#but also my more politically involved friends (like the ones that work for orgs) said and i quote:

[bbjobo]

listen. this is the most minor thing but i've gotta get it off my chest:

the electoral map at the end of RWRB does! not! work! i will suspend my disbelief that a democrat could lose THE WHOLE midwest but win Georgia and Texas, but the actual honest-to-god electoral votes don't match the map

[withkun]

volcanic | wong lucas

word count: 4.5k

pairing: female graduate student! reader x fratboy! lucas

genre: enemies to lovers au

warnings: smut, swearing, alcohol

a/n: yesterday i had a dream about going on a date with lucas so you can thank @god for inspiring this mess. also the last person i slept with was a trump supporter and kinda inspired the relationship... i have regrets. 

You hated admitting it to yourself, but you were instantly drawn to Lucas when he first entered the ballroom. Along with his trademark dashing smile, he disregarded the dress code and opted for a formal, black-tie suit. If you hadn’t known better, you would have guessed he was a famous actor or a prince out of a fairy tale. Of course, his entrance garnered everyone’s attention as well. Whispers and quiet giggles began to flood the room.

Flustered, you tore yourself away from him and reached for a small flask buried at the bottom of your purse. Emergency vodka could go a long way on nights like these.

“A bit early, don’t you think?” a smug voice arose.

You gritted your teeth and brought the flask to your lips, then ignored the burning sensation slipping down your throat. “Not at all,” you murmured, your voice almost a growl.

Without prompt, Lucas pulled the flask from your hands and helped himself to a sip. “Svedka,” he complained. “Definitely too early for that.”

You watched him down the remainder of the liquor, your anger beginning to boil. “Don’t you have to prepare yourself for the pageant?”

He eyed you, seemingly finding amusement in your fury. “I am,” Lucas assured you. “I’m actually campaigning right now.”

“I’m not voting for you,” you told him, a self-satisfied grin replacing your scowl.

Unphased, Lucas offered you a wink. “We’ll see,” he said in a sing-song voice, then left you to your devices and an empty flask.

Before you could chase after him and demand replacement vodka, your student organization beckoned you to their table. Begrudgingly, you slumped over and plopped into your chair. Your table consisted of the other members of the executive board, being Taeyong, Johnny, Taeil, Yuta, Jaehyun, and Doyoung. “I will pay everyone at this table fifty dollars to not vote for Lucas,” you muttered, half-serious with a glance to Taeyong. “Back me up Mr. Club President.”

Taeyong widened his eyes, putting his hands up in mock surrender. “We’re just here as a courtesy,” he laughed awkwardly. “Try not to stir any trouble.”

You resisted the urge to roll your eyes, with the knowledge that he was right. The APIDA Graduate Student Organization rarely involved itself in any undergraduate matters, but sometimes aligned with their APIDA counterparts for events like this especially seeing as most of their members once were a part of those groups. Arguably, the Mr. Asia pageant was the most important conglomerate event of the year. Each Asian, Pacific Islander, and Desi undergrad student org sent one representative each year to compete for the title of Mr. Asia. The representatives would prepare a talent portion, then partake in a question and answer session. Other attendees would dress to the nines, often seeing the event as an opportunity to flex. Most, however, did not flex to Lucas’ extent. They were also served a meal to be shared with other club members. After, attendees would cast their votes and crown that year’s Mr. Asia.

“No,” you deadpanned, already rummaging through Johnny’s backpack. ���Unless maybe you keep me drunk this entire evening. Then I might consider.���

Of course, you knew it was only a matter of time until Lucas ran with his fraternity, Pi Delta Psi, or PDPsi for short. You were hoping you’d graduate before that happened. And yet, in your sixth year at the university you found yourself subjected to the terrors of frat boy Lucas gloating more than usual.

Johnny offered you his coke upon seeing your distress, and you were not surprised to taste an exuberant amount of rum. You wrinkled your face, but still refused to return the mixed drink. Johnny and Jaehyun shared a laugh as you downed the drink. “If I make you another drink will you forgive us for voting for Lucas,” Johnny inquired, his bottom lip pouted.

Meanwhile, Taeil passed his water bottle to you. An inauspicious clear liquid to the untrained eye, but you knew better. You looked positively giddy pouring yourself a glass of lemonade followed with a solid two shots worth of Taeil’s vodka. “You rich boy,” you accused jokingly. “Out here with Tito’s.” With a grateful smile, you offered, “But you are officially my favorite and hereby ‘best boy.’”

Yuta snatched the bottle and poured some in his water before Jaehyun could get his grimy hands on it. “Petition to all vote for Mark Lee,” he said, prompting the club for a cheers.

Your fellow members clinked glasses just as the lights began to dim. With a relaxed sigh, you whispered, “Hear, hear!” At least the booze hit before you had to see Lucas parade around on stage.

The event went as it did each year, Lucas taunting you with knowing smirks occurring as it always did. This time, you had to endure it with him from the spotlight. You made it a game to send him goofy, tipsy expressions that were often accompanied by finger guns and hearts in hopes of throwing him off.  Lucas, unbothered, continued with his act. His confidence only seemed to grow.

However, you had not anticipated Lucas’ performance in the talent show. The performance began slowly as Lucas executed a graceful traditional Chinese dance. The music suddenly changed tempo, and your jaw practically dropped to the table when he ripped off his shirt. You knew he was ripped, but you couldn’t help but be mesmerized by his sculpted body. Your increasingly drunk mind went forbidden places before you snapped out of it.

Your friends noticed your cheeks burning red and stifled laughter as Lucas closed his performance. You felt his eyes on your back, your head buried in your hands.

“Oooooh,” Jaehyun teased, “He’s looking at you.”

Although a few seats away, you managed to land a solid knee kick that elicited a sharp yelp from the boy. “He’s not,” you said defensively.

Even Taeyong let out a quiet laugh. “You’ve been flirting for years…”

“You think that excessively hating each other is flirting?” you inquired incredulously.

The boys exchanged looks and knowing smiles, a familiar ritual that occurred each time you and Lucas interacted.

Frustrated, you rose from your seat and made even strides to the restroom. You looked at yourself in the mirror, cheeks still ablaze from embarrassment. To your gratitude, you still looked fairly sober otherwise.

You almost jumped when you heard a couple knocks on the restroom door. “Occupied,” you called out.

The handle twisted to reveal a sweaty Lucas, peeking curiously through the crack. “Is it just you?”

“Yes,” your answered with a bitter tone. “What can I help you with in this esteemed ladies’ restroom?”

“Hold out your hands,” he ordered.

You obliged but raised your eyebrows in confusion. Lucas carefully placed a Pepcid capsule in hand, a bottle of water in the other. “What?”

Lucas shrugged. “I get Asian glow really bad too,” he replied, “unless if there’s another reason your cheeks are read.

Overzealous, you swallowed the pill and downed the entire bottle of water. “We both know it’s Asian glow,” you said defensively.

“You’re welcome!” Lucas said, already half out the door.

And once more, he left you stunned and silent.

In your purse, your phone began to buzz with frantic messages from the boys. Jaehyun made fun of you for already breaking the seal, while Taeyong demanded that you respond before he calls an ambulance for alcohol poisoning. A third unknown number accompanied the texts with an invite to the PDPsi after party that night.

You returned to your table to find that the pageant had already moved into the question and answer portion. Mark Lee excitedly described his plans to bring more of the university clubs together for common causes. That meant Lucas was on deck.

Thankfully, the Pepcid worked some of its magic and brought your cheeks back to a normal color.  You almost felt sober again. Still, Lucas’ actions muddled your mind.

With a polite bow, Lucas concluded his session and prompted the closing of the pageant.

Lucas took the stage and elicited quite a few cheers. His frat brothers startled the room as they let out a deep chant in support. Graciously, Lucas approached the microphone and once more glanced in your direction. Without expression, you offered him a thumbs up which he appeared to appreciate.

He surprised you once more with his articulate and thought out answers before you remembered his background. His father, an industrious and well-known businessman in Eastern Asia, likely prepared him for moments like this. Lucas may have been an untouchable playboy, but he was also poised to become a part of his father’s company. Still, you felt a certain genuity to his words despite that.

You turned your attention to your cell phone and took in the options. As your thumb hovered over Mark Lee’s name, you could not stop your eyes from wandering to Lucas’. Biting your lip, you hesitantly selected Lucas.

Within a few moments, the results were in and the MCs called the contestants to the stage. You refused to look at Lucas, instead focusing intently on your restless hands.

You expected to hear Lucas’ name, but instead heard Mark Lee announced as 2020’s Mr. Asia.

Following the applause, the MCs bid everyone a good night. Johnny addressed the table, “We’re all going to PDPsi’s after party, right?”

Looking over your shoulder, you saw Lucas clowning around with his frat brothers, then turned back to your friends. “Do we have to?”

“Absolutely,” Doyoung responded, eliciting flabbergasted responses from the table.

They all stared at you expectantly, knowing that you were cornered. If Doyoung wanted to party, an event none of them would have ever predicted, then you would have to see that through. “Fuck y’all,” you grunted.

A couple hours later, you arrived as a group at the notorious PDPsi frat house with a few handles. You hadn’t changed your outfit, but the boys ensured that you at least let your hair down from your high ponytail and touch up your makeup. They convinced themselves that the night was finally upon them, the night where you and Lucas would finally hook up. Despite their protests, you looked essentially the same. You wore mostly light makeup, but maybe got overzealous applying highlighter. You adorned the same black neck top tucked into a short argyle skirt, but with different shoes. The boys made you wear your “slut shoes,” which were basically just a pair of thigh-high suede black boots. In your hasty attempt to get ready, you barely had time to drink.

The party already was in full swing, and you could easily hear the music from a couple houses down. Beer cans and empty white claws littered the front lawn. A few people played beer pong on the front deck, but they had only filled the cups with water. The boys paired off amongst themselves in preparation for the drinking game, leaving you without a partner. Just as you began to complain, Lucas appeared at your side. “Hey, Y/N, I’m claiming you as my beer pong partner. Oh, and we’re next.”

Lucas practically dragged you away. “I’m terrible at beer pong,” you attempted to dissuade him.

Indifferent, Lucas made the first shot and gave your team the advantage of going first. “Here, I’m better at going second.” He pushed the ping pong ball in your hand.

You considered your options for a second. “You’re lucky I hate losing more than I hate you.” With that sentiment, you watched your ball splash into the back-right cup.

He grinned. “I knew it.”

Despite being a frat boy, AKA master of all party games, Lucas did not have a consistent shot. Still, you fended off the opposing team until you were down to the last cup. Two consecutive shots in and they would win. “Let’s make this interesting,” you offered. “If you miss your shot, you have to do whatever I want.”

With a knowing a smile, Lucas agreed. “If I make it, then you have to do whatever I want.”

You nodded, your confidence swelling, then gleefully watched your ball land perfectly centered in the last cup. And to your horror, you watched Lucas do the same thing.

“Oh, humble winner,” you decreed sarcastically, “what it is that you seek?”

To no one’s surprise, Lucas replied, “I want you to kiss me.”

You saw it coming, but that didn’t mean you were any less disgruntled. In a classic, you-like fashion, you launched into a rant. “Seriously, Lucas?? You’re a robot set to fuck boy mode and I will not be a part of it- “

He took your arm and pulled you away from the deck, into an alleyway. “You lost the bet,” Lucas reminded you. “And all you have to do is uphold your part of the deal.” He gestured around the empty space. “No one will even see it.”

You caught your breath, still enraged. “I was just going to make you find a new beer pong partner if I won. And maybe take a shot.”

“I wish you’d stop denying that there’s something between us.”

Biting your lip, you couldn’t bring your eyes to his and left them trained on the pavement. You never denied that you felt attracted to him. Yet, you also despised him for how perfect everyone perceived him to be. You saw another frat boy when you looked at him, nothing special. “What is there between us,” you asked cautiously.

“You try a little too hard to hate me, don’t you think?” Lucas pulled your chin up to meet his gaze.

Damn it. Sometimes he was too good. With him watching you so closely, you knew you couldn’t lie. “And what game are you playing now?”

“I’m not playing any games,” Lucas answered with sincerity.

Your mind whirling, you pressed your lips against his only for a second. Just a quick peck, nothing more. “And there you have it, humble winner. I’ll be inside drinking myself into an oblivion.”

Lucas grabbed your wrist before you could run off and pulled you closer for another kiss. This one, longer and deeper than before. You couldn’t help but melt into it and wrap your arms around his neck. Soon his tongue danced softly with yours, and you knew you were in for it. He had you.

You pulled away, attempting to catch your breath and gather your thoughts, but Lucas attached his lips to your neck and made his way to your ear. He planted soft kisses along its shape, then lightly bit your ear lobe. His heavy breaths in your ear made a knot in your stomach tighten. “I can’t believe I voted for you,” you admitted, your inhibitions disappearing.

You felt him smile as he kissed your lips once again. “I voted for Mark,” he murmured.

For the first time, he had you laughing genuinely. “In what kind of world do I vote for you and you vote for Mark Lee?” With that, you pressed your body closer to his, close enough to feel a growing bulge grind against your core. Teasing, you drew your hips back and forth.

Lucas soon grew impatient, and growled in your ear, “You’re driving me crazy. We’re going to my bedroom.”

“Not until I say so.” You attached your lips to his again, continuing to rock your hips.

His breath hitched in his throat, and you knew you had the power. Seeming to catch himself, he grabbed your wrists and held them against the brick wall behind you. “I want you,” he said airily, “all of you.”

“Fine,” you agreed, accepting the stalemate. “But no one sees us.”

You snuck around to the back yard first, praying that no one would question her messy hair and how red her lips must have been. Thankfully, you only saw Doyoung who acknowledged your presence with a knowing nod. At least you knew he wouldn’t snitch... most likely.

You skimmed you hand across his book shelf, retrieving his copy of Kurt Vonnegut’s Cat’s Cradle. The pages were marred with messy annotations in Chinese and English, so many you could not understand.

Lucas directed you to the far left bedroom on the frat house’s second floor. You stepped over beer cans and finally made your way there. Inside, you were almost surprised with how tidy everything was. He was a fuck boy, but damned if he didn’t keep his room up to A

sian parent standards.

Behind you, you heard the door open and lock click. Lucas pushed you against the bookcase, causing you to drop the book. “I was reading,” you managed as his hands wandered up and down your body and stopping to cup your breasts.”Didn’t take you for a Vonnegut guy.”

He lifted you, bridal style and tossed you onto the bed with ease. “I’m not just a fuck boy,” Lucas said, climbing over you. “I also read books for class.”

“You’re depth is astounding,” you mocked playfully. “I didn’t know you actually do your assignments.”

In response, he lifted his henley shirt over his head and once more revealed his toned torso and upper body. “I’ve changed a lot since I was a freshman, I thought you paid more attention.”

Your eyes glinted mischievously. “Like when you banged half of the AKDPhi sorority girls two years ago.”

“Okay, that was exaggerated,” Lucas grinned, hooking his fingers the hem of your skirt. “I haven’t slept with anyone in a year.”

You pulled your shirt off, prompting Lucas to dispose of your skirt as well. You were left in just your nude bra and panties, and Lucas breathless. “I find that hard to believe,” you scoffed, your tone a bit softer. “Are you going to tell me you’re secretly a virgin as well?”

“I mean,” Lucas scratched his head, “I used to get around.”

You took his moment of weakness in stride, moving so that you were on top of him. You registered the surprise on his face and let out a laugh. “Do you forget that I’m older than you, maybe even more experienced?”

As you undid Lucas’ belt, your eyes met. Both full of hunger and desire. A part of you felt as if you were making a bad decision, becoming another name for him to add to his list. Even so, you didn’t care. You hadn’t felt so alive since you dated your first boyfriend. Everything felt like a rush then, every kiss and every glance. Losing your virginity hadn’t even felt as good as these playful moments together.

With Lucas’ help, you removed his jeans. Both you were similarly half naked, only undergarments shielding the rest of your bodies. In that moment, you finally saw your similarities. Thirsty for control over the way you were perceived, a love for power, and longing for each other. “What do you see in me?” you inquired.

“Someone who could easily kick my ass,” he replied, his tone light but entirely serious. “I can’t believe I managed to get you in my bed.”

You scoffed. “I chose to be here, and I’m the one who made you want it.”

Lucas conceded, leaning up to kiss you, “That’s true. I’ve never dated someone that gives me such a hard time.”

“We’re not dating,” you prompted. “I only hate you slightly less now.”

“You’re the most interesting person I ever met,” Lucas said woefully. “And what do you see in me?”

“A clown,” you answered without hesitation. “Boo-boo the fool, if you will.”

You didn’t stop his hands as the reached for your bra clasp and let it fall off your chest.

“But you’re also sweeter and more genuine than I thought you could be,” you granted. “Thank you for the Pepcid, by the way.”

And with that, you pulled down his boxer briefs. His already hard length popped out, You maintained eye contact as you ran your tongue along the shaft, closing your mouth at the tip. Once again, you continued this motion and began to suckle his testicles and flicker your tongue as your hand firmly stroked his dick. He lost himself, groaning and muttering, “Fuck,” under his breath.

You loved seeing him like this, completely bent to your will. Returning your attention to the tip, you ran your thumb gently across the slit before replacing it with your mouth. You bobbed your head along the length and urged yourself to take more and more. Lucas encouraged you, his fingers tangling in your hair and guiding your motions. With almost its entirety reaching the back of your throat, you gagged.

Honestly, you could’ve went on like this for hours, but Lucas roughly flipped you over and dragged his index finger over your panties. You shuddered as it ran over your clit, then down to the wet spot you left. “My turn.”

In a swift motion, Lucas slid the panties down your legs and threw them aside. Lucas stared at you for a moment, taking in the sight of your naked, waiting body. He wasted no time in pushing your legs back, fully exposing you, and planted butterfly kisses along your thighs. His flat tongue lapped from your entrance and up to your clit, then down again. The anticipation almost made you lose your mind. He closed his lips on your clit, tongue to circling the sensitive bud. You never realized how big his hands were until he slid a finger inside of you. The overwhelming sensation had you gasping, begging for more. And then he slid another finger alongside it, pumping rhythmically as his tongue continued to work on your clit.

