My husband works on his postcards. |
Hi ______. Thank you for being a voter! Who you vote for is private, but whether you vote is important. Please vote in the November 5th election. Thank you so much! ― Molly
Holding a vision of a world that works for all..... "Let yourself be silently drawn by the stronger pull of what you really love." ~ Rumi
My husband works on his postcards. |
Hi ______. Thank you for being a voter! Who you vote for is private, but whether you vote is important. Please vote in the November 5th election. Thank you so much! ― Molly
This is such an excellent and vital piece by Norman Solomon! And worth posting again. And again. Yes, our government’s funding of the genocide in Gaza is abhorrent, immoral, inhuman, and insane. Absolutely!! And we still must do what we have to to stop Trump. Never before has so much been at risk. This is absolutely the single most important Presidential election in my lifetime and likely all time. ― Molly
The policy that Harris has defended for the war on Gaza is despicable, yet she is the only candidate who can spare us from another Trump presidency, which—from all indications—would be far worse than the first one.
By Norman Solomon
With Election Day just three weeks off and voting already underway in some states, the race for president is down to the wire. Progressives could make the difference.
While no one in their left mind plans to vote for the fascistic and unhinged former U.S. President Donald Trump, some say they won’t vote for Vice President Kamala Harris because of her loyalty to President Joe Biden’s support for the Israeli war on Gaza. That might enable Trump to win with enough electoral votes from swing states—Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
Those seven states are where progressives may well hold the future in their voting hands.
If it becomes a reality, the Trump-Vance administration will force progressives back on their heels, necessarily preoccupied with trying to mitigate the onslaught of massive damage being inflicted by right-wing zealots with vast government power.
The policy that Harris has defended for the war on Gaza is despicable. At the same time, she is the only candidate who can spare us from another Trump presidency, which—from all indications—would be far worse than the first one.
The need is urgent for dialectics—“a method of examining and discussing opposing ideas in order to find the truth”—in this case, the truth of what’s most needed at this electoral crossroads of fateful history.
“The harms of the other options” mean that the best course of action is to vote for Harris, 25 Islamic clerics said in a letter released last week. They focused on an overarching truth: “Particularly in swing states, a vote for a third party could enable Trump to win that state and therefore the election.” The U.S. clerics called such a vote “both a moral and a strategic failure.”
Personally, as a resident of solid-blue California, I have no intention of voting for Harris. But if I lived in one of the seven swing states, I wouldn’t hesitate to join in voting for her as the only way to defeat Trump.
Some speak of the need to exercise conscience rather than voting for Harris. Yet in swing states, what kind of “conscience” is so self-focused that it risks doing harm to others as a result of a Trump presidency?
If it becomes a reality, the Trump-Vance administration will force progressives back on their heels, necessarily preoccupied with trying to mitigate the onslaught of massive damage being inflicted by right-wing zealots with vast government power.
On domestic policies—involving racism, reproductive rights, civil liberties, the environment, climate, labor rights, the social safety net, civil rights, voting rights, LGBTQ rights, freedom of speech and the right to organize, the judicial system, and so much more—the differences between the Trump and Harris forces are huge. To claim that those differences are insignificant is a nonsensical version of elitism, no matter how garbed in leftist rhetoric.
On foreign policy, Harris is the vice president in an administration fully on board with bipartisan militarism that keeps boosting the Pentagon budget, bypassing diplomacy for ending the Ukraine war while stoking the cold war, and—with vast arms shipments to Israel—literally making possible the ongoing genocide in Gaza.
At the same time, anyone who thinks that Trump (“finish the job”) wouldn’t be even worse for Palestinian people—hard as that is to imagine—doesn’t grasp why Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is so eager for Trump to win.
The leadership of the Uncommitted Movement has sorted out the political options. The terrain was well described by Uncommitted leader Abbas Alawieh, who said last month: “At this time, our movement opposes a Donald Trump presidency whose agenda includes plans to accelerate the killing in Gaza while intensifying the suppression of anti-war organizing. And our movement is not recommending a third-party vote in the presidential election, especially as third-party votes in key swing states could help inadvertently deliver a Trump presidency, given our country’s broken Electoral College system.”
As his frequent collaborator C.J. Polychroniou noted last month, Noam Chomsky “has repeatedly made the argument that voting for a third-party or independent candidate in a swing state would accomplish nothing but increase the possibility of the most extreme and positively nuts candidate winning the election.”
