Republicans splitting, splitting, splitting: Koch vs Trumpy

Transsexual Empire

Writings on transsexualism and transgender issues edit See also: The Transsexual Empire In 1979, Raymond published a book on transsexualism called The Transsexual Empire: The Making of the She-Male.[20] Controversial even today, it looked at the role of transsexualism – particularly psychological and surgical approaches to it – in reinforcing traditional gender stereotypes, the ways in which the medical-psychiatric complex is medicalizing "gender identity" and the social and political context that has helped spawn transsexual treatment and surgery as normal and therapeutic medicine.

Raymond maintains that transsexualism is based on the "patriarchal myths" of "male mothering," and "making of woman according to man's image." She claims this is done in order "to colonize feminist identification, culture, politics and sexuality," adding: "All transsexuals rape women's bodies by reducing the real female form to an artifact, appropriating this body for themselves… Transsexuals merely cut off the most obvious means of invading women, so that they seem non-invasive."[21]

In The Transsexual Empire, Raymond includes sections on Sandy Stone, a trans woman who had worked as a sound engineer for Olivia Records, and Christy Barsky, accusing both of creating divisiveness in women's spaces.

In 2021, Raymond's Doublethink: A Feminist Challenge to Transgenderism was published. A positive review by Claire Heuchan was published in the gender critical publication Lesbian and Gay News. Heuchan wrote, "With a directness that is characteristic of her work, Raymond cuts through the culture of fear and intellectual dishonesty that defines many discussions around gender identity.[24]

Democrat Biden makes laws against lead pipes stronger

Most U.S. cities would have to replace lead water pipes within 10 years under strict new rules proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency as the Biden administration moves to reduce lead in drinking water and prevent public health crises like the ones in Flint, Michigan and Washington, D.C. Millions of people consume drinking water from lead pipes and the agency said tighter standards would improve IQ scores in children and reduce high blood pressure and heart disease in adults. It is the strongest overhaul of lead rules in more than three decades, and will cost billions of dollars. Pulling it off will require overcoming enormous practical and financial obstacles. “These improvements ensure that in a not too distant future, there will never be another city and another child poisoned by their pipes,” said Mona Hanna-Attisha, a pediatrician and clean water advocate. The Biden administration has previously said it wants all of the nation’s roughly 9 million lead pipes to be removed, and rapidly. Lead pipes connect water mains in the street to homes and are typically the biggest source of lead in drinking water. They are most common in older, industrial parts of the country. Lead crises have hit poorer, majority-Black cities like Flint especially hard, propelling the risks of lead in drinking water into the national consciousness. Their impact reaches beyond public health. After the crises, tap water use declined nationally, especially among Black and Hispanic people. The Biden administration says investment is vital to fix this injustice and ensure everyone has safe, lead-free drinking water. “We're trying to right a longstanding wrong here," said Radhika Fox, head of the EPA Office of Water. “We're bending the arc towards equity and justice on this legacy issue.” The proposal, called the lead and copper rule improvements, would for the first time require utilities to replace lead pipes even if their lead levels aren’t too high. Most cities have not been forced to replace their lead pipes and many don’t even know where they are. Some cities with a lot of lead pipes might be given longer deadlines, the agency said. The push to reduce lead in tap water is part of a broader federal effort to combat lead exposure that includes proposed stricter limits on dust from lead-based paint in older homes and child-care facilities and a goal to eliminate lead in aviation fuel. The EPA enacted the first comprehensive lead in drinking water regulations in 1991. Those have significantly helped reduce lead levels, but experts have said they left loopholes that keep lead levels too high and lax enforcement allows cities to ignore the problem. “We now know that having literally tens of millions of people being exposed to low levels of lead from things like their drinking water has a big impact on the population” and the current lead rules don't fix it, said Erik Olson, an expert with the Natural Resources Defense Council who challenged the original regulations back in the early 1990s. “We’re hoping this new rule will have a big impact.” In addition, the EPA announced it wants to lower the level of lead at which utilities are forced to take action. And federal officials are pushing cities to do a better job informing the public when elevated lead levels are found. Another change involves how lead is measured. Utilities would need to collect more samples and this alone could have significant consequences – when Michigan did something similar, the number of communities flagged for having high lead levels skyrocketed. The public will have a chance to comment on the proposal and the agency expects to publish a final version of the rule in the Fall of 2024. There is then a waiting period before it goes into effect. Unlike other contaminants, lead seeps into drinking water that’s already left the treatment plant. The main remedy is to add chemicals to keep it from leaching out of pipes and plumbing fixtures. It’s hard. A home with dangerous lead levels can be next to a house with no lead exposure at all. It will ultimately be up to utilities to decide whether to pay the full cost of replacing lead pipes, which is too expensive for many people to afford. “We strongly, strongly encourage water utilities to pay for it," Fox said. The Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, which represents large public water utilities, said it can be difficult to secure homeowner permission to do the work and handle rising costs. President Donald Trump's administration addressed lead in water, issuing new standards just before the end of his term, after years of efforts by advocates. Those rules forced utilities to take stronger action when lead levels rose too high and required them to test day-care centers and schools. They also made communities locate their lead pipes — initial inventories are due in October 2024. But environmental groups criticized the rule for not going far enough. In response, the Biden administration said it would make the improvements officials announced Thursday. The 2021 infrastructure law included $15 billion to find and replace lead pipes. More will be needed. Additional federal funds are available to improve water infrastructure and the EPA is providing smaller communities with extra help. Some states, however, have been slower to attack the problem — a handful declined the first round of federal lead pipe funds. A few communities have replaced pipes quickly. After crises in Benton Harbor, Michigan, and Newark, New Jersey, officials paid for and efficiently replaced lead pipes, adopting novel rules that required homeowners to let construction crews onto their property to do the work. Replacing the country’s lead pipes will be expensive, but the EPA says the health benefits far outweigh the cost. Those benefits, Fox said, “are really priceless.” ___

For decades, the struggle for national liberation in Palestine was rightly understood to be part and parcel of a global struggle for liberation, mainly in the Global South.

And since national liberation movements were, per definition, the struggle for indigenous people to assert their collective rights for freedom, equality, and justice, the Palestinian struggle was positioned as part of this global indigenous movement.

Alas, the collapse of the Soviet Union, the growing dominance of the United States and its allies, and the return of Western colonialism in the form of neocolonialism to Africa, the Middle East, and elsewhere, have localized many of the indigenous movements’ struggles.

This proved costly, as it allowed France, the U.S., Britain, and others to, once more, sectionalize the Global South into regions of influence, controlling them through whatever military, political, and economic strategies they had in mind. Similar to the scramble for Africa in the late 19th century, recent decades wrought a new kind of colonial scramble for the Global South.

In the Palestinian context, in particular, the struggle was multi-faceted: The demise of global powers, like the USSR, which created some kind of geopolitical balance, isolated Palestinian resistance movements. This forced these movements, namely those involved in the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), to seek political “compromises,” without achieving much tangible in return.

For Washington, these concessions on the part of a once national liberation movement in Palestine were consistent with the U.S.’ regional agenda and the quest for a “New Middle East.”

Ultimately, this resulted in the wrongly termed “Palestinian division,” factional clashes in 2007, and a state of political paralysis which defined the so-called Palestinian leadership.

And, while Palestinians were busy sorting out their political and leadership crisis, Israel’s settler-colonial process accelerated, at the expense of whatever remained of the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

Of course, this does not, from an intellectual and historical point of view, alter the essential nature of the Palestinian struggle, which remained that of an indigenous nation fighting for its rights. However, it did confuse the political definitions and discourses surrounding the so-called “Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”

This confusion was a direct outcome of the misrepresentation of the Palestinian struggle through Israeli propaganda and U.S.-Western media, which remained committed to elevating the Israeli line. Israel invested in presenting Palestinians as a divided people who have no vision of peace and all their resistance movements as essentially terrorist groups hellbent on the destruction of Israel and so on.

But things began to change in recent years, with the revival of indigenous movements around the world, from Black Americans’ struggle in the U.S. to the indigenous resurgence in North and South America, to the ultimate rise of an actual global movement centered around landless societies and indigenous rights—which heavily invested in global solidarity and intersectionality, allowing it to multiply its powers several times over.