You had slept with a few partners before, but none left you as unhinged as Lucas. The pleasure built, somehow rendering you more helpless to his whim, and its release almost had you screaming.

In your shock, you sat up and looked at Lucas with bewilderment. “No one has ever made me come before.” To your embarrassment, it was true. You either grew tired and faked it or they never even made an attempt.

With a devilish look in his eyes, he sucked the two fingers that had previously been inside you. “Maybe you should have given in sooner.”

“Oh, just shut the fuck up and fuck me already.”

He went to open his cabinet drawer beside his bed and searched for a condom. “Protection first.”

You laid back on the bed, still catching your breath. “I’m on the pill,” you confided. “As long as you don’t have the clap, we’ll be fine.”

“Good thing I only have chlamydia.” Lucas kissed you, the taste of your orgasm still on his lips, and positioned himself at your entrance.

His forehead rested on yours, eyes cast down to where your bodies met. Slowly, he thrusted inside you, eliciting your moans. He moved his hips delicately, making you feel every inch bury itself deeper. Instead of immediately jackhammering it in, Lucas took his sweet time and chose his own pace. He brought his lips to your nipple, suckling on it softly. You couldn’t believe his patience.

“I’m going on top,” you managed, pushing Lucas down where you had laid. Although already turned on, you wanted to see Lucas squirm the way he had you. You brought your folds over his cock, driving him just as mad as you predicted. When you finally allowed him back in, he attempted to thrust upward. You shut him down, resting your hands on his pecs. “And now I’m in control,” you gloated. You ground your hips and then slowly brought yourself up and down. “So I’m going to do what I want,” you whispered into his ear.

He looked up to you, an animal-like glare present in his eyes. “Don’t forget who made you come.”

You sped your pace, willfully doing all the work. This time, you wanted Lucas to know he couldn’t do anything but allow himself to be used. And he watched you losing yourself on top of him, never having been more turned on in his life.

As you slowed, he brought your chin down for a chaste kiss. A trick, you realized, but too late, he thrusted into you this time much faster. You felt the hints of another orgasm budding, and involuntarily tightened your walls. Lucas felt the shift, drawing himself out. “You’re not going to come until I want you too.”

Before you could protest, Lucas aligned his head below your womanhood and pulled you in closer. His hands attached to your hips, encouraging you to rock yourself on his tongue. “You’re really something,” you murmured, obliging to his whims.

He murmured against you, sending vibrations up your spine. Soon enough, he had you writhing in your orgasm all over again.

Still unfinished himself, he positioned you on your hands and knees. Lucas pushed himself inside you, then slapped your ass. “God, your body...”

You couldn’t support yourself as he vigorously fucked you, but allowed your hand to float to your clit. As Lucas increase his pace, you felt your breath hitch. His thrusts became sloppier, and you realized he was close as well. Unable to hold out longer, you came again. Lucas followed shortly after, coming onto your back as you laid there, nearly exhausted. He produced a towel and wiped the excess off.

Lucas fell next to you, out of breath, and nearly exhausted. “Wow,” he muttered.

You rose from the bed, still shaking and legs a bit sore. “I’ll be in the shower. You’re welcome to join me as long as there’s no hanky panky.”

“No promises,” Lucas smiled, slowly gathering himself. “I’ll meet you there in a moment.”

You, still naked, walked to Lucas’ bathroom with a sway in your step. Just to mess with him. He gave you a moment for yourself while you turned on the shower and stepped in. You felt as if you were in a different reality, being in Lucas’ bathroom and just having had sex with Lucas Wong. You wondered if the rest of your student organization would be surprised, but suspected that they wouldn’t. Maybe Doyoung would’ve have filled them in when you didn’t return to your shared apartment with Yuta.

Lucas came in soon after, still eyeing your body the way he was before. “You can stay the night if you want, maybe get breakfast tomorrow.”

You kneaded some shampoo into his hair, and repressed a smile. It was like he read your mind. “I suppose so,” you attempted to be casual.

“And back to the dating thing,” Lucas began, “maybe we should try it.”

“Is that code for you want to have sex with me again?”

“I won’t deny that’s part of it,” Lucas admitted.

You turned from him to face the faucet, and felt him behind you once again. This time, you felt comforted by his embrace. “We’ll see how breakfast goes,” you offered.

He laughed, a low sweet sound prompting you to smile. You let yourself go in the moment, enjoying the feeling the water cascade down your skin and Lucas’ presence warming your body. “You’re never going to stop giving me a hard time, are you?”

You shook your head.

OLucas turned you to face him, descending his lips onto yours. “I wouldn’t want you to stop.”

[blackidyll]

.

mmm i’ve been kind of in a mental spiral lately (literally feels like i’m having an existential crisis 70% of the time). like you know, 2020 was super fucked up but as time went by we all kind of adjusted? and things are not fine but you can juggle all the balls just so and breathe a little, but a couple of weeks back something tipped the balance for me and it’s like mentally i’ve been thrown off the cliff 

i can pinpoint what threw me out of whack though -- at the end of feb we got the call to return to onsite for work (my country went back into lockdown in november... we’re technically still under lockdown but employers don’t give af anymore i guess). we’re supposed to be on team a/b (team a goes in/team b works from home one week, second week the teams alternate) but i was pulled into this project immediately upon my return to the office, and i went into the office every. single. work day. in march. and because this project was so damn urgent? i was working my weekends. i worked every single day for three weeks straight until i threw a (silent) fit the final weekend and refused to open my email, and even then one of the managers was calling me at 5:20 pm that Friday as i was about to shut down my laptop. 

“luckily” i am good friends with that manager - a colleague who got the promotion recently - so i literally scream-ranted at him 80% of the time and then kicked him off the phone at 5:45 because i was fucking going to my apartment that weekend and I REFUSE TO WORK ANYMORE IT IS OFF WORK HOURS.

anyway. i am kind of not doing great. work is a mess. in october last year i was approached by my manager’s manager for a job role that was 1) effective immediately but 2) “i can’t actually tell you any details about it because it involves P&C information 3) also you can’t tell anyone because re: P&C. 

i said yes, because it’s not like i could say no (like, it’s nice they phrased it as a question and all, but i’m pretty sure the underlying message was that this is a job transfer, not a new job role offer). 

so after i said yes to the new role, i got to learn what it involved! long story short, suddenly i wasn’t working for just a manager - my new boss is getting a major promotion so the stakes are a million times higher! also, my new role reflects that, i am not only supporting literally only the VPs and senior managers (instead of working with my fellow rank and file colleagues) now, but it also involves skillsets that i don’t actually fucking have (like tracking/reporting finances! i spent my first three weeks in the new job almost crying over numbers and spreadsheets. even now i get a bit panicky when someone throws me a curveball and i don’t know how to get the information i need. i am very lucky that the actual data and finance people have been very patient with my gaps).

and to top it off, i am still just a fucking employee, although my job scope and requirements are so much more now. every single person i work with is a manager or higher so of course with their cushy pay and privileges they take the odd/long hours, and since I have the work with them I end up having to do the same. but it’s not the same because i don’t get the same fucking compensation they do and i don’t have a team that works under me. I don’t actually want that. I want work-life balance and less fucking stress. if you ask me if i would have taken the job if i knew what it involved, the honest answer is that I would not. 

(but it’s not like I had a choice really, because literally the entire company - not just our division - went through a major reorganization, so if i didn’t have my current job i think i would have no job). 

and to be fair my boss is pretty decent as far bosses go. he subjects himself to the same crazy hours that we do. he doesn’t scream or yell (like some horror stories i’ve definitely heard of others in the org). he values my work, and makes sure to tell me so. i did get a pay raise. he mentioned trying to push through a promotion mid-year (let’s see if that pans out). he knows i was very much out of my depth and gave me a lot of leeway despite the mistakes i inevitably make, but on the other hand he also got me into this fucking situation so :<

anyway. i don’t know. i’ve been struggling a lot since last october. every month and quarter close is a financial reporting and review nightmare. having to deal with office politics is hell. i was not joking when i say that playing genshin was literally the only thing keeping me sane those early months, because gaming forces me to not think/panic over work because i have to concentrate on the battles. and this past few weeks i have been depressed enough that even gaming lost its spark for me. 

i haven’t been on tumblr much lately and probably will continue to be sporadically active in the future. when i was working from home i could log in during breaks and take a breather, but now that i’m back in the office i can’t even get on twitter on my phone (because engineering company, i can’t get a good data signal inside the office due to the shielding, and i am sure as hell not checking my social media using the work wifi). i don’t really have much energy after i get home from work. and when things are bad a lot of other things kind of pile up, like falling sick easier and interrupted sleep, and the it becomes this cycle of everything just dragging you down. today i worked from home but tomorrow i’m due back in the office. 

i’m sorry if you’ve messaged me and i haven’t responded. it’s been.. really difficult. i’m hanging in here. i just don’t know when i can find my balance again. 

on a bright side? i am really, really looking forward to building houses in genshin. the thought of it feels really calming. guess they knew what they were doing when they named it serenitea pot. 

[iwanthermidnightz]

“Not a shot. Not a single chance. Not a snowball’s chance in hell.”

Taylor Swift — who, at 30, has reached a Zen state of cheerful realism — laughs as she leans into a pillow she’s placed over her crossed legs inside her suite at the Beverly Hilton Hotel, leaning further still into her infinitesimal odds of winning a Golden Globe, which will zero out when she heads down to the televised ball in a few hours.

Never mind whether or not the tune she co-wrote, “Beautiful Ghosts,” might actually have been worthy of a trophy for best original song (or shortlisted for an Oscar, which it was not). Since the Globe nominations were revealed, voters could hardly have been immune to how quickly the film it’s a part of, “Cats,” in which she also co-stars, became a whipping boy for jokes about costly Hollywood miscalculations and creative disasters. Not that you’ll hear Swift utter a discouraging word about it all. “I’m happy to be here, happy to be nominated, and I had a really great time working on that weird-ass movie,” she declares. “I’m not gonna retroactively decide that it wasn’t the best experience. I never would have met Andrew Lloyd Webber or gotten to see how he works, and now he’s my buddy. I got to work with the sickest dancers and performers. No complaints.”

If this leads you to believe that the pop superstar is in the business of sugarcoating things, consider her other new movie — a vastly more significant documentary that presents Swift not just sans digital fur but without a whole lot of the varnish of the celebrity-industrial complex. The Netflix-produced “Taylor Swift: Miss Americana” has a prestige slot as the Jan. 23 opening night gala premiere of the Sundance Film Festival before it reaches the world as a day-and-date theatrical release and potential streaming monster on Jan. 31.

The doc spends much of its opening act juxtaposing the joys of creation with the aggravations of global stardom — the grist of many a pop doc, if rendered in especially intimate detail — before taking a more provocative turn in its last reel to focus more tightly on how and why Swift became a political animal. It’s the story of an earnest young woman with a self-described “good girl” fixation working through her last remaining fears of being shamed as she comes to embrace her claws, and her causes.

Given that the film portrays how gradually, and sometimes reluctantly, Swift came to place herself into service as a social commentator, “Miss Americana” is a portrait of the birth of an activist. Director Lana Wilson sets the movie up so that it pivots on a couple of big letdowns for its subject. The first comes early in the film, and early in the morning, when Swift’s publicist calls to update her on how many of the top three Grammy categories her 2017 album “Reputation” is nominated for: zilch. She’s clearly bummed about the record’s brushoff by the awards’ nominating committee, as just about anyone who’d previously won album of the year twice would be, and determinedly tells her rep that she’s just going to make a better record.

But she suffers what feels like a more meaningful blow toward the end of the film. In the fall of 2018, Swift finally comes out of the closet politically to intervene on behalf of Democrats in a midterm election in her home state of Tennessee. As the Washington Post put it, this announcement “fell like a hammer across the Trump-worshipping subforums of the far-right Internet, where people had convinced themselves… that the world-famous pop star was a secret MAGA fan.” Donald Trump goes on camera to smirk that he now likes Swift’s music a little less. The singer is successful in enlisting tens of thousands of young people to register to vote, but her senatorial candidate of choice, Democrat Phil Bredesen, loses to Republican Marsha Blackburn, whom she’d called out as a flagrant enemy of feminism and gay rights.

“Definitely, that was a bigger disappointment for me,” Swift says, pitting the midterm snub against the Grammy snub. “I think what’s going on out in the world is bigger than who gets a prize at the party.”

It was not always thus for Swift — as the detractors who dragged her for staying quiet during the last presidential election eagerly pointed out. If you had to pick the most embarrassing or regrettable moment in “Miss Americana,” it might be the TV clip from “The Late Show With David Letterman” in which the host brings up politics and gets Swift to essentially advocate the “Shut up and sing” mantra. As the studio audience roars approval of her vow to stay apolitical, Letterman gives her what now looks like history’s most dated fist bump.

Thinking back on it, Swift is incredulous. “Every time I didn’t speak up about politics as a young person, I was applauded for it,” she says. “It was wild. I said, ‘I’m a 22-year-old girl — people don’t want to hear what I have to say about politics.’ And people would just be like, ‘Yeahhhhh!’”

At that point, Swift was already starting to record isolated pop tracks, taking baby steps that would soon turn into full strides away from her initial genre. But whether she had designs on switching lanes or not, the lesson of the Dixie Chicks’ forced exile after Natalie Maines’ comment against then-President George W. Bush had branded itself onto her brain at an earlier age, when she’d just planted her young-teen flag in Nashville and overheard a lot of the lamentations of older Music Row songwriters about how the Chicks had thrown it all away.

“I saw how one comment ended such a powerful reign, and it terrified me,” says Swift. “These days, with social media, people can be so mad about something one day and then forget what they were mad about a couple weeks later. That’s fake outrage. But what happened to the Dixie Chicks was real outrage. I registered it — that you’re always one comment away from being done being able to make music.”

Maybe the most transfixing scene in “Miss Americana” is one where Swift argues with her father and other members of her team about the statement she’s about to release coming out against Blackburn and — it’s clear from her references to White House opposition to the Equality Act — Donald Trump too. The comments were so spontaneous that Wilson wasn’t there to film the moment, but the director had asked people to turn on the camera if anything interesting transpired, and here it most certainly did.

“For 12 years, we’ve not got involved in politics or religion,” an unnamed associate says to Swift, suggesting that going down the road of standing against a president as well as Republican gubernatorial and Senate candidates could have the effect of halving her audience on tour. Her father chimes in: “I’ve read the entire [statement] and … right now, I’m terrified. I’m the guy that went out and bought armored cars.”

“I needed to get to a point where I was ready, able and willing to call out bullshit rather than just smiling my way through it.” TAYLOR SWIFT

But Swift is adamant about pressing the button to send a nearly internet-breaking Instagram post, saying that Blackburn has voted against reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act as well as LGBTQ-friendly bills: “I can’t see another commercial [with] her disguising these policies behind the words ‘Tennessee Christian values.’ I live in Tennessee. I am Christian. That’s not what we stand for.” Pushing back tears, she laments not having come out against Trump two years earlier, “but I can’t change that. … I need to be on the right side of history. … Dad, I need you to forgive me for doing it, because I’m doing it.”

Says Swift now, “This was a situation where, from a humanity perspective, and from what my moral compass was telling me I needed to do, I knew I was right, and I really didn’t care about repercussions.” She understands why she faced such heated opposition in the room: “My dad is terrified of threats against my safety and my life, and he has to see how many stalkers we deal with on a daily basis, and know that this is his kid. It’s where he comes from.”

Swift was recently announced as the recipient of a Vanguard Award from GLAAD, and she name-checked the org in her basher-bashing single “You Need to Calm Down,” which was released as one of the teaser tracks for last fall’s more outwardly directed and socially conscious “Lover” album. Part of her politicization, she says, is feeling it would be hypocritical to hang out with her gay friends while leaving them to their own devices politically. In the film, she says, “I think it is so frilly and spineless of me to stand onstage and go ‘Happy Pride Month, you guys,’ and then not say this, when someone’s literally coming for their neck.”

A year and a half later, she elaborates: “To celebrate but not advocate felt wrong for me. Using my voice to try to advocate was the only choice to make. Because I’ve talked about equality and sung about it in songs like ‘Welcome to New York,’ but we are at a point where human rights are being violated. When you’re saying that certain people can be kicked out of a restaurant because of who they love or how they identify, and these are actual policies that certain politicians vocally stand behind, and they disguise them as family values, that is sinister. So, so dark.”

Her increasing alignment with the LGBTQ community wasn’t the only thing raising her consciousness to a breaking — i.e., speaking — point. So did the sexual assault trial in which judgment was rendered that she had been groped by a DJ in a backstage photo op (for financial restitution, Swift had asked for $1).

Her experience with the trial was crucial, she says, in finding herself “needing to speak up about beliefs I’d always had, because it felt like an opportunity to shed light on what those trials are like. I experienced it as a person with extreme privilege, so I can only imagine what it’s like when you don’t have that. And I think one theme that ended up emerging in the film is what happens when you are not just a people pleaser but someone who’s always been respectful of authority figures, doing what you were supposed to do, being polite at all costs. I still think it’s important to be polite, but not at all costs,” she says. “Not when you’re being pushed beyond your limits, and not when people are walking all over you. I needed to get to a point where I was ready, able and willing to call out bulls— rather than just smiling my way through it.”

That came into play when Kanye West stepped into her life and publicly shamed her a second time. In the video Kim Kardashian released in 2016, you can hear the people-pleasing Swift on the other end of the line sheepishly thanking him for letting her know about the “Me and Taylor might still have sex” line he plans to include about her in a song — only to regret it later when the eventual track also includes the claim “Why? I made that bitch famous.” The boast, of course, referred back to the moment when he interrupted her and stole her spotlight at the MTV VMAs six years earlier as she was in the middle of an acceptance speech. West’s is not a name that ever publicly escapes Swift’s lips, so it might be surprising to fans that these events are recapped in “Miss Americana,” although Swift says the filmic decisions were all up to the director, who explains that Swift’s reaction to the episode was important to include.

