Saturday, April 30, 2022

Take It Easy on May Day !

http://take10us.wordpress.com/category/charles-brown-labor-notes/

The Internationale https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JmFa2Q40lg#t=61

Charles Brown – Labor Notes

Take It Easy On May Day!

Posted on May 2, 2014

May Day approaches again. I have a dream of a 35 hour workweek with no cut in pay. Leisure is freedom! Hurray, Hurray for the Very First of May!

YET, today in the real world in Michigan, original location of big historical victories in industrial unionism, woe is the Laboring Class and its trade unions. Snake Snyder, the Governor, and his band of tea party pirates have humiliated the middle class enacting a work-for-Less (“right”- to -work) statute. It is archaic, conservative law based on the federal Taft-Hartley statute of 1948.

Taft-Hartley law, this old bourgeois ghost, hovers over all that labor does in politics in Michigan this Merry, Merry First of May 2014. Round the Maypole we’ll go anyway! “The anthropologist Mircea Eliade theorizes that the maypoles were simply a part of the general rejoicing at the return of summer, and the growth of new vegetation. In this way, they bore similarities with the May Day garlands which were also a common festival practice in Britain and Ireland.”

Hurray for May Day and the Haymarketeers, who protested in Chicago in 1886, seeking a shortening of the work-day. They were framed and martyred by the local business class. Let us remember their struggle for longer holidays and shorter work days; and stand on their shoulders this spring.

In Michigan, we will win again. Repeal “right”-to-work-FOR-LESS” law! Repeal Taft-Hartley! May Day will come again. The Cause of Labor is the Hope of the World Shorter Working Day, A Longer Life; Cooperation and Emulation, not Competition; Hope in Work and Joy in Leisure; Art and Enjoyment for All!.

Written by: Charles Brown Charles Brown is a decades long political activist, feminist and partisan of the working class in Detroit , Michigan. His favorite slogans are “We are the 99%” and “Yes we can !”.
https://take10us.wordpress.com/category/charles-brown-labor-notes/

http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2022/04/httpsen_30.html

Friday, April 29, 2022

Vanguard of the 99%

Michigan Republican resigns from GOP committee citing 'delusional lies' Craig Mauger The Detroit News

Michigan Republican resigns from GOP committee citing 'delusional lies'

Craig Mauger The Detroit News

Lansing — Tony Daunt, a longtime Michigan Republican insider, resigned Tuesday night from the GOP's state committee, saying party leaders had made the coming election a test of "who is most cravenly loyal" to former President Donald Trump.

Daunt, who is one of two Republican members of the Board of State Canvassers, made the comment in an email addressed to Judy Rapanos, chairwoman of the 4th Congressional District Republican Committee. The message was obtained by The Detroit News.

New:Wealthy Michigan GOP donors move to avert Trump takeover

For five years, Daunt has been one of about 100 members of the Republican Party's state committee, a panel that helps guide the party's decisions. But that ended Tuesday with his immediate resignation, three days after a contentious GOP convention in Grand Rapids.

Instead of focusing on Democrats' "myriad failures," Daunt wrote that "feckless, cowardly party 'leaders' have made the election here in Michigan a test of who is the most cravenly loyal to Donald Trump and re-litigating the results of the 2020 cycle."

Daunt described Trump as a "deranged narcissist."

The former president has maintained unproven claims that fraud cost him Michigan's 2020 election, assertions that have divided the state's Republicans. Trump lost the 2020 race to Democrat Joe Biden by 154,000 votes or 3 percentage points.

In New York City, ads for jobs will have to say what they pay Jennifer PeltzAssociated Press

New York — Help wanted. The job: putting one of the nation’s most far-reaching salary disclosure laws into practice. Location: New York City.

Just four months ago, city lawmakers overwhelmingly voted to require many ads for jobs in the nation’s most populous city to include salary ranges, in the name of giving job applicants — particularly women and people of color — a better shot at fair pay. But on the cusp of implementing the measure, lawmakers will likely vote Thursday to postpone it for five months after employers waved red flags.

UWM CEO Mat Ishbia bashes Rocket Mortgage over buyouts Breana Noble

The Detroit News

Mat Ishbia, the CEO of United Wholesale Mortgage Holdings Corp., has reignited the Pontiac-based mortgage giant's feud with crosstown rival Rocket Mortgage, slamming the country's No. 1 mortgage lender for taking workforce reduction actions that he called "disgusting."

Detroit-based Rocket Companies Inc. this week said it was offering voluntary buyouts to 8% of its employees at Rocket Mortgage and title insurer Amrock. In doing so, it joined a chorus of lenders across the country in announcing efforts to reduce their workforces as interest rates increase and inventory remains tight, reducing demand for refinances and other mortgages. It wasn't clear as to how many people Rocket Companies, which also includes businesses like Rocket Homes and Rocket Auto, made its offer, but it employs in total 26,000 people, mostly in Detroit.

"Disappointed is the nicest way to describe my thoughts around Rocket Mortgage/Quicken Loans laying off over 2,000 of their people, as this should not be necessary for a company that made over $5 Billion last year in profits," Ishbia wrote in a post on LinkedIn. "Even though United Wholesale Mortgage directly competes with Rocket, I hate seeing this type of negative impact on families in Metro Detroit. These 2,000+ people will struggle to find new jobs, and I think it’s disgusting that they’re thinking short term and are solely focused on cutting a few million per month in costs… this is the wrong thing to do to people."

With the extent of republican and trump efforts to fix election results in many states now undeniable, is the US effectively no longer a democracy?

"Money buys elections - both parties need contributions but as the media is owned by big monied entities - uses its media power non stop - year in year out - promoting lies - the poor vote against their own intera We barely have a democracy now and with so many determined efforts against voting - our democracy will shortly have vanished."v v b
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day The eight-hour day movement or 40-hour week movement, also known as the short-time movement, was a social movement to regulate the length of a working day, preventing excesses and abuses. An eight-hour work day has its origins in the 16th century Spain,[1] but the modern movement dates back to the Industrial Revolution in Britain, where industrial production in large factories transformed working life. At that time, the working day could range from 10 to 16 hours, the work week was typically six days a week and the use of child labour was common.[2][3] The first country that introduced the 8-hour work day by law for factory and fortification workers was Spain in 1593.[1] In Contemporary Era, it was established for all professions by the Soviet Union in 1917.[4] History Edit Sixteenth century Edit In 1593, Philip II of Spain established an eight-hour work day by a royal edict known as Ordenanzas de Felipe II, or Ordinances of Philip II. This established: Título sexto. De las fábricas y fortificaciones. Ley VI Que los obreros trabajen 8 horas al día repartidas como convenga. Todos los obreros trabajaran ocho horas al día, cuatro á la mañana, y cuatro á la tarde en fortificaciones y fábricas, que se hicieren, repartidas á los tiempos más convenientes para librarse del rigor del sol, más o menos lo que á los ingenieros pareciere, de forma que no faltando un punto de lo posible, también se atienda à procurar su salud y conservación. Sixth title. From factories and fortifications. Law VI That the workers work eight hours a day distributed as appropriate. All the workers will work eight hours a day, four in the morning, and four in the afternoon in fortifications and factories, which [The hours] are to be made, distributed at the most convenient times to get rid of the rigor of the sun, [and] more or less what seems to [be right to] the engineers, so that not missing a point of the possible [work], it is also attended to ensure their health and conservation. — Recopilación de leyes de los reinos de las indias. Mandadas a Imprimir y Publicar por la majestad católica del rey Don Carlos II, nuestro señor. Libro Tercero.[5] An exception was applied to mine workers, whose work day was limited to seven hours. These working conditions were also applied to natives in the Spanish America, who also kept their own legislation organized in "Indian republics" where they elected their own mayors.[1] Industrial revolution Edit In the early 19th century, Robert Owen raised the demand for a ten-hour day in 1810, and instituted it in his "socialist" enterprise at New Lanark. By 1817 he had formulated the goal of the eight-hour day and coined the slogan: "Eight hours' labour, Eight hours' recreation, Eight hours' rest". Women and children in England were granted the ten-hour day in 1847. French workers won the 12-hour day after the February Revolution of 1848.[6] A shorter working day and improved working conditions were part of the general protests and agitation for Chartist reforms and the early organisation of trade unions. There were initial successes in achieving an eight-hour day in New Zealand and by the Australian labour movement for skilled workers in the 1840s and 1850s, though most employed people had to wait to the early and mid twentieth century for the condition to be widely achieved through the industrialised world through legislative action. The International Workingmen's Association took up the demand for an eight-hour day at its Congress in Geneva in 1866, declaring "The legal limitation of the working day is a preliminary condition without which all further attempts at improvements and emancipation of the working class must prove abortive", and "The Congress proposes eight hours as the legal limit of the working day." Karl Marx saw it as of vital importance to the workers' health, writing in Das Kapital (1867): "By extending the working day, therefore, capitalist production...not only produces a deterioration of human labour power by robbing it of its normal moral and physical conditions of development and activity, but also produces the premature exhaustion and death of this labour power itself."[7][8] On 17 November 1915 Uruguay adopted an eight-hour working day, under the government of José Batlle y Ordóñez.[9] Nevertheless, the law was not effective on all type of works. On 3 April 1919, Spain introduced a universal law effective on all type of works, restricting the workday to a maximum of eight hours. The "Real decreto de 3 de abril de 1919" was signed by the prime minister, Álvaro de Figueroa, 1st Count of Romanones. The first international treaty to mention it was the Treaty of Versailles in the annex of its thirteenth part establishing the International Labour Office, now the International Labour Organization.[10] The eight-hour day was the first topic discussed by the International Labour Organization which resulted in the Hours of Work (Industry) Convention, 1919 ratified by 52 countries as of 2016. The eight-hour day movement forms part of the early history for the celebration of May Day, and Labour Day in some countries.
U.S. GDP down 1.4% in first quarter U.S. GDP shrank at a 1.4% annual rate in the first quarter, as supply disruptions continued to weigh on the economy, marking a sharp reversal from a 6.9% annual growth rate in the fourth quarter. The Commerce Department said the first three months of the year were the weakest since spring 2020, when the COVID-19 pandemic and related shutdowns drove the U.S. economy into recession. Personal consumption expenditures, a measure of consumer spending, rose at an annual rate of 2.7% in the first quarter, fuelled by a 4.3% jump in spending on services and a 4.1% increase in spending on durable goods. A deceleration in private inventory investment weighed on growth after helping propel GDP in the back half of 2021. Other restraints came from exports and government spending across state, federal and local governments, as well as rising imports. Nevertheless, Pantheon Macroeconomics chief economist Ian Shepherdson said the economy is unlikely to fall into recession, describing the GDP figures as "noise, not signal." He observed: “Net trade has been hammered by a surge in imports, especially of consumer goods, as wholesalers and retailers have sought to rebuild inventory. This cannot persist much longer, and imports in due course will drop outright, and net trade will boost GDP growth in Q2 and/or Q3.”