The common element of “decolonization”—in all its manifestations—has created intersectional links among various struggles around the world which allowed the Palestinian struggle for liberation to fit perfectly into the new global narrative.

“Black Australians and Palestinians share a history and reality of erasure that has lasted far beyond the anticolonial era of the early last century when most colonized peoples gained independence from colonial powers,” Eugenia Flynn and Tasnim Sammak wrote in an IndigneousX article, “Black Australia to Palestine: Solidarity in decolonial struggle.”

The Black Lives Matter Movement also played a central role in recentering Palestine around urgent and revived struggles in the United States and even beyond U.S. political geography.

“Palestinians played a crucial role in the (2014) Ferguson, Missouri, uprising that flared that year in the wake of the police killing of Black teenager Michael Brown,” Russell Rickford wrote in an article in Vox.

“Palestinian activists used social media to share with African American protesters tactics for dealing with tear gas attacks by militarized police forces—an experience with which many subjects of Israeli occupation are all too familiar,” Rickford added.

This was only the beginning, however, as, over the years, Palestine began featuring as a staple in the Black struggle discourse in the U.S. Both movements fed on each other’s popularity, conceiving new networks and connecting other global struggles together in a most harmonious fashion.

All of this has been propelled forward by the growing connectivity of activists and their struggles around the world, thanks to the utilization of social media, along with independent indigenous media as critical components in organization and mobilization.

While the credibility of mainstream media is being increasingly questioned by people living in Western societies, social media now appears to be a reliable source of information and news when it comes to popular mobilization and direct action.

The ongoing Israeli genocide in Gaza has demonstrated the power of social media in terms of its ability to overcome the intentional lies and deception of corporate media, thus greatly diminishing its traditional role in shaping public opinion around Palestine, the Middle East, the U.S.’ “war on terror,” and many other issues.

It would not be an exaggeration to state that there is a parallel war to the one happening in Gaza now, one that engages millions of people around the world, working diligently to defeat Israeli-U.S.-Western propaganda and to demand accountability for those carrying out war crimes in Gaza.

It would be inaccurate to say that Western governments have been “silent” in the face of Israeli atrocities in Gaza. As indigenous struggles around the world ally with the struggle of the Palestinians, colonial and neocolonial powers have no other option but to ally with colonial Israel.

This means that Western powers are active participants in the Israeli war on Gaza through their generous military support of Israel, the sharing of intelligence information, and political and financial backing.

Whether the war lasts for another week, another month, or a year, the consequences of this war will certainly be felt for many years to come, not only in Palestine or even the Middle East but worldwide as well.

The war in Gaza has galvanized global solidarity movements, especially those who are invested in indigenous rights. All of this is reminiscent of the height of the anticolonial national liberation movements of decades ago.

Thus, this historic moment must be seized, not only for the sake of Gaza and the Palestinian people but also for the sake of freedom and justice everywhere else in the world.

We hope you appreciated this article. At People’s World, we believe news and information should be free and accessible to all, but we need your help. Our journalism is free of corporate influence and paywalls because we are totally reader-supported. Only you, our readers and supporters, make this possible. If you enjoy reading People’s World and the stories we bring you, please support our work by donating or becoming a monthly sustainer today. Thank you!
' TAGS: Black Lives Matter

ceasefire colonialism

Gaza War

history indigenous

Israel
Palestine war

CONTRIBUTOR Ramzy Baroud Ramzy Baroud Dr. Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of six books. His latest book, co-edited with Ilan Pappé, is “Our Vision for Liberation: Engaged Palestinian Leaders and Intellectuals Speak out.” Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA). Romana Rubeo Romana Rubeo

Romana Rubeo is the managing editor of The Palestine Chronicle. An Italian writer, her articles appear in many online newspapers and academic journals. She specializes in audio-visual and journalism translation and holds a Master’s Degree in Foreign Languages and Literature.

 10/26/22 -Anthropology 152- Lecture 13

What am I getting at on the questions under A) on Test 3 ? Usually the term “Civilization” or Civilized is used to refer to human society that is superior morally and technologically to the Stone Age human societies. The popular image of “cavemen” and Neanderthals is of brutes, savages who drag women around by the hair and presumably force themselves on them. Cannibals who are in regular and frequent conflict with each other .

Civilization is superior technologically in that it has an increasingly more productive social organization and technology. With Civilization population size begins to grow more and is more concentrated than in the Stone Age. So , in that regard , Civilization is superior to the Stone Age on the Darwinian Fitness/Adaptation test, moving further from potential extinction/zero population.

On the other hand, the total population of the Stone Age was growing and perpetuated for approximately 2.5 million years; and it was able to adapt to the full range of environmental types , from arctic to rain forest. Civilization has only existed for about 6,000 years, a tiny fraction of the 2.5 million years of the Stone Age . And , importantly, tragically, “civilized’ technology has gone so far as to invent NUCLEAR WEAPONS. Nuclear war at this stage would probably create a “nuclear winter’, similar to the “winter” created by the comet that hit the Earth and caused the extinction of the dinosaurs. So, by So-called Civilization originating War between members of the same species, and super-destructive war technology, weapons, it has created a potentially UNFIT /EXTINCTION/POPULATION LOSS , in the Darwinian sense, dynamic for the human species. Civilization has 100,000s of years to go before it equals the Stone Age longevity of the human species.

Not only that: War with even less than nuclear destructive potential , with swords, knives, clubs, guns and other weapons USED ON MEMBERS OF OUR OWN SPECIES is morally inferior – real savagery/barbarism- to Stone Age largely peaceful society, in my opinion.

Furthermore, “Civilization’s” slaves work harder at food production than foragers or hunters and gatherers . This claim is based in part on Marshall Sahlins’s thesis in “ The Original Affluent Society” essay with the inference that societies through the 2.5 million years of the Stone Age were basically the same in terms of work time and intensity as Stone Age/Hunter-gatherer societies in the last 500 years; societies that Europeans _observed_ as they conquered the globe in the era of Capitalist Civilization . Civilization has more toil than Stone Age Society (See Lecture 12). A society with more leisure is superior , in my opinion.

“Civilized” society with masters exploiting production surpluses from slaves, greed; and oppressing and capturing slaves with armed force is inferior to Stone Age society where all adults are of equal status

Also, Stone Age society with equal status between women and men is morally superior to So-called Civilization’s Male Supremacist culture.

Along with the inference concerning the nature of Ancient Stone Age society from the thesis of “The Original Affluent Society”, I make the following inference concerning the superior morality of Stone Age Society ( from the Overview Lecture number 1):

Since the advent about 6,000 years ago of so-called civilization, as you have no doubt heard it referred to sometimes, it's not so clear how wise our culture makes us. Therein lies the central drama of the history of the human species. Nonetheless, clearly in the Stone Age, our having culture was a highly adaptive advantage over species that did not have culture , stone tools or controlling fire made through culture or symbolic or imaginary thinking and communication, etc, raising our species fitness, the growth of our population . This is evidenced by _Homo sapiens_ expanding in population and therefore migrating to an expanded area of living space across the earth , out of what is now named Africa to the other continents. Stone Age foraging and kinship organized societies were the mode of life for the vast majority of time of human species ' existence, 95% or more. The first human societies had an extraordinarily high survival need to be able to rely on each other at levels of solidarity that we cannot even imagine. The intensity of the network of social connections of a band of 25 to 100 people living in the ecological food chain location close to the one described in our textbook , Chapter 4, would almost constitute a new level of organic organization and integrity above individual bodies or selves. Ancient kinship /family/culture /symbolic communication systems from around 2.5 million years ago ( the beginning of the Truly Civilized Stone Age) were almost super-organic bodies; the human social group was a harmonious , multi-individual Body, quasi-organism. The Individual human bodies, Selves, were very frail and weak in contrast with the bodies of the field of predators they were prey for .

The dominance of the food chain that humans, ultimately reached even in the Stone Age with relatively _frail_ individual bodies. could only be reached by super-social , super internally-cooperative, super-intra-species harmony . This was only possible with symbolic communication both within a living generation and across generations, It is clear to me that natural selection , in the classical Darwinian sense, elected hominin groups with policies and practices of of "love thy neighbor as thyself " and "charity" over those that might have derived principles of "selfishness and greed", if there were any in the Stone Age before Civilization.