“With the 2009 VMAs, it surprised me that when she talked about how the whole crowd was booing, she thought that they were booing her, and how devastating that was,” says Wilson. “That was something I hadn’t thought about or heard before, and made it much more relatable and understandable to anyone.”

“I see the movie as looking at the flip side of being America’s sweetheart.” LANA WILSON, DIRECTOR OF “TAYLOR SWIFT: MISS AMERICANA”

Swift acknowledges how formative both incidents have been in her life, for ill and good. “As a teenager who had only been in country music, attending my very first pop awards show,” she says now, “somebody stood up and sent me the message: ‘You are not respected here. You shouldn’t be here on this stage.’ That message was received, and it burrowed into my psyche more than anyone knew. … That can push you one of two ways: I could have just curled up and decided I’m never going to one of those events ever again, or it could make me work harder than anyone expects me to, and try things no one expected, and crave that respect — and hopefully one day get it.

“But then when that person who sparked all of those feelings comes back into your life, as he did in 2015, and I felt like I finally got that respect (from West), but then soon realized that for him it was about him creating some revisionist history where he was right all along, and it was correct, right and decent for him to get up and do that to a teenage girl…” She sighs. “I understand why Lana put it in.”

Adds the woman who started her recent “Lover” album with a West-allusive romp that’s pointedly called “I Forgot That You Existed”: “I don’t think too hard about this stuff now.”

What’s not in the film is any mention of her other most famous nemeses — Scooter Braun and Scott Borchetta of Big Machine Records, with whom she’s scrapped publicly for several months. “The Big Machine stuff happened pretty late in our process,” says Wilson. “We weren’t that far from picture lock. But there’s also not much to say that isn’t publicly known. I feel like Taylor’s put the story out there in her own words already, and it’s been widely covered. I was interested in telling the story that hadn’t been told before, that would be surprising and emotionally powerful to audiences whether they were music industry people or not.”

Still, the way Swift has been willing to stand up politically for others parallels the manner in which she stood up for herself in regard to Braun, et al., at the recent Billboard Women in Music Awards, where she gave an altogether blistering speech, naming names and taking no prisoners, going after the men who now control her six-album Big Machine back catalog. Certainly Swift was aware that, along with supporters, there were many friends and business associates of Braun among the VIPs in the Hollywood Palladium who would not be pleased with what this very reformed people-pleaser had to say.

One thing everyone who was in the room agrees on is that you could hear a pin drop as Swift used the speech to get even bolder about the meat of these disputes. Some would say it’s because they were riveted by her boldness in speaking truth to power, others because they just felt uncomfortable. Says one fellow honoree who works in a high position in the industry (and who’s worked with some high-profile Braun clients): “People were excited for her at the beginning of the speech. But once she started going in a negative direction at an event that is supposed to be celebrating accomplishments and rah-rah for women, I felt it fell flat with a good portion of the room, because it wasn’t the appropriate place to be saying it.”

Wasn’t it intimidating for Swift, knowing she might be polarizing an auditorium full of the most powerful people in the business? “Well, I do sleep well at night knowing that I’m right,” she responds, “and knowing that in 10 years it will have been a good thing that I spoke about artists’ rights to their art, and that we bring up conversations like: Should record deals maybe be for a shorter term, or how are we really helping artists if we’re not giving them the first right of refusal to purchase their work if they want to?”

“Obviously, anytime you’re standing up against or for anything, you’re never going to receive unanimous praise. But that’s what forces you to be brave. And that’s what’s different about the way I live my life now.” (Braun’s camp did not respond to a request for comment.)

One thing Taylor Swift can’t bend to her determined will is her family’s health. She revealed a few years ago that her mother, Andrea, a beloved figure among the thousands of fans who’ve met her at road shows, is battling breast cancer. Swift addressed the uncertainty of that struggle in an anguished song on her latest album, “Soon You’ll Get Better.” Many who view “Miss Americana” will look for signs of how her mom is doing. The subject comes up in a section of the film that includes a relatively light-hearted scene in in which it’s shown that one of Andrea Swift’s ways of saying “eff you” to cancer recently was to break the mold and bring a canine — her “cancer dog” — into a famously feline-friendly family.

The real answer may come in Swift’s touring activity for “Lover.” Whereas typically she’d spend nine months in the year after an album release on the road, she plans to limit herself to four stadium dates in America this summer and a trip around the festival circuit in Europe. This may not be 100% for personal reasons: “I wanted to be able to perform in places that I hadn’t performed in as much, and to do things I hadn’t done before, like Glastonbury,” she says. “I feel like I haven’t done festivals, really, since early in my career — they’re fun and bring people together in a really cool way. But I also wanted to be able to work as much as I can handle right now, with everything that’s going on at home. And I wanted to figure out a way that I could do both those things.”

Is being able to be there for her mother the main concern? “Yeah, that’s it. That’s the reason,” she says. “I mean, we don’t know what is going to happen. We don’t know what treatment we’re going to choose. It just was the decision to make at the time, for right now, for what’s going on.”

In her case, it’s as if her manager had taken seriously ill as well as the person she’s always been closest to, all at once. “Everyone loves their mom; everyone’s got an important mom,” she allows. “But for me, she’s really the guiding force. Almost every decision I make, I talk to her about it first. So obviously it was a really big deal to ever speak about her illness.” During filming, when Andrea’s breast cancer had returned for a second time, “she was going through chemo, and that’s a hard enough thing for a person to go through.” Then it got harder. Speaking about this latest development publicly for the first time, Swift quietly reveals: “While she was going through treatment, they found a brain tumor. And the symptoms of what a person goes through when they have a brain tumor is nothing like what we’ve ever been through with her cancer before. So it’s just been a really hard time for us as a family.”

Compared with that, nearly any other topic the movie might address would pale. But it finds weightiness in addressing other kinds of unhealthiness, like the physical expectations that are placed on women in general and celebrity women specifically, Swift being no exception. In this department, she has her own heroines. “I love people like Jameela Jamil, because he way she speaks about body image, it’s almost like she speaks in a hook. Women are held to such a ridiculous standard of beauty, and we’re seeing so much on social media that makes us feel like we are less than, or we’re not what we should be, that you kind of need a mantra to repeat in your head when you start to have unhealthy thoughts. I swear the way Jameela speaks is like lyrics — it gets stuck in my head and it calms me down.”

Swift’s collaborator in this messaging, Wilson, was on a list of potential directors Netflix gave her when she expressed interest in possibly doing a documentary to follow the concert special that premiered on the service just over a year ago. You could discern a feminist message, if you chose to, in the fact that Swift chose a director most well known for a documentary about abortion providers, “After Tiller.” Swift says she was most impressed, though, that Wilson’s docs look for nuance and subtlety in addressing subjects that do lend themselves to soapboxes, and their first conversation was about their mutual desire to avoid “propaganda” in any form.

If there’s a feminist agenda in “Miss Americana,” Wilson and Swift wanted it to emerge naturally, although the director admits it was pretty blatant from the outset, given that she set up the film (which is co-produced by Morgan Neville, the director’s “sounding board”) with an all-female crew. Or nearly all-female, says Wilson, laughing, “I will say that we did always have male production assistants, because I like trying to show people that men can fetch coffee for women.”

Adds Wilson, “When I started filming, it was before she’d come out politically. She knew that she was coming out of a very dark period, and wanted collaborate on something that captured what she was going through and that was really raw and honest and emotionally intimate.” The political awakening, the director says, “was a profound decision for her to make. In that, I saw this feminist coming of age story that I personally connected with, and that I really think women and girls around the world will see themselves in.”

“The bigger your career gets, the more you struggle with the idea that a lot of people see you the same way they see an iPhone or a Starbucks.” TAYLOR SWIFT

The film borrows its title from a song on the “Lover” album, “Miss Americana & the Heartbreak Prince,” that’s maybe the one fully allegorical song Swift has ever released — and, in its fashion, is a great protest song. The entire lyric is a metaphor for how Swift grew up as an unblinking patriot and has had to reluctantly leave behind her naiveté in the age of Trump. Her partner on that track, as well as other message songs like “You Need to Calm Down” and “The Man,” was a co-writer and co-producer new to her stable of collaborators this time around, Joel Little.

With the song “Miss Americana & the Heartbreak Prince,” although the lyrics are cloaked in metaphor, “We like to think it was a very clear statement,” Little says. “There are lots of little hidden messages within that song that are all pointing toward the way that she thinks and feels about politics and the United States. I love that it uses a lot of classic Taylor Swift imagery, in terms of the songwriting topics of high school and cheerleaders, as a clever nod to what she’s done in the past, but tied in with a heavy political message.”

“Miss Americana & the Heartbreak Prince” doesn’t actually appear in the documentary, but the director says the film’s title is understood by fans as an obvious reference to political themes in the number. “Even if you don’t know the song,” Wilson says, “I see the movie as looking at the flip side of being America’s sweetheart, so I like how the title evokes that too.”

The doc doesn’t lack for its own protest songs though. In the wake of her midterm disappointment, Swift is seen writing an anthem for millennials who might have come away disillusioned with the political process. That previously unheard song, “Only the Young,” is seen being demo-ed before it plays in full over the end credits; it’ll be released as a digital single in conjunction with the doc. Key lyric: ““You did all that you could do / The game was rigged, the ref got tricked/ The wrong ones think they’re right / We were outnumbered — this time.”

“One thing I think is amazing about her,” says Wilson, “is that she goes to the studio and to songwriting as a place to process what she’s going through. I loved how, when she got the Grammy news (about “Reputation”), this isn’t someone who’s going to feel sorry for herself or say ‘That wasn’t right.’ She’s like, ‘Okay, I’m going to work even harder.’ You see her strength of character in that moment when she gets that news. And then with the election results, I loved how she channeled so many of her thoughts and feelings into ‘Only the Young.’ It was a great way to kind of show how stuff that happens in her life goes directly into the songs; you get to witness that in both cases.

So is the film aimed at satisfying the fan base or teasing the unconvinced hordes who might dial it up as a free stream? “I think it’s a little bit of both,” Swift says. “I chose Netflix because it’s a very vast, accessible medium to people who are just like, ‘Hey, what’s this? I’m bored.’ I love that, because I do so many things that cater specifically to fans that like my music, I think it’s important to put yourself out there to people who don’t care at all about you.”

In the wake of the last round of Kanye-gate, stung by the backlash of those who took his side, Swift took a three-year break from interviews. The mantra of her 2017 album “Reputation” and subsequent tour was “No explanations.” But her Beyoncé-style press blackout was a passing phase. With “Lover” and now, especially, the documentary, she could hardly be more about the explanations. Although this interview is the only one she currently plans to do about the documentary, it’s clear that she’s come back into a season of openness, and that she considers it her natural habitat.

“I really like the whole discussion around music. And during ‘Reputation,’ it never felt like it was ever going to be about music, no matter what I said or did,” she says. “I approach albums differently, in how I want to show them to the world or what I feel comfortable with at that time in my life.” Being more transparent “feels great with this album. I really feel like I could just keep making stuff — it’s that vibe right now. I don’t think I’ve ever written this much. That’s exhibited in ‘Lover’ having the most songs that I’ve ever had on an album” (18, to be exact). “But even after I made the album, I kept writing and going in the studio. That’s a new thing I’ve experienced this time around. That openness kind of feels like you finally got the lid off a jar you’ve been working at for years.”

Cipher-dom never could have stood for long for someone who’s established herself as one of the most accomplished confessional singer-songwriters in pop history. “I don’t really operate very well as an enigma,” she says. “It’s not fulfilling to me. It works really well in a lot of pop careers, but I think that it makes me feel completely unable to do what I had gotten in this to do, which is to communicate to people. I live for the feeling of standing on a stage and saying, ‘I feel this way,’ and the crowd responding with ‘We do too!’ And me being like, ‘Really?’ And they’re like, ‘Yes!’”

Swift believes talking things up again isn’t a form of giving in to narcissism — it’s a way of warding off commodification.

“The bigger your career gets, the more you struggle with the idea that a lot of people see you the same way they see an iPhone or a Starbucks,” she muses. “They’ve been inundated with your name in the media, and you become a brand. That’s inevitable for me, but I do think that it’s really necessary to feel like I can still communicate with people. And as a songwriter, it’s really important to still feel human and process things in a human way. The through line of all that is humanity, and reaching out and talking to people and having them see things that aren’t cute.

[somnilogical]

<<Over the past year, however, Google has appeared to clamp down. It has gradually scaled back opportunities for employees to grill their bosses and imposed a set of workplace guidelines that forbid “a raging debate over politics or the latest news story.” It has tried to prevent workers from discussing their labor rights with outsiders at a Google facility and even hired a consulting firm that specializes in blocking unions. Then, in November, came the firing of the four activists. The escalation sent tremors through the Google campus in Mountain View, Calif., and its offices in cities like New York and Seattle, prompting many employees — whether or not they had openly supported the activists — to wonder if the company’s culture of friendly debate was now gone for good.

(A Google spokeswoman would not confirm the names of the people fired on Nov. 25. “We dismissed four individuals who were engaged in intentional and often repeated violations of our longstanding data-security policies,” the spokeswoman said. “No one has been dismissed for raising concerns or debating the company’s activities.” Without naming Berland, Google disputed that investigators pressured him.)>>

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/02/18/magazine/google-revolt.html

<<“Of the five people that were fired, three of us are trans women,” Spiers said. “That is either an unbelievable coincidence or Google is targeting the most vulnerable.”

“Trans Googlers make up a very small percentage of Googlers,” she added. “They make up a slightly larger percentage of organizers, but not 60%.”>>

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/dec/17/fifth-google-worker-activist-fired-in-a-month-says-company-is-targeting-the-vulnerable

i too am transfem and would "violate longstanding data-security policies" if my organization were being unjust. i wouldnt say that unless it were already obvious by what bits ive leaked to people about my life, because otherwise i could suppress this information and whistleblow more.

if you were an evil corp at this point youd probably try to avoid hiring any trans women in the first place because given this happens to you, its likely done by a transfem. not that this saved CFAR, who never hired a trans woman, from having a bunch of transfems whistleblow on them despite not being employees.

from what ive read from transfem google employees who are or were involved in activism, the degredation of google's culture. their complicity with ICE and weapons manufacturing mirrors CFAR's with OpenAI and DeepMind; authoritarianism and expulsion of transfems who object to this among a myriad of wrongs. to protect the territory of injustice and complicity with organizations like ICE, google needs to import "a consulting firm that specializes in blocking unions", CFAR needs to violate their whistleblower policy. if you once protect injustice, justice is ever after your enemy. morality isnt some modular thing such that you can be comitted to protecting injustice and not have this choice spiral into also invoking and protecting systems that protect injustice and invoking further things to protect those, recursively. all the way down to doing really dumb and obvious unjust things like transmisogyny (lots of future posts), changing your fundraiser after its clear its losing money, announcing that this year you got way below your donation target and claim to have no idea why.

well *i* know the compact generator for all of these things, and that makes me strong. unlike MIRI/CFAR who like the CDC rely on gaslighting the populace for myopic gains. i also wore a particle mask during the time that the CDC claimed that they were useless to preventing spread of disease, so it was really important to give them to doctors and nurses.

after so much gaslighting, *i* have built up general capabilities at arbitraging the difference between what agents claim and the truth. people who say:

<<Edit: This is a type of post that should have been vetted with someone for infohazards and harms before being posted, and (Further edit) I think it should have been removed by the authors., though censorship is obviously counterproductive at this point.

Infohazards are a real thing, as is the Unilateralists’s curse. (Edit to add: No, infohazards and unilateralist’s curse are not about existential or global catastrophic risk. Read the papers.) And right now, overall, reduced trust in CDC will almost certainly kill people. Yes, their currently political leadership is crappy, and blameworthy for a number of bad decisions—but it doesn’t change the fact that undermining them now is a very bad idea.

Yes, the CDC has screwed up many times, but publicly blaming them for things that were non-obvious (like failing to delay sending out lab kits for further testing,) or that they screwed up, and everyone paying attention including them now realizes they got wrong (like being slow to allow outside testing,) in the middle of a pandemic seems like exactly the kind of consequence-blind action that lesswrongers should know better than to engage in.

Disclaimer: I know lots of people at CDC, including some in infectious diseases, and have friends there. They are human, and get things wrong under pressure—and perhaps there are people who would do better, but that’s not the question at hand.>>

https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/h4vWsBBjASgiQ2pn6/credibility-of-the-cdc-on-sars-cov-2/comment/uDYbgf3QtEQirbsJk

havent. its easy to see how peoples minds are warped when its someone elses glowy thing, when its someone elses friends working for an institution that that someone else routed their hopes through.

its easier to recognize betrayal and see knowledge beyond the veil when its happening to someone else, instead of you.

until you build up general skills for recognizing it, this sort of betrayal isnt infinitely powerful. and like how you might expect that smart people who live for predation would do anti-inductive smart predatory things, but they end up converging on child sex rings; institutions that betray you, because justice is their enemy will start doing dumb unjust things like banning two people from speaking about their irl experiences with anna salamon, saying their first-hand accounts werent evidence and then citing anna salamon's first-hand account of the meeting as evidence. when i objected that this was a fucked up self-serving ontology of "evidence" they acted like i was objecting to "beliefs flow from evidence" and they acted as if what i was saying was obscure and beyond their ability to comprehend. their "incomprehension" was fake, downstream of a fear to dynamically compute things in front of other people that might end up outside the orthodoxy. the result of which is they display a blue screen of death and say “i just dont understand and aaa dont explain this to me!!!”. and then people agree that it "seems like it could be an infohazard" because when your goal is the preservation of the matrix, everything that tears it down looks like hazardous information.

or a cfar employee, in response to claims that anna's transmisogyny influences CFAR's hiring choices, claiming that anna salamon, head of CFAR, is not involved in CFAR's hiring. until i post proof from another CFAR employee pursuing personal vengeance against the org for hiring their rapist where its tangentially mentioned and they suddenly "realize" that anna salamon, head of CFAR, is involved in CFAR's hiring process.

or a thousand other injustices that have burned themselves into my brain during my months of talking with people under the assumption that they were simply mistaken in their path to saving the world. when they were actually un-mistaken in their path to having babies and a low chance of personal death. hoping and expecting someone else will take heroic responsibility for the planet.

like when you drill down to the base of injustice, it bottoms out in dumb and petty injustice. like the structure doesnt go infinitely high and complex, if you go down to the base level, you just need a bit of courage to not flinch away from what you see even if it seems that it means the ruin of something you ran your hopes and dreams through.