The Hill CNBC Wall Street Journal New jobless claims decline amid tight labor market New applications for U.S. unemployment benefits fell slightly last week as employers held on to their workers in a tight labor market. Initial jobless claims, a proxy for layoffs, decreased to 180,000 from the previous week’s revised level, the Labor Department said Thursday, in line with forecasts of economists polled by the Wall Street Journal. The four-week average for claims, which smooths out volatility, inched higher to 179,750 from the previous week’s revised 177,500. Continuing claims, a proxy for the total number of people receiving payments from state unemployment programs, declined to 1.408m for the week ended April 16th, the fewest since February 21st 1970. “The labor market remains in excellent shape as the spring quarter begins. We expect a payroll job rise of close to 450,000 in April and a decline in the unemployment rate to 3.5%,” said Stuart Hoffman, senior economic advisor at PNC Financial Services Group. Market Watch Washington Post Wall Street Journal CORPORATE
Cinco de Mayo is a Mexican holiday. So why does the United States celebrate it more?

On May 9, 1862, President Juárez declared that the anniversary of the Battle of Puebla would be a national holiday regarded as "Battle of Puebla Day" or "Battle of Cinco de Mayo". Today, the commemoration of the battle is not observed as a national holiday in Mexico (i.e. not a statutory holiday). https://en.m.wikipedia.org › wiki Cinco de Mayo - Wikipedia

Cinco de Mayo is a Mexican holiday. So why does the United States celebrate it more?

Contrary to popular belief, Cinco de Mayo doesn’t commemorate Mexico’s Independence Day.

n May 5, 1862, in Puebla de Los Angeles, a small town in east-central Mexico, 6,000 French troops faced 2,000 Mexican soldiers at daybreak. By the evening, Mexico had claimed victory.

Days later Juárez declared May 5 a national holiday.

Celebrating Cinco de Mayo Celebrating Cinco de Mayo was not always like this, and in fact was something Mexican Americans celebrated in the mid-1800s as an act of resistance.

“They began to celebrate that holiday because they also wanted to commemorate their acts of resistance during the U.S.-Mexico war, but also holding their own after incorporation," Gradilla said. "After Mexican Americans who decided to stay after 1848 and become U.S. citizens, they realized that all the promises the U.S. had made to them were not going to come true. They were not going to be treated as equals.

Racquel Soto, 30, was born in Veracruz, Mexico, and immigrated to the U.S. when she was 15. Soto later became a U.S. citizen and said the American way of celebrating Cinco de Mayo still confuses her.

“I was born near the town where this historic battle took place. My Zapotec ancestors died there, and I came to the U.S. to find all these white Americans drinking margaritas and hitting piñatas,” Soto said.

Advertising and decorations about the holiday focus on the “party” aspect rather than the cultural and historical significance, Soto said. Her biggest pet peeve when it comes to the holiday? When people call it "Cinco de Drinko.”

Growing up in Mexico, Soto said her family celebrated the holiday by cooking with family, dancing the national “Jarabe Tapatio” or Mexican hat dance and praying over their ancestors. When she can, Soto said she educates her American friends about the Mexican battle and victory on May 5.

“I don’t care how much Corona advertises their beers and parties. Cinco de Mayo is not just an excuse to party. People lost their lives on Mexico’s soil,” Soto said.

There is no exact point in time when deals on Corona’s and carne asada were available at grocery stores, but in “Studies in Symbolic Interaction,” José M. Alamillo points out how the beer companies Anheuser-Busch, Coors and Miller spent nearly $38 million in the 1980s in Hispanic advertising that contributed to the commercialization of the holiday. Across the country, restaurants will host Cinco de Mayo specials and cocktails for the holiday. Chili’s is promoting $5 Margaritas all day while Barberitos is offering free cheese dip to customers. Chipotle brought back its popular trivia game with 250,000 buy-one-get-one-free coupon codes available and will offer five $500 gift cards on its Instagram page. “The fact that you had Mexican communities in the southwest celebrating Cinco de Mayo was very powerful and very symbolic because what that war was about was David vs. Goliath,” he said.

May 5 marks the Mexican army’s victory over France at the Battle of Puebla during the Franco-Mexican War in 1862. Mexico’s Independence Day is celebrated on September 16.

A 2018 survey by NationalToday.com showed only 10% of Americans knew the true reason behind the holiday, yet it has turned into a day where people can get cheap margaritas and wear sombreros.

“Most people drinking in the bars have no idea that it's celebrating the strength in the power and the resilience of Mexican people to overcome invaders who are trying to take their land,” said Alexandro Gradilla, associate professor of Chicana and Chicano Studies at California State University, Fullerton.

The history of Cinco de Mayo French Emperor Napoleon III wanted to claim Mexican territory for himself and sent his troops to force Mexico's President Benito Juárez and the government out of Veracruz.
Good morning reader, Michigan public health advocates hailed the FDA’s plan to ban menthol cigarettes, calling it a milestone in the effort to curb tobacco, particularly among African American smokers, who overwhelmingly smoke menthol brands. In other news, Central Michigan University finds itself again in the unwanted spotlight, with a federal civil rights agency looking into the racial implications of the school’s decision to shut down its men’s track and field team and revive its men’s golf program. College is supposed to be the best four years of a young adult’s life – that’s the marketing pitch, anyway. But like many COVID college students, Bridgette Bauer of Michigan State University missed much of the fun amid isolation and other pandemic protocols. She’s left wondering how a 21-year-old could feel so old. A rare species of butterfly – so rare it can only be found in Oakland County and in Manitoba, Canada – is the focus of a $57-million federal effort to save it from extinction. Folks are still getting COVID, but approved treatments for infection are now broadly available across Michigan. We can point you to 66 sites where you can get tested and then handed treatment medication at the same time. That’s important because treatments must be taken within a short period after symptoms to be effective. And Michigan’s independent redistricting commission keeps meeting, with no apparent end in sight, though its map work drawing state political maps appears done. Thanks for reading Bridge Michigan, please consider a donation to our nonprofit newsroom. - David Zeman See other newsletter options smoking FDA menthol cigarette ban hailed as triumph, especially for Black health Michigan advocates and health experts say the ban could have a significant impact on improving public health, but particularly for African American smokers, who overwhelmingly favor menthol cigarettes. But some Black advocates warn of unintended consequences. Your donation is matched! You read our newsletters because we deliver stories that matter to you and to our state. Will you help us keep delivering for Michigan in this important election year? Donations to our spring campaign are matched by the Herrick Foundation! Donate here Central Michigan University faces civil rights probe for cutting track team A federal civil rights agency is looking into why CMU ended men’s track and field and then revived its men’s golf program. University President Bob Davies said a tight budget (track costs more to run than golf) not racial bias was the reason. At Michigan State, graduation haunted by ‘what could have been’ without COVID The pandemic didn’t hospitalize or kill as many college students as it did their grandparents, but it still left a mark on “the best four years of your life.” A rare butterfly makes its last stand in Michigan. Feds bank $57M to save it The Poweshiek skipperling is an endangered butterfly species with only two remaining populations that are teetering on the verge of extinction. Got COVID? Michigan has 66 one-stop shops that both test and treat Once suffering a shortage of COVID-19 treatments, the state now has an abundance of them, as well as clinics and pharmacies to dispense them — critically, at the same time you are diagnosed. Michigan’s redistricting panel’s future uncertain, even though maps long done Michigan’s citizen commission is still meeting — and getting paid. How much longer? Nobody knows. Twitter Facebook Website Instagram Email Too many Bridge emails? Update your preferences Never want another Bridge email? Unsubscribe here This email was sent to: Cb31450@gmail.com Copyright © 2022 The Center for Michigan • 220 W Michigan Ave, Ypsilanti, MI 48197
This week Sex Matters launched revamped guidance on sex and gender-identity issues for schools in England, which explains how they can keep all their pupils safe and comply with the law.

We’ve updated our 2021 guidance to include references to the law, statutory guidance and other new official recommendations, and revised it to make the text as clear and simple as possible.