In an interview with Jacobin a few weeks ago, Alawieh had this to say:
As someone who has family who lives in South Lebanon right now—who are living under the terror of U.S. weapons raining down on them from the Israeli military—I do not have the luxury of giving up on the only one of the two major parties where there is room for this debate. To be clear, there’s room for this debate not because the Democratic Party is friendly to Palestinian human rights. There’s room for this debate because A) the Republican Party is not the party where we can have this conversation; not a single federal elected official on the Republican side even supports a cease-fire as this genocide has raged on, and B) the Democratic Party speaks of being the party of justice and inclusion, and there are more and more of us within the party who are insisting that the party change its immoral and illegal support of sending weapons to harm and kill civilians.
Similarly, another prominent Uncommitted Movement leader, Palestinian American Layla Elabed, said: “We urge Uncommitted voters to register anti-Trump votes and vote up and down the ballot. Our focus remains on building this anti-war coalition, both inside and outside the Democratic Party.”
This is certainly not the presidential election that we want, but it’s the one we have. The immediate task is to prevent a Trump victory. His defeat is essential to keep doors open for progressive change that a new Trump presidency would slam shut with extreme right-wing power.
Please go here for the original article: https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/united-front-against-trump
Photo by Molly |
So many indigenous people have said to me that the fundamental difference between Western and indigenous ways of being is that even the most open-minded westerners generally view listening to the natural world as a metaphor, as opposed to the way the world really is. Trees and rocks and rivers really do have things to say to us.
A culture that values production over life values the wrong things, because it will produce things at the expense of living beings, human or otherwise.An excellent, illuminating, and spot on article. — Molly
Former President Donald J. Trump in Fayetteville, N.C. (photo credit: REUTERS/Jonathan Drake) |
If things go the way I hope they go in November, it may well turn out that Sunday’s terrific New York Times piece by Peter Baker and Dylan Freedman on Donald Trump’s age and fitness for office could stand as the single most important piece of journalism in this election. If you’ve been reading me and Greg Sargent and Parker Molloy and our Breaking News desk, then you know that The New Republic has been pretty obsessive about the topic of Trump’s mental fitness—and more importantly about the media’s general refusal to discuss it.
This is what has come to be known as the “sanewashing” of Trump: the practice by media outlets of covering him like a normal candidate and not telling their audiences in detail about all the monstrous, false, disjointed, and plain old nonsensical fountains of gibberish he serially spouts at every public appearance he makes.
We (and others) have been critical of the press in general and the Times in particular, mainly because the Times is still the most important news outlet in the country. So let’s give credit where it’s due. The Baker-Freedman piece was a deeply reported analysis that wasn’t afraid to say things most mainstream outlets won’t say. I’d also note that in recent days, Michael Gold, the paper’s Trump correspondent, has written a couple pieces that are more blunt and direct in calling out Trump’s lies and quoting some of his more outrageous comments.
The Sunday Times article puts it on the line: “He rambles, he repeats himself, he roams from thought to thought—some of them hard to understand, some of them unfinished, some of them factually fantastical. He voices outlandish claims that seem to be made up out of whole cloth. He digresses into bizarre tangents about golf, about sharks, about his own ‘beautiful’ body. He relishes ‘a great day in Louisiana’ after spending the day in Georgia. He expresses fear that North Korea is ‘trying to kill me’ when he presumably means Iran. As late as last month, Mr. Trump was still speaking as if he were running against President Biden, five weeks after his withdrawal from the race.”
That’s just for starters. The gist of the piece argues—with statistical analyses of Trump’s tropes and speech patterns—that his rhetoric is very different from what it was in 2015 and 2016. Which is to say, it’s worse in every way: more long-winded, more disconnected, more rambling; also coarser, far more prone to swearing. In sum, the article is devastating about whether Trump, who is now the old one in the race and who would be 82 at the end of a second term, is simply capable on a mental level of doing the job of president.
So, good job, New York Times. But now the question is, will this just stop here?
It had better not. I hope the Times keeps finding ways to raise this question, and I hope other mainstream outlets follow. The first part of that equation shouldn’t be hard for the simple reason that Trump will keep cranking out material. He has been, in case you’ve missed it, absolutely insane with regard to his lies about Hurricane Helene. He claims that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have denied money to the affected states because they’ve spent it all coddling undocumented immigrants. He actually said this. (For the record, it’s not true.) Another line is that they’ve denied aid to red parts of the states but sent money to blue parts. No, idiot, that’s you!