Treating each other better was critical to survival and thriving for the ancient Stone Age. Concerning my claim that American society is white supremacist (racist), in every statistical category measuring the quality and quantity of life – life expectancy, wealth , income, quality of neighborhoods, academic attainment, etc., whites _on average_ are better off that Black and Brown people. Not every white person is better off than every Black/Brown person ; but on average it is so. The legacy of white supremacist history of slavery and Jim Crow segregation is inherited by today’s white population,

http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2014/07/tell-em-that-its-original-human-nature.html

http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2014/07/tell-em-that-its-original-human-nature.html

In the days after Democrats won control of Virginia’s state legislature, Charles “Chaz” Nuttycombe was focused on the results in house of delegates districts 41 and 82, both of which you’ve probably never heard of. Related: Strength in Numbers by G Elliot Morris review – why polls matter Neither of the competitive races would determine which party controlled the Virginia legislature, but it was one of a handful where votes were still being counted and the results too close to call. In the lead-up to election day, Nuttycombe, a 24-year-old senior at Virginia Tech, had predicted that the Republican candidates would win both. But his final forecast in Virginia gave Democrats a 61% chance of winning control of the house of delegates and a 71% chance of holding control in the state senate.

The Belt and Road Initiative is a Key Component ... ... of Marxist Internationalism in the 21st Century Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360° on NOVEMBER 10 2023 The following is the closing speech given by our co-editor Keith Bennett at our webinar held on November 4, marking 10 years of China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) {1}. Keith refers to the recent Third Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation, held in Beijing, where President Xi Jinping said in his opening speech: "We have learned that humankind is a community with a shared future. China can only do well when the world is doing well. When China does well, the world will get even better." The BRI, Keith notes, is concerned with development, modernization and globalization. And there are two fundamentally different approaches to these questions in today's world. It is not a coincidence that the approach to these questions that represents and embodies the interests of the overwhelming majority of countries, and the overwhelming majority of the people in every country, should be put forward by the world's leading socialist country. Nor is it a coincidence that it is above all the world's leading imperialist country that announces a supposed alternative to the BRI every few months, none of which achieve any traction or any concrete result. Regarding globalization, in the western countries, the prevailing discourse, from much of both the left and the right, tends to assert that China has wholeheartedly embraced the model of globalization advanced by the major capitalist powers. This is so far from reality as to suggest that those who advance it are either ignorant or malicious. A White Paper {2} issued by China's State Council on October 10 makes clear that the fruits of economic globalization have until now been dominated by a small group of developed countries. Rather than contributing to common prosperity at a global level, it continues, globalization has widened the wealth gap between the rich and poor, between developed and developing countries, and within the developed countries themselves. Many developing countries have benefited little from economic globalization and even lost their capacity for independent development. Certain countries, it notes, have practiced unilateralism, protectionism and hegemonism. Keith argues that, grounded as it is in the stand, viewpoint, and method of Marxism, the BRI is based on and inherits not only the Silk Roads of antiquity, but also the diplomatic history of socialist China as well as the standpoint and practice of the international working-class movement more generally, particularly since the establishment of workers states. – Friends of Socialist China {3} First, on behalf of Friends of Socialist China, I'd like to thank all those who registered for, attended, and supported our webinar today. Special thanks go to our brilliant speakers who, from five continents, have shared their insights with us on the Belt and Road Initiative. Thanks also to our co-organisers, the International Manifesto Group, as well as our sponsors, Connolly Books, Critical Theory Workshop, Geopolitical Economy Research Group, Geopolitical Economy Report, Hampton Institute, International Action Center, Iskra Books, Kawsachun News, Peace, Land and Bread, Pivot to Peace, and Veterans for Peace - China Working Group. It is 10 years since President Xi Jinping put forward the Belt and Road Initiative and therefore a good time to take stock and make an initial summing up. Last month, I was privileged to be seated in Beijing's Great Hall of the People to listen to President Xi open the Third Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation, his speech being followed by those of President Putin and the Presidents of Kazakhstan, Indonesia and Argentina, the Prime Minister of Ethiopia, and the Secretary-General of the United Nations. As President Xi noted, in the course of its first decade, Belt and Road cooperation has extended from its initial focus on the Eurasian landmass to Africa, Latin America and elsewhere. Indeed, more than 150 countries and over 30 international organisations have signed Belt and Road cooperation documents. Through this process, he explained, belt and road cooperation has progressed from 'sketching the outline' to 'filling in the details', and blueprints have been turned into real projects. Xi Jinping said that over the past decade, "we have learned that humankind is a community with a shared future. China can only do well when the world is doing well. When China does well, the world will get even better." President Xi, in my view, expresses things here with such simplicity and clarity, making it sound like obvious common sense, that it might seem that this is acceptable to all and that nobody could possibly disagree with it. But this is far from the case. The BRI is concerned with development, modernization and globalization. And there are two fundamentally different approaches to these questions in today's world. It is not a coincidence that the approach to these questions that represents and embodies the interests of the overwhelming majority of countries, and the overwhelming majority of the people in every country, should be put forward by the world's leading socialist country. Nor is it a coincidence that it is above all the world's leading imperialist country that announces a supposed alternative to the BRI every few months, none of which achieve any traction or any concrete result. Comrade Liu Jianchao, the Minister of the International Department of the Communist Party of China's Central Committee, spelled matters out clearly in a recent article, where he wrote: The vision of building a human community with a shared future and the three global initiatives are scientific. They encapsulate the stances, viewpoints, and methods of Marxism, reflecting the hallmarks of Marxism, and demonstrating salient theoretical character. Underpinned by dialectical and historical materialism, the vision and the three global initiatives reveal the laws governing the development of human society and its future direction. Careful study of the White Paper released by the Information Office of China's State Council on October 10, to coincide with the tenth anniversary and the Beijing Forum, can help to understand this more concretely. And all the documents to which I refer may be read in full on our website, along with useful introductions. The White Paper again makes clear that whilst the BRI has been launched by China, it belongs to the world and benefits the whole of humanity. "Irrespective of size, strength and wealth, all countries participate on equal terms". Making very clear the distinction between the socialist and imperialist approaches to such questions, it notes that the type of development advanced by the BRI diverges from, "the exploitative colonialism of the past, avoids coercive and one-sided transactions, rejects the centre-periphery model of dependency, and refuses to displace crisis onto others or exploit neighbours for self-interest". The same point was made even more forcefully by President Xi Jinping in his report to the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China in October last year, where he stated: In pursuing modernization, China will not tread the old path of war, colonization and plunder taken by some countries. That brutal and blood-stained path of enrichment at the expense of others caused great suffering for the people of developing countries. These words of President Xi surely acquire even greater relevance and poignancy today in the face of Israel's genocidal war in Gaza and the courageous resistance of the Palestinian people, a veritable 21st century Warsaw Ghetto. On one hand, the United States, Britain, France, and Germany, aid and abet the genocide and even seek to curtail and deny their own peoples' right to protest. On the other hand, socialist China, along with the overwhelming majority of the countries of the world, principally the Global South, and as seen in the recent United Nations General Assembly vote, stand for peace, an end to the war of aggression, and for the long overdue realization of the national rights to an independent state of the Palestinian people. And the same fundamental distinction with regard to which road to take informs socialist China's approach to globalization. In the Western countries, the prevailing discourse, from much of both the left and the right, tends to assert that China has wholeheartedly embraced the model of globalization advanced by the major capitalist powers. This is so far from reality as to suggest that those who advance it are either ignorant or malicious. Or quite possibly both. The White Paper is clear that the fruits of economic globalization have until now been dominated by a small group of developed countries. Rather than contributing to common prosperity at a global level, it continues, globalization has widened the wealth gap between the rich and poor, between developed and developing countries, and within the developed countries themselves. Many developing countries have benefited little from economic globalization and even lost their capacity for independent development. Certain countries, it notes, have practiced unilateralism, protectionism and hegemonism. But just as, in their day, Marx and Engels could not endorse, but rather repudiated and stood against, the Luddite approach which, faced with the undoubted depredations and cruelties of the industrial revolution, sought to reverse the objective course of historical progress, China, unlike some, does not reject globalization. But it stands for a different globalization. Economic globalization, the White Paper insists, remains an irreversible trend. It is unthinkable for countries to return to a state of seclusion or isolation. But economic globalization must undergo adjustments in both form and substance. The focus of BRI, it explains, is precisely on contributing to a form of globalization that generates common prosperity and that brings benefits particularly to developing countries. Thus, while the BRI is open to all, it is neither accident nor coincidence that the majority of its participants are developing countries. The developing countries as a whole all seek to leverage their collective strength to address such challenges as inadequate infrastructure, lagging industrial development, and insufficient capital, technologies and skills, so as to promote their economic and social development. Grounded as it is therefore in the stand, viewpoint, and method of Marxism, it should be clear that the BRI is based on and inherits not only the Silk Roads of antiquity, but also the diplomatic history of socialist China as well as the international standpoint and practice of the international working-class movement more generally, particularly since the establishment of workers states, the constitution of the working class as the ruling class. It resonates, for example, with China's building of the Tazara railway in Zambia and Tanzania in the 1970s. With the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence put forward by Premier Zhou Enlai in 1954 and the Ten Principles adopted by the Afro-Asian Conference held in the Indonesian city of Bandung the following year. As far back as 1921, even before the official formation of the USSR, Lenin's government concluded treaties with Afghanistan, Persia and Turkiye, which provided for mutual support, aid in the financial, technical, personnel and other fields, and especially for support in their struggles to win and maintain independence from colonial and imperial powers. This in turn built on the deliberations of the Second Congress of the Communist International, held in 1920, which established the absolute duty of the working-class movement to support the struggles of the colonial and oppressed countries and peoples for liberation and for independence against imperialism. The Belt and Road Initiative, and the other global initiatives put forward by President Xi Jinping, are the 21st century inheritance and expression of this Marxist theory and practice. The difference is that today it is becoming a material force that is progressively uniting and mobilizing the majority of humanity. This is a major part of why President Xi constantly reminds us that we are presently witnessing changes unseen in a century. That is since the birth of the first workers' state. In Friends of Socialist China, we will continue to pay the closest attention to these developments. Thank you again for your support today and we hope to continue working with you. Links: {1} https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MB3dwLuMQw&ab_channel=FriendsofSocialistChina {2} http://en.people.cn/n3/2023/1010/c90000-20081566.html {3} https://socialistchina.org/2023/11/10/keith-bennett-the-belt-and-road-initiative-is-a-key-component-of-marxist-internationalism-in-the-21st-century/ https://libya360.wordpress.com/2023/11/10/the-belt-and-road-initiative-is-a-key-component-of-marxist-internationalism-in-the-21st-century/ List help:

The letter, signed by almost 15,000 people, asks the Prime Minister to take urgent action to halt the escalating campaign of violence and intimidation against women in the name of “trans rights”. It details how women are being threatened with social ostracism, loss of livelihood and physical violence; shouted down and intimidated at public events; and even subjected to physical violence for insisting on their freedom of belief and freedom of expression, and calling for existing sex-based legal protections to be upheld.

The letter, signed by almost 15,000 people, asks the Prime Minister to take urgent action to halt the escalating campaign of violence and intimidation against women in the name of “trans rights”.

It details how women are being threatened with social ostracism, loss of livelihood and physical violence; shouted down and intimidated at public events; and even subjected to physical violence for insisting on their freedom of belief and freedom of expression, and calling for existing sex-based legal protections to be upheld.

We urge the government to issue a call for evidence and to commission a rapid review on the impact of extreme transactivism on women’s rights. This is the letter: 20231109 Letter to Rishi SunakDownload Together with Heather Binning from Women’s Rights Network, Standing for Women stewards Aja and DJ Lippy, feminist writer and activist Joan Smith and frontline worker Raquel Rosario Sánchez we delivered the letter to 10 Downing Street. Supporters of Sex Matters deliver a petition to Downing Street and protest the male violence they encounter at the hands of trans rights supporters, Westminster, London We were joined by Rosie Duffield MP and by Women’s Rights Network members at the “Courage Calls to Courage” statue of Millicent Fawcett in Parliament Square. And then there was a rainbow!

Trumpy started a trade war with the EU; now US whiskey industry is threatened by a European tariff : “had his stance on steel and aluminum and in response, in June 2018, the Europeans imposed a 25% tariff on American whiskey along with other products. The industry was very alarmed by that because we were embroiled in a trade dispute that wasn’t related to our industry. They went back and forth until 2021 when the Democrat Biden got relief from the earlier tariff

Why the American whiskey industry is freaking out chart The $5.1 billion whiskey industry is big business. While the majority of US-distilled whiskey stays in the country, about $1.3 billion worth was shipped abroad last year, accounting for 62% of all American spirits exports. But that could soon change. The EU, the largest export market for American whiskey, is set to impose a 50% tariff on imports of the golden liquor next year. Spirit industry advocates say that would be a devastating blow to a growing part of the US economy. Two decades ago, there were 35 whiskey distilleries in the United States. Today that number has exploded to 2,600. The move is all part of a retaliatory package of tariffs being imposed on US goods by the EU in relation to a dispute over steel and aluminum. And this isn’t the first time US whiskey has been subject to this type of retribution. Between June 2018 and December 2021 there was a 25% tax imposed on the spirit, which decreased American whiskey exports by 18%. Since that tariff’s suspension, the industry has sprung back to life. American whiskey exports to the EU jumped 118% in the first half of 2023 when compared to the same period in 2022. A senior European Commission official said last week that the EU was aiming to resolve the steel and aluminum dispute by year-end. But US whiskey industry advocates worry that time is running out to find some way to avoid "dramatic" damage. Before the Bell spoke with Chris Swonger, the president and CEO of the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States, about what comes next. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. Before the Bell: How did these tariffs come to be? Chris Swonger: During the Donald Trump era, the president took a very aggressive posture on a whole host of trade issues all around the world, including with the European Union. One big issue related to trade was challenges over steel and aluminum. So the president had his stance on steel and aluminum and in response, in June 2018, the Europeans imposed a 25% tariff on American whiskey along with other products. The industry was very alarmed by that because we were embroiled in a trade dispute that wasn’t related to our industry. They went back and forth until 2021 when the tariffs on American whiskey were suspended and we took a great sigh of relief. They were suspended as the US and the EU committed to try to resolve the steel and aluminum case. That suspension is up at the end of December 2023. And if it doesn’t get resolved in negotiations before then, the EU will automatically impose a 50% tariff on American whiskey on January 1. The Biden administration’s leadership and efforts on this have enabled the suspension of tariffs on American whiskey and all distilled spirits products, but we are rightly anxious because a 50% tariff on American whiskey would be beyond devastating to exports. Has any progress been made? President Joe Biden met with EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on October 20 and we did have high hopes that there would be some announcement made about continuing to suspend or eliminate those tariffs. There wasn’t and we were disappointed. But we’re cautiously optimistic. The Biden administration is well aware of this. We’ve had a series of meetings with our European counterparts. But we are ringing the alarm bells now because we’re on the clock, we’ve got less than two months. But God forbid, we don’t want these tariffs to go on. When the tariffs were imposed back and forth, the exports of American whiskey were significantly impacted. That impacted jobs and economic growth. Since those tariffs have been suspended, we’ve seen American whiskey exports rebound to beyond pre-pandemic levels. Look, when there are negotiations like these within governments, they never happen sooner rather than later. It’s just the nature of the beast of negotiating complex trade disputes. We just hope that something gets sorted between now and the next 45 days because companies have to do contingency planning for this. How detrimental will this tariff be to whiskey makers? Can you quantify it? The EU is the largest American export market, and due to the earlier 25% tariff — which is half of what this upcoming tariff will be — exports plunged by 20%. It went from $550 million to $440 million between 2018 and 2021. If you double that, it would be pretty significant. We’ve seen the market rebound and exports are back to where they were, but if we get hit with that 50% tariff, it’s going to be pretty dramatic.