Now we need your help to get it into the hands of head teachers and school governors.

Do you have a child in school in England? Do you have a relationship with a local school?

Did you attend school in England yourself? Then please use our form to send the school our guidance. Just take two minutes to tell us the right person to send it to – and, if you like, add a sentence explaining your connection with the school. We’ll do the rest.

Send our guidance to a school now! In coming weeks we will produce versions for Scotland and Wales, and we’ll be looking for your help then too.

Thank you!

Haymarket Martyr Albert Parsons’s Last Words to His Wife

http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/46/

Haymarket Martyr Albert Parsons’s Last Words to His Wife

The Chicago radicals convicted of the infamous May 4, 1886 Haymarket Square bombing in which one policeman was killed remained openly defiant to the end. In his final letter to his wife, written August 20, 1886 from the Cook County “Bastille” (jail), convicted Haymarket bombing participant Albert R. Parsons, an Alabama-born printer, admitted that the verdict would cheer “the hearts of tyrants,” but still optimistically predicted that “our doom to death is the handwriting on the wall, foretelling the downfall of hate, malice, hypocrisy, judicial murder, oppression, and the domination of man over his fellow-man.”

Cook County Bastille, Cell No. 29,

Chicago, August 20, 1886.

My Darling Wife:

Our verdict this morning cheers the hearts of tyrants throughout the world, and the result will be celebrated by King Capital in its drunken feast of flowing wine from Chicago to St. Petersburg. Nevertheless, our doom to death is the handwriting on the wall, foretelling the downfall of hate, malice, hypocrisy, judicial murder, oppression, and the domination of man over his fellowman. The oppressed of earth are writhing in their legal chains. The giant Labor is awakening. The masses, aroused from their stupor, will snap their petty chains like reeds in the whirlwind.

We are all creatures of circumstance; we are what we have been made to be. This truth is becoming clearer day by day.

There was no evidence that any one of the eight doomed men knew of, or advised, or abetted the Haymarket tragedy. But what does that matter? The privileged class demands a victim, and we are offered a sacrifice to appease the hungry yells of an infuriated mob of millionaires who will be contented with nothing less than our lives. Monopoly triumphs! Labor in chains ascends the scaffold for having dared to cry out for liberty and right!

Well, my poor, dear wife, I, personally, feel sorry for you and the helpless little babes of our loins.

You I bequeath to the people, a woman of the people. I have one request to make of you: Commit no rash act to yourself when I am gone, but take up the great cause of Socialism where I am compelled to lay it down.

My children—well, their father had better die in the endeavor to secure their liberty and happiness than live contented in a society which condemns nine-tenths of its children to a life of wage-slavery and poverty. Bless them; I love them unspeakably, my poor helpless little ones.

Ah, wife, living or dead, we are as one. For you my affection is everlasting. For the people, humanity. I cry out again and again in the doomed victim’s cell: Liberty! Justice! Equality!

Albert R. Parsons.

Source: Lucy Parsons, Life of Albert R. Parsons (Chicago: 1889), 211–212.

See Also:Haymarket Martyr Louis Lingg Says Good-bye "I Am Sorry Not to Be Hung": Oscar Neebe and the Haymarket Affair "We ask it; we demand it, and we intend to have it": Printer Albert R. Parsons Testifies before Congress about the Eight Hour Day

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haymarket_affair

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2006/05/the-roots-of-may-day.html

Feminism in Britain-UK

As in other countries, feminism in the United Kingdom seeks to establish political, social, and economic equality for women. The history of feminism in Britain dates to the very beginnings of feminism itself, as many of the earliest feminist writers and activists—such as Mary Wollstonecraft, Barbara Bodichon, and Lydia Becker—were British. 19th century Edit Main article: History of women in the United Kingdom § 19th century Ann Thornton Going Aloft, c. 1835 The advent of the reformist age during the 19th century meant that those invisible minorities or marginalised majorities were to find a catalyst and a microcosm in such new tendencies of reform. Robert Owen, while asking for "social reorganisation", was laying down the basis of a new reformational background. One of those movements that took advantage of such new spirit was the feminist movement. The stereotype of the Victorian gentle lady became unacceptable and even intolerable. The first organised movement for British women's suffrage was the Langham Place Circle of the 1850s, led by Barbara Bodichon (née Leigh-Smith) and Bessie Rayner Parkes. They also campaigned for improved female rights in the law, employment, education, and marriage. Property owning women and widows had been allowed to vote in some local elections, but that ended in 1835. The Chartist Movement of 1838 to 1857 was a large-scale demand for suffrage—however it only gave suffrage to men over 21. In 1851 the Sheffield Female Political Association was founded and submitted an unsuccessful petition calling for women's suffrage to the House of Lords. This probably inspired British feminist Harriet Taylor Mill to write the pro-women's-suffrage The Enfranchisement of Women (1851).[1][2][3] On 7 June 1866 a petition from 1,499 women calling for women's suffrage was presented to the Parliament, but it also did not succeed.[4] Upper-class women could exert a little backstage political influence in high society. However, in divorce cases, rich women lost control of their children. Careers Edit Ambitious middle-class women faced enormous challenges when they proposed entering suitable careers, such as nursing, teaching, law, and medicine, and the loftier their ambition, the greater the challenge. Physicians barred admission to the medical profession; there were a few opportunities for women lawyers, but none as clerics.[5] White collar business opportunities outside family-owned shops were few until clerical positions opened in the 20th century. Florence Nightingale demonstrated the necessity of professional nursing and warfare, and set up an educational system that tracked women into that field in the second half of the nineteenth century. Teaching was not quite as easy to break into, but the low salaries were less of the barrier to the single woman than to the married man. By the late 1860s a number of schools were preparing women for careers as governesses or teachers. The census reported in 1851 that 70,000 women in England and Wales were teachers, compared to the 170,000 who comprised three-fourths of all teachers in 1901.[6][7] The great majority came from lower middle class origins.[8] The National Union of Women Teachers (NUWT) originated in the early 20th century inside the male-controlled National Union of Teachers (NUT). It demanded equal pay with male teachers, and eventually broke away.[9] Oxford and Cambridge minimized the role of women, allowing small all-female colleges to operate. However the new redbrick universities and the other major cities were open to women.[10] Medicine was the greatest challenge, with the most systematic resistance by the physicians, and the fewest women breaking through. One route to entry was to go to the United States where there were suitable schools for women as early as 1850. Britain was one of the last countries to train women physicians, so 80 to 90% of the British women came to America for their medical degrees. Edinburgh University admitted a few women in 1869, then reversed itself in 1873, leaving a strong negative reaction among British medical educators. The first separate school for women physicians opened in London in 1874 to a handful of students. Scotland was more open. Coeducation had to wait until the World War.[11] By the end of the nineteenth century women had secured equality of status in most spheres – except of course for the vote and the holding of office. Child custody Edit Before 1839 after divorce rich women lost control of their children as those children would continue in the family unit with the father, as head of the household, and who continued to be responsible for them. Caroline Norton was one such woman; her personal tragedy where she was denied access to her three sons after a divorce led her to a life of intense campaigning which successfully led to the passing of the Custody of Infants Act 1839 and introduced the Tender years doctrine for child custody arrangement.[12][13][14][15] The Act gave women, for the first time, a right to their children and gave some discretion to the judge in child custody cases. Under the doctrine the Act also established a presumption of maternal custody for children under the age of seven years maintaining the responsibility for financial support to the father.[12] In 1873 due to additional pressure from women, the Parliament extended the presumption of maternal custody until a child reached sixteen.[16][17] The doctrine spread in many states of the world because of the British Empire.[14] Divorce Edit Traditionally, poor people used desertion, and (for poor men) even the practice of selling wives in the market, as a substitute for divorce.[18] In Britain before 1857 wives were under the economic and legal control of their husbands, and divorce was almost impossible. It required a very expensive private act of Parliament costing perhaps £200, of the sort only the richest could possibly afford. It was very difficult to secure divorce on the grounds of adultery, desertion, or cruelty. The first key legislative victory came with the Matrimonial Causes Act of 1857. It passed over the strenuous opposition of the highly traditional Church of England. The new law made divorce a civil affair of the courts, rather than a Church matter, with a new civil court in London handling all cases. The process was still quite expensive, at about £40, but now became feasible for the middle class. A woman who obtained a judicial separation took the status of a feme sole, with full control of her own civil rights. Additional amendments came in 1878, which allowed for separations handled by local justices of the peace. The Church of England blocked further reforms until the final breakthrough came with the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973.[19][20] Prostitution Edit Main article: Prostitution in the United Kingdom Bullough argues that prostitution in 18th-century Britain was a convenience to men of all social statuses, and economic necessity for many poor women, and was tolerated by society. The evangelical movement of the nineteenth century denounced the prostitutes and their clients as sinners, and denounced society for tolerating it.[21] Prostitution, according to the values of the Victorian middle-class, was a horrible evil, for the young women, for the men, and for all of society. Parliament in the 1860s in the Contagious Diseases Acts ("CD") adopted the French system of licensed prostitution. The "regulationist policy" was to isolate, segregate, and control prostitution. The main goal was to protect working men, soldiers and sailors near ports and army bases from catching venereal disease. Young women officially became prostitutes and were trapped for life in the system. After a nationwide crusade led by Josephine Butler and the Ladies National Association for the Repeal of the Contagious Diseases Acts, Parliament repealed the acts in 1886 and ended legalised prostitution. Butler became a sort of saviour to the girls she helped free. The age of consent for young women was raised from 12 to 16, undercutting the supply of young prostitutes who were in highest demand. The new moral code meant that respectable men dared not be caught.[22][23][24][25] Protection for rich and poor women Edit A series of four laws each called the Married Women's Property Act passed Parliament from 1870 to 1893 that effectively removed the restrictions that kept wealthy married women from controlling their own property. They now had practically equal status with their husbands, and a status superior to women anywhere else in Europe.[26][27][28] Working class women were protected by a series of laws passed on the assumption that they (like children) did not have full bargaining power and needed protection by the government.[29] The Act did receive a great deal of criticism as many believed that "household harmony could only be achieved by the total subordination of women women to their husband".[30] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism_in_the_United_Kingdom
the new global financial system
The world's new monetary system, underpinned by a digital currency, will be backed by a basket of new foreign currencies and natural resources. And it will liberate the Global South from both western debt and IMF-induced austerity.