--

"isnt this a little... extreme?" i hear some people ask. ""dont protect regions of injustice?" that sounds like the end product of obsessive compulsive fixation on virtue at the expense of practicality."

well, assuming the algorithm seeding this response is a systemic reasoning tool, it should forkbomb when you consider if youd output ""dont protect regions of untruth?" that sounds like the end product of obsessive compulsive fixation on virtue at the expense of practicality." in response to eliezers essay. the principle behind both is the same such that if you hold by one you should hold by the other.

all of these things have parallels. if you want to see what is happening with MIRI/CFAR, theres a lot of mutual information with whats happening with Google.

[anonforlackofabettername]

@tw0-ravens sent me these numbers over a week ago and honestly this is the first time I’ve been on my computer since then and I have a thing about not answering asks on mobile despite the fact that I’m on tumblr mobile 98% of the time.

40. Are you involved with any LGBT Jewish groups?

I’m not right now, unfortunately. I was a part of my college’s pride and hillel clubs which while not the same thing had a lot of the same people and thus had a nice queer jewish vibe. I need to get involved in both queer and jewish organizations now that I’m out of college but finding the time while working 9 to 5 is exhausting and I hate putting myself out there. There are some orgs I can check out but I heard something about the people and politics and israel and honestly that sounds more exhausting than anything else.

41. Is it easier to find lgbt Jews irl or online?

Online definitely. To me everyone is queer online and everyone is queer until proven straight. This extends to my irl friends. I just assume they’re some flavor of queer even if they’re in a straight-passing relationship. My neighborhood/city has a large jewish population but I haven’t figured out where to meet other queers my age, let alone jewish queers. I’m sure once I find the queers I’ll find the jews but first I have to get off my ass and meet new people.

8. What branch of Judaism are you?

Reform. My college rabbi was reconstructionist/humanistic but I’ve always been happy with the reform movement and haven’t felt the need to change.

And you asked for any I felt like answering so I picked some at random bc why not. 

34. What has been the best part about being Jewish and lgbt?

G-d loves me and I’m perfect just the way I am. Also I can’t go to hell bc judaism doesn’t believe in it. But for real, so many people have baggage about religion and sexuality and I just don’t have it. Maybe some people in my religious community would frown on my life and my decisions but I have never doubted that G-d loved me. Even when I wasn’t sure I wanted to believe in G-d (and I’m currently agnostic so you can see how well that decision worked out for me) there was no doubt that G-d made me the way I was and that is special. If my parents love me unconditionally and G-d feels like the parent of the world, then how can he/she/they not love me?

35. What has been the hardest part of being Jewish and lgbt?

The fun intersection of homophobia and antisemitism including antisemitism coming from within the queer community. The bullshit about banning the star of david on a rainbow flag which has made the news multiple times in the last few years makes me feel really uncomfortable. I’m already exposed to a lot of the acephobic discourse that exists in the online communities I don’t need mainstream discourse too. 

11. Do you have a favorite/most comforting prayer? 

Sorta? Most of what I like is stuff that I can chant and is repetitive. I don’t have one go-to so much as a couple of go-to prayers. I really like a version of Adonai S’fatai Tiftach that my temple uses sometimes. I also think its a gorgeous prayer when said/sung the right way. I got Hineh Mah Tov stuck in my head so many times as a kid it will always have a soft spot in my heart. And honestly when I need comfort sometimes the She’ma is the perfect thing to say. And finally, there is nothing that screams home and community than the whole congregation singing “Torah (x6)/ Torah tzivah lanu moshe.” The cantor used to sing that during Simchat Torah while the Rabbi made laps around the sanctuary carrying the Torah and its an acute sensory memory. 

50. What makes you feel most connected to being a Jew?

I wear a mezuzah around my neck that I’ve had since I was around 10 years old probably. I’m picky about my jewelry and symbols but its something I feel naked without. And because its always with me its something I feel connected to. 

1. What pronouns do you use for G-d?

She/they/her/he/him/them. So like whatever I feel in the mood for basically. I try to use feminine and neutral pronouns but the default that I was taught is masculine and I will still use it from time to time. I truly believe G-d is above all this petty gender shit and doesn’t care about what pronouns we use as long as we are comfortable. 

37. What do you wish more lgbt people knew about Judaism?

We ain’t fucking Christianity and we ain’t fucking Israel. You see all that hate? All that bullshit about leviticus? Yeah that’s a bunch of bullshit. I mean no community is perfect and I’m certain there’s homophobic jews out there, but stop lumping us in with the xtians. We are two separate religions with two separate points of view. Judeo-christian is not only wrong its antisemitic because all we have in common is a couple books. That’s it. Also Israel. IIsrael does not speak for the entire jewish community worldwide and you need to stop acting like it does. The same people who get mad when people say bullshit about the middle east representing all of islam turn around and say the same thing about israel and judaism and add in some condemnation of the palestine situation as well. Its such a fucking double standard. Yes the israel-palestine situation is bad. No it doesn’t have anything to do with all jews, especially jews who have not lived or even visited israel.

20. How did you come out?

So funny story. I’ve never really felt one way or another about the gay community and possibly liking people other then men growing up (I’m a cis woman). In high school I always felt like I’d find the right person when the time was right and it didn’t matter if they were a guy or a girl. Then I got to college and decided I was ace (still am woo!) and really tried to embrace the queer community at my college. I had a couple of discussions with my mother about being gay and the answer was shrug and to change the subject to show I don’t like gay as an umbrella term (I’m not gay. To me gay is cis male homosexuals and I’m not that). So anyway my mom and I were at home, probably the summer after freshman year of college and we were both chilling on the couch on our phones. I was scrolling through tumblr and someone had a set of pictures of stickers or buttons that said “Oy Vey I’m Gay,” which I proceeded to giggle at and show my mom with the comment of “Me” which prompted us to have a talk followed by a semi-serious one with my dad the next gay. Apparently this was a new thing that neither of them had known about me. (which I suppose is valid since I did deny it to my mother’s face six months earlier). They’re both supportive, especially since my older sister is bi, I just think I caught them off guard. But that’s how I came out to my parents with a jewish meme. 

I think that’s enough for tonight. 

LGTB Jewish Asks

Ask Me Stuff

[backseatsiren]

Some Serious Reflection Indeed

I’ve been doing far too much lately. Working fulltime at VICE. Teaching two courses at Berklee. Training and competing in grappling. Tons of cardio and lifting to support that. And hey, a busy social life (a ton has changed, Patricia and I broke up in June). Oh, hey, and volunteering a minimum shift every other week on the ambulance. Something has to give.

I was worried, for awhile, that it will be my 911 service. I need to re-certify soon, and hey, things can be weird at a volunteer org. People have their misunderstandings, etc. And I was worried about feeling kind of useless. I was struggling with that when I wrote a bunch of this from the back of the ambulance between calls last month:

--

“I’m writing the first part of this on my ambulance, between calls. I’ve been feeling good about my progress, in becoming a bit more confident and also better at knowing where I’m NOT confident. And I’ve been more confident in my cross EMT and MMA/positional/awareness, on a recent call a patient got violent and I was able to immediately help immobilize him and alleviate the threat, without fear or hesitation. And obviously without the violent person being hurt - he immediately fell back asleep after being about to punch another (peaceful) patient’s lights out. I was doing a little soul searching, so, forgive me for being pretty sentimental here. I do wrestle, sometimes, with feeling complicated about what we do here. Buffing 911 calls, basically acting as support for the FDNY crews that are paid (poorly!!!) And private hospital crews who do this professionally in the area. Sometimes I feel a little useless. I’m here to help! But sometimes, I wonder what value that help is. Fundamentally, I believe in volunteer work, I believe, as a guiding principle, in good, evidence-based medical care, in serving in my community. We don’t bill ppl who dont have insurance. And we never send collections to ppl who can’t pay. This is a free service for folks who can’t afford it otherwise. And I believe in that. I think I’d love to volunteer at a homeless services org, or some other free services organization. I believe in service... I’m writing this sitting in the back of the bus, and I’m cranky about how political and weird it can be at a volunteer org sometimes (of course, I know, I know). And I do feel very weary about the American medical system and how it’s structured. How so many ppl get shafted. An earlier draft here had me hand wringing a bit more on this. I can only affect things at all on this level by doing what I do, by volunteering and putting myself out there and doing anything I can. It’s not Pollyanna bullshit. It has to do with something Austin mentioned on a podcast recently, the idea of things being fundamentally broken and wrong, but finding meaning in resisting or acting despite the efficacy of those actions. It may not do a goddamned thing. But I do honestly hope that I can do some minuscule bit of good or help someone meaningfully at least *some* of the time out here. And I have felt great at times, fundamental to an effort to help a person in need. I know I need to hold on to that, and understand that it ain’t all glory lol. I actually love “boring” calls that aren’t a massive emergency, but if I got a sense that I helped to reassure or calm someone, or provide some kind of actual assistance. And I need to hold on to that as well. I just went on a call, and feeling a bit better. A young man, feeling very sick. A big guy, but I felt ok lifting. And he thanked us. I felt for him, he was sick and extremely anxious. It felt good to be a presence and at least hopefully a calming and competent one in getting him some care.

-- 

The next shift, I had one call, but it was over two hours. Extreme psych episode, police were involved because this person was making threats. She was disturbed and traumatized, and being taken in an ambulance was specifically traumatizing for her, because she had been restrained before, being literally dragged out of her house kicking and screaming.

I was the crew chief, and I talked to her calmly. Listened patiently. She was screaming and crying at first, and did many times throughout the call, but I told her I believed her when she said she was traumatized by her experiences with hospital staff and other EMTs and cops. There were cops present, but the main cop here was (he was a POC, it should be noted, I’ve tended to have much, MUCH better experiences w. cops of color) gentle and patient with her. It actually felt like teamwork, the de-escalation process. 

Legally, she needed to go for a psych evaluation, because she posed a danger to the people she was making threats against. But it is always, obviously much better if you can get a person to come happily of their own free will, to understand that I actually really do care and want to help, and get them the best care. She came down willingly, we evaluated her again on the bus, and I talked with her calmly for another half an hour, letting her know that I care about her well-being, but I’m not a psychiatrist, and that they could offer her better help. She chilled out and came with.

There was a friend with her as well, and he was an absolute doll. Thanking us, helping us talk to her calmly. He was impressed that we were volunteers, and with no insurance info, we weren’t going to charge.

And that call cemented in me the ways I can be helpful. A burned out (by no fault of their own, again, EMTS are underpaid and overworked) EMT may not have had the patience I did on that call. To put the time in to build a rapport with a person who was legitimately traumatized by her previous dealings with emergency services, to talk calmly and affirm her feelings. I’m here because I want to be, because I like doing this. I’m not working 24 hour shifts on the bus, I’m on for six every other week. I come in fresh and happy and excited. I can offer that.

I can offer a lot of patience precisely *because* I’m a volunteer here. And no, I’m probably not half the EMT as someone who does this 60 hours a week. It’s taken me a lot longer to be as competent in the field, and there are still some major areas of improvement for me. I try to work on those every time. In every call. 

But it certainly made me feel better, to be able to offer something of real value to a patient, and yes, to an imperfect, shitty system. So much of my life, I just want to be EFFECTIVE, and helpful, and valuable to whatever it is I’m doing. That day, it became clear to me how that can be possible, and it made me happy.

[burgundydahlia]

Tangled Chapter 3 - Shame and Fortune

A/N: Surprise! I posted chapter three last night at midnight so now all of you lovely people can read it! I’m sorry it took so long between updates, but real life got kinda nuts and then I was a bit of a perfectionist with this chapter. Anyway, all I’ll say is I do love me a good Romione fight... and I hope you do, too :)

And for those interested in reading (and commenting) on either AO3 or FF.net, here are the links:

Tangled on AO3.org

Tangled on FF.net

Otherwise, here’s chapter 3!

Chapter 3

Shame and Fortune

Ron was frozen. Time had stopped and he suddenly found himself unable to breathe because all the air had been knocked out of him. An odd buzzing sound now filled his ears and everything around him seemingly disappeared except for her, as she stood right in front of him.

Hermione Granger: his former best friend, ex-girlfriend, and possible love of his life.

As she walked into the room, smiling brightly, he stared, stunned, and rendered temporarily mute and dumb by her presence and the distant knowledge that he had desperately missed looking at her. How was it that she could look exactly as he remembered while simultaneously completely different? She seemed older and more mature, yet as she smiled, her face still lit up in the same, girlish way from when they were young. Her bushy hair somehow looked softer to the touch and far better tamed, as well as shorter than what he remembered, though he supposed after three years that shouldn't come as much of a surprise. Cheeks still pink from the wind outside, the color only seemed to make her skin glow, and her lips were painted a soft, rosy shade, while her eyes–

Merlin, those eyes…

Ron had long come to accept the fact that he would most likely never get the chance to look into her dark, brown eyes again. But somehow, against all luck and logic, she was here and she was as real as anything he had ever seen in his life. Wearing a smart, silky white blouse and a dark blue, knee-length skirt, she sidled up to Chris who looped an arm around her back and pulled her close. Standing there, they were a perfectly put together duo with their polite smiles, posh clothing, and surrounded by their giant, magnificent manor. But as Ron watched Hermione stick her hand out towards Tony, a painful knot pulled at the bottom of his stomach and he gritted his teeth.

"It's a pleasure to meet you," she said, still smiling brightly and for one wild moment, Ron genuinely wondered if she hadn't seen him. However, as she shook Tony's hand she glanced in his direction and Ron watched as a shadow drew across her face and a small frown met her brow. But almost as soon as it appeared, it was gone again.

"It's very nice to meet you, Ms. Granger," Tony said politely.

"Oh, please, call me Hermione. Ms. Granger makes me feel like my mum."

Ron continued to stare in disbelief as she laughed airily, but now he could feel something else building inside him – something familiar and oddly comforting, if long dormant. Why was he the only one who could barely seem to contain himself while she was totally unruffled? How could she ignore him so easily and act as though nothing was wrong? And why did she get to be poised and polished and bloody perfect while he looked like a moronic sideshow act?

Suddenly, and irrationally, Ron felt a surge of fury shoot through him.

"Speaking of your mum, how is she? Did you have a successful shopping trip?" Chris asked, showing Hermione into one of the high-backed chairs and signaling something to Benson who hurried noiselessly out of the room.

"She's fine and we had a lovely time. There's still a lot left on my list, but it was nice to be out with her."

"Hermione's parents are Muggles," Chris explained as he sat in the chair next to her, still staring at her. "They spent the morning together, working on finding some new items to replace those that were lost in the fire."

"Which would explain the Muggle clothing," Tony said as he walked over to the sofa and sat down. Ron followed suit, his movements slightly stilted and unnatural, as he sat directly across from Hermione.

Hermione smiled again. "It's not that my parents aren't used to Wizard robes by now, but I have a feeling the rest of London would have found them to be a bit odd." She looked over at Chris. "And how about you? Were you able to explain the change in your situation…?"

Chris sighed. "My day's been as was to be expected, love." Ron's blood boiled at the term of endearment, and he hastily covered a disdainful snort with a cough. "My meeting this morning took longer than planned and then I got a bit carried away showing Anthony and Ronald around the manor. I was actually just about to explain to them the circumstances surrounding your flat." Chris took her hand into his and stroked it with his thumb. Ron gripped the sofa, his knuckles turning opaque.

The doors to the sitting room rattled open from behind them and Benson re-entered carrying a silver tray with a tea set, plates, and a platter full of sandwiches.

"Thank you, Benson," Chris said as the old man bowed deeply and exited the room. "I know you all must be hungry. Please, eat." He gestured to the food in front of them and then grabbed a plate himself. "Tea?" he asked Hermione, who nodded.

Tony reached for a sandwich, but when he offered one to Ron, Ron shook his head no. Although his stomach growled in protest, he felt his hunger ebb away as he watched Chris hand Hermione a teacup, his hand lingering on top of hers slightly longer than seemed necessary.

"So, what happened to your flat?" Tony asked. "Chris mentioned something about a fire."

Hermione nodded, placing her cup down on the coffee table in front of her. "I live in a Muggle owned building in London and about a week ago, a fire burned down most of the unit. It was quite scary – most of the tenants, including myself, were inside our flats when it happened. One minute, I was in my room reading and then the next, I smelled smoke and heard people shouting. It all happened rather quickly – I had just enough time to grab my cat and a few small, personal effects and get out."

"That explains the book..." Ron muttered.

All heads turned in his direction, somewhat taken aback by this sudden comment. Hermione looked confused and for the first time since arriving, addressed him directly. "What do you mean?"

Ron felt his ears burn, and tried to shrug. "I noticed an old copy of Hogwarts, A History on one of the shelves earlier."

"But how could you have possibly known it wasn't Chris' book?" Hermione said innocently, but Ron could practically see her gaze sharpen.

"I—er," he scrambled. "When I opened it, I thought I saw…er, feminine handwriting inside, is all."

"The whole ordeal sounds awful all the same," Tony interjected, turning back to Hermione. "Any word on what may have caused the fire?"

Hermione tore her piercing gaze away from Ron and turned back towards Tony. "The Muggle fire services are still conducting an investigation, but they believe it was due to faulty electrical wiring. The building is old and while the property managers have done a fairly good job at maintaining it, it's highly likely it was caused by something as simple and mundane as that."

"And what about the Ministry? What has their investigation shown so far?" Tony asked as he took a sip of tea.

"Well, nothing yet," Hermione said and Ron watched as she nervously folded her hands in her lap. "As I said, with the building being older and Muggle built and owned, and not to mention the fact that I'm quite certain I'm the only witch or wizard who's living there, the chances of it being magic-related are slim. Also," Hermione's eyes darted surreptitiously towards Chris, "not many people know of my connection to Chris, so it's not something that's triggered any further investigating. Really, there hasn't been a need for the Ministry to get involved."

