b), auto theft ($3.8b), and robbery ($0.34b). The image is from tworkerscenter.org
This is one part of why the gap between rich and poor keeps growing, and why life is such a struggle for those at the bottom. Even minimum wage is too much for these people. I often talk about the endless greed of the capitalist class, and this is exactly what I mean – they earnestly seem to believe that everything belongs to them by right, and therefor they are justified in doing whatever they can get away with to hoard more. It doesn’t matter that they signed a contract, they don’t even want to pay enough to keep their workers alive.
The problem is that even this is just a part of the whole picture. To start with, it’s not really treated like a crime. There may be fines or prison if theft can be proven to be intentional and the legal team isn’t good, but if the employer maintains that it was just incompetence, or a mistake, or an error in a new system, generally the worst-case scenario for the boss is that they have to hand over what they stole. Minor theft by poor people will result in years in the violent hellscape of the U.S. prison system, but when rich people steal billions, they can be confident that they’re safe.
And let’s not forget that with so many USians living paycheck to paycheck, even if they get back the money, they might have had to take out a payday loan, or been unable to afford medicine, or food. They might have gotten evicted because they couldn’t afford rent, even though they’d held up their end of the contract.
But it seems that all this barely-illegal theft, and all the harm caused by it, is itself dwarfed by the amount of money that has been, quite legally, taken from the USian working class, even as those workers have been increasing their productivity year after year. See, it turns out that we can, in some ways, measure wage stagnation in terms of Wall Street bonuses:
The federal minimum wage in the United States would be more than $42 an hour today if it rose at the same rate as the average Wall Street bonus over the past four decades, according to an analysis released Thursday by the Institute for Policy Studies.
Citing newly released data from the New York State Comptroller, IPS noted that the average Wall Street bonus has increased by 1,165% since 1985, not adjusted for inflation.
Last year, the average cash bonus paid to Wall Street employees was $176,700—75% higher than in 2008 but slightly lower than the 2021 level of $240,400.
The federal minimum wage, meanwhile, has been completely stagnant since 2009, when it was bumped up to $7.25 from $5.15. While many states and localities have approved substantial pay increases in recent years, 20 states have kept their hourly wage floors at the federal minimum.
Sarah Anderson, director of the Global Economy Project at IPS and the author of the new analysis, wrote Thursday that “average weekly earnings for all U.S. private sector workers increased by only 54.4%” between 2008 and 2022—a significantly slower pace than inequality-fueling Wall Street bonuses.
“The total bonus pool for 190,800 New York City-based Wall Street employees in 2022 was $33.7 billion—enough to pay for 771,520 jobs that pay $15 per hour with benefits for a year,” Anderson observed. “Wall Street bonuses come on top of base salaries, which averaged $516,560 for New York securities industry employees in 2021.”
There’s a popular misconception that rich people don’t do any work to actually earn their wealth. In reality, they buy influence, create labyrinths of bureaucracy, and put a great deal of effort into taking as much as they possibly can from everyone who is poorer than them. This is the system working as designed. This is the world capitalism provides – one in which those at the bottom are ground down relentlessly, to the point where they’re selling parts of themselves to survive, while those at the top invest obscene amounts of money in military and police to crush the uprisings that such a system will inevitably provoke.
And, lest you forgot about climate change for a blissful moment, those same tools of control are used to put down any other efforts at radical change. They won’t pay you, but they’ll happily chip in to train and pay thugs to beat you down for complaining too loudly. Stories like this are why this “climate change blog” is so often about social and political stuff that’s not directly related. Some of it’s that I feel a duty to talk about things, like the ongoing genocidal attack on trans people, but a lot of it is that all of these things are connected. Money isn’t all they’re stealing. They’re stealing our health, by pouring poison into the world. They’re stealing our time, by ensuring that we have to work most of our lives away. They’re stealing our future, by working to prevent climate action. They’re doing all of that, and they make sure that no matter how many billions of lives they may destroy, it’s all legal.
No system of law that allows this can be considered legitimate.