A worrisome sign for the Federal Reserve is starting to emerge. The Fed keeps a close eye on several risks that could make its job of taming inflation even more difficult, such as red-hot consumer demand keeping some upward pressure on prices and the possible effects of geopolitical tensions in the Middle East on oil prices. But the US central bank also pays close attention to whether Americans still have faith inflation will eventually return to normal. That faith seems to be eroding. The University of Michigan’s latest consumer survey released Friday showed that Americans’ long-run inflation expectations rose to 3.2% this month, the highest level since 2011. And those perceptions could continue to get worse the longer it takes the Fed get inflation back to its 2% target. Fed officials don’t expect inflation to reach 2% until 2026, according to their latest economic projections released in September. If there’s one thing that would make the Fed quake in its boots, it would be worsening inflation expectations. “If we find that consumers or businesses are really starting to feel like that long-term level of inflation … is creeping up, if that’s their expectation, we’ve got to act and we’ve got to get that under control,” Atlanta Fed President Raphael Bostic told Bloomberg earlier this month. If Americans lose faith that inflation can ever return to normal that would prompt the Fed to tighten monetary policy even more — either by raising interest rates or keeping them elevated for much longer than expected. The Fed’s benchmark lending rate is currently at a 22-year high and investors already expect the central bank to keep rates higher for longer. “I worked at the Fed for six years and if inflation expectations are drifting higher and they’re not under control, the Fed absolutely will act,” Luke Tilley, chief economist at Wilmington Trust Investment Advisors, told CNN. “That is the one thing that gives them trouble sleeping at night. They don’t lose sleep over recessions because they come and go, but they do lose sleep over long-term inflation expectations drifting higher,” he said. It’s unclear if inflation expectations will continue to worsen, and the Fed looks at a broad range of surveys, not just the University of Michigan’s. But the university’s survey is one of the most closely watched by investors and economists. The Fed specifically focuses on long-run inflation expectations and Fed Chair Jerome Powell makes it a point to mention the state of Americans’ inflation perceptions at every news conference after officials set monetary policy (which happens eight times a year.) During his most recent post-meeting presser earlier this month after officials voted to hold rates steady, Powell said “longer-term inflation expectations appear to remain well anchored.” But the clock is ticking, inflation remains well above 2% and some economists believe the last mile of the Fed’s inflation fight might be the most difficult. “I remain willing to support raising the federal funds rate at a future meeting should the incoming data indicate that progress on inflation has stalled or is insufficient to bring inflation down to 2% in a timely way,” Fed Governor Michelle Bowman, one the Fed’s most hawkish officials, said last week at a New York Bankers Association forum in Palm Beach, Florida. The keyword there is “timely.” Sticky inflation could possibly “un-anchor” inflation expectations or elicit a consistent deterioration in Americans’ perception on inflation. But it’s unclear how long it would take for persistently high inflation to cause that. Tilley said “the Fed is being way too pessimistic” in expecting inflation not to reach 2% until 2026. At the end of the day, the Fed just needs to maintain confidence that the inflation monster will someday go away, and inflation’s steady slowdown over the past year has so far helped in that regard, according to the New York Fed. A recent analysis from the bank on consumers’ perspectives on inflation showed that “consumers today know enough about the Federal Reserve to recognize its policies as the most important factor behind the recent and expected future decline in inflation.” The Fed perhaps just needs to continue to prove that it is making progress in its historic inflation fight. “I think 2% is just a number because what’s more meaningful is the direction of travel rather than where they get to before the trip is over,” Drew Matus, chief market strategist at MetLife Investment Management, told CNN. “The Fed really just wants people to not expect inflation will run at 4% forever.” So what’s kept inflation expectations in check this long? Matus said it might just be nostalgia. “People want to believe the future will be like the good old past because it’s something that the brain can get itself around,” he said. “They’re trying to actualize their memory when things were more affordable and what the Fed really has to watch out for is the risk of a shock to inflation right now.”

Credit: Pobytov/Getty Images ADVERTISEMENT The science of consciousness has not lived up to expectations. Over the summer, the neuroscientist Christof Koch conceded defeat on his 25-year bet with the philosopher David Chalmers, a lost wager that the science of consciousness would be all wrapped up by now. In September, over 100 consciousness researchers signed a public letter condemning one of the most popular theories of consciousness—the integrated information theory—as pseudoscience. This in turn prompted strong responses from other researchers in the field. Despite decades of research, there’s little sign of consensus on consciousness, with several rival theories still in contention. Your consciousness is what it’s like to be you. It’s your experiences of color and sound and smell; your feelings of pain, joy, excitement or tiredness. It’s what makes you a thinking, sentient being rather than an unfeeling mechanism. ADVERTISEMENT In my new book, entitled Why? The Purpose of the Universe, I take head-on the question of why it’s so hard to make progress on consciousness. The core difficulty is that consciousness defies observation. You can’t look inside someone’s brain and see their feelings and experiences. Science does deal with things that can’t be observed, such as fundamental particles, quantum wave functions, maybe even other universes. But consciousness poses an important difference: In all of these other cases, we theorize about things we can’t observe in order to explain what we can observe. Uniquely with consciousness, the thing we are trying to explain cannot be publicly observed. How then can we investigate consciousness? Although consciousness can’t be directly observed, if you’re dealing with another human being, you can ask them what they’re feeling, or look for external indications of consciousness. And if you scan their brain at the same time, you can try to match up the brain activity, which you can observe, with the invisible consciousness, which you can’t. The trouble is there are inevitably multiple ways of interpreting such data. This leads to wildly different theories as to where consciousness resides in the brain. Believe it or not, the debates we are currently having in the science of consciousness closely resemble debates that were raging in the 19th century. There may be a way forward. I argue that we can account for the evolution of consciousness only if we reject reductionism about consciousness. Most consciousness researchers employ a reductionist view of the universe, where physics is running the show. Thus insofar as there are some future possibilities left open by the arrangements of particles in our brains, they are settled by nothing more than the random chanciness implicit in quantum mechanics. Some challenges have lately emerged to this reductionist paradigm. The neuroscientist Kevin Mitchell has argued that the free will of conscious organisms plays a role in determining what will happen in the brain, over and above what is settled by the laws of physics. And the assembly theory of chemist Lee Cronin and physicist Sara Walker decisively rejects reduction to microscopic-level equations, arguing for a kind of memory inherent in nature that guides the construction of complex molecules. Evolution offers one of the strongest challenges to reductionist approaches to consciousness. Natural selection only cares about behavior, as it’s only behavior that matters for survival. Rapid progress in AI and robotics has made it clear, however, that extremely complex behaviour can exist in a system that entirely lacks conscious experience. Natural selection could have constructed survival mechanisms: complex biological robots able to track features of their environment and initiate survival-conducive behavioral responses, without having any kind of inner life. For any adaptive behaviour associated with consciousness, there could be a nonconscious mechanism that instigates the same behaviour. Given all this, it is a deep mystery why consciousness evolved at all. ADVERTISEMENT Or rather, the evolution of consciousness is a deep mystery under the reductionist paradigm, according to which the behavior is determined at the micro level, making it irrelevant whether or not consciousness pops up at higher levels. But suppose instead that the emergence of biological consciousness brings into existence radically new forms of behavior, over and above what physics alone could produce. Perhaps organisms that have conscious awareness of the world around them, and thereby freely respond based on that awareness, behave very differently than mere mechanisms. Consequently, they survive much better. With these assumptions in place, we can make sense of natural selection’s preference for conscious organisms. If consciousness does defy reduction, this could revolutionize the science of consciousness. What it would essentially provide is a new empirical marker of consciousness. If the neural processes that correspond to consciousness have a novel causal profile, one that could not be predicted—even in principle—from underlying chemistry and physics, then this would amount to a giant “HERE IT IS!” in the brain. Would we not have noticed already if there were processes in the brain that didn’t reduce to underlying chemistry and physics? The truth is we know very little about how the brain works. We know a lot about the basic chemistry: how neurons fire, how chemical signals are transmitted. And we know a fair bit about the large functions of various brain regions. But we know almost nothing about how these large-scale functions are realized at the cellular level. To an extent, abstract theorizing has stood in for detailed neurophysiological investigation of what is actually going on in the brain. newsletter promo Sign up for Scientific American’s free newsletters. Sign Up As a philosopher, I’m not opposed to abstract theorizing. However, it’s crucial to distinguish the scientific questions of consciousness from the philosophical questions. The scientific task is to work out which kinds of brain activity correspond to consciousness, and it’s this task that detailed neurophysiological investigations—equipped to catch the HERE IT IS marker of consciousness—will help us make progress on. But what we ultimately want from a theory of consciousness is an explanation of why brain activity—of whatever form—is correlated with consciousness in the first place. Because consciousness is not an observable phenomenon, the “why” question is not one we can make progress on with experiments. In Why? I develop a radical form of panpsychism—the view that consciousness goes right down to the fundamental building blocks of reality—aimed at addressing the philosophical challenges of consciousness, as well as providing a framework for scientists to make progress on the scientific issues. We’re still not at first base in dealing with consciousness. It requires working on many fronts, exploiting many different areas of expertise. We need to let the philosophers do the philosophy and the scientists study the brain. Each provides a different piece of the puzzle. It is a pincer movement of science and philosophy that will, ultimately, crack the mystery of consciousness. ADVERTISEMENT This is an opinion and analysis article, and the views expressed by the author or authors are not necessarily those of Scientific American. Rights & Permissions ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S) Philip Goff is a professor of philosophy at Durham University in the U.K. His research focuses on consciousness and the ultimate nature of reality. Goff's books include Why? The Purpose of the Universe, Galileo's Error: Foundations for a New Science of Consciousness, Consciousness and Fundamental Reality and Is Consciousness Everywhere? Essays on Panpsychism. Follow him on Twitter @Philip_Goff Recent Articles by Philip Goff Our Improbable Existence Is No Evidence for a Multiverse Galileo's Big Mistake