The press has done a decent job of covering the Helene-related lies. But again, this isn’t just a question of lies. It’s a question of whether he’s all there in the head. And it’s a relevant question because Trump makes it relevant every time he opens his mouth.
Whatever I thought of the policies of George W. Bush or John McCain or Mitt Romney, I knew one reliable thing about all of them. They weren’t going to start talking about poor misunderstood Hannibal Lecter. They weren’t going to go on WTF riffs about “vicious” mosquitoes and the Panama Canal or how Cary Grant looked in a bathing suit. They didn’t frequently get wrong what city or state they were in or say “Minneananpolis” or forget who they were running against.
But Trump has done all that and much, much more while campaigning for president. And there’s surely more coming. As George Conway tweeted Sunday morning:
The great thing about this lengthy New York Times report about @realDonaldTrump’s extensive cognitive decline is how he’s going to react to it. — George Conway (@gtconway3d) October 6, 2024
A key word in the Times article was “disinhibition.” It’s just what it sounds like—the loss of inhibition for one reason or another. It means that as you age and your brain starts to go, you become more yourself.
With most older adults, that’s harmless—they become a little more stubborn, a little more direct. But this is different. Does America need a Donald Trump in the Oval Office who is more himself? It means more people will be arrested, more laws will be broken, more constitutional guardrails smashed. The mainstream media has four weeks to lead that conversation.
Please go here for the original article: https://newrepublic.com/article/186836/trump-mental-fitness-cognitive-decline-new-york-times
Michael Tomasky is the editor of The New Republic and the author of five books, including his latest and critically acclaimed The Middle Out: The Rise of Progressive Economics and a Return to Shared Prosperity. With extensive experience as an editor, columnist, progressive commentator, and special correspondent for renowned publications such as The Guardian, The Washington Post, The New York Times, the Daily Beast, and many others, Tomasky has been a trusted voice in political journalism for more than three decades.
CREDIT: Sebastian Nevols |
News from Naomi
It’s a very difficult day and I have been working for weeks on an essay that I hope might be some sort of help. Help in seeing one another’s narratives better. Help in getting out of what increasingly feels like a recurrent genocide loop. The Guardian was kind and courageous enough to publish it. Please read below for an excerpt and a link to read the entire piece in The Guardian. Share it if you are so moved. I’ve also included the link to download the free excerpt of two chapters from Doppelganger, called Israel, Palestine, and the Doppelganger Effect. Finally, I’ve linked to last week’s unpaywalled episode of Unshocked: The Case for BDS where Mehdi and I debunk the myths around the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) Movement – a nonviolent Palestinian-led movement that works to pressure Israel into complying with international law using some of the tactics of the South African anti-Apartheid Movement. Thank you for reading.
A year later, memorials to the 7 October attacks use art, virtual reality and dark tourism to stir support for limitless violence. But there is a different way to remember
By Naomi Klein
A slick, high-priced television production. Speeches from top officials. A live audience of thousands. A unified show of collective sorrow and military resolve.
That is how the Israeli government hoped to mark the passing of one year since Hamas’s surprise and bloody attacks last 7 October. But little has gone according to plan.
Many of the families of people killed or taken hostage on that day have come out forcefully against the state-sponsored event, saying pageantry can wait until after the government secures a hostage deal and faces an independent investigation of its own failures before, after and on that day. Some parents have forbidden the government of Benjamin Netanyahu from using their children’s names and images.
Several of the kibbutzim that suffered the greatest losses have said they will boycott. Instead, they will gather in their communities to collectively grieve their loved ones, and remember their hostages, in “intimate, sensitive” rituals. In response, the minister responsible for the ceremony has nixed the live audience while seeming to dismiss the families’ objections as “background noise”. This has led to even fiercer denunciations on social media, with some of Israel’s top celebrities pledging their support to a rival commemoration.
For the government, “everything is a show”, said Danny Rahamim, a member of Kibbutz Nahal Oz.