Thank you for reading! If you liked this post, please share it around. If you read this blog regularly, please consider joining my small but wonderful group of patrons. Because of my immigration status, I’m not allowed to get a normal job, so my writing is all I have for the foreseeable future, and I’d love for it to be a viable career long-term. As part of that goal, I’m currently working on a young adult fantasy series, so if supporting this blog isn’t enough inducement by itself, for just $5/month you can work with me to name a place or character in that series!
Have I mentioned that I think we’re being too slow in our response to climate change? I feel like it’s come up. We’re not moving fast enough. We need to end fossil fuel use far, far faster than the current rate, and that is not going to happen if we care more about corporate profits than human survival. Now, I suppose I should say that this is based on the modeling of a research group, and it isn’t currently the “consensus” that we’re headed for three degrees of warming. I’m willing to bet that most climate scientists would agree that we are, or that three degrees is optimistic, but I couldn’t cite you a source on that. What I can cite is this report saying that it’s likely that that’s the trajectory we’re on:
“More and more countries are promising that they will phase out coal from their energy systems, which is positive. But unfortunately, their commitments are not strong enough. If we are to have a realistic chance of meeting the 2-degree target, the phasing out of coal needs to happen faster, and countries that rely on other fossil fuels need to increase their transition rate”, says Aleh Cherp, professor at the International Environmental Institute at Lund University.
The phasing out of coal is a necessity to keep the world’s temperature increase below 2 degrees, compared to pre-industrial levels. In a study by Mistra Electrification, a group of researchers has analyzed 72 countries’ pledged commitments to phase out their coal use by 2022-2050.
In the best case scenarios, the researchers show that it is possible that the temperature increase will stay below 2 degrees. But that assumes, among other things, that both China and India begin phasing out their coal use within five years. Furthermore, their phase-out needs to be as rapid as it has been in the UK and faster than Germany has promised.
The research group has also developed scenarios that they consider to be the most realistic. These scenarios indicate that Earth is moving towards a global warming of 2.5-3 degrees.
“The countries’ commitments are not sufficient, not even among the most ambitious countries. In addition, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine risks jeopardizing several of the countries’ commitments”, says Jessica Jewell, Associate professor at Physical Resource Theory, Chalmers University of Technology.
And Biden’s not really helping, either.
To say I’m disappointed would be to imply that I expected better. I suppose I did expect better, a couple decades ago, but world “leaders” have taught me the naivete of that optimism. This isn’t a problem that we can solve by trying to “nudge” the market in a particular direction, because a great many of the most powerful people in the world are already spending vast sums of money to “nudge” things back on track. I’ll be writing a post soon about how the billionaires think all this is going to play out, but the basic reality is that we can’t afford to wait for them to realize they’re wrong, assuming they’re even capable of such a realization. As a matter of survival, we need to take control of society away from them, and put it on a different path.
It is an evident truth that, whatever may be the rate of increase in the means of subsistence, the increase of population must be limited by it, at least after the food has once been divided into the smallest shares that will support life. All the children born beyond what would be required to keep up the population to this level must necessarily perish, unless room be made for them by the deaths of grown persons. It has appeared indeed clearly in the course of this work, that in all old states the marriages and births depend principally upon the deaths, and that there is no encouragement to early unions so powerful as a great mortality. To act consistently there- fore we should facilitate, instead of foolishly and vainly endeavouring to impede, the operations of nature in producing this mortality ; and if we dread the too frequent visitation of the horrid form of famine, we should sedulously encourage the other forms of destruction which we compel nature to use. Instead of recommending cleanliness to the poor, we should encourage contrary habits. In our towns we should make the streets narrower, crowd more people into the houses, and court the return of the plague. In the country we should build our villages near stagnant pools, and particularly encourage settlements in all marshy and unwholesome situations.^ But above all we should reprobate specific remedies for ravaging diseases ; and those benevolent, but much mistaken men, who have thought they were doing a service to mankind by projecting schemes for the total extirpation of particular disorders. If by these and similar means the annual mortality were increased from 1 in 36 or 40, to one in 18 or 20, we might probably every one of us marry at the age of puberty, and yet few be absolutely starved
When Thomas Malthus wrote that, he was convinced that population growth would inevitably outstrip our ability to produce food. He was wrong, of course, but more than that his solution was eugenics based on the assumption that poor people were the problem, and the solution was to deliberately make their lives worse so they’d die faster. Once upon a time, I might have written that, since we’re more than capable of feeding everyone on the planet, we have outgrown this misguided and murderous idea. Unfortunately, I think it’s as popular as ever, particularly among those to whom Malthus’ recommendation would not apply. They also seem to love the perspective that poor people are sub-human, and more like livestock to be controlled, than actual people. I don’t know whether capitalists actually believe it, but they all adhere to the dogma that because “anyone can make it” under capitalism, that means that the poor chose their lot in life by not working hard enough. Poverty, under this ideology, is itself proof of unworthiness, and the only way to make people better is to punish them for being bad. They tend to avoid saying as much, but it’s pretty clear when you look at their “solutions” to societal problems.