Swiftie vanguard in abolishing the Republican Party as We , the Majority know it.

Right-wing extremist and conspiracy theorist Jack Posobiec seethed in an unhinged post on X about "THE CHILDLESS, UNMARRIED ABORTION ARMY MOBILIZED BY BARBIE, TAYLOR SWIFT, AND TIKTOK THAT IS CRUSHING REPUBLICANS AT THE BALLOT BOX." In the words of Taylor Swift, you need to calm down. Charlie Kirk, who runs the extremist organization Turning Point USA, a radical group attempting to pull young voters into the MAGA movement, could not contain his rage during his podcast. "Taylor Swift is going to come out in the presidential election and she is going to mobilize her fans, I'll be nice...and we're going to be like 'Oh why, where did all of these young female voters come from'... We better have a plan for that... Taylor Swift, I think she put up one voter registration link and she registered millions and millions. And let's be honest, all the Swifties want, is swift abortion." Helps Detect Threats At Home Learn Why Millions of Neighbors Trust Ring to Help Keep Their Home and Neighborhood Safe. READ MORE SPONSORED • BY RING Pro-democracy political activist Olivia Julianna posted the clip to TikTok with a call to action: "Swifties... you know what to do." Julianna urged her followers to visit Vote.org to register to vote. Julianna's clip quickly went viral, amassing more than 1.6 million views in the first 24 hours alone. Swifties were eager to take action. "Voting ✨️Taylor's Version ✨️," one TikTok user wrote in the comments. "Yes!! We love it when Taylor Swift mobilizes her legions of fans for women’s rights!!" another fan exclaimed. "Are y'all gonna make friendship bracelets for the polls or," said user Cass. The comment received over 4,000 likes as of the writing of this article. Trading colorful friendship bracelets containing lyrics to Swift's songs has become a popular activity among Swifties at Swift's concerts. Now, with Swifties motivated to convert their friendship bracelets into messages to get out the vote and support pro-democracy candidates, their impact at the ballot box can be seismic. Custom Logo The North Face Men's Big Skyline Full Zip Fleece Jacket READ MORE SPONSORED • BY LANDS' END OUTFITTERS It remains unclear why MAGA Republicans think it is smart to pick a fight with the Swifties. Recently, Marjorie Taylor Greene's boyfriend Brian Glenn, a host on MAGA propaganda network RSBN, absurdly claimed that Taylor Swift was jealous of Trump's crowd sizes as he covered a Trump luncheon in a hotel event space. Other MAGA influencers, including Clay Travis, Tomi Lahren, Ian Miles Cheong, Nick Adams, and others recently lashed out at Taylor Swift following news that she was dating NFL star Travis Kelce. During a recent rally, Donald Trump bragged that his song with the January 6 insurrectionists was more popular than Taylor Swift's music (it's not). Kirk plotted his strategy to combat Swift's influence in one of the most laughable ways imaginable, instructing the Republican National Committee to "bring in D.C. Draino, bring in Ben Shapiro...bring in Cernovich, bring in Posobiec..." Yeah, good luck with that. Trump and his MAGA acolytes have made a potentially fatal mistake with their obsession with attacking Swift. They should take a look at what they've done. 'Cause now they've got bad blood. By Brett Meiselas Follow bmeiselas Around the Web Don Lemon Says He Was Fired From CNN Because Of His Commitment To Telling The Truth Don Lemon Says He Was Fired From CNN Because Of His Commitment To Telling The Truth Blavity | Sponsored [Gallery] She Had The Guts To Wear This Dress At The Met Gala Red Carpet [Gallery] She Had The Guts To Wear This Dress At The Met Gala Red Carpet The red carpet can be an opportunity to see a lot more of the stars than we might have expected. Kueez | Sponsored Dermatologist Begs Americans To "Fill In" Wrinkles With This Tip (Every Morning) Dermatologist Begs Americans To "Fill In" Wrinkles With This Tip (Every Morning) Forget Retinol, Use This Household Item To Fill In Wrinkles wrinkles.pro | Sponsored Mail Order Weed Is a Real Thing, and It's Amazing Mail Order Weed Is a Real Thing, and It's Amazing HelloMood | Sponsored [Photos] Man Was Found Alive And Well 23 Years After He Told His Wife He Went To The Hospital [Photos] Man Was Found Alive And Well 23 Years After He Told His Wife He Went To The Hospital Show Snob | Sponsored News Best of Pro-Democracy Content for November 9th By Troy Matthews11 hours ago News Tuberville Blocks Over 300 Military Nominees on Military Day and Right Before Veterans Day By Acyn14 hours ago News Swifties Vow to Save Democracy After MAGA Attacks By Brett Meiselas16 hours ago News 2022 and 2023 Have Been Very Good Years for Democrats. We Should Be Optimistic About 2024. By Simon Rosenberg17 hours ago News Biden Celebrates Union Victory in Rousing Speech Celebrating Workers By Troy Matthews17 hours ago News GOP House Candidate Implies Unarmed Man Cursing in Viral Video Deserves to Be Shot and... By J.D. Wolf18 hours ago News "Don't Blame Trump"— Trump Posts Article Blaming Everyone but Himself for GOP Losses By J.D. Wolf18 hours ago News GOP In Chaos With 8 Days Until Government Shutdown By Troy Matthews18 hours ago News BREAKING: Joe Manchin Will NOT Run for Reelection By J.D. Wolf19 hours ago See More About Us Privacy Policy Terms of Use © 2023

Democrats and progressive issues had a great night on Tuesday: Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear’s strong reelection, Democrats gaining control of both chambers of the Virginia state legislature, Dan McCaffery’s Pennsylvania Supreme Court win, Ohio voters putting abortion rights in their state constitution, and a bad night for Moms for Liberty-endorsed school board candidates. It’s an impressive list! If you think that’s going to dissuade the media from continuing to run with everything-is-bad-for-Biden narratives, though, you will need to think again. To be sure, some in the media got it—even some surprises, like Politico. (Seriously!) The New York Times, on the other hand, cannot accept that its big weekend poll showing Donald Trump leading President Joe Biden in key battleground states might not be the top story of the day after voters went to the polls and handed Biden’s party some wins. Outside of the straight news pieces about results of specific elections, the Times coverage of Tuesday’s elections was overwhelmingly focused on how even though Democrats won, That Poll is still right a year out. That no matter how much Democrats keep winning elections, Biden is in deep trouble. Here's Peter Baker: “Poll? What poll? The Democratic victories in Tuesday’s off-year elections gave President Biden’s White House some breathing space that it desperately needed just when it needed it.” Got that? The poll is the story. The elections are the distraction. Nate Cohn arrived to explain: “There’s no contradiction between the polling and Tuesday’s election results. There’s not even a contradiction between the polling and the last year of special elections.” Cohn wasn’t alone in making that case, but:

In the reddest of states last night Trumpite politicians went down to defeat in a wave of victories notched by anti-MAGA forces. The sweeping victories came just two days after the New York Times/Siena poll showed President Biden running behind Trump in key swing states, calling into question the validity of the polls.