That may be, but it seems certain that on 7 October, the official show will go on. Indeed it is nearly impossible to imagine a world in which the Netanyahu government – and the legacy Jewish organizations that echo its messaging around the world – would resist the chance to use the potent date as a megaphone to broadcast the same story about the attacks that we have all heard many times before.
It’s a simple fable of good and evil, in which Israel is unblemished in its innocence, deserving unquestioning support, while its enemies are all monsters, deserving of violence unbounded by laws or borders, whether in Gaza, Jenin, Beirut, Damascus or Tehran. It’s a story in which Israel’s very identity as a nation is forever fused with the terror it suffered on 7 October, an event that, in Netanyahu’s telling, will be seamlessly merged both with the Nazi Holocaust and a battle for the soul of western civilization.
In Germany, they speak of a Staatsraison, or reason of state – and in recent decades, its leaders have said that reason is protecting Israel. Israel has a Staatsraison too, related but different. Officially, it is Jewish safety. But integral to the state’s conception of safety is Jewish trauma. Building shrines to it. Erecting walls around it. Waging wars in its name.
And so, as sure as the sun will rise over Jerusalem, Netanyahu will tell his avenging story to the world on 7 October – and no meddlesome, grief-struck families can stop him.
These clashes over commemoration tap into deep underlying debates about the uses and abuses of Jewish suffering, conflicts that date back to before Israel’s founding, and that stretch well beyond its notoriously undefined borders. They are over a series of unresolved but increasingly high-stakes questions.
What is the line between commemorating trauma and cynically exploiting it? Between memorialization and weaponization? What does it mean to perform collective grief when the collective is not universal, but rather tightly bound by ethnicity? And what does it mean to do so while Israel actively produces more grief on an unfathomable scale, detonating entire apartment blocks in Beirut, inventing new methods of remote-controlled maiming, and sending more than a million Lebanese people fleeing for their lives, even as its pummeling of Gaza continues unabated?
With a full-scale regional conflagration looking more possible by the hour, focus on the mechanics of how Israel heightens and manipulates Jewish trauma may seem irrelevant, even insensitive. Yet these forces are profoundly interconnected, with the particular stories that Israel tells about Jewish victimhood providing the rationale and cover story for the shattering violence and colonial land annexation now on such stark display. And nothing makes these connections clearer than the ways that Israel chooses to tell the story of its own people’s trauma on 7 October – an event that has been memorialized continuously since nearly the moment that it occurred.
Please go here to continue the full original article: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2024/oct/05/israel-gaza-october-7-memorials
Please go here for Naomi's website: https://naomiklein.org/
There are worn out social conventions that desperately need to be destroyed by whatever truth is in your heart...
Truth is a sacred interruption of conditioned blindness. It empowers everyone and enables no one...
We are all healers and creators by being our truest selves. Unspoken truth is at the base of all our relational pain. Unspoken truth is at the base of all worn-out patterns we would rather maintain than transform...
Truth is the supreme liberator. And what liberates one supports the liberation of all. To liberate means to free our hearts from the limited bondage of conditional love. What is unspoken within us contains us.
Cultivate a thirst for truth that nothing else can shake. In alignment with our truth, the reeds of our destiny quiver with the music of the cosmos. The path of truth is our redemption, our renaissance, our resurrection, and our remaking. It clarifies our essence...
While truth can bring the discomfort of shaking you out of the comfortable narcotic of falsity, truth never harms.
Truth restores us with the most personal and universal intimacy with our essence. Walk with truth and let others be invited to deepen themselves in their reception of you.
We all need to take the sword of truth from its sheath of silence. It is time to slay illusion, not with violence but with the blade of clarity, of discernment. Truth germinates our reality to break through the hard seed of our conditioning, it calls forth our potential. If love is the beauty of the flower, truth is the boldness that brings it to continuously reveal more of itself.
— Chelan Harkin
Such a joy to know Chelan. And to now have all of her books. 💜 |
In the modern western world, vocation was equated with work. But each of us has callings, not merely to be professionals, but to be friends, neighbors, colleagues, family, citizens, lovers of the world. Each of us imprints the people in the world around us, breath to breath and hour to hour, as much in who we are and how we are present as in whatever we do. And just as there are callings for a life, there are callings for our time.
Hello again.
I love a line of a poem by the late William Stafford. The poem is titled “Vocation,” and the sentence is, “Your job is to find out what the world is trying to be.” Now, I could make a compelling case that the world right now is doing its best to turn inwards and hurtle backwards. But this poetry breaks my heart open.