The newest version of this old idea is probably longtermism/effective altruism, which basically holds that because rich people are “doing” all the important stuff like trying to colonize space, they need to be able to do whatever they want now, because it will make life better for the trillions of humans that will live out in space some time in the future. Poverty, child slavery, workplace death or injury, disease, global warming – none of it matters “in the grand scheme of things”, because Elon’s gonna make us interplanetary. This same self-importance seems to be prevalent throughout the ranks of the rich, including politicians.
This post isn’t about all of that, but I wanted to try to provide some context for the fact that North Dakota Republicans just shot down a free school lunch program – for feeding hungry children – and then gave themselves an increase in their own free lunch program:
Just over a week ago, North Dakota lawmakers voted to prevent giving free school lunches to low-income students. Then, on Thursday, they voted to increase the amount of money they get to spend on their own lunch.
On March 27, the Senate narrowly rejected a bill, which had passed the House, guaranteeing free school lunches to K-12 students in families at or below 200 percent of the federal poverty level.
Debating free school lunch for low-income kids, North Dakota State Sen. Mike Wobbema (R) says families are to blame for their hunger: "It’s really the problem of parents being negligent with their kids, if their kids are choosing to eat in the first place."
The bill died, 23-24. pic.twitter.com/WotKJqOXGN
— Heartland Signal (@HeartlandSignal) March 29, 2023
On Thursday, the Senate voted 26–21 to pass a bill to raise per diem meal reimbursements for state employees traveling within the state, from $35 to $45.
Republican Assistant Majority Leader Jerry Klein told local outlet InForum that state employees should be getting a higher sum because inflation costs have made meals more expensive. Klein voted against giving students, whose parents are also being squeezed by inflation, free school lunch.
“I thought today’s vote was very self-serving,” Democratic Senate Minority Leader Kathy Hogan told InForum. “How can we vote for ourselves when we can’t vote for children?”
The effort to give low-income students free school lunches for the next two years would have cost just some $6 million, a relatively small price to pay to ensure children don’t go hungry. While the Senate failed to pass the bill, the House is not giving up quite yet, reattaching the provision to a broader school funding bill.
I think that every person running for political office should be made to spell out what they believe society is for. Why are we doing all this? If literally feeding children is not the problem of the government, then what is? For some, it seems like it’s literally just there to serve the whims and interests of the rich, and to keep everyone else in line as the rich destroy everything. These politicians, and all others who oppose free school lunches, are actively choosing to harm the development of children in ways that will likely affect their entire lives. They’re also choosing to weaken the immune systems of poor children, and to make it much, much harder for them to succeed in school. The resources absolutely exist, but whatever these “leaders” view as their responsibilities, feeding starving children isn’t on the list.
I suppose that shouldn’t be surprising. After all, US politicians in both parties work to inflict and maintain malnutrition in poor children all over the world on a daily basis. and have done for decades. Honestly, they’ve been working to ensure people go hungry in the U.S. as well, from the enforcement of racial poverty during and since segregation, to the continuation of environmental inequality, to the continual assault on any government program that seeks to improve life for the working class.