by Pepe Escobar

https://thecradle.co (April 14 2022)

https://media.thecradle.co/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Unknown-6.jpeg Leading Russian economist Sergey Glazyev says a complete overhaul of the western-dominated global monetary and financial system is under way. And the world's rising powers are buying into it. Photo Credit: The Cradle

Sergey Glazyev is a man living right in the eye of our current geopolitical and geoeconomic hurricane. One of the most influential economists in the world, a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and a former adviser to the Kremlin from 2012 to 2019, for the past three years he has helmed Moscow's uber strategic portfolio as Minister in Charge of Integration and Macroeconomics {1} of the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU).

Glazyev's recent intellectual production has been nothing short of transformative, epitomized by his essay Sanctions and Sovereignty {2} and an extensive discussion of the new, emerging geo-economic paradigm in an interview to a Russian business magazine {3}.

In another of his recent essays {4}, Glazyev comments on how

I grew up in Zaporozhye, near which heavy fighting is now taking place in order to destroy the Ukrainian Nazis, who never existed in my small Motherland. I studied at a Ukrainian school and I know Ukrainian literature and language well, which from a scientific point of view is a dialect of Russian. I did not notice anything Russophobic in Ukrainian culture. In the 17 years of my life in Zaporozhye, I have never met a single Banderist.

Glazyev was gracious to take some time from his packed schedule to provide detailed answers to a first series of questions in what we expect to become a running conversation, especially focused to the Global South. This is his first interview with a foreign publication since the start of Operation Z. Many thanks to Alexey Subottin for the Russian-English translation.

The Cradle: You are at the forefront of a game-changing geo-economic development: the design of a new monetary/financial system via an association between the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) and China, bypassing the US dollar, with a draft soon to be concluded. Could you possibly advance some of the features of this system - which is certainly not a Bretton Woods III - but seems to be a clear alternative to the Washington consensus and very close to the necessities of the Global South?

Glazyev: In a bout of Russophobic hysteria, the ruling elite of the United States played its last "trump ace" in the hybrid war against Russia. Having "frozen" Russian foreign exchange reserves in custody accounts of western central banks, financial regulators of the US, EU, and the UK undermined the status of the dollar, euro, and pound as global reserve currencies. This step sharply accelerated the ongoing dismantling of the dollar-based economic world order.

Over a decade ago, my colleagues at the Astana Economic Forum and I proposed to transition to a new global economic system based on a new synthetic trading currency based on an index of currencies of participating countries. Later, we proposed to expand the underlying currency basket by adding around twenty exchange-traded commodities. A monetary unit based on such an expanded basket was mathematically modeled and demonstrated a high degree of resilience and stability.

At around the same time, we proposed to create a wide international coalition of resistance in the hybrid war for global dominance that the financial and power elite of the US unleashed on the countries that remained outside of its control. My book The Last World War: the USA to Move and Lose, published in 2016, scientifically explained the nature of this coming war and argued for its inevitability - a conclusion based on objective laws of long-term economic development. Based on the same objective laws, the book argued the inevitability of the defeat of the old dominant power.

Currently, the US is fighting to maintain its dominance, but just as Britain previously, which provoked two world wars but was unable to keep its empire and its central position in the world due to the obsolescence of its colonial economic system, it is destined to fail. The British colonial economic system based on slave labor was overtaken by structurally more efficient economic systems of the US and the USSR. Both the US and the USSR were more efficient at managing human capital in vertically integrated systems, which split the world into their zones of influence. A transition to a new world economic order started after the disintegration of the USSR. This transition is now reaching its conclusion with the imminent disintegration of the dollar-based global economic system, which provided the foundation of the United States' global dominance.

The new convergent economic system that emerged in the People's Republic of China (PRC) and India is the next inevitable stage of development, combining the benefits of both centralized strategic planning and market economy, and of both state control of the monetary and physical infrastructure and entrepreneurship. The new economic system united various strata of their societies around the goal of increasing common well-being in a way that is substantially stronger than the Anglo-Saxon and European alternatives. This is the main reason why Washington will not be able to win the global hybrid war that it started. This is also the main reason why the current dollar-centric global financial system will be superseded by a new one, based on a consensus of the countries who join the new world economic order.

In the first phase of the transition, these countries fall back on using their national currencies and clearing mechanisms, backed by bilateral currency swaps. At this point, price formation is still mostly driven by prices at various exchanges, denominated in dollars. This phase is almost over: after Russia's reserves in dollars, euro, pound, and yen were "frozen", it is unlikely that any sovereign country will continue accumulating reserves in these currencies. Their immediate replacement is national currencies and gold.

The second stage of the transition will involve new pricing mechanisms that do not reference the dollar. Price formation in national currencies involves substantial overheads, however, it will still be more attractive than pricing in 'un-anchored' and treacherous currencies like dollars, pounds, euro, and yen. The only remaining global currency candidate - the yuan - won't be taking their place due to its inconvertibility and the restricted external access to the Chinese capital markets. The use of gold as the price reference is constrained by the inconvenience of its use for payments.

The third and final stage of the new economic order transition will involve the creation of a new digital payment currency founded through an international agreement based on principles of transparency, fairness, goodwill, and efficiency. I expect that the model of such a monetary unit that we developed will play its role at this stage. A currency like this can be issued by a pool of currency reserves of BRICS countries, which all interested countries will be able to join. The weight of each currency in the basket could be proportional to the GDP of each country (based on purchasing power parity, for example), its share in international trade, as well as the population and territory size of participating countries.

In addition, the basket could contain an index of prices of main exchange-traded commodities: gold and other precious metals, key industrial metals, hydrocarbons, grains, sugar, as well as water and other natural resources. To provide backing and to make the currency more resilient, relevant international resource reserves can be created in due course. This new currency would be used exclusively for cross-border payments and issued to the participating countries based on a pre-defined formula. Participating countries would instead use their national currencies for credit creation, in order to finance national investments and industry, as well as for sovereign wealth reserves. Capital account cross-border flows would remain governed by national currency regulations.

The Cradle: Michael Hudson specifically asks that if this new system enables nations in the Global South to suspend dollarized debt and is based on the ability to pay (in foreign exchange), can these loans be tied to either raw materials or, for China, tangible equity ownership in the capital infrastructure financed by foreign non-dollar credit?

Glazyev: Transition to the new world economic order will likely be accompanied by systematic refusal to honor obligations in dollars, euro, pound, and yen. In this respect, it will be no different from the example set by the countries issuing these currencies who thought it appropriate to steal foreign exchange reserves of Iraq, Iran, Venezuela, Afghanistan, and Russia to the tune of trillions of dollars. Since the US, Britain, EU, and Japan refused to honor their obligations and confiscated the wealth of other nations which was held in their currencies, why should other countries be obliged to pay them back and to service their loans?

In any case, participation in the new economic system will not be constrained by the obligations in the old one. Countries of the Global South can be full participants of the new system regardless of their accumulated debts in dollars, euro, pound, and yen. Even if they were to default on their obligations in those currencies, this would have no bearing on their credit rating in the new financial system. The nationalization of extraction industries, likewise, would not cause a disruption. Further, should these countries reserve a portion of their natural resources for the backing of the new economic system, their respective weight in the currency basket of the new monetary unit would increase accordingly, providing that nation with larger currency reserves and credit capacity. In addition, bilateral swap lines with trading partner countries would provide them with adequate financing for co-investments and trade financing.

The Cradle: In one of your latest essays, The Economics of the Russian Victory {5}, you call for "an accelerated formation of a new technological paradigm and the formation of institutions of a new world economic order". Among the recommendations, you specifically propose the creation of "a payment and settlement system in the national currencies of the EAEU member states" and the development and implementation of "an independent system of international settlements in the EAEU, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), and BRICS, which could eliminate critical dependence of the US-controlled SWIFT system". Is it possible to foresee a concerted joint drive by the EAEU and China to "sell" the new system to SCO members, other BRICS members, ASEAN members, and nations in West Asia, Africa, and Latin America? And will that result in a bipolar geo-economy - the West versus The Rest?

Glazyev: Indeed, this is the direction where we are headed. Disappointingly, the monetary authorities of Russia are still a part of the Washington paradigm and play by the rules of the dollar-based system, even after Russian foreign exchange reserves were captured by the west. On the other hand, the recent sanctions prompted extensive soul searching among the rest of the non-dollar-block countries. Western 'agents of influence' still control the central banks of most countries, forcing them to apply suicidal policies prescribed by the IMF. However, such policies at this point are so obviously contrary to the national interests of these non-western countries that their authorities are growing justifiably concerned about financial security.