"Honestly, Hermione, the fact of the matter is the Ministry, and you, have yet to take what happened seriously. You could have been hurt!" Chris shook his head in disgust and although he hated himself for it, Ron found himself secretly agreeing. "I know I won't feel better until I know what caused the fire, and until then, having you close by feels more important than ever." Chris placed a hand atop Hermione's as they sat in her lap, and she gave him a thin smile in return. Ron clenched his jaw as he watched.

Tony nodded. "This is all good information to have, and I appreciate you telling us. Once we're a bit more settled in, I think it would be best if Ron and I sit down with you and go over some of the other particulars of that evening and the days leading up to the fire."

"Is that really necessary?" Hermione asked, her voice slightly higher as her cheeks flushed. "I don't want to be a bother or a distraction to your case, especially since you're both here to offer your support and services to Chris and what's been going on with his business, not to try and determine the cause of a fire at the block of flats I happen to live in–"

"You can't seriously be surprised you've made yourself a target by being close to him, can you?" Ron scoffed, trying to keep his voice steady, as his heart beat erratically in his chest. "He's been getting threatening letters for months, not to mention he's one of the most visible and well-off businessmen in Europe. How could you not see a connection?"

Ron locked eyes with Hermione and watched as she pursed her lips and narrowed her gaze. A small thrill sparked inside him and he stared defiantly back. Chris and Tony, however, seemed completely unaware of the silent standoff occurring and continued on.

"I agree with Ronald," Chris said, giving Hermione's hand a quick squeeze before turning back to Tony. "I've been saying the same thing all week – that the timing is too coincidental and she needs to be smart about this, but she's been quite resistant to the idea. But as I said before, all the more reason for her to be here, especially now that you two will be living at the manor."

Hermione wrenched her eyes away from Ron, her icy gaze now fixed on Chris and she opened her mouth to respond, however, it was Tony who spoke next.

"No detail is too small when it comes to helping with our investigation of the threats being made against you, Mr. Rhiney." He stood up. "However, while it's been very nice meeting you both if you would please excuse me, I need to get in contact with the Ministry right away to let them know of the changes to our plans."

"I'm not causing any problems, am I?" Hermione asked.

Tony shook his head. "Not at all. Just standard protocol."

She smiled wanly. "I'm sure Chris has already let you know how grateful he is to the Ministry for doing this, but please know how thankful I am as well. It means a lot that you're willing to come here and help and I have every reason to believe that you two and the Ministry will catch the men and women who are doing this."

"That's our job, ma'am," Tony bowed his head momentarily, then headed out the doors towards the rest of the house.

From the corner of the room, the grandfather clock chimed loudly, and Chris almost immediately jumped out of his chair. "Ah! It appears as if I've completely lost track of time again. I must steal away for another meeting, although my hope is this one will be much shorter than the one this morning. Ronald, if you or Anthony have any questions about the protections we have set up, Benson will be your best asset. Otherwise, I am happy to speak with you two later this evening."

"You have another meeting? Now?" Hermione's eyes were wide as the pitch of her voice went up another octave. "Are you sure you can't push it?"

Chris patted her hand and shook his head. "You know I can't but, as I said, it shouldn't take too long. Go ahead and finish eating and I'll check in with you later." He leaned down to kiss her forehead, then turned on his heel and swept out of the room, leaving Ron and Hermione alone together.

The ringing silence that followed was deafening. Seconds seemed to expand into infinity and the only sound was that of the quiet, rhythmic ticking of the grandfather clock. Ron sat glued to the sofa, the palms of his hands sweating and his blood pulsing through his veins. While Hermione seemed content to stare out the window and act as if nothing was wrong, Ron could feel the simmering anger he had been pushing down begin to boil over.

"So..." he finally said after what seemed like an eternity. "So..."

Hermione finally turned and gave him a distasteful look. "So what?"

"Oh, come off it," Ron spat as he rolled his eyes.

Hermione crossed her arms over her chest as she began jiggling her foot. "I don't believe I know what you're referring to."

"For Merlin's sake, Hermione, you know damn well what I'm talking about!" he exploded, as his heart hammered inside his chest.

Hermione's eyes flashed dangerously. "What do you want me to say? Do you want me to tell you I'm thrilled to see you? Or lie and say this isn't literally my worst nightmare come true?"

Ron cringed but continued on angrily. "Really, Hermione? That's what I am for you? Your worst nightmare?"

"Oh, does that hurt your feelings? Here, allow me to start over." Hermione put on a fake cheery tone, her foot still jiggling relentlessly. "Hello, Ron! It's so nice to see you! Goodness, it's been ages!" She tapped a finger to her chin. "I believe the last time we saw each other, we got into a massive row and you left me utterly gutted in your parents' backyard, but let's not think about that and we'll just act as though we're best friends again!" She rolled her eyes. "Oh yes, there's a brilliant idea."

Ron's pulse thundered in his ears. "So your plan is to what? Ignore me? Pretend you have no bloody clue who I am? How long do you think you can keep that up for?"

"And what, pray tell, would you suggest?" she snapped.

"You could at least acknowledge my presence! It's not like I planned for this to happen!" Ron watched Hermione's eyes grow wide with indignation.

"And what about me?" she said as she pointed a finger at her chest. "Do you think I imagined for even one second you would be here?"

"Well, join the club, because I damn well had no idea you'd be here either! Or did you not see the stupid look on my face when you walked in?"

"I suppose I couldn't see a difference between how you looked when I walked in and how you always look," she said coldly.

Ron swallowed painfully and gave a derisive snort. "Nice, Hermione. Real nice. Tell me, does it ever get lonely up there on your pedestal, looking down on all the rest of us? Or have you just gotten used to it? I'd imagine it's easier now, especially since you've started spending all your free time cozying up to the likes of Christopher bloody Rhiney!"

Hermione growled. "You are such a– a–"

"A what?"

"A child!"

"Yeah? Well, I'd rather be a child than a snob!"

"My God, you are absolutely unbearable!" she cried.

"And you think you're a bloody picnic right now?" he snapped.

"FINE!" she shouted as she threw her hands up in the air, her foot still jiggling mercilessly. "You win, Ron! I'm insufferable and a snob and this whole situation is clearly worse for you than it is for me! Is that what you want? Are you happy now?"

Ron gripped the edge of the sofa painfully and his face flushed with anger. He grunted and turned to look out one of the giant windows, his brain unable to muster up a response. Hermione shook her head as she scowled at him.

"At least tell me this, since you seem to care so much: how would you have me explain this lovely little situation to Chris?" Ron's stomach lurched at the sound of the businessman's name coming from her mouth and he whipped his head back towards her. "Well? I mean you must have some idea since you seem to have such strong feelings on the matter! Should I wait until we're all at dinner tonight and bring it up to him then?"

For a fleeting moment, Ron thought of trying to stop her – to apologize and attempt to reach some sort of ceasefire, even if it was temporary. But as words continued to tumble from her perfectly painted mouth, Ron felt his anger grow from a white-hot ember to a dark, menacing blaze.

"Or, better yet, maybe I'll wait until Chris and I are in bed, and I can whisper in his ear, 'You know that young, ginger-haired Auror staying down the hall from us? Well, he's actually the Ronald Weasley who helped Harry and me defeat Voldemort. Oh, and by the way, we used to date, so I hope that doesn't bother you!'"

Every word she spoke rained down on him like a punch and Ron shook with barely suppressed rage as he clenched his fists tightly.

"You don't need to be so bloody sarcastic!"

"Oh, I'm sarcastic?" she screeched. "When every single word out of your mouth is dripping in contempt? Honestly, you have some nerve coming here and blowing up at me!" She gripped the arms of her chair, her face red with fury. Closing her eyes briefly, she took a long, steadying breath. "Obviously this is an awful situation, but there isn't a lot we can do to change it unless you quit or I move out. And since neither of those are practical or realistic options, and you can't seem to come up with any better ideas as to how we should handle this, I'm going to continue on with my current course of action and yes, act like I don't know you!"

They sat there for a few minutes, silently seething and breathing heavily. Ron was so angry, he felt light-headed. He knew that even if he wanted to, there was no way he could go back to the Ministry and tell Kingsley he couldn't be on the case just because of the history between Hermione and himself. And regardless of the fact that it made his blood boil and his stomach churn painfully to think about, he knew there was no chance Hermione was going to leave either.

None of this, of course, made him feel any better. In fact, it made him feel worse.

Hermione was still jiggling her foot rapidly, an old nervous habit of hers he recognized from when they were in school. But now, as she sat across from him, her hair crackling with electricity and her eyes filled with loathing, Ron realized that this was not the same Hermione he had known from his youth. This Hermione was different; she was angry, yes, and certainly angrier than he had seen her in a long time. But more than that, she was unkind and defensive and clearly unafraid to let him know just what she thought of him. The fiery resentment residing inside Ron's chest hissed and popped as he glared back at her.

"You know what, Hermione? You're right."

She stared at him distrustfully. "What?"

He leaned back into the sofa and rested his arms across the top of it. "I said you're right. Why should we act like we know one another when it's obvious we don't?" Hermione's expression faltered, and he pressed on. "You see, the Ron Weasley you knew from Hogwarts isn't the same Ron Weasley sitting in front of you today. And you? Well, the Hermione Granger I knew would never have thought of shacking up with a man just because he's well off. But clearly, that doesn't bother you one bit."

Ron watched as her jaw dropped. "You–you–" she spluttered.

"Don't act so offended, love," he said mockingly. "You know damn well how this looks."

Hermione swallowed hard as the color drained from her face and sat quietly for a moment. However, when she spoke again, her voice was trembling with rage and emotion.

"How dare you! I have every right to be angry. But you?" She shook her head indignantly. "You're just a bitter, jealous, lonely little man who's clearly unhappy and unfulfilled with your own life. And now that you're being forced to watch as I move on with someone else – someone better than you – you can't handle it because it makes you feel so pathetic and inferior, your head spins! But you know what, Ron? Just because you're miserable doesn't mean I have to be as well. You may be sad and nasty and lonely but guess what? I don't care!"

Hermione stood up from her chair and towered over Ron, whose mouth now hung slightly open as his arms slipped off the top of the sofa. She pointed a shaking finger at his chest.

"You did this, Ronald Weasley! You put all of this into motion three years ago and I'll be damned if I let you lash out at me or somehow blame me for your own shortcomings or the position we find ourselves in now. So, kindly? SOD OFF!"

She stared at him a moment, her eyes glossy but with a hint of triumph behind them. Then, with her head held high, she whipped around and marched out of the room, slamming the doors behind her and leaving Ron thunderstruck. * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * 

Ron stomped upstairs to his room, trying not to slam the door behind him before throwing himself onto the bed. He began punching the oversized pillows over and over again until they started to release tiny clouds of soft, white feathers and when he was finally exhausted, he watched as they floated lazily around him and landed noiselessly on the bed. With a groan, he rubbed his face roughly as he tried to scrub her words from his brain. Was Hermione right about him? His chest ached as if in response and he felt himself sag with regret, his insides burning with guilt and his head throbbing miserably.

His stomach growled painfully and with another groan, Ron dragged himself up off the bed and over to his rucksack, fishing through it in search of something to eat. Pulling out an assortment of jeans and shirts, a particularly worn pair of balled up socks, and a set of dark blue dress robes, his hand found the corner of a box that distinctly felt like it belonged to a chocolate frog. As he grasped it, his fingers brushed against a small, metal tube the size of a cigarette lighter and suddenly, all thoughts of chocolate frogs and hunger pangs left his brain.

Sitting back on the floor and drawing his knees up to his chest, he slowly pulled the Deluminator out from the bottom of his bag. Rolling it between his fingers, he clicked it open and watched as light from around the room whooshed through the air and collected inside it, creating a flame-like point. Ron closed his eyes, letting the darkness envelop him and in an instant, he was transported back to early Christmas morning at Shell Cottage years before. He could feel the tiny ball of blue light enter his chest, warm and soft, and it filled him with a sense of purpose. He was going to find them. He was going to find her.

To this day, Ron still wasn't completely sure of how it worked, or why. But the fact that it had been her voice he'd heard that morning – that she was the reason he could get back to them – had never been a surprise. She'd always had that power over him, whether she realized it or not. And he knew that no matter how much time passed, and no matter what happened between them, he would still do anything for her.

Ron clicked the Deluminator again and released the light back into the room. Standing gingerly, he noticed a small pouch of silvery powder sitting on a bookshelf nearby and felt like a light went off over his head. Grabbing a pinch from the bag, he flung it into the fireplace and watched as bright, green flames erupted instantaneously. Kneeling back down again, he took a deep breath, stuck his head inside, and said in a clear, firm voice, "Number twelve, Grimmauld Place!"

His body was still firmly planted on the floor in Rhiney Manor, but when Ron opened his eyes, he could see the fire swirling around his face and almost as quickly as it had started, it stopped again showing the kitchen to Harry's home.

"Harry! Harry, are you there?" Ron called out, but the room was silent. He turned his face to the side, attempting to crane his neck as he tried to look around. "OI! HARRY POTTER! GET YOUR ARSE OVER HERE!"

There was the sound of rapid footsteps and Ron watched as Harry came skidding into the kitchen, a piece of parchment crumpled in his hand, and a bewildered look on his face as he scanned the room.

"Ron…?"

"Down here, you git!" Ron laughed. Harry glanced down at the fireplace and smiled warmly as he saw his best friend's head floating in the grate.

"Is everything okay? You were shouting like a madman," Harry said as he pulled a chair over and sat down. "How was it meeting the famous Christopher Rhiney? Is he everything you dreamed he'd be?"

A flicker of anger rose up in his chest again, and Ron scowled. "He's like if Lockhart and Slughorn had a baby, and then that baby grew up to be a giant wanker," Ron said darkly and Harry sniggered. "He's obnoxiously well off and knows it, he loves to brag about himself and all the famous people he's friends with, and he's disturbingly overly-cheerful. Seriously – he didn't stop smiling or shut up about himself for almost two hours. Until…"

"Until what?" Harry frowned.

"Until…" Ron sighed. "Until Hermione showed up."

Harry stared at Ron, dumbstruck. "Wait. What?"

"Hermione. She's here."

"Hang on – what the hell is Hermione doing at Christopher Rhiney's place?"

"She lives here with him," Ron said slowly, his heart rate ticking upwards.

Harry gaped and placed the parchment he was holding down on the table. "Wow. I…wow."

Ron was quiet a moment. "You really didn't know?"

"Know what?"

"About Rhiney and–"

"Of course not," Harry cut him off definitively. "Do you really think I'd have let you walk out of the Ministry without so much as a warning? Or that I wouldn't have immediately sent Hermione an owl, giving her a head's up? I didn't even know she was dating someone, let alone that she'd moved in with him."

"Well, apparently the living together part is new. There was a fire in her building in London last week so she's moved in with him until the unit's repaired."

"A fire? You're joking!" Harry's eyes were wide. "Is she all right?"

"She's fine. If anything, she seemed to want to avoid talking about it altogether," Ron replied. "It was weird, how nonchalant she was about it. But the Muggles aren't sure what caused it and the Ministry hasn't gotten involved yet, so Tony went to let Gemma and Kingsley know right after we heard."

Harry let out a low breath. "So, have you talked to her yet?"

"Not exactly…" Ron looked away as he trailed off, his mind flooding with images of the scene from earlier, and a fresh wave of guilt washed over him.

Harry looked at Ron warily. "Please tell me you didn't have a row with her in front of everyone."

"Not in front of everyone," Ron muttered as his ears burned. "Tony left to send word to Kingsley, and then Rhiney had to step into some meeting or whatever, so it was just Hermione and me. And I —well, I got angry." Harry stared at him skeptically and Ron looked down sheepishly. "Look, I flew off the handle and took it out on her. I know it was stupid, but it happened."

Harry frowned. "What did you say?"

"Er –" he started uncomfortably, "In short order, I called her a snob, told her she'd changed for the worse, and then accused her of dating Rhiney for his money."

Harry stared with his mouth wide open. "I can't believe you're still alive, let alone Flooing me right now. I'm guessing she didn't take that well?"

"She told me off so soundly, you'd think she'd practiced it. Actually," Ron added, "now that I think about it, she probably did. Anyway, she told me I was bitter and unhappy with my own life and that seeing her with Rhiney just reminded me of how pathetic I am. Then she told me this was all my fault. Oh, and then she told me to sod off."

Harry's eyes looked as though they might pop out of his head. "Merlin, she must have been apoplectic."

"Yeah, well, like I said, it…got out of hand," Ron finished lamely. "That was the end of it, though. She stormed out and I haven't seen her since."

They sat quietly for a moment, and Harry hesitated before asking, "So, what are you going to do? Do you think Tony or Rhiney have any idea about the two of you?"

"I don't think so, though Tony might suspect something's up if he's talked to Kingsley. But there are enough Weasley's in the world that it's possible Rhiney doesn't realize yet that I'm the one who's friends with you. But honestly, mate, I have no idea what's going to happen now. Kingsley might decide I can't work on this case because of my history with Hermione, and even if he gives me a chance…" he trailed off miserably.

"Do you even want to?" Harry asked. "Work on the case, that is?"

Ron sighed. "I mean, it's not ideal, having to basically work as security for some rich pillock, but this is a huge case. But, now that I know Hermione's involved and possibly in danger because of some arsehole she's seeing, I just…" Ron shook his head. "I can't leave. Not now. It's… she's…"

"She's Hermione," Harry said quietly and Ron nodded slowly as he swallowed past the small lump in his throat. "Then I think you tell Kingsley that. Maybe not the bit about you and Hermione, but the part about how the case is too important to walk away from. He knows what you're capable of and if you say you can do this, then you can. Just, you know, maybe try and avoid having a go at Hermione again." Harry's voice hardened slightly as he continued. "She has a point, you know. It is sort of your fault you're in this situation, and you can't get mad at her for moving on."

Ron insides burned with shame. "I know, I know. I just…" he tried to continue, but words escaped him. "I know I'm the one who ended it with her, but I can't pretend I'm fine with sitting back and watching her with this wanker. It was bloody awful today, and that was for less than an hour."