Writing about this feels a bit like writing about the train derailment in East Palestine. This isn’t a new problem, it’s just that sometimes reporting on it catches national attention for a little while. This stuff is going to keep happening. It will not stop until the people organize enough to make it stop. There are absolutely politicians who are doing what they can to make the world better, and that work is worth acknowledging. The school lunch program has been attached to another education bill, and maybe the press about this glaring hypocrisy will shame some people into changing their votes, but the resources of the wealthy are on the side of those who want children to go hungry, and unless we take away the power of the wealthy, they will never stop trying to consume everything and everyone to for their own enrichment. Is it eugenics? It’s hard to say what’s going on inside a person’s head, but the actions we can see sure read like those of someone who shares Malthus’ disdain for the filthy poors.
Thank you for reading! If you liked this post, please share it around. If you read this blog regularly, please consider joining my small but wonderful group of patrons. Because of my immigration status, I’m not allowed to get a normal job, so my writing is all I have for the foreseeable future, and I’d love for it to be a viable career long-term. As part of that goal, I’m currently working on a young adult fantasy series, so if supporting this blog isn’t enough inducement by itself, for just $5/month you can work with me to name a place or character in that series!
There have been a lot of concerns, over the past few years, about Clarence Thomas and his fitness for the exalted office he holds. Most of that has revolved around the fact that his wife, Ginni Thomas, has been active in far-right politics. I feel like corruption from conservatives in government should be expected. Everything about their philosophy says that they ought to be able to take whatever they can get, and so I’m not especially surprised to hear that Clarence Thomas has been getting lavish gifts from a billionaire in the form of jet rides, vacations and more, without disclosing them as he is required to do.
In late June 2019, right after the U.S. Supreme Court released its final opinion of the term, Justice Clarence Thomas boarded a large private jet headed to Indonesia. He and his wife were going on vacation: nine days of island-hopping in a volcanic archipelago on a superyacht staffed by a coterie of attendants and a private chef.
If Thomas had chartered the plane and the 162-foot yacht himself, the total cost of the trip could have exceeded $500,000. Fortunately for him, that wasn’t necessary: He was on vacation with real estate magnate and Republican megadonor Harlan Crow, who owned the jet — and the yacht, too.
For more than two decades, Thomas has accepted luxury trips virtually every year from the Dallas businessman without disclosing them, documents and interviews show. A public servant who has a salary of $285,000, he has vacationed on Crow’s superyacht around the globe. He flies on Crow’s Bombardier Global 5000 jet. He has gone with Crow to the Bohemian Grove, the exclusive California all-male retreat, and to Crow’s sprawling ranch in East Texas. And Thomas typically spends about a week every summer at Crow’s private resort in the Adirondacks.
The extent and frequency of Crow’s apparent gifts to Thomas have no known precedent in the modern history of the U.S. Supreme Court.
These trips appeared nowhere on Thomas’ financial disclosures. His failure to report the flights appears to violate a law passed after Watergate that requires justices, judges, members of Congress and federal officials to disclose most gifts, two ethics law experts said. He also should have disclosed his trips on the yacht, these experts said.
This is what happens when you create unaccountable power. What are you gonna do, call the cops on a member of the Supreme Court? Sure, he ought to be impeached, but I’m not going to hold my breath. I’m not saying Democrats are much better, but conservatives have long, long had their game plan for when they get caught breaking rules or laws – claim that it’s all a political ploy by enemies who don’t know when to stop, threaten violence from right-wing extremists, and promise political retribution that’s now justified because “they” struck first. I continue to have little hope that any powerful person in the United States will ever be held to account, unless their victims are other members of the ruling class.
Still, I suppose it’ll be interesting to watch this unfold, and it’d be lovely to be proven wrong, as always. You may find this video on the topic from Beau of the Fifth Column to be interesting. I was intrigued by his claim that the hardest part for Thomas to justify won’t be the hundreds of thousands of dollars in vacations and the like, but the use of his benefactor’s private jet.