RICHMOND, VA.—In the reddest of states last night Trumpite politicians went down to defeat in a wave of victories notched by anti-MAGA forces. The sweeping victories came just two days after the New York Times/Siena poll showed President Biden running behind Trump in key swing states, calling into question the validity of the polls.

The victories last night were taken by many as an indication that the nation’s anti-MAGA forces continue to be strong and aren’t going anywhere, despite what the pollsters say. Democrats and the issues they support won convincingly in states where Trump had racked big victories in prior elections.

Many say that if Biden reversed his unpopular support for war in the Middle East, considering last night’s victories, he could be on his way to a big victory in 2024.

Riding the continuing wave of pro-abortion and pro-reproductive rights votes, progressives engineered impressive wins last night—-and gave a kick in the rear to another MAGA Republican, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin–in the 2023 off-year elections.

With almost all the votes counted in key races in Ohio, Virginia, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania, pro-abortion candidates and Democrats swept the board, proving the issue is still potent in national politics and unlikely to fade next year, either. In his comments on the results, President Biden signaled he’s going to make sure it doesn’t.

In the process, Virginians turned Youngkin’s hopes of completely controlling Virginia state politics and imposing his social issues—“parental choice,” anti-abortion, textbook censorship among them—to ashes, by delivering both houses of the legislature to the Democrats.

Union leaders cheered the results, with Teachers (AFT) President Randi Weingarten, a New York City civics teacher, describing their national impact.

“These results underline what families have been telling us for the last two years: They don’t want culture wars. They want safe and welcoming public schools where their kids can recover and thrive. Where extremists peddled fear, voters wanted hope. Where extremists tried to smear and divide, voters demanded real solutions,” she said.

“Voters want the government to support them, not ban books, censor history, or limit their reproductive choices. They want good jobs, higher wages, lower costs, and investments in transport and infrastructure. They reject division and want to seize the future together.

“Voters saw the extremists for who they were,” Weingarten concluded. “The culture war agenda is toxic and hurtful, and voters agree the path to a brighter future for kids and families runs through the nation’s communities and public schools. That’s the message tonight.”

Virginia flip is not the sole win

The Virginia legislature’s flip to total Democratic—it had been split—was a sweeter win for progressives and yet was far from the only one.

They also scored triumphs in Ohio’s referendum to write abortion rights into the state Constitution, in re-electing moderate-to-progressive Democrat Andy Beshear as Kentucky governor, and in electing former state Rep. Sara Innamorato as Allegheny County (Pittsburgh) Executive.

Innamorato “framed her campaign around those…‘left behind’ over the years,” Julian Routh reported in the Pittsburgh Union Progress, the strike paper the Pittsburgh News Guild runs while Pittsburgh Post-Gazette owners defy federal orders to bargain a new contract with their workers.

And in a vote for a vacant U.S. House seat, heavily Rhode Islanders elected Democrat Gabriel Amo by almost a 2-to-1 ratio.

The U.S. Justice Department sent election observers to Rhode Island’s 1st District, which Amo was running in and which includes the state capital of Providence, to ensure right-wing “observers” didn’t intimidate voters of color. Amo will be Rhode Island’s first-ever Black member of Congress.

Abortion rights drove voters to polls in Virginia

But the Virginia legislative sweep, with abortion rights as a big driver, was major news on election night.

“Virginians understood the assignment,” said Alexis McGill Johnson, president and CEO of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, which spent more than a million dollars on phone banks, door-knocking, and ads in the Old Dominion. “By sending pro-reproductive rights majorities to the Commonwealth’s Senate and House, Virginians voted to keep in check an overzealous Gov. Youngkin, who’s said he’d happily sign any anti-abortion legislation that comes across his desk.

“Voters and advocates” sent “a resounding message that they want the power to make decisions about their own bodies, lives, and futures.”

The Virginia voters also helped workers, said AFSCME President Lee Saunders. And teachers and kids, added National Education Association President Becky Pringle. Both said their unions’ members knocked on thousands of doors, called voters, and, in NEA’s case, enlisted concerned parents, too.

“Voters demanded an end to the right-wing attacks on public schools, book bans, and censoring history,” Pringle declared. GOP heavy hitters also had a big interest in the race, seeing Youngkin as a potential alternative to Donald Trump, she explained.

“Over the last few months, right-wing billionaires have been pouring money into these [legislative] elections seeking to prop up” Youngkin. “Those billionaires are desperate for anyone but Trump to be the GOP nominee, which is why they spent millions of dollars to buoy their latest candidate de jour. But as Youngkin made this election a referendum on his political ambitions, voters spoke loudly in rejecting him and his radical agenda.

Instead, voters elected leaders who “will work with parents, grandparents, and educators to help every student thrive–no matter their race, place, or background,” Pringle, a Philadelphia science teacher, said.

“Virginians made a strong, clear statement this election: We won’t give up our voice on the job,” said Saunders. “AFSCME members mobilized their communities to elect candidates who will protect their hard-earned right to collectively bargain. Together, they flipped the Virginia House of Delegates and reelected labor champions to the Senate, knocking on thousands of doors in the process.

“With a pro-worker majority in both chambers, the economic future for so many Virginians is much brighter.”

Among the other Virginia winners: State Delegate Danica Roem (D), Virginia’s first-ever transgender state official, won an open State Senate seat, defeating Republican Bill Woolf 51.7%-48.3%. Roem concentrated on local issues, such as clogged highways, in rapidly changing Prince William County.

As in prior campaigns, former newspaper reporter Roem asked voters for their views, jotting the answers down in notebooks. Woolf tried to nationalize the race and make it about her gender and social issues.

“Six years later they doubled, tripled, and quadrupled down on transphobia in their closing message in this race,” Roem said in her victory speech. “And we won.”

In a key race that helped flip the Senate, Schuyler VanValkenburg, a teacher who opposes Youngkin’s ham-handed attempt to dictate book buying to local schools, ousted a right-wing Republican incumbent in the Richmond suburbs. Virginia progressives concentrated on both Roem and VanValkenberg and on re-electing a Democratic incumbent Assemblyman Rodney Willett from Henrico County, who won.

Ohioans write reproductive rights into the Constitution

In Ohio, voters followed up their rejection in August of a right-wing attempt to make referendums tougher to get on the ballot and tougher to pass by approving a constitutional amendment writing abortion rights, including medical contraception and pregnancy prevention, into the state Constitution.

The 56%-44% win cheered abortion rights advocates, but still left State House Speaker Jason Stephens, R-Kitts Hill, unconvinced. He threatened to find a legislative maneuver in Ohio’s GOP-gerrymandered legislature to enact a tough abortion ban, anyway.

As of 1 a.m. Eastern Time November 8, the raw vote totals were 2,142,956 (56.3%) for the amendment and 1,660,211 (43.7%) against it. The margin should grow. Totals included more than 95% of all precincts reporting in Ohio’s biggest counties—except Cuyahoga (Cleveland). There, the amendment led by a 3-to-1 ratio, with 86% of the vote counted. Pro-amendment ratios in the four biggest counties were two-to-one or better.

President Biden singled out the Ohio win in particular, previewing at least one campaign theme he will run for re-election on next year: Constitutional rights, including abortion rights.

“Americans once again voted to protect their fundamental freedoms–and democracy won,” said Biden. “In Ohio, voters protected access to reproductive health in their state constitution.

“Ohioans and voters across the country rejected attempts by MAGA Republican elected officials to impose extreme abortion bans that put the health and lives of women in jeopardy, force women to travel hundreds of miles for care, and threaten to criminalize doctors and nurses for providing the health care that their patients need and that they are trained to provide.