You correctly highlight the potentially central roles of China and Russia in the genesis of the new world economic order. Unfortunately, the current leadership of the Central Bank of Russia (CBR) remains trapped inside the intellectual cul-de-sac of the Washington paradigm and is unable to become a founding partner in the creation of a new global economic and financial framework. At the same time, the CBR already had to face the reality and create a national system for interbank messaging which is not dependent on SWIFT, and opened it up for foreign banks as well. Cross-currency swap lines have been already set up with key participating nations. Most transactions between member states of the EAEU are already denominated in national currencies and the share of their currencies in internal trade is growing at a rapid pace.

A similar transition is taking place in trade with China, Iran, and Turkey. India indicated that it is ready to switch to payments in national currencies as well. A lot of effort is put in developing clearing mechanisms for national currency payments. In parallel, there is an ongoing effort to develop a digital non-banking payment system, which would be linked to gold and other exchange-traded commodities - the 'stablecoins'.

Recent US and European sanctions imposed on the banking channels have caused a rapid increase in these efforts. The group of countries working on the new financial system only needs to announce the completion of the framework and readiness of the new trade currency and the process of formation of the new world financial order will accelerate further from there. The best way to bring it about would be to announce it at the SCO or BRICS regular meetings. We are working on that.

The Cradle: This has been an absolutely key issue in discussions by independent analysts across the west. Was the Russian Central Bank advising Russian gold producers to sell their gold in the London market to get a higher price than the Russian government or Central Bank would pay? Was there no anticipation whatsoever that the coming alternative to the US dollar will have to be based largely on gold? How would you characterize what happened? How much practical damage has this inflicted on the Russian economy short-term and mid-term?

Glazyev: The monetary policy of the CBR, implemented in line with the IMF recommendations, has been devastating for the Russian economy. Combined disasters of the "freezing" of circa $400 billion of foreign exchange reserves and over a trillion dollars siphoned from the economy by oligarchs into western offshore destinations, came with the backdrop of equally disastrous policies of the CBR, which included excessively high real rates combined with a managed float of the exchange rate. We estimate this caused under-investment of circa 20 trillion rubles and under-production of circa 50 trillion rubles in goods.

Following Washington's recommendations, the CBR stopped buying gold over the last two years, effectively forcing domestic gold miners to export full volumes of production, which added up to 500 tons of gold. These days the mistake and the harm it caused are very much obvious. Presently, the CBR resumed gold purchases, and, hopefully, will continue with sound policies in the interest of the national economy instead of 'targeting inflation' for the benefit of international speculators, as had been the case during the last decade.

The Cradle: The US Federal Reserve (Fed), as well as the European Central Bank (ECB), were not consulted on the freeze of Russian foreign reserves. Word in New York and Frankfurt is that they would have opposed it were they to have been asked. Did you personally expect the freeze? And did the Russian leadership expect it?

Glazyev: My book, The Last World War, which I already mentioned, which was published as far back as 2015, argued that the likelihood of this happening eventually is very high. In this hybrid war, economic warfare and informational/cognitive warfare are key theaters of conflict. On both of these fronts, the US and Nato countries have overwhelming superiority and I did not have any doubt that they would take full advantage of this in due course.

I have been arguing for a long time for the replacement of dollars, euros, pounds, and yen in our foreign exchange reserves with gold, which is produced in abundance in Russia. Unfortunately, western agents of influence which occupy key roles at central banks of most countries, as well as rating agencies and key publications, were successful in silencing my ideas. To give you an example, I have no doubt that high-ranking officials at the Fed and the ECB were involved in developing anti-Russian financial sanctions. These sanctions have been consistently escalating and are being implemented almost instantly, despite the well-known difficulties with bureaucratic decision-making in the EU.

The Cradle: Elvira Nabiullina has been reconfirmed as the head of the Russian Central Bank. What would you do differently, compared to her previous actions? What is the main guiding principle involved in your different approaches?

Glazyev: The difference between our approaches is very simple. Her policies are an orthodox implementation of IMF recommendations and dogmas of the Washington paradigm, while my recommendations are based on the scientific method and empirical evidence accumulated over the last hundred years in leading countries.

The Cradle: The Russia-China strategic partnership seems to be increasingly ironclad - as Presidents Putin and Xi themselves constantly reaffirm. But there are rumbles against it not only in the west but also in some Russian policy circles. In this extremely delicate historical juncture, how reliable is China as an all-season ally to Russia?

Glazyev: The foundation of the Russian-Chinese strategic partnership is common sense, common interests, and the experience of cooperation over hundreds of years. The US ruling elite started a global hybrid war aimed at defending its hegemonic position in the world, targeting China as the key economic competitor and Russia as the key counter-balancing force. Initially, the US geopolitical efforts were aimed to create a conflict between Russia and China. Agents of western influence were amplifying xenophobic ideas in our media and blocking any attempts to transition to payments in national currencies. On the Chinese side, agents of western influence were pushing the government to fall in line with the demands of the US interests.

However, the sovereign interests of Russia and China logically led to their growing strategic partnership and cooperation, in order to address common threats emanating from Washington. The US tariff war with China and financial sanctions war with Russia validated these concerns and demonstrated the clear and present danger our two countries are facing. Common interests of survival and resistance are uniting China and Russia, and our two countries are largely symbiotic economically. They complement and increase the competitive advantages of each other. These common interests will persist over the long run.

The Chinese government and the Chinese people remember very well the role of the Soviet Union in the liberation of their country from the Japanese occupation and in the post-war industrialization of China. Our two countries have a strong historical foundation for strategic partnership and we are destined to cooperate closely in our common interests. I hope that the strategic partnership of Russia and the PRC, which is enhanced by the coupling of the One Belt One Road with the Eurasian Economic Union, will become the foundation of President Vladimir Putin's project of the Greater Eurasian Partnership and the nucleus of the new world economic order.

Links:

{1} http://www.eurasiancommission.org/en/act/integr_i_makroec/Pages/director.aspx

{2} https://rentry.co/sanctions-and-sovereignty

{3} https://thesaker.is/events-like-these-only-happen-once-every-century-sergey-glazyev/

{4} https://www.stalkerzone.org/sergey-glazyev-the-results-of-american-aggression-that-are-positive-for-russia/

{5} https://www.stalkerzone.org/the-economics-of-the-russian-victory/ _____

The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of The Cradle.

https://thecradle.co/Article/interviews/9135

https://billtotten.wordpress.com/ https://www.ashisuto.co.jp--- To unsubscribe: List help:

Thursday, April 28, 2022

Every day , 340 people die because of hazardous working conditions

Hi Charles,

Every day, 340 people die because of hazardous working conditions. When employers don’t keep our workplaces safe, it’s workers and our families who pay the price.

On Workers Memorial Day, we remember and mourn those we’ve lost.

And we recommit to our fight for a safe workplace for every worker. Because we know that workplace injuries, illnesses and deaths are preventable.

More than 50 years ago, the Occupational Safety and Health Act was passed, promising workers the right to a safe job.

However, our Death on the Job: The Toll of Neglect report shows how much work still needs to be done. So we will continue our fight.

Let’s create stronger job safety laws.

Let’s hold workplace safety agencies and employers accountable.

Let’s make sure every worker makes it home at the end of the day.

In Solidarity,

Team AFL-CIO

Haymarket and May Day: 8 Hour Day

http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/571.html

Haymarket and May Day LABOR UNREST, 1886 (MAP)

On May 1, 1886, Chicago unionists, reformers, socialists, anarchists, and ordinary workers combined to make the city the center of the national movement for an eight-hour day. Between April 25 and May 4, workers attended scores of meetings and paraded through the streets at least 19 times. On Saturday, May 1, 35,000 workers walked off their jobs. Tens of thousands more, both skilled and unskilled, joined them on May 3 and 4. Crowds traveled from workplace to workplace urging fellow workers to strike. Many now adopted the radical demand of eight hours' work for ten hours' pay. Police clashed with strikers at least a dozen times, three with shootings. At the McCormick reaper plant, a long-simmering strike erupted in violence on May 3, and police fired at strikers, killing at least two. Anarchists called a protest meeting at the West Randolph Street Haymarket, advertising it in inflammatory leaflets, one of which called for “Revenge!”

The crowd gathered on the evening of May 4 on Des Plaines Street, just north of Randolph, was peaceful, and Mayor Carter H. Harrison, who attended, instructed police not to disturb the meeting. But when one speaker urged the dwindling crowd to “throttle” the law, 176 officers under Inspector John Bonfield marched to the meeting and ordered it to disperse.

Then someone hurled a bomb at the police, killing one officer instantly. Police drew guns, firing wildly. Sixty officers were injured, and eight died; an undetermined number of the crowd were killed or wounded.

? The Haymarket bomb seemed to confirm the worst fears of business leaders and others anxious about the growing labor movement and radical influence in it. Mayor Harrison quickly banned meetings and processions. Police made picketing impossible and suppressed the radical press. Chicago newspapers publicized unsubstantiated police theories of anarchist conspiracies, and they published attacks on the foreign-born and calls for revenge, matching the anarchists in inflammatory language. The violence demoralized strikers, and only a few well-organized strikes continued.