"Yeah, you were always rubbish at keeping your anger in check when it came to Hermione and other blokes. But you have a job to do and that's what you should focus on. Concentrate on working with Tony to figure out who's making these threats towards Rhiney. Maybe we'll get this thing solved quickly and then you can move on, too."

"Right..." Ron said miserably.

Harry considered Ron carefully for a moment. "Ron, I know we've haven't talked much about what happened between you and Hermione. But I also know you and… well, I know you regret ending things with her. And yes," he continued as Ron looked up at him, wide-eyed, "I know that even though you've never admitted it. But the thing is, Hermione's the closest thing I have to a sister and even though you two had a falling out, she and I are still close and she and Ginny are close, too, and –" Harry struggled for a moment, then pressed on. "Look, all I'm saying is if you think you still have feelings for her, then maybe you should consider telling her. If not for her sake, then for your own."

Ron snorted. "Harry, mate, you didn't see her today. The way she looked at me and the things she said… she hates me. I mean, actually, deeply hates me. She said my being here was her worst nightmare."

Harry smirked. "Ron, if there's one thing I know about women—"

"Oh, really, Mr. Most Eligible Bachelor runner-up?"

"Do you want my help or not?" Ron stifled a laugh and nodded. "Clearly, this isn't my field of expertise, but I know Hermione and I know you and all I'm saying is maybe she got as angry as she did with you because there's something else there. And yeah, Christopher Rhiney's rich and charming or whatever, but that doesn't mean that he's 'the one.' I mean, she loved you once, didn't she?"

"Yeah," Ron said sadly. "Yeah, she did."

"Then maybe there's a chance she never stopped."

Ron glanced up at Harry and saw a small smirk on his face. "So, you're telling me you actually believe there's a chance she still cares about me and that she doesn't want to pour undiluted Bubotuber pus down my pants?"

"Did she say that to you?" Harry asked, horrified.

"No, I just feel like she might not be against it."

"Well, strangely enough, I think her blowing up at you kind of proves that she still feels something. Otherwise, she wouldn't have really reacted at all. But after what you said to her today, and considering your history together, I reckon you're going to have a hell of a time getting her to admit it." Harry sighed and shook his head. "Ron, just be nice to her. It's going to be awkward, especially after what happened this morning, but if you apologize and mean it, then you'll at least have gained some ground with her and right now, that might be the most you can hope for."

Ron gave a half smile. "I'm a fucking mess."

"Careful – that's my best friend you're talking about."

"Ah, don't go all soft on me now, Potter!"

As they laughed, there was a knock at Harry's front door. "Damn. That's probably Sean. I'd better go."

"Thanks for listening to me whinge."

"It's the least I can do," Harry said with a grin. "Ron, seriously mate, just keep your cool and at least think about apologizing. Then go from there."

"All right, all right! Tell Sean I say hi." And with a small pop! Ron pulled his head out of the fireplace.

Sitting on the floor again, Ron stared ahead at the empty grate as Harry's advice rolled around his brain. There was no easy or quick way to fix things between him and Hermione – that he knew for sure. And while Harry seemed confident that Hermione still cared for him, Ron couldn't quite forget the venom with which she had flung her insults at him earlier. Still, apologizing, or at least trying to, definitely couldn't make things any worse than they already were. And just as he always had, Ron knew that when it came to Hermione, he would do whatever he needed to in order to keep her safe.

Ron glanced down at the Deluminator in his hand and with a small grimace, he pocketed it. Then, standing up, he gathered all his courage and walked out the door.

[word-of-sanjana]

Local Offices 2020

Ok, I am very hesitant to put my specific location info out there on the internet, but suffice to say, I am a Santa Clara County voter, and these are the offices at stake here in my area.

Researchers

Sanjana and her brother Aditya

all opinions belong to Sanjana

Short Guide:

US House of Reps, District 18: Vote Anna Eshoo over Rishi Kumar - those of you who know what it’s like living in a community with Rishi Kumar, I hope you are big enough not to wish such a nauseating fate on all of us in the United States

CA State Senator, District 15: Pick Cortese over Ravel, even though both candidates seem pretty solid!

CA State Assembly, District 28: Obviously pick Evan Low over Republican weirdo real-estate agent Carlos Rafael Cruz.

Judge of the Superior Court, Office No. 24: Stuart Scott gives me a bad vibe so I’m going to ABSTAIN from this one.

SUSD Board: The only candidate I feel comfortable recommending you vote for is Scott Adler. As risk management, for a second candidate, I will recommend Melissa Stanis because she seems more trustworthy than any of the other remaining candidates.

City Council: After watching the City Council Candidates Forum, I recommend Renee Paquier and Kookie Fitzsimmons. But even more than that, I recommend you watch the Forum and make up your own mind. I suspect that my priorities (connecting with other communities, making space for non-wealthy people, thinking about the needs of the larger Bay Area, dismantling the illusion that Saratoga is a “semi-rural” town), are not necessarily yours. Anyways, my former write-up is below, and I take it back because some of the candidates did touch upon at least a part of what I am concerned about. As they say, op-ed writing means always having to say you’re sorry.

Oh wow, turns out (to no one’s surprise), most of Saratoga and I have different ideas about responsibility, humanitarianism, sustainability, and above all courage. I am of course, talking about Saratoga’s complete refusal to consider affordable housing. This is the central issue for the campaigns for city council, and no candidates reflect my values, so I will be endorsing none. Privately, I will most likely vote for this office as a form of risk management, so if you want to do that as well, please consult the longer explanations below.

Long Guide:

US House of Reps, District 18: Ah, the local kiss-ass is trying to go to Congress. Rishi Kumar snaked his way into being a local “leader” in the community I live in just a couple of years ago. His main platform has been cuddling up with law enforcement, creating “neighborhood watch groups” that profile people on the streets, and showing an overall tone-deafness about privilege, race, class, and basic decency. A lot of my stories about him involve other people, so unfortunately I am not at liberty to share them here, but here’s a fun one that was published in local news. Rishi Kumar is slimy both in policy and personality, and if you support him, you’re a fool to think he would remember you ever again if somehow he went to Washington.

As for Anna Eshoo, she’s nowhere near my ideal rep- she’s a classic establishment Democrat and career politician, and I can’t see her pushing for much-needed changes in the Democrat Party despite her influence. She’ll keep doing what she always does, and “the usual” is not something I’m satisfied with. However, for this office this year, we didn’t have any good candidates, and out of all the scrubs who showed up, she at least has some basic competency to get the job done. So, for the sake of not unleashing Rishi Kumar on the nation, I’ll endorse Eshoo for US Rep.

Sources: candidate campaign websites, community connections

CA State Senator, District 15: I have some internal conflict over this one. Dave Cortese has been involved in South Bay politics for years, and has a strong backing from progressive groups. But on the other hand, Ann Ravel has a record of bravery in fighting dark money, and also, I like what I’ve seen of her character. Honestly, I wish both of them could go to State Congress (and how rare is it to feel that way about an election!) In the end, I am going to endorse Cortese for State Senator simply because progressive orgs that know more than me are backing him. Ultimately, you want a senator that will work with the local groups doing the work on the ground, and if these groups are backing him, then they must have faith that he will get the job done in Sacramento as well. Still hoping to see more from Ann Ravel in the future!

Sources: candidate campaign websites, this interview on Valley Politics August 2020, SF Chronicle endorsement, Progressive Voters Guide, research I did back in the primaries

CA State Assembly Member, District 28: This one is a no-brainer; vote Evan Low. He’s been around for a few years now and from what I’ve seen, he’s alright. Actually when I get more time to be a politics nerd, I might go through his voting record and see what I find in there; I was told by Progressive Voters Guide that it’s mixed, and I’m curious to see for myself. Oh yeah, the opponent in this race is Carlos Rafael Cruz, who is a never-held-office Republican real estate agent, who seems to think Sacramento is trying to take over parenting? He garbled something about how children are all gonna be “emancepated wards of the state”. Anyways, the choice is clear just from the ballot itself- there really was no other research necessary heh.

Sources: candidate campaign websites, Progressive Voters Guide, official ASM28 website, research I did back in the primaries, background knowledge on Evan Low from a few years ago in his last election

Judge of the Superior Court, Office No. 24: My friend in Chicago gets to vote Yes/No on Judges?! And here in California we basically don’t have a choice by the time the General election rolls around. Anyways, this dude, Stuart Scott gives me a bad vibe. He’s super pals with the police– and he used to be a prosecutor– and this incident rubs me the wrong way. So instead of voting for him, I will ABSTAIN.

Sources: Ballotpedia, 2016 Mercury News article, Gilroy Dispatch article

SUSD Board:

Scott Adler mentioned that he wants to “acknowledge and address racism, sexism, harassment and bullying” which sounds good to me. It could be empty words, but at least mentioning these realities is a needed start. I’ll give him a shot and say YES.

Melissa Stanis seems like a dedicated parent volunteer, which is not necessarily what the school board needs. I’m more interested in finding someone who will bring challenging issues to the forefront. But she does seem to really care about the students and the district, and that is not a bad base for a school board. (Plus, I didn’t like the candidates below very much.) So while it’s not an enthusiastic endorsement, she has at least half a YES from me.

Cecile Cohen-Jonathan mentions “social-emotional programs” for students, which sounds intriguing, but I’m unclear what these programs are without concrete details. Can’t support without enough info so it’s a NO.

Sunita Verma’s “Voice of the community” section says ”I will work to ensure visibility to all district stakeholders through open and timely communication,” and if I was a corporation, that would sound great. Unfortunately for her I am a human, so her corporate tone plus a lack of any interesting policies makes her campaign a NO in my book.

Azadeh Weber says some great things about mental health and about connecting with the larger community. However, she is also supported by the Libertarian Party, so... hm. In politics, it’s always best to look at actions first, allies second, and words third, so even though the words are good, the allies are not, so it’s a NO from me.

Sources: candidate campaign websites

City Council: Ugh. Ok, first things first- all these candidates are against SB 35, the bill that mandates counties build affordable housing. There are valid reasons to be concerned with putting local control in the hands of the state; HOWEVER, to my understanding, we in this area have not made ANY notable steps to build affordable housing on our own, so OF COURSE the state is going to take control when there is this crisis going on. Despite what many want to believe, Saratoga isn’t a separatist, elitist colony– we’re as much a part of the larger Bay Area community as anyone, and if we can help with the housing crisis, we have a responsibility to step up. SB 35 may or may not be the best way to force this town to help our community; there are, as always, legitimate concerns as to how changes will play out. But the housing crisis has gone too far for us to not take action, let alone pretend like we don’t have the means to do something. I find it shameful that so many of the candidates for city council are more interested in pushing back against SB 35 than looking for ways we can actually share support with the communities in crisis outside our borders.

[10/12, 11:30 pm: The City Council section is revised, with the old write-ups crossed out. I did indeed have to eat my own words on some of what I said previously, so please forgive me for being sharp-tongued on limited information. I have made the updated recommendations after watching the Saratoga City Council Candidates Forum.]

Belal Aftab may be what I initially suspected: a sheltered South Bay tech guy with political aspirations and a myopic sense of vision that extends to wealthy counties in the Bay Area and no further. He thinks Saratoga is doomed by SB 35. It’s a NO for him because while I don’t think he’ll change Saratoga at all, I do think he’ll continue the cycle of Saratoga elitism. Also, I don’t want to enable his inevitable State Congress run.

Belal Aftab is a finance/tech guy, but I wonder if he has higher political aspirations, given the pandering tone of the website. Anyways, his agenda has a couple of interesting ideas, like a “Psychiatric Response Unit“ and more city budget transparency. He also wants to work closely with the Sheriff’s dept. and wants to push back against SB 35, so clearly he and I are not on the same page here. I can’t in good consciousness endorse someone has a less than 50% chance of representing my values, so I’ll give him a MAYBE.

Renee Paquier seemed fairly balanced in her forum appearance. She talked about economic recovery for local businesses, which no one else addressed early on. She also consistently brought up discussion with community members, and deferred to the people most impacted when considering proposals. She also said she’s not against housing in principle, which is what I’m looking for (because I have lowered my standards after seeing the other candidates). Also, very tellingly, she was the ONLY candidate who supported Prop 15 (and one of two that supported Prop 16). I am still wary of her ties to policing, and given that we have a county Sheriff’s Office in our town, this is an important consideration. But by far she seems more progressive than any of the other candidates. Now that I have a better sense of her, I will say an uncontested YES.

Renee Paquier is a former cop turned West Valley Dean. She had no notable ideas, as far as I could tell. She does want to expand the Neighborhood Watch Program, you know, the one championed by the illustrious barf bag Rishi Kumar. Anyways, if it wasn’t clear before, it’s a NO.

John Fitzpatrick is obsessed with open space areas, and connects every question back to that. He says his lawyer skills will help when dealing with Sacramento. Altogether, it’s not enough so NO.

John Fitzpatrick seems really devoted to keeping low-income people out of Saratoga. His website even said “more highly skilled jobs in Saratoga could prevent the high density development that we are now facing,” which is real telling. I don’t have a NO strong enough for this asshole.

Kookie Fitzsimmons is a bit scattered but also does her research. She was open to new housing options and supports Prop 16 (one of only two people who do). I wonder if she’s too soft, but I’ll take nice over a snake any day of the week. Compared to everyone else here, she’s in the top 2 so it’s a YES from me.

Kookie Fitzsimmons has the worst website I’ve seen so far. I didn’t see any specific policies proposed, but maybe it’s just on a page I can’t access cause the HTML is so screwed up. No policy, so it’s a NO.

Doug Case had a good answer to the housing question about the need for space for people who need a place in Saratoga, like non-white collar workers whose children can go to the schools. But that was the only point on which we fully agreed. So he’ll come in third with a NO.

Doug Case has no website, and his candidate statement just talked about his life. So as usual, no policy, NO endorsement from me.

Tina Walia is very against SB 35 and very in love with self-promotion. She knows her policy and is ready to wield it against new housing as much as possible. She’s smart, so some of her suggestions are reasonable, but I see no evidence of a heart there. She kinda feels like a person who would be the headmistress of a school but doesn’t seem to care about humans as individuals to the point that you feel like, why did you choose this career? Anyways it’s a NO.

Tina Walia seems to have a great grasp of how Saratoga works, and would no doubt be an efficient and positive addition to the council. However, her policies are all in favor of minimizing Saratoga’s housing supply, with no other ideas detailed on her website. Hmm, should I vote for a probably decent person who has clashing values with me? MAYBE, but I don’t know what I’ll choose yet.

Sources: candidate campaign websites, LWV Candidate Forum - Saratoga City Council

Conclusion

Finally I am DONE! Researching those local offices ended up being pretty grueling. But they are all very important, so I hope you will vote in these  elections, or whichever downballot elections are in your area. These are the positions that most directly affect people’s lives, so don’t forget about them! As of now [Oct. 12, 2020], this section is complete!

[itsfinancethings]

New story in Technology from Time: Facebook’s Ties to India’s Ruling Party Complicate Its Fight Against Hate Speech

In July 2019, Alaphia Zoyab was on a video call with Facebook employees in India, discussing some 180 posts by users in the country that Avaaz, the watchdog group where she worked, said violated Facebook’s hate speech rules. But half way through the hour-long meeting, Shivnath Thukral, the most senior Facebook official on the call, got up and walked out of the room, Zoyab says, saying he had other important things to do.

Among the posts was one by Shiladitya Dev, a lawmaker in the state of Assam for Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). He had shared a news report about a girl being allegedly drugged and raped by a Muslim man, and added his own comment: “This is how Bangladeshi Muslims target our [native people] in 2019.” But rather than removing it, Facebook allowed the post to remain online for more than a year after the meeting, until TIME contacted Facebook to ask about it on Aug. 21. “We looked into this when Avaaz first flagged it to us, and our records show that we assessed it as a hate speech violation,” Facebook said in a statement to TIME. “We failed to remove upon initial review, which was a mistake on our part.”

Thukral was Facebook’s public policy director for India and South Asia at the time. Part of his job was lobbying the Indian government, but he was also involved in discussions about how to act when posts by politicians were flagged as hate speech by moderators, former employees tell TIME. Facebook acknowledges that Thukral left the meeting, but says he never intended to stay for its entirety, and joined only to introduce Zoyab, whom he knew from a past job, to his team. “Shivnath did not leave because the issues were not important,” Facebook said in the statement, noting that the company took action on 70 of the 180 posts presented during the meeting.

Eric Miller—World Economic ForumShivnath Thukral at the Moving to Better Ground session during the India Economic Summit in Mumbai, November, 2011.

The social media giant is under increasing scrutiny for how it enforces its hate speech policies when the accused are members of Modi’s ruling party. Activists say some Facebook policy officials are too close to the BJP, and accuse the company of putting its relationship with the government ahead of its stated mission of removing hate speech from its platform—especially when ruling-party politicians are involved. Thukral, for instance, worked with party leadership to assist in the BJP’s 2014 election campaign, according to documents TIME has seen.

Facebook’s managing director for India, Ajit Mohan, denied suggestions that the company had displayed bias toward the BJP in an Aug. 21 blog post titled, “We are open, transparent and non-partisan.” He wrote: “Despite hailing from diverse political affiliations and backgrounds, [our employees] perform their respective duties and interpret our policies in a fair and non-partisan way. The decisions around content escalations are not made unilaterally by just one person; rather, they are inclusive of views from different teams and disciplines within the company.”

Facebook published the blog post after the Wall Street Journal, citing current and former Facebook employees, reported on Aug.14 that the company’s top policy official in India, Ankhi Das, pushed back against other Facebook employees who wanted to label a BJP politician a “dangerous individual” and ban him from the platform after he called for Muslim immigrants to be shot. Das argued that punishing the state lawmaker, T. Raja Singh, would hurt Facebook’s business prospects in India, the Journal reported. (Facebook said Das’s intervention was not the sole reason Singh was not banned, and that it was still deciding if a ban was necessary.)

Read more: Can the World’s Largest Democracy Endure Another Five Years of a Modi Government?