The language of vocation is really important to me, and I take it as a pointer for the way forward. It comes from the Latin “vocari,” “calling,” which is a word we use a lot at On Being. In Western culture, in the world I was born into, vocation was equated with work and with job title. But we are called not merely to be professionals, but to be friends, neighbors, colleagues, family, citizens, lovers of the world. We are called to creativity and caring and play and service for which we will never be paid — or never be paid enough — but which will make life worth living. And each of us imprints the people in the world around us, breath to breath and hour to hour, as much in who we are and how we are present as in whatever we do.
And just as there are callings for a life, there are callings for our time. Some of us are called to place our bodies before other bodies on the front line of danger. There are so many front lines of danger in our young century. But there are other, quieter callings that are as necessary to the health of our communal soul and to make the beyond of danger and the beyond of division more muscular and more real.
Some of us are called to be bridge people, staking out the vast ground in the middle and heart of our life together, where there is meaningful difference but no desire for animosity. Some of us are called to be patient calmers of fear. This calling is so tender and so urgent if what we truly want is to coax our own best selves and the best selves of others into the light.
There are many ways to analyze the crises and the tumult of our world. There are political ways of analyzing and economic ways of analyzing. But one way of seeing our world and the incredible toxicity and polarization is that it is pain and fear on the loose, pain and fear metastasized. So these callings I’m describing about how we live into the fullness of our humanity become essential to generative forward movement on any of the great issues of our time.
“Issues” is too small a word for what we have to meet. Whether and how we rise to our ecological, racial, economic, social reckonings will mean the difference between whether we flourish and grow or whether we perhaps merely survive, as a species. And in these last years, it’s come to seem to me that the end of all of this aspiring, what we’re called to collectively, is nothing less than the possibility of wholeness — to figure out what it means to be whole human beings, with whole institutions, living in whole societies. Wholeness does not mean perfection. Being whole will not mean that we are less strange, but that we turn and structure towards what is life-giving, that we can become conscious of our complexity and our strangeness and work with them — as creatures who also have it in us to become wise.
That’s our name, after all, homo sapiens — “the creatures who are wise.” We have so far to go to live into that, and we may not get there. But across my life of conversation I have seen, experienced, learned that wisdom and wholeness emerge in lives and in places precisely in moments like this one — ours is writ large — when human beings have to hold seemingly opposing realities in a creative tension and interplay: power and frailty, birth and death, pain and hope, beauty and brokenness, mystery and conviction, calm and fierceness, mine and yours.
The invitation here is to open wide your powerful, reality-shifting imagination, your heart, your energy, your will, to the possibility of wholeness — how to live into that. This brings us full circle back to seeing and participating in the generative story, the generative landscape, of our time. It comes back, too, to that simple practice of taking in the good, because again, there is so much learning and wisdom unfolding all around, right alongside our better-publicized dysfunction and decay.
In science we are being shown how wholeness functions, how vitality happens, with words and disciplines that we did not possess when I was born, and others that are a century old: neuroscience, social psychology, “ecosystem,” “microbiome,” “tectonic shift.” Evolutionary biologists in our day are rediscovering or discovering for the first time humanity’s superpower of cooperation. They are telling a completely different story than the one the West was built around — the story that we as a species have always progressed by competing and fighting and winning. It is simply not true.
In the name of that story, we perfected systems for making an “us” and an “other.” We made of the natural world an “other.” But now, on frontiers of seeing inside our brains and our bodies, we are grasping that we are also capable of change our whole lives long and that we have inhabited ecosystems — our bodies themselves are ecosystems — while we organized around parts. It even turns out that we are linked in our cells to cosmic time — the life and death of stars. Every generation of our species has looked up at the night sky and wondered where we came from; we are the generation that learns definitively that you and I and everyone you see is actually made of stardust.
Every surface of fracture in our world notwithstanding, for us all of life is being revealed in its insistence on wholeness: the organic interplay between our bodies, the natural world, the lives we make, the worlds we create. It is the calling of callings to make that vivid and practical and real, starting inside ourselves and with the lives we’ve been given.
So I’m going to end there. Thank you for being here, for being with me, for being with each other. Until we meet again.
Please go here for the original: https://onbeing.org/programs/calling-and-wholeness/