HAYMARKET POSTER, 2002

Police arrested hundreds of people, but never determined the identity of the bomb thrower. Amidst public clamor for revenge, however, eight anarchists, including prominent speakers and writers, were tried for murder. The partisan Judge Joseph E. Gary conducted the trial, and all 12 jurors acknowledged prejudice against the defendants. Lacking credible evidence that the defendants threw the bomb or organized the bomb throwing, prosecutors focused on their writings and speeches. The jury, instructed to adopt a conspiracy theory without legal precedent, convicted all eight. Seven were sentenced to death. The trial is now considered one of the worst miscarriages of justice in American history.

Many Americans were outraged at the verdicts, but legal appeals failed. Two death sentences were commuted, but on November 11, 1887, four defendants were hanged in the Cook County jail; one committed suicide. Hundreds of thousands turned out for the funeral procession of the five dead men. In 1893, Governor John Peter Altgeld granted the three imprisoned defendants absolute pardon, citing the lack of evidence against them and the unfairness of the trial.

? Inspired by the American movement for a shorter workday, socialists and unionists around the world began celebrating May 1, or “May Day,” as an international workers' holiday. In the twentieth century, the Soviet Union and other Communist countries officially adopted it. The Haymarket tragedy is remembered throughout the world in speeches, murals, and monuments. American observance was strongest in the decade before World War I. During the Cold War, many Americans saw May Day as a Communist holiday, and President Eisenhower proclaimed May 1 as “Loyalty Day” in 1955. Interest in Haymarket revived somewhat in the 1980s.

A monument commemorating the “Haymarket martyrs” was erected in Waldheim Cemetery in 1893. In 1889 a statue honoring the dead police was erected in the Haymarket. Toppled by student radicals in 1969 and 1970, it was moved to the Chicago Police Academy.

Christopher Thale


Bibliography Avrich, Paul. The Haymarket Tragedy. 1984. David, Henry. The History of the Haymarket Affair. 1936. Schneirov, Richard. Labor and Urban Politics. 1998. The Electronic Encyclopedia of Chicago © 2005 Chicago Historical Society. The Encyclopedia of Chicago © 2004 The Newberry Library. All Rights Reserved. Portions are copyrighted by other institutions and individuals. Additional information on copyright and permissions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day

Respect My Sex campaign gathers momentum

CB : Viva la difference ! All posts | 17th April 2022 Respect My Sex campaign gathers momentum

https://sex-matters.org/posts/updates/respect-my-sex-campaign/

http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2022/04/respect-my-sex-campaigner-heather.html

There has been some amazing media coverage of the “Respect My Sex if you Want My X” local election campaign. This includes the front page of the Mail, a feature story in the Times and Heather Binning, Helen Joyce and Caroline Ffiske in a studio interview with GB News.

It got a front-page boost in the Times from J K Rowling and the ladies who lunch!

Rosie Duffield MP spoke about it on BBC Woman’s Hour. Politicians of every party are beginning to recognise that they cannot continue to duck this issue.

Up and down the country, women and men are taking the chance to ask politicians questions on the doorstep, starting with: “Can you tell me what a woman is?”

And Women’s Rights Network groups are organising stalls and giving out leaflets in their local high streets.

Get involved! Everyone in the UK can get involved in this campaign!

Talk to campaigners and candidates when they come to your doorstep – tell them why you are concerned and ask them our four questions:

Can you tell me what a woman is? Do you understand that the Equality Act 2010 allows for single-sex services and sports?

Will you work to protect single-sex services in our local community? Will you ensure that our local authority uses the clear concept of sex in its policies?

Email your candidates – find out who they are then use our template email Share the campaign on social media – #RespectMySex

Write to your local newspaper or go to a local election meeting and ask a question Print out the Respect My Sex campaign poster and put it up in your window – you never know what conversations it might spark!

There are campaign resources to download on the Women Uniting and Women’s Rights Network websites including doorstep questions, a template email and a template letter to the editor.

Download the poster, print it out and put it in your window!

Respect-My-Sex-PosterDownload

Three brave activists launch 'most significant female movement since the Suffragettes' urging public demand EVERY politician standing in next month's elections can answer that simple - and very direct - question... ​ Can a woman have a penis? ​ We believe that politicians should know they can't expect our cross in the voting box if they do not acknowledge and protect women's sex-based rights. https://www.womensrights.network/
I am a Democrat because by Henry Jason 2015 1 hr · "My Republican friends have often asked, with incredulous snarls: “Why are you a Democrat? ” I finally decided that I owed them, and myself, an honest reflection upon my choice of Party: I am a Democrat because shared sacrifice is, in my view, a greater act of patriotism than wearing a flag lapel pin. I am a Democrat because my faith is a private matter and not a litmus test of my quality as a citizen. I am a Democrat because I would rather see a poor child fed or a devastated neighborhood rebuilt before reducing taxes on those making so much money that they can live where such things are never seen. I am a Democrat because I cannot support politicians that would take away a woman’s right to control her own body while otherwise ranting that government should get out of our lives. I am a Democrat because I see several things wrong with eliminating the necessary tax revenue to wage a trillion dollar war of choice. I am a Democrat because I don’t believe that the oil, insurance, and pharmaceutical industries deserve obscene windfall profits and tax breaks while so many Americans can’t afford gas to get them them to work or health care and prescription drugs to keep them alive. I am a Democrat because if only government can protect the national security and provide for the least fortunate among us, then it should be run by those who don’t fundamentally hate the concept of government. I am a Democrat because laws discriminating against gay relationships share something in common with a constitutional amendment banning flag-burning: Neither is necessary to preserve the Republic, but both serve as loud distractions from the important issues that affect us all. I am a Democrat because human rights, the freedom of man, and the rule of law are the foundations of our country’s greatness, and any fear-based compromise of such principles is both shortsighted and dangerous. I am a Democrat because no leader should impede any life-saving science or be dismissive of life-threatening environmental problems. I am a Democrat because I know that there are more people harmed by defective products, medical mistakes, and bad-faith acts by insurance companies than there are frivolous lawsuits filed; and that no liability insurance company has yet proportionately lowered premiums in exchange for laws passed by Republicans that unfairly limit a deserving victim’s damages. I am a Democrat because I don’t blame the poor for their plight, nor will I ignore company owners who acquire vast wealth by abusing their workers. I am a Democrat because the just and Biblical aspirations to “feed the hungry, cure the sick, and comfort the comfortless” each require direct action which does not result from “trickle down” schemes invented to reward the “haves” and leave the “have nots” at their mercy. I am a Democrat because I realize that America is made safer by closer cooperation with our allies and greater diplomatic engagement with our enemies. I am a Democrat because I believe that the rich can take care of themselves pretty well, but that the poor and disadvantaged need and deserve the help of a compassionate government. I am a Democrat because history teaches that organized labor was created to counter corporate greed and abuse, not the other way around. I am a Democrat because it is hard not to see a causal relationship between lead-tainted toys flooding our markets and a gutting of the Consumer Products Safety Commission budget and staff. I am a Democrat because my Party proudly has a long tradition of African-American, Latino, and other minority members serving as active meaningful participants and not merely acting as props at national conventions and televised events. I am a Democrat because dictating foreign policy to others at gunpoint while creating greater animosity with, and isolation from, the rest of the world are things that should be avoided, not praised. I am a Democrat because I know that my life will not change dramatically if I don’t receive another upper income bracket tax cut, yet I am certain that a child somewhere would benefit from a hot lunch and a better education purchased with those dollars. I am a Democrat because our current candidates and our next nominee serve as an example that neither race nor gender is a bar to leadership. I am a Democrat because it is undeniably clear that equal justice, protection of consumers, and correction of corporate misdeeds can only be enforced by strong and fair government regulation and by unfettered access to our courts. I am a Democrat because most that would disagree with that last statement have only a profit motive for doing so. I am a Democrat because I am ashamed of the nexus between record oil prices and historically high profits for Exxon/Mobil on the one hand; and on the other, a Republican President and VP who were each in the “oil bidness” and who openly support an increased fossil-fuel energy policy and special tax incentives for oil companies. I am a Democrat because I know that human suffering and lost opportunity are greater problems than either the size of my government or the amount of my stock dividends. I am a Democrat because I am proud that we are a nation of immigrants, whose strengths and talents have resulted in the strongest and most diverse society on earth; and because I know that we will not be stronger tomorrow by building fences and jails for those who seek a better life in our country. I am a Democrat because I also understand that compassionate aid, rather than constant artillery, does more to enhance America’s global standing. I am a Democrat because it is a fundamental rule of henhouse guarding that you don’t put the fox in charge, which Republicans happily enjoy doing; as in routinely placing industry cronies as heads of environmental protection, security regulation, mine safety and other agencies that were created to protect us and not their livelihoods. I am a Democrat because I believe that both dissent and diversity are signs of strength, and that policies that discourage either are signs of a nation’s weakness. I am a Democrat because the above political and social beliefs are not embraced to protect my own personal wealth or position, yet none of them preclude me or anyone else from creating and enjoying great economic success as a result of innovative or hard effort. I am a Democrat because at my fundamental core, I like people more than things. Because I think that my having money does not mean that others don’t deserve a decent life. Because I feel that there is more power in hope than in fear. If you don’t agree with me on any or all of my reasons for being a Democrat, that’s not only perfectly fine, but it is also why we have a two-party system and a First Amendment. But if you do feel empathy with the beliefs above, the next time some condescending elephant-in-the-room asks you disdainfully: “Why are you a Democrat?” I can only hope that you answer them with an equal amount of conviction and pride.