Those business prospects are sizeable. India is Facebook’s largest market, with 328 million using the social media platform. Some 400 million Indians also use Facebook’s messaging service WhatsApp — a substantial chunk of the country’s estimated 503 million internet users. The platforms have become increasingly important in Indian politics; after the 2014 elections, Das published an op-ed arguing that Modi had won because of the way he leveraged Facebook in his campaign.

But Facebook and WhatsApp have also been used to spread hate speech and misinformation that have been blamed for helping to incite deadly attacks on minority groups amid rising communal tensions across India—despite the company’s efforts to crack down. In February, a video of a speech by BJP politician Kapil Mishra was uploaded to Facebook, in which he told police that unless they removed mostly-Muslim protesters occupying a road in Delhi, his supporters would do it themselves. Violent riots erupted within hours. (In that case, Facebook determined the video violated its rules on incitement to violence and removed it.)

WhatsApp, too, has been used with deadly intent in India — for example by cow vigilantes, Hindu mobs that have attacked Muslims and Dalits accused of killing cows, an animal sacred in Hinduism. At least 44 people, most of them Muslims, were killed by cow vigilantes between May 2015 and December 2018, according to Human Rights Watch. Many cow vigilante murders happen after rumors spread on WhatsApp, and videos of lynchings and beatings are often shared via the app too.

Read more: How the Pandemic is Reshaping India

TIME has learned that Facebook, in an effort to evaluate its role in spreading hate speech and incitements to violence, has commissioned an independent report on its impact on human rights in India. Work on the India audit, previously unreported, began before the Journal published its story. It is being conducted by the U.S. law firm Foley Hoag and will include interviews with senior Facebook staff and members of civil society in India, according to three people with knowledge of the matter and an email seen by TIME. (A similar report on Myanmar, released in 2018, detailed Facebook’s failings on hate speech that contributed to the Rohingya genocide there the previous year.) Facebook declined to confirm the report.

But activists, who have spent years monitoring and reporting hate speech by Hindu nationalists, tell TIME that they believe Facebook has been reluctant to police posts by members and supporters of the BJP because it doesn’t want to pick fights with the government that controls its largest market. The way the company is structured exacerbates the problem, analysts and former employees say, because the same people responsible for managing the relationship with the government also contribute to decisions on whether politicians should be punished for hate speech.

“A core problem at Facebook is that one policy org is responsible for both the rules of the platform and keeping governments happy,” Alex Stamos, Facebook’s former chief security officer, tweeted in May. “Local policy heads are generally pulled from the ruling political party and are rarely drawn from disadvantaged ethnic groups, religious creeds or castes. This naturally bends decision-making towards the powerful.”

Some activists have grown so frustrated with the Facebook India policy team that they’ve begun to bypass it entirely in reporting hate speech. Following the call when Thukral walked out, Avaaz decided to begin reporting hate speech directly to Facebook’s company headquarters in Menlo Park, Calif. “We found Facebook India’s attitude utterly flippant, callous, uninterested,” says Zoyab, who has since left Avaaz. Another group that regularly reports hate speech against minorities on Facebook in India, which asked not to be named out of fear for the safety of its staffers, said it has been doing the same since 2018. In a statement, Facebook acknowledged some groups that regularly flag hate speech in India are in contact with Facebook headquarters, but said that did not change the criteria by which posts were judged to be against its rules.

Read more: Facebook Says It’s Removing More Hate Speech Than Ever Before. But There’s a Catch

The revelations in the Journal set off a political scandal in India, with opposition politicians calling for Facebook to be officially investigated for alleged favoritism toward Modi’s party. And the news caused strife within the company too: In an internal open letter, Facebook employees called on executives to denounce “anti-Muslim bigotry” and do more to ensure hate speech rules are applied consistently across the platform, Reuters reported. The letter alleges that there are no Muslim employees on the India policy team; in response to questions from TIME, Facebook said it was legally prohibited from collecting such data.

Facebook friends in high places

While it is common for companies to hire lobbyists with connections to political parties, activists say the history of staff on Facebook’s India policy team, as well as their incentive to keep the government happy, creates a conflict of interest when it comes to policing hate speech by politicians. Before joining Facebook, Thukral had worked in the past on behalf of the BJP. Despite this, he was involved in making decisions about how to deal with politicians’ posts that moderators flagged as violations of hate speech rules during the 2019 elections, the former employees tell TIME. His Facebook likes include a page called “I Support Narendra Modi.”

Former Facebook employees tell TIME they believe a key reason Thukral was hired in 2017 was because he was seen as close to the ruling party. In 2013, during the BJP’s eventually successful campaign to win national power at the 2014 elections, Thukral worked with senior party officials to help run a pro-BJP website and Facebook page. The site, called Mera Bharosa (“My Trust” in Hindi) also hosted events, including a project aimed at getting students to sign up to vote, according to interviews with people involved and documents seen by TIME. A student who volunteered for a Mera Bharosa project told TIME he had no idea it was an operation run in coordination with the BJP, and that he believed he was working for a non-partisan voter registration campaign. According to the documents, this was a calculated strategy to hide the true intent of the organization. By early 2014, the site changed its name to “Modi Bharosa” (meaning “Modi Trust”) and began sharing more overtly pro-BJP content. It is not clear whether Thukral was still working with the site at that time.

In a statement to TIME, Facebook acknowledged Thukral had worked on behalf of Mera Bharosa, but denied his past work presented a conflict of interest because multiple people are involved in significant decisions about removing content. “We are aware that some of our employees have supported various campaigns in the past both in India and elsewhere in the world,” Facebook said as part of a statement issued to TIME in response to a detailed series of questions. “Our understanding is that Shivnath’s volunteering at the time focused on the themes of governance within India and are not related to the content questions you have raised.”

Now, Thukral has an even bigger job. In March 2020, he was promoted from his job at Facebook to become WhatsApp’s India public policy director. In the role, New Delhi tech policy experts tell TIME, one of Thukral’s key responsibilities is managing the company’s relationship with the Modi government. It’s a crucial job, because Facebook is trying to turn the messaging app into a digital payments processor — a lucrative idea potentially worth billions of dollars.

In April, Facebook announced it would pay $5.7 billion for a 10% stake in Reliance Jio, India’s biggest telecoms company, which is owned by India’s richest man, Mukesh Ambani. On a call with investors in May, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg spoke enthusiastically about the business opportunity. “With so many people in India engaging through WhatsApp, we just think this is going to be a huge opportunity for us to provide a better commerce experience for people, to help small businesses and the economy there, and to build a really big business ourselves over time,” he said, talking about plans to link WhatsApp Pay with Jio’s vast network of small businesses across India. “That’s why I think it really makes sense for us to invest deeply in India.”

Read more: How Whatsapp Is Fueling Fake News Ahead of India’s Elections

But WhatsApp’s future as a payments application in India depends on final approval from the national payments regulator, which is still pending. Facebook’s hopes for expansion in India have been quashed by a national regulator before, in 2016, when the country’s telecoms watchdog said Free Basics, Facebook’s plan to provide free Internet access for only some sites, including its own, violated net neutrality rules. One of Thukral’s priorities in his new role is ensuring that a similar problem doesn’t strike down Facebook’s big ambitions for WhatsApp Pay.

‘No foreign company in India wants to be in the government’s bad books’

While the regulator is technically independent, analysts say that Facebook’s new relationship with the wealthiest man in India will likely make it much easier to gain approval for WhatsApp Pay. “It would be easier now for Facebook to get that approval, with Ambani on its side,” says Neil Shah, vice president of Counterpoint Research, an industry analysis firm. And goodwill from the government itself is important too, analysts say. “No foreign company in India wants to be in the government’s bad books,” says James Crabtree, author of The Billionaire Raj. “Facebook would very much like to have good relations with the government of India and is likely to think twice about doing things that will antagonize them.”

The Indian government has shown before it is not afraid to squash the dreams of foreign tech firms. In July, after a geopolitical spat with China, it banned dozens of Chinese apps including TikTok and WeChat. “There has been a creeping move toward a kind of digital protectionism in India,” Crabtree says. “So in the back of Facebook’s mind is the fact that the government could easily turn against foreign tech companies in general, and Facebook in particular, especially if they’re seen to be singling out major politicians.”

With hundreds of millions of users already in India, and hundreds of millions more who don’t have smartphones yet but might in the near future, Facebook has an incentive to avoid that possibility. “Facebook has said in the past that it has no business interest in allowing hate speech on its platform,” says Chinmayi Arun, a resident fellow at Yale Law School, who studies the regulation of tech platforms. “It’s evident from what’s going on in India that this is not entirely true.”

Facebook says it is working hard to combat hate speech. “We want to make it clear that we denounce hate in any form,” said Mohan, Facebook’s managing director in India, in his Aug. 21 blog post. “We have removed and will continue to remove content posted by public figures in India when it violates our Community Standards.”

But scrubbing hate speech remains a daunting challenge for Facebook. At an employee meeting in June, Zuckerberg highlighted Mishra’s February speech ahead of the Delhi riots, without naming him, as a clear example of a post that should be removed. The original video of Mishra’s speech was taken down shortly after it was uploaded. But another version of the video, with more than 5,600 views and a long list of supportive comments underneath, remained online for six months until TIME flagged it to Facebook in August.

from Blogger https://ift.tt/3b4nKgL via IFTTT

[newstechreviews]

In July 2019, Alaphia Zoyab was on a video call with Facebook employees in India, discussing some 180 posts by users in the country that Avaaz, the watchdog group where she worked, said violated Facebook’s hate speech rules. But half way through the hour-long meeting, Shivnath Thukral, the most senior Facebook official on the call, got up and walked out of the room, Zoyab says, saying he had other important things to do.

Among the posts was one by Shiladitya Dev, a lawmaker in the state of Assam for Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). He had shared a news report about a girl being allegedly drugged and raped by a Muslim man, and added his own comment: “This is how Bangladeshi Muslims target our [native people] in 2019.” But rather than removing it, Facebook allowed the post to remain online for more than a year after the meeting, until TIME contacted Facebook to ask about it on Aug. 21. “We looked into this when Avaaz first flagged it to us, and our records show that we assessed it as a hate speech violation,” Facebook said in a statement to TIME. “We failed to remove upon initial review, which was a mistake on our part.”

Thukral was Facebook’s public policy director for India and South Asia at the time. Part of his job was lobbying the Indian government, but he was also involved in discussions about how to act when posts by politicians were flagged as hate speech by moderators, former employees tell TIME. Facebook acknowledges that Thukral left the meeting, but says he never intended to stay for its entirety, and joined only to introduce Zoyab, whom he knew from a past job, to his team. “Shivnath did not leave because the issues were not important,” Facebook said in the statement, noting that the company took action on 70 of the 180 posts presented during the meeting.

Eric Miller—World Economic ForumShivnath Thukral at the Moving to Better Ground session during the India Economic Summit in Mumbai, November, 2011.

The social media giant is under increasing scrutiny for how it enforces its hate speech policies when the accused are members of Modi’s ruling party. Activists say some Facebook policy officials are too close to the BJP, and accuse the company of putting its relationship with the government ahead of its stated mission of removing hate speech from its platform—especially when ruling-party politicians are involved. Thukral, for instance, worked with party leadership to assist in the BJP’s 2014 election campaign, according to documents TIME has seen.

Facebook’s managing director for India, Ajit Mohan, denied suggestions that the company had displayed bias toward the BJP in an Aug. 21 blog post titled, “We are open, transparent and non-partisan.” He wrote: “Despite hailing from diverse political affiliations and backgrounds, [our employees] perform their respective duties and interpret our policies in a fair and non-partisan way. The decisions around content escalations are not made unilaterally by just one person; rather, they are inclusive of views from different teams and disciplines within the company.”

Facebook published the blog post after the Wall Street Journal, citing current and former Facebook employees, reported on Aug.14 that the company’s top policy official in India, Ankhi Das, pushed back against other Facebook employees who wanted to label a BJP politician a “dangerous individual” and ban him from the platform after he called for Muslim immigrants to be shot. Das argued that punishing the state lawmaker, T. Raja Singh, would hurt Facebook’s business prospects in India, the Journal reported. (Facebook said Das’s intervention was not the sole reason Singh was not banned, and that it was still deciding if a ban was necessary.)

Read more: Can the World’s Largest Democracy Endure Another Five Years of a Modi Government?

Those business prospects are sizeable. India is Facebook’s largest market, with 328 million using the social media platform. Some 400 million Indians also use Facebook’s messaging service WhatsApp — a substantial chunk of the country’s estimated 503 million internet users. The platforms have become increasingly important in Indian politics; after the 2014 elections, Das published an op-ed arguing that Modi had won because of the way he leveraged Facebook in his campaign.

But Facebook and WhatsApp have also been used to spread hate speech and misinformation that have been blamed for helping to incite deadly attacks on minority groups amid rising communal tensions across India—despite the company’s efforts to crack down. In February, a video of a speech by BJP politician Kapil Mishra was uploaded to Facebook, in which he told police that unless they removed mostly-Muslim protesters occupying a road in Delhi, his supporters would do it themselves. Violent riots erupted within hours. (In that case, Facebook determined the video violated its rules on incitement to violence and removed it.)

WhatsApp, too, has been used with deadly intent in India — for example by cow vigilantes, Hindu mobs that have attacked Muslims and Dalits accused of killing cows, an animal sacred in Hinduism. At least 44 people, most of them Muslims, were killed by cow vigilantes between May 2015 and December 2018, according to Human Rights Watch. Many cow vigilante murders happen after rumors spread on WhatsApp, and videos of lynchings and beatings are often shared via the app too.

Read more: How the Pandemic is Reshaping India

TIME has learned that Facebook, in an effort to evaluate its role in spreading hate speech and incitements to violence, has commissioned an independent report on its impact on human rights in India. Work on the India audit, previously unreported, began before the Journal published its story. It is being conducted by the U.S. law firm Foley Hoag and will include interviews with senior Facebook staff and members of civil society in India, according to three people with knowledge of the matter and an email seen by TIME. (A similar report on Myanmar, released in 2018, detailed Facebook’s failings on hate speech that contributed to the Rohingya genocide there the previous year.) Facebook declined to confirm the report.

But activists, who have spent years monitoring and reporting hate speech by Hindu nationalists, tell TIME that they believe Facebook has been reluctant to police posts by members and supporters of the BJP because it doesn’t want to pick fights with the government that controls its largest market. The way the company is structured exacerbates the problem, analysts and former employees say, because the same people responsible for managing the relationship with the government also contribute to decisions on whether politicians should be punished for hate speech.

“A core problem at Facebook is that one policy org is responsible for both the rules of the platform and keeping governments happy,” Alex Stamos, Facebook’s former chief security officer, tweeted in May. “Local policy heads are generally pulled from the ruling political party and are rarely drawn from disadvantaged ethnic groups, religious creeds or castes. This naturally bends decision-making towards the powerful.”

Some activists have grown so frustrated with the Facebook India policy team that they’ve begun to bypass it entirely in reporting hate speech. Following the call when Thukral walked out, Avaaz decided to begin reporting hate speech directly to Facebook’s company headquarters in Menlo Park, Calif. “We found Facebook India’s attitude utterly flippant, callous, uninterested,” says Zoyab, who has since left Avaaz. Another group that regularly reports hate speech against minorities on Facebook in India, which asked not to be named out of fear for the safety of its staffers, said it has been doing the same since 2018. In a statement, Facebook acknowledged some groups that regularly flag hate speech in India are in contact with Facebook headquarters, but said that did not change the criteria by which posts were judged to be against its rules.

Read more: Facebook Says It’s Removing More Hate Speech Than Ever Before. But There’s a Catch

The revelations in the Journal set off a political scandal in India, with opposition politicians calling for Facebook to be officially investigated for alleged favoritism toward Modi’s party. And the news caused strife within the company too: In an internal open letter, Facebook employees called on executives to denounce “anti-Muslim bigotry” and do more to ensure hate speech rules are applied consistently across the platform, Reuters reported. The letter alleges that there are no Muslim employees on the India policy team; in response to questions from TIME, Facebook said it was legally prohibited from collecting such data.

Facebook friends in high places

While it is common for companies to hire lobbyists with connections to political parties, activists say the history of staff on Facebook’s India policy team, as well as their incentive to keep the government happy, creates a conflict of interest when it comes to policing hate speech by politicians. Before joining Facebook, Thukral had worked in the past on behalf of the BJP. Despite this, he was involved in making decisions about how to deal with politicians’ posts that moderators flagged as violations of hate speech rules during the 2019 elections, the former employees tell TIME. His Facebook likes include a page called “I Support Narendra Modi.”

Former Facebook employees tell TIME they believe a key reason Thukral was hired in 2017 was because he was seen as close to the ruling party. In 2013, during the BJP’s eventually successful campaign to win national power at the 2014 elections, Thukral worked with senior party officials to help run a pro-BJP website and Facebook page. The site, called Mera Bharosa (“My Trust” in Hindi) also hosted events, including a project aimed at getting students to sign up to vote, according to interviews with people involved and documents seen by TIME. A student who volunteered for a Mera Bharosa project told TIME he had no idea it was an operation run in coordination with the BJP, and that he believed he was working for a non-partisan voter registration campaign. According to the documents, this was a calculated strategy to hide the true intent of the organization. By early 2014, the site changed its name to “Modi Bharosa” (meaning “Modi Trust”) and began sharing more overtly pro-BJP content. It is not clear whether Thukral was still working with the site at that time.

In a statement to TIME, Facebook acknowledged Thukral had worked on behalf of Mera Bharosa, but denied his past work presented a conflict of interest because multiple people are involved in significant decisions about removing content. “We are aware that some of our employees have supported various campaigns in the past both in India and elsewhere in the world,” Facebook said as part of a statement issued to TIME in response to a detailed series of questions. “Our understanding is that Shivnath’s volunteering at the time focused on the themes of governance within India and are not related to the content questions you have raised.”

Now, Thukral has an even bigger job. In March 2020, he was promoted from his job at Facebook to become WhatsApp’s India public policy director. In the role, New Delhi tech policy experts tell TIME, one of Thukral’s key responsibilities is managing the company’s relationship with the Modi government. It’s a crucial job, because Facebook is trying to turn the messaging app into a digital payments processor — a lucrative idea potentially worth billions of dollars.