“This extreme and dangerous agenda is out of step with the vast majority of Americans. My administration will continue to protect access to reproductive health care and call on Congress to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade”—the Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion that right-wing justices obliterated in 2022—“in federal law once and for all.”

Beshear keeps Kentucky governorship

In Kentucky, incumbent Gov. Andy Beshear (D), the Bluegrass State’s sole bulwark against a complete MAGA Republican takeover, beat state Attorney General Daniel Cameron, the first Black to hold the office.

Four years ago, Beshear ousted controversial Republican incumbent Matt Bevins by a little more than 5,000 votes. He hit Bevins’s opposition to Medicaid expansion and his concentration on social issues.

This time Beshear beat Cameron by 693,370-626,196 (52.5%-47.5%) with more than 95% of the vote counted. Republicans won the other statewide offices. They also have supermajorities in the Kentucky legislature and, including both senators and hold all but one congressional seat.

Beshear ran on his economic record of lowering unemployment and bringing new jobs to Kentucky and on sharp criticism of Cameron’s absolute abortion ban. Cameron tried to run away from it, changing his position late in the campaign, to allow some exceptions. He also tried to tie Beshear to Democratic President Biden, who lost Kentucky badly in 2020 to Donald Trump. Neither message worked.

Cameron also ducked discussing the fatal shooting of Breonna Taylor, the sleeping and innocent Black woman, in her bed, by Louisville cops in a drug raid gone wrong. Cameron shied away from prosecution. Taylor’s family campaigned against him.

“Listen up Republicans: A strict anti-abortion law without some exceptions is not the preferred position of most voters,” one tweeter, Clair, commented after seeing the results. Last year, Kentucky voters also rejected a state constitutional amendment to ban abortion. Another tweeter, identified as George, added: “Great. Including Ohio, I hope Republicans just keep running on anti-abortion.”

The only race progressives and workers didn’t win was one where abortion had nothing to do with the outcome. It was a local referendum, Proposition 22, on the ballot in Cincinnati. There, Norfolk Southern Railroad—the same freight railroad that brought disaster and a mushroom cloud to East Palestine, Ohio—spent $4.2 million on its campaign to get the voters’ OK to buy the Cincinnati Southern, the last city-owned freight line in the U.S. It runs from Cincinnati to Chattanooga, Tenn.

The big freight line also recruited the mayor’s support, and the endorsement of the Cincinnati Enquirer, for its bid. Its money would give Cincinnati a “trust fund” for infrastructure improvements.

Railroad Workers United, the grass-roots group uniting members of the 14 different rail crafts, and the NAACP—both concerned about the big freight line’s safety record—campaigned against Norfolk Southern. But they lost 42,255 (51.8%)-39,252 (48.2%). We hope you appreciated this article. At People’s World, we believe news and information should be free and accessible to all, but we need your help. Our journalism is free of corporate influence and paywalls because we are totally reader-supported. Only you, our readers and supporters, make this possible. If you enjoy reading People’s World and the stories we bring you, please support our work by donating or becoming a monthly sustainer today. Thank you!

Victory! 6th Circuit Judge Upholds Ban on Dangerous Child ‘Gender’ Medicine The decision finally acknowledged what feminists have been saying for years: “Transgender” identification is neither an immutable status nor an oppressed class

More GOP splintering : Former staunch allies of Michigan GOP Chairwoman Kristina Karamo, who assumed the role following an unsuccessful secretary of state campaign, are now uniting to remove her as the party remains mired in infighting and hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt.

LANSING, Mich. (AP) — Former staunch allies of Michigan GOP Chairwoman Kristina Karamo, who assumed the role following an unsuccessful secretary of state campaign, are now uniting to remove her as the party remains mired in infighting and hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt. It's a swift fall for Karamo, an election conspiracy theorist who in February was overwhelmingly elected by grassroots activists to lead the state party through the next presidential election until early 2025. Michigan Republicans were coming off historic losses in the 2022 midterms, and Karamo promised to rebuild the state party into a “a political machine that strikes fear in the heart of Democrats.” Just nine months later, a petition is circulating within the state GOP calling for a vote to remove Karamo as chairwoman, according to internal communications obtained by The Associated Press. Party members supporting the petition say Karamo has done little in her time to advance the party, which had at least $500,000 in debt as of last month. The turmoil among Donald Trump loyalists who have largely controlled formal state GOP operations since 2020 has added to growing discord among Michigan Republicans who are grasping for a strategy to turn around the party’s string of recent losses. “I love Kristina as an individual, as a person. I think she’s an amazing, amazing woman when you talk to her one-on-one about stuff. But her administration and the way she’s operating has been an absolute disappointment,” said Jon Smith, a former district chair of the Michigan GOP who stepped down last month. Karamo did not respond to a request for comment by AP. The Michigan GOP has historically been one of the most powerful state parties in the country, led by the likes of former Education Secretary Betsy DeVos and Ronna McDaniel, who is now the chair of the Republican National Committee. With millions in fundraising, the state party helped Michigan Republicans hold control of the governor's office and both chambers of the Legislature from 2011 to 2018. But since Trump’s 2016 presidential victory in Michigan, fervent grassroots Trump supporters have gradually gained prominence within the party. In 2022, Democrats swept every statewide race and gained control of all levels of state government for the first time in 40 years. Karamo, a former college instructor, rose to prominence after claiming she saw election fraud as a poll challenger in Detroit. No evidence of voting fraud was found, and she lost by 14 percentage points in the secretary of state race last year after being backed by Trump. Three months later, she was elected by Republican delegates to lead the Michigan GOP. Many party members who supported Karamo’s candidacy have lost faith, and infighting has consumed the GOP in recent months. It escalated to the point of a physical altercation during an executive committee meeting on July 8. Mark DeYoung, chairman of the Clare County Republican Party, was hospitalized after a party activist who was unhappy that the meeting was closed “kicked him in the crotch,” according to a Clare police report. The activist, James Chapman, was later charged with assault and battery and disturbing the peace. Smith, the former 5th District chair who said he still gets calls every day about party affairs, estimated that between “55% and 65%” of the state's more than 100 Republican Party state committee members currently want to remove Karamo as chair. The petition calling for a vote on Karamo’s removal was first circulated by a state committee member, Daniel Lawless, on Oct. 24. It was first reported by The Detroit News. “I regret to say that after much thought and reflection, I have become convinced that Kristina Karamo cannot lead us in this effort and it is upon us, the State Committee, to replace her and move our party forward,” Lawless wrote in an email to other state committee members that was obtained by the AP. Half of the party’s state committee members would need to sign the petition before it could go to a vote, which would require a 75% approval to oust Karamo, Smith said. The petition is just one of multiple efforts to remove Karamo. While internal emails show other committee members support Karamo's removal, it’s unclear how many have signed the petition. Lawless said he “will make public comment at an appropriate time,” when asked how many members had signed the petition. The potential vote follows the party's biannual leadership conference on Mackinac Island in September. The conference attracted six presidential candidates in 2015, the state's last contested GOP presidential primary. This year, the event was headlined by former Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake, actor Jim Caviezel and presidential hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy. The Michigan GOP agreed to pay Caviezel $110,000 for his appearance, according to a contract obtained by AP. “We had a goal to raise a lot of money for that event, and unfortunately, that did not occur,” Karamo said about the conference on Oct. 19, according to a video posted online by the party. Michigan GOP leadership outlined the financial situation that day at an event in Macomb County, showing that the party had at least $500,000 in debt. Karamo, who refused to answer a question about how much money the party currently had, blamed the debt on previous leadership. She said that “we are a ways away from where we would like to be,” when asked whether the party could finally support candidates in the 2024 election. Internal banking documents obtained by AP showed that the party had $35,000 cash on hand as of Aug. 10. Warren Carpenter resigned from his position as one of 13 Republican district committee chairs following the Mackinac leadership conference due to what he called “financial malfeasance.” Carpenter, who said he was once a supporter of Karamo, is now leading his own effort to remove her. He said that when a vote occurs to remove Karamo, he doesn't believe “she walks out of that room with more than 15% support.”