Wednesday, April 27, 2022

The Oldowan (or Mode I) was a widespread stone tool archaeological industry (style) in prehistory. These early tools were simple, usually made with one or a few flakes chipped off with another stone. Oldowan tools were used during the Lower Paleolithic period, 2.6 million years ago up until at least 1.7 million years ago, by ancient Hominins (early humans) across much of Africa. This technological industry was followed by the more sophisticated Acheulean industry (two sites associated with Homo erectus at Gona in the Afar Region of Ethiopia dating from 1.5 and 1.26 million years ago have both Oldowan and Acheulean tools[2]). Oldowan Canto tallado 2-Guelmim-Es Semara.jpg Geographical range Afro-Eurasia Period Lower Paleolithic Dates 2.6 million years BP – 1.7 million years BP Major sites Olduvai Gorge Preceded by Lomekwi 3[1] Followed by Acheulean The term Oldowan is taken from the site of Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania, where the first Oldowan stone tools were discovered by the archaeologist Louis Leakey in the 1930s. However, some contemporary archaeologists and palaeoanthropologists prefer to use the term Mode 1 tools to designate pebble tool industries (including Oldowan), with Mode 2 designating bifacially worked tools (including Acheulean handaxes), Mode 3 designating prepared-core tools, and so forth.[3] Classification of Oldowan tools is still somewhat contentious. Mary Leakey was the first to create a system to classify Oldowan assemblages, and built her system based on prescribed use. The system included choppers, scrapers, and pounders.[4][5] However, more recent classifications of Oldowan assemblages have been made that focus primarily on manufacture due to the problematic nature of assuming use from stone artefacts. An example is Isaac et al.'s tri-modal categories of "Flaked Pieces" (cores/choppers), "Detached Pieces" (flakes and fragments), "Pounded Pieces" (cobbles utilized as hammerstones, etc.) and "Unmodified Pieces" (manuports, stones transported to sites).[6] Oldowan tools are sometimes called "pebble tools", so named because the blanks chosen for their production already resemble, in pebble form, the final product.[7] It is not known for sure which hominin species created and used Oldowan tools. Its emergence is often associated with the species Australopithecus garhi[8] and its flourishing with early species of Homo such as H. habilis and H. ergaster. Early Homo erectus appears to inherit Oldowan technology and refines it into the Acheulean industry beginning 1.7 million years ago.[9] Dates and ranges Edit The oldest known Oldowan tools have been found in Gona, Ethiopia (near the Awash River), and are dated to about 2.6 mya.[10] The use of tools by apes including chimpanzees[11] and orangutans[12] can be used to argue in favour of tool-use as an ancestral feature of the hominin family.[13] Tools made from bone, wood, or other organic materials were therefore in all probability used before the Oldowan.[14] Oldowan stone tools are simply the oldest recognisable tools which have been preserved in the archaeological record. There is a flourishing of Oldowan tools in eastern Africa, spreading to southern Africa, between 2.4 and 1.7 mya. At 1.7 mya., the first Acheulean tools appear even as Oldowan assemblages continue to be produced. Both technologies are occasionally found in the same areas, dating to the same time periods. This realisation required a rethinking of old cultural sequences in which the more "advanced" Acheulean was supposed to have succeeded the Oldowan. The different traditions may have been used by different species of hominins living in the same area, or multiple techniques may have been used by an individual species in response to different circumstances. Sometime before 1.8 mya Homo erectus had spread outside of Africa, reaching as far east as Java by 1.8 mya[15] and in Northern China by 1.66 mya.[16] In these newly colonised areas, no Acheulean assemblages have been found. In China, only "Mode 1" Oldowan assemblages were produced, while in Indonesia stone tools from this age are unknown. By 1.8 mya early Homo was present in Europe, as shown by the discovery of fossil remains and Oldowan tools in Dmanisi, Georgia.[17] Remains of their activities have also been excavated in Spain at sites in the Guadix-Baza basin[18] and near Atapuerca.[19] Most early European sites yield "Mode 1" or Oldowan assemblages. The earliest Acheulean sites in Europe only appear around 0.5 mya. In addition, the Acheulean tradition does not seem to spread to Eastern Asia.[20] It is unclear from the archaeological record when the production of Oldowan technologies ended. Other tool-making traditions seem to have supplanted Oldowan technologies by 0.25 mya. The discovery of stone tools that predate the Oldowan, dated to as early as 3.3 mya (million years ago), at the Lomekwi site in Kenya, was announced in 2015.[21] This age pre-dates the current estimates for the age of the genus Homo by half a million years, and would fall into the pre-human period, associated with the direct australopithecine ancestors of genus Homo. It is not clear whether the tools of such a "Lomekwian industry" bear any relation to the Oldowan industry.[22] Tools Edit Learn more This section does not cite any sources. (December 2019) Manufacture Edit To obtain an Oldowan tool, a roughly spherical hammerstone is struck on the edge, or striking platform, of a suitable core rock to produce a conchoidal fracture with sharp edges useful for various purposes. The process is often called lithic reduction. The chip removed by the blow is the flake. Below the point of impact on the core is a characteristic bulb with fine fissures on the fracture surface. The flake evidences ripple marks. The materials of the tools were for the most part quartz, quartzite, basalt, or obsidian, and later flint and chert. Any rock that can hold an edge will do. The main source of these rocks is river cobbles, which provide both hammer stones and striking platforms. The earliest tools were simply split cobbles. It is not always clear which is the flake. Later tool-makers clearly identified and reworked flakes. Complaints that artifacts could not be distinguished from naturally fractured stone have helped spark careful studies of Oldowan techniques. These techniques have now been duplicated many times by archaeologists and other knappers, making misidentification of archaeological finds less likely. Use of bone tools by hominins also producing Oldowan tools is known from Swartkrans, where a bone shaft with a polished point was discovered in Member (layer) I, dated 1.8–1.5 mya. The Osteodontokeratic industry, the "bone-tooth-horn" industry hypothesized by Raymond Dart, is less certain. Shapes and uses Edit Oldowan-tradition stone chopper. Mary Leakey classified the Oldowan tools as Heavy Duty, Light Duty, Utilized Pieces and Debitage, or waste.[23] Heavy-duty tools are mainly cores. A chopper has an edge on one side. It is unifacial if the edge was created by flaking on one face of the core, or bifacial if on two. Discoid tools are roughly circular with a peripheral edge. Polyhedral tools are edged in the shape of a polyhedron. In addition there are spheroidal hammer stones. Light-duty tools are mainly flakes. There are scrapers, awls (with points for boring) and burins (with points for engraving). Some of these functions belong also to heavy-duty tools. For example, there are heavy-duty scrapers. Utilized pieces are tools that began with one purpose in mind but were utilized opportunistically. Oldowan tools were probably used for many purposes, which have been discovered from observation of modern apes and hunter-gatherers. Nuts and bones are cracked by hitting them with hammer stones on a stone used as an anvil. Battered and pitted stones testify to this possible use. Heavy-duty tools could be used as axes for woodworking. Both choppers and large flakes were probably used for this purpose. Once a branch was separated, it could be scraped clean with a scraper, or hollowed with pointed tools. Such uses are attested by characteristic microscopic alterations of edges used to scrape wood. Oldowan tools could also have been used for preparing hides. Hides must be cut by slicing, piercing and scraping them clean of residues. Flakes are most suitable for this purpose. Lawrence Keeley, following in the footsteps of Sergei Semenov, conducted microscopic studies (with a high-powered optical microscope) on the edges of tools manufactured de novo and used for the originally speculative purposes described above. He found that the marks were characteristic of the use and matched marks on prehistoric tools. Studies of the cut marks on bones using an electron microscope produce a similar result. Abbevillian Edit Abbevillian is a currently obsolescent name for a tool tradition that is increasingly coming to be called Oldowan. The label Abbevillian prevailed until the Leakey family discovered older (yet similar) artifacts at Olduvai Gorge and promoted the African origin of man. Oldowan soon replaced Abbevillian in describing African and Asian lithics. The term Abbevillian is still used but is now restricted to Europe. The label, however, continues to lose popularity as a scientific designation. In the late 20th century, discovery of the discrepancies in date caused a crisis of definition. Because Abbevillian did not necessarily precede Acheulean and both traditions had flakes and bifaces, it became difficult to differentiate the two. It was in this spirit that many artifacts formerly considered Abbevillian were labeled Acheulean. In consideration of the difficulty, some preferred to name both phases Acheulean. When the topic of Abbevillian came up, it was simply put down as a phase of Acheulean. Whatever was from Africa was Oldowan, and whatever from Europe, Acheulean. The solution to the definition problem is stated in the article on Acheulean. The difference is to be defined in terms of complexity. Simply struck tools are Oldowan. Retouched, or reworked tools are Acheulean. Retouching is a second working of the artifact. The manufacturer first creates an Oldowan tool. Then he reworks or retouches the edges by removing very small chips so as to straighten and sharpen the edge. Typically but not necessarily the reworking is accomplished by pressure flaking. The pictures in the introduction to this article are mainly labeled Acheulean, but this is the now false Acheulean, which also includes Abbevillian. The artifacts shown are clearly in the Oldowan tradition. One or two of the more complex bifaces may have edges made straighter by a large percussion or two, but there is no sign of pressure flaking as depicted. The pictures included with this subsection show the difference. Tool users Edit Learn more This section needs additional citations for verification. (January 2010) Current anthropological thinking is that Oldowan tools were made by late Australopithecus and early Homo. Homo habilis was named "skillful" because it was considered the earliest tool-using human ancestor. Indeed, the genus Homo was in origin intended to separate tool-using species from their tool-less predecessors, hence the name of Australopithecus garhi, garhi meaning "surprise", a tool-using Australopithecine discovered in 1996 and described as the "missing link" between the genera Australopithecus and Homo. There is also evidence that some species of Paranthropus utilized stone tools.[24] There is presently no evidence to show that Oldowan tools were the sole creation of members of the Homo line or that the ability to produce them was a special characteristic of only our ancestors. Research on tool use by modern wild chimpanzees in West Africa shows there is an operational sequence when chimpanzees use lithic implements to crack nuts. In the course of nut cracking, sometimes they will create unintentional flakes. Although the morphology of the chimpanzees' hammer is different from the Oldowan hammer, chimpanzees' ability to use stone tools indicates that the earliest lithic industries were probably not produced by only one kind of hominin species.[25] The makers of Oldowan tools were mainly right-handed.[26] "Handedness" (lateralization) had thus already evolved, though it is not clear how related to modern lateralization it was, since other animals show handedness as well.[clarification needed] In the mid-1970s, Glynn Isaac touched off a debate by proposing that human ancestors of this period had a "place of origin" and that they foraged outward from this home base, returning with high-quality food to share and to be processed. Over the course of the last 30 years, a variety of competing theories about how foraging occurred have been proposed, each one implying certain kinds of social strategy. The available evidence from the distribution of tools and remains is not enough to decide which theories are the most probable. However, three main groups of theories predominate. Glynn Isaac's model became the Central Forage Point, as he responded to critics that accused him of attributing too much "modern" behavior to early hominins with relatively free-form searches outward. A second group of models took modern chimpanzee behavior as a starting point, having the hominids use relatively fixed routes of foraging, and leaving tools where it was best to do so on a constant track. A third group of theories had relatively loose bands scouring the range, taking care to move carcasses from dangerous death sites and leaving tools more or less at random. Each group of models implies different grouping and social strategies, from the relative altruism of central base models to the relatively disjointed search models. (See also central foraging theory and Lewis Binford) Hominins probably lived in social groups that had contact with others. This conclusion is supported by the large number of bones at many sites, too large to be the work of one individual, and all of the scatter patterns implying many different individuals. Since modern primates in Africa have fluid boundaries between groups, as individuals enter, become the focus of bands, and others leave, it is also probable that the tools we find are the result of many overlapping groups working the same territories, and perhaps competing over them. Because of the huge expanse of time and the multiplicity of species associated with possible Oldowan tools, it is difficult to be more precise than this, since it is almost certain that different social groupings were used at different times and in different places. There is also the question of what mix of hunting, gathering and scavenging the tool users employed. Early models focused on the tool users as hunters. The animals butchered by the tools include waterbuck, hartebeest, springbok, pig and zebra. However, the disposition of the bones allows some question about hominin methods of obtaining meat. That they were omnivores is unquestioned, as the digging implement and the probable use of hammer stones to smash nuts indicate. Lewis Binford first noticed that the bones at Olduvai contained a disproportionately high incidence of extremities, which are low in food substance. He concluded other predators had taken the best meat, and the hominins had only scavenged. The counter view is that while hunting many large animals would be beyond the reach of an individual human, groups could bring down larger game, as pack hunting animals are capable of doing. Moreover, since many animals both hunt and scavenge, it is possible that hominins hunted smaller animals, but were not above driving carnivores from larger kills, as they probably were driven from kills themselves from time to time. Sites and archaeologists Edit A complete catalog of Oldowan sites would be too extensive for listing here. Some of the better-known sites include the following:

WHY DON’T WE TREAT ALL REFUGEES AS THOUGH THEY WERE UKRAINIAN?

BY SONALI KOLHATKAR March 8, 2022 CounterPunch

It was inevitable that when brown-skinned Afghan refugees fleeing war were turned away from European borders over the past few years, the callous actions of these governments would come back to haunt them. A whopping 1 million people have fled Ukraine from Russia’s violent invasion in the span of only a week. They are being welcomed—as refugees should be—into neighboring nations, inviting accusations of racist double standards.

Poland offers the most egregious example of national racism. Its government, whose nation borders Ukraine, has warmly welcomed traumatized Ukrainians, just months after turning away Afghans. If these optics weren’t bad enough, Polish nationalists have sought out people of color who are among the refugees fleeing Ukraine and violently attacked them. According to the Guardian, “three Indians were beaten up by a group of five men, leaving one of them hospitalized.” African nationals studying in Ukraine joined the exodus after Russia’s invasion, and have been stopped at the Polish border. Poland might as well erect a giant sign on its border declaring, “whites only.”

In elevating such disparate skin-tone-dependent attitudes toward refugees, Europe is giving its colonialist heritage a new lease on life. We see echoes today of the dehumanization that enabled European colonization of the Global South and the enslavement of generations.

It’s not just Poland. The Arab and Middle Eastern Journalists Association has denounced the overtly racist language of many Western journalists, including American ones like Charlie D’Agata of CBS who said of Ukraine that “this isn’t a place, with all due respect, like Iraq or Afghanistan, that has seen conflict raging for decades.” (In fact, Ukraine has seen plenty of conflict in the past years.)

D’Agata’s insertion of “with all due respect” was perhaps his belated realization that he was veering into dangerous territory by contrasting Ukrainian civilization against the presupposed barbarity of the darker nations. But then, he continued, saying, “this is a relatively civilized, relatively European—I have to choose those words carefully, too—city where you wouldn’t expect that, or hope that it’s going to happen.”

Again, D’Agata likely realized as the words were escaping his mouth just how racist he was sounding. He needed to choose his words carefully in order to avoid the appearance of bias. He clearly failed. His later apology was not very convincing.

D’Agata exposed his personal allegiance with the Global North when he expressed “hope” against war breaking out in a nation whose people look like he does. The implied flip side is that he harbors no such hope when the conflict-ridden nations of the Global South are embroiled in violence.

Serena Parekh, professor of philosophy at Northeastern University in Boston, told me in a recent interview, “it is very human to feel connections to people that you perceive to be like you and to feel more remote from people you perceive as being not like you.” At the very least, this is a good reason why newsrooms across the United States need to diversify their staff.

Parekh, who has written two books, including No Refuge: Ethics and the Global Refugee Crisis and Refugees and the Ethics of Forced Displacement, says that one “assumption” she has heard justifying favorable treatment of the latest wave of refugees in Europe is that “Ukrainians are not terrorists and they are not criminals, and so we can let them in safely, without having to worry about screening them.” She calls such views “racialized assumptions… largely unsustainable by any evidence.”

Such assumptions are infectious. Social media platforms abound with images sporting the now-ubiquitous blue and yellow of the Ukrainian flag. Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has emerged as a larger-than-life hero to the morally outraged. So invested are people in believing Zelenskyy’s heroism that many have shared a photo (including several of my own Facebook friends) of him in military fatigues as evidence of his courage in standing up to Russian militarism, when in fact the image was captured well before Russia’s invasion.

Similar expressions of solidarity with brown-skinned resisters of Western militarism or victims of Western wars have been far less common.

Pointing out the double standards of governments and the press at a time when Ukrainians are watching their nation getting utterly destroyed will inevitably spark accusations of insensitivity and of engaging irresponsibly in “whataboutism” to make a point.

But now is the time to clearly call out what human rights groups and independent journalists have for years been saying: that the U.S. and NATO-led wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, and elsewhere are racist, and that the callous dismissals of the resulting humanitarian catastrophes are equally barbaric.

There’s another reason why brown-skinned refugees are seen as undesirable. Welcoming those people fleeing wars that the West has fomented would be an admission of Western culpability. Not only do Ukrainian refugees offer palatable infusions of whiteness into European nations, but they also enable governments to express self-righteous outrage at Russia’s imperialist ambitions and violent militarism. If Ukrainian refugees are evidence of Russian brutality, then Afghan and Iraqi refugees are evidence of the same kind of brutality on the part of the U.S. and NATO.

While Europe’s double standard toward refugees is on full display in Russia’s war on Ukraine, the United States is certainly not innocent either. Former President Donald Trump effectively slammed shut the door on refugees during his tenure and bolstered his anti-refugee policies with racist language.

President Joe Biden, who campaigned on reversing Trump’s anti-refugee rules, initially faltered on keeping his promise when he took office. But, even after the limits on allowing refugees into the U.S. were eventually lifted, few have been admitted into the country. Last year, when U.S. troops left Afghanistan at the mercy of the Taliban, Afghans were, naturally, desperate to flee. While the Biden administration laudably fast-tracked U.S. resettlement for Afghans, problems remain, with one refugee advocate calling the process, “kind of abysmal.”

Parekh says that decisions by Poland and other nations to admit fleeing Ukrainians with open arms, “[show] that the European Union can take in large numbers of asylum seekers and can do so in a relatively efficient way.”

In light of the sudden wellspring of compassion toward Ukrainian refugees emerging from Western nations, media, and the public, a simple thought experiment could protect governments, journalists, and us from further accusations of racist double standards: we could treat all refugees as though they were white-skinned Ukrainians, as though they were human.

This article was produced by Economy for All, a project of the Independent Media Institute. -Sonali Kolhatkar is the founder, host and executive producer of “Rising Up With Sonali,” a television and radio show that airs on Free Speech TV (Dish Network, DirecTV, Roku) and Pacifica stations KPFK, KPFA, and affiliates.