In April, Facebook announced it would pay $5.7 billion for a 10% stake in Reliance Jio, India’s biggest telecoms company, which is owned by India’s richest man, Mukesh Ambani. On a call with investors in May, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg spoke enthusiastically about the business opportunity. “With so many people in India engaging through WhatsApp, we just think this is going to be a huge opportunity for us to provide a better commerce experience for people, to help small businesses and the economy there, and to build a really big business ourselves over time,” he said, talking about plans to link WhatsApp Pay with Jio’s vast network of small businesses across India. “That’s why I think it really makes sense for us to invest deeply in India.”

Read more: How Whatsapp Is Fueling Fake News Ahead of India’s Elections

But WhatsApp’s future as a payments application in India depends on final approval from the national payments regulator, which is still pending. Facebook’s hopes for expansion in India have been quashed by a national regulator before, in 2016, when the country’s telecoms watchdog said Free Basics, Facebook’s plan to provide free Internet access for only some sites, including its own, violated net neutrality rules. One of Thukral’s priorities in his new role is ensuring that a similar problem doesn’t strike down Facebook’s big ambitions for WhatsApp Pay.

‘No foreign company in India wants to be in the government’s bad books’

While the regulator is technically independent, analysts say that Facebook’s new relationship with the wealthiest man in India will likely make it much easier to gain approval for WhatsApp Pay. “It would be easier now for Facebook to get that approval, with Ambani on its side,” says Neil Shah, vice president of Counterpoint Research, an industry analysis firm. And goodwill from the government itself is important too, analysts say. “No foreign company in India wants to be in the government’s bad books,” says James Crabtree, author of The Billionaire Raj. “Facebook would very much like to have good relations with the government of India and is likely to think twice about doing things that will antagonize them.”

The Indian government has shown before it is not afraid to squash the dreams of foreign tech firms. In July, after a geopolitical spat with China, it banned dozens of Chinese apps including TikTok and WeChat. “There has been a creeping move toward a kind of digital protectionism in India,” Crabtree says. “So in the back of Facebook’s mind is the fact that the government could easily turn against foreign tech companies in general, and Facebook in particular, especially if they’re seen to be singling out major politicians.”

With hundreds of millions of users already in India, and hundreds of millions more who don’t have smartphones yet but might in the near future, Facebook has an incentive to avoid that possibility. “Facebook has said in the past that it has no business interest in allowing hate speech on its platform,” says Chinmayi Arun, a resident fellow at Yale Law School, who studies the regulation of tech platforms. “It’s evident from what’s going on in India that this is not entirely true.”

Facebook says it is working hard to combat hate speech. “We want to make it clear that we denounce hate in any form,” said Mohan, Facebook’s managing director in India, in his Aug. 21 blog post. “We have removed and will continue to remove content posted by public figures in India when it violates our Community Standards.”

But scrubbing hate speech remains a daunting challenge for Facebook. At an employee meeting in June, Zuckerberg highlighted Mishra’s February speech ahead of the Delhi riots, without naming him, as a clear example of a post that should be removed. The original video of Mishra’s speech was taken down shortly after it was uploaded. But another version of the video, with more than 5,600 views and a long list of supportive comments underneath, remained online for six months until TIME flagged it to Facebook in August.

[fightersagainstnarccistic]

The Deal with Kat Fanning President of HEMA Alliance

As said in the article about Jason these HEMAA officers play the victim whenever they get called out for their abuses of power and cannot handle criticism of their bad conduct. Here is Kat Fanning complaining about how her being mentioned as one of the narcissistic abusers in HEMA ( https://fightersagainstnarccistic.tumblr.com/post/624699657862381568/additional-narcissistic-abusers-who-assist ) is ‘harassment’.

Nothing is unfair though. She is a supporter of the radical political page Swords against Fascism which has posted hateful and divisive comments about police officers, and we proved this toward the end of the following article with screenshots,

https://fightersagainstnarccistic.tumblr.com/post/624699667915128832/in-conclusion

A page that uses the tragic death of a man as a prop for their own virtue signaling bullshit and to justify harassing and discrimination against law enforcement in HEMA who had nothing to do with it,

A page that has claimed to have participated in the violence and looting that took place in Minneapolis,

This is a page that Kat endorses and follows as we showed in the first screenshot, even if she has now hidden her profile so that it is difficult to see what it she endorses and follows. 

Kat is just upset that she has been called out for it and refuses to accept responsibility for her own poor judgement.  Instead she wants to pretend to be a victim. But she is not. She is president of HEMAA, a position of great influence and power and privilege and she has abused it for her own unrelated agendas, just like all these other people have we have called out.

These little self-described crusaders seek to gain positions of power and influence over other organizations, using structures created by others and twist them toward their own agendas. This follows the script for a strategy developed by communists to de-stabilize democratic countries, called ‘the long march through the Institutions”. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_long_march_through_the_institutions

Kat is one of these people. It’s been fairly obvious from the beginning.

Her entire platform for running for President of the HEMAA was that she was going to clean it up, as if it was problematic before her tier. 

The HEMAA main service is providing insurance policies to clubs using a structure that in our opinion is actually very bad for the schools. Without spending too much time on this subject because it is distracting, it’s pretty absurd to setup a nonprofit where all the clubs must be charter org of a nonprofit (one that is not even incorporated under the correct class of nonprofit for operating recreational athletics clubs. but that is another thing entirely.....there is much incompetence in the HEMAA and they dismiss the criticism because they dont care about being better, they only care about CONTROL).

Because members rely on HEMAA for insurance for clubs and for events, they have immense amounts of control. They also by extension have that influence over vendors, as well and then naturally it is their club finder page many people use to find clubs. While there are other club lists local to countries, if you are based in the USA then the HEMAA page is the main way people can discover your club. 

So what has Kat done with all of this power at her disposal? It hasn’t been to do any PR for HEMA, to promote or anything. All she and her cronies have focused on is how to kick people they do not like out of the group, and used similar fear tactics Valkyrie does for their own cult. In fact many of the people she is associated with are the same individuals Valkyrie is, as all of these screenshots we posted have demonstrated.

At the end of the day they are all part of the same cabal of narcissistic abusers, bullying and harassing other people instead of getting treatment for their personal problems. 

Kat wrote this post back in June that tells you how she really feels about politics in HEMA and what she actually endorses.

Also notice how in this original post she says “my HEMA community”, a very possessive framing of her statement to the HEMAA. “My HEMA community”. That really gives you insight into how she views herself and the community, doesn’t it?

(by the way here is the part we posted before, where Scarlett -- one of Valkyrie’s harassers of Duello -- talks shit about Richard Marsden)

And this last bit is really revealing on how Kat views herself as a moral crusader,

She is ‘coming for the information professions orgs next’, after she feels she has gotten enough internet points from creating division in HEMAA. 

Kat is no better than any of these other narcissistic abusers. She does a better job of hiding her public postings that show she has the same leanings they do but still, she makes mistakes every now and then.

She is one of these long marchers of the institutions, and her only objective in HEMAA is to follow the script and abuse her position to make it toward her political leanings, which are both very militant, extremely violent and radical. Again, she follows the Swords against Fascism page and her appointed officers endorse these idealogies.

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

Now that you’ve seen what has been going on in her circle of people (the same ones commenting on this post she made, we point out) , it really puts her public statements into more clear context, doesn’t it?  

Kat posted this back in June for what can only assume is to gain virtue signaling points. It just justifies kicking people out of HEMAA while falsely claiming people should not give in to mob justice. That’s just hilarious. All of her officers participate in online mob justice and she herself likes and follows the Swords against Fascism page!

Kat is also in our opinion abusing her influence to promote a completely unrelated website (Tradition of the ancients, TOTA) which we can only assume has been created by her librarian friends, trying to get them a userbase from the HEMA community even though their website is both poorly designed and has nothing expressly to do with HEMA. It’s a a bad Facebook competitor with elements of Wikipedia, and it’s totally absurd to be promoting it while not working on the HEMAA site itself. 

Ironically this announcement from Mach 26, which was about 7 months ago, claimed Kat, as an information specialist / librarian who is an expert at this, and is organizing the resources on the HEMAA site better, but the site has had barely any improvements all year. 

See for yourself how “slowly” she has done absolutely nothing she claimed she was going to do. 

https://www.hemaalliance.com/resource-library

This isn’t the first time they have talked about not making the resource page; it was one of the first meetings Kat held way back in October of LAST year.

That is what you get with Kat as president of an important HEMA org. 

Empty promises and bullshitting, while she instead promotes people like Clara Smith to officer positions in HEMAA who post hate speech and endorse fringe militant violent movements like antifa, 

Clara calling all police “nazis”, even though many law enforcement members are good people and involved in HEMAA clubs. 

And here is some notable HEMAA people liking the post.

Michael Chidester director for Wiktenauer (which is owned and funded by HEMAA) and Rebeca Glass, a HEMAA officer.

Here is another Swords against fascists post which Clara likes a lot.

Clara and them of course will never be punished for posting and endorsing hate speech against police officers, and all other bullshit these people engaged in that are clear violations of HEMAA policies Clara, Rebecca and Kat participated in drafting and implementing. This is because they created these policies to justify their harassment of OTHER PEOPLE, not so they could be held to the same standards themselves.  

Here is Kat in HEMA Council forum telling people who were banned for disagreeing with the “HEMA benefits from racism” post that they “broke the rules” and presents a very black and white viewpoint on the issue, yet she obviously is just speaking carefully worded bullshit to frame herself as being objective when in reality she is completely bias and has never punished any of her officers for violating the rules, which tells you everything you need to know about her.

What she claims and what she permits, are two different things. 

(as a side note we’ll be posting all the comments we archived from the “HEMA benefits from racism” video and posting, in a future post here so you can see for yourselves what people got banned for)

Kat is preoccupied with other bullshit than her duties to the HEMA membership. Our opinion is she is mostly encouraging bullying and harassment while protecting her friends that engage in this, and they label themselves as victims whenever called out on their abusive behavior, as she has recently done in response to this blog. 

Yet they are the ones making HEMA unsafe and divisive, and are being exposed for what they engage in doing and how they make it divisive and unsafe. How they break their own rules and should not have the positions they possess as a result. 

Meanwhile HEMAA under her reign as president has become a very divided organization unnecessarily involving itself in political movements that risks its nonprofit status for violations of its charter, in addition to doing basically almost nothing to advocate for and promote HEMA, which is really what the organization is for. 

Kat will never enforce the “safe space” policy she and her cronies created in an objective way, always making exceptions for themselves. And she will also never condemn the promotion of illegal activity by the antifa liberation gym people, including her friends Tanya and Clara who promote such things, and in the case of Clara is an HEMAA officer Kat promoted to the position.

Tanya, who openly posts hatred right below the HEMAA organization logo, which she and her club is a member of.

http://roguefencing.com/

“Proudly against fascism and white supremacy. This means no cops. We’re a club and free to associate how we want. Go somewhere else or die mad. Liberation starts here.”

Rogue Fencing is part of HEMAA so these are by extension HEMAA statements now, and it’s in violation of HEMAA bylaws and policies. 

Yet she will never be punished for this radical, political and hateful behavior. This is because Kat ran for election in bad faith, never intending to make HEMA better. She is only interested in gaining power and control to twist it into a platform to serve her personal agendas and those of her sycophants, even if it brings harm to others and hurts the public image of HEMA. 

Funny enough Kat declared several months ago she was not going to run for President but guess again, she decided she wants to keep gripping onto power and is running again. To the surprise of nobody. Just as nobody should be surprised that they recently changed rules so that officers are elected for two years instead of one. 

Kat will of course probably “win” the election because the corrupt HEMAA leaders that counts the votes is the ones who declare the outcome of it. When if they really were not corrupt the directors would remove the governing council for abusing their positions with the stuff we have demonstrated. 

The HEMAA organization is beyond hope in our opinion, because the directors will never remove the governing council cuz most of them are big endorsers of what these people do, and the officers are all abusive people writing policies to justify their harassment. That is why no one is held accountable and removed even when there is evidence for their transgressions. 

The reality of things is that people like Kat do not give two shits about HEMA community as a whole. That is why they do basically nothing that you would expect them to do as officers of the org, and something as simple as making a resource section of their website is an impossible task that doesn’t even get accomplished in a year. 

They are instead entirely focused on developing ways to shun and harass people. That is about all they have done this entire year. That is what they are focusing all their energy on doing. 

The only thing Kat has achieved is make HEMA more divisive and toxic through the “inclusion” of toxic and divisive people into positions of power and influence.

Also the HEMAA likes to claim they hold “elections” for positions but the reality is that candidates run unopposed so they aren’t really elections at all. They are appointments.  

These narcissistic abusers only care about themselves and what they can get from the HEMA community, and for whatever reason what they care about most is getting internet points for virtue signaling at the expense of others’ whose lives they try to ruin with bullying and false accusations. Again they are supporters of Valkyrie, and promoters of their crusades against Duello despite no evidence for the accusations and Duello having actually paid for an independent investigation into the accusations YEARS ago. 

[lineatura]

Issue #7: Simon James Phillips

** **

Peter Koval: You are currently working on a quiet piece, using silence as the main material. As a composer, where do you think we can find silence?

Simon James Phillips: I don’t think you’ll find silence unless you’re dead. Though we can try to get close to it, it seems that the closer we are, the less likely we are able to grasp it. I have been thinking a lot about poetry in recent weeks. For me, the strongest poetry always avoids saying the specific thing. This is a sort of silence in my opinion.

PK: How did you become a pianist?

SJP: We had a piano at home when I was a child. It arrived when I was about four and I started lessons when I was about six. I hated the practicing, but the piano became part of my everyday life. I used to play it whenever something was on my mind. If I was really upset or elated, I just played the piano. I’ve never really practiced but I was talented enough to get through.

When I finished the school, I considered studying law. I wanted to become a human rights lawyer and do something for the world. But the more I thought about it, the more it became clear to me that the law is probably the worst thing I can do because it’s based on imposition. And the best thing I can do is to find some way to excite others, to spark the activity of the individual, to get people thinking and arouse curiosity about the world. This is something you can’t really do by any didactic. You have to do it through an invitation. And art is a way to do it. Actually, I wanted to study composition but I didn’t have a portfolio, so I had to apply as a pianist. I was accepted and quickly became successful as a pianist. For about ten years, I focused mainly on playing piano and interpretation – which was a kind of detour – but then I decided to swap to a more creative form of music making, as opposed to an interpretative one, and that’s why I am here.

PK: Your music embraces improvisation. What would you tell to your son about the relationship between systematic practice and improvisation?

SJP: I taught piano for a long time, but all the teaching that I've had was part of a didactic focusing more on technique. That didactic doesn’t really work for me. First I need to feel motivation to do something and then I can find my own way or to ask somebody how to do it. I believe that this fundamental interest cannot be imposed on us by someone else. It doesn’t really motivate. So I’m a little bit nervous about how to tell my son anything. Hopefully he will ask me and then I can make a suggestion. If he really wants to know something about music I would just follow his lead.

When I have an idea, I do quite a lot research into it. But the interesting thing about improvisation – with any kind of improvisation – is that if you have too much knowledge, then you will very likely get stuck with the things you know. That’s probably the reason why, when I’m really working, I try not to listen too much. I’m not going to concerts. I need to read books, I need to look at pictures, or I need to go for a walk. Because otherwise the influence is just too big. It’s like too much traffic. It’s the nature of knowing, I guess. When you know something – whether it’s a concept or something else – once you say you know it then there is no motivation to look for another alternative. Because you know it. If I know the coffee cup is in the kitchen, I’m not going to look for the coffee cup anymore. The knowing stops me. Just think of a murder mystery. If you don’t know who the murderer is you can’t stop reading the book. But as soon as you know it, you realize that you spent last three weeks reading a crap murder mystery. The not knowing is something that I really like. I feel like my eyes open a little bit wider when I don’t know.

PK: How do you write music?

SJP: Visual notation really works well for me. I usually start with mapping out ideas, sketching time and spatial structures and then I try to notate. The second part is really tricky. For example, in one piece I am working on, I want the musicians to get involved, so I have to give them some idea of what action to take. But if I put too much information in the score, they won’t really get involved and if I don’t give them enough information, they don’t know what to do. It’s always a challenge and it takes a lot of time to figure out the adequate notation. Also, I always want to understand the instrument I’m writing for. I’m very intimate with the piano – I can do almost anything with the piano – but at the moment, I’m writing a double bass piece so I’m playing double bass a lot to understand the details of its various techniques.

Photo: Simon James Phillips explaining one of his notations.

** **

PK: One online music store labels your music as “classical avant-garde”. Is there a better description of your music?

SJP: I just met a curator who said that the music I’m doing is what she would call ‘immersive music’. I’ve never thought about it, but from her definition, it’s something I have been interested in for the last five years or so. However, I really don’t like to put music into boxes. People should come to the concerts and deal with what they experience there, rather than letting the names of specific genres prescribe their ways of approaching the music.

PK: How do you explore music?

SJP: Something will just catch my ear. If I really like it, then I might find out more about who made the music and explore other stuff. I also often get inspiration from other art forms. If I encounter an interesting idea, I use music or sound as my medium to explore it, so I kind of try to transcribe the concept or idea into sound.

PK: Your music deserves a certain mode of attention in order to be enjoyed. It produces a very intensive, even contemplative atmosphere. It’s quite impressive to see you performing live. You are very present – but at the same time you disappear. How do you balance self-expression and absorption by the immediate sensual experience?

SJP: It’s complicated. Actually, I was discussing this recently with a friend of mine who is a visual artist. He brought up this quote by Philip Guston; something like "when you are in the studio, you have with you all the curators, agents, audience and critics. But if you really start painting, not only do they walk out, but also you yourself have to leave, so something like art can happen.” This refers, in some ways, more to the nature of visual art, which is unique, and my experience with music which isn't exactly the same. However, my aim is not to express something concrete to the audience but rather evoke or to provide the space for them to think. It’s more about creating a realistic sense of atmosphere, realistic in sense of time. I’m also not trying to push people in one direction. I like when people can drift off and have more room to have their own experience. I play the kind of music I would like to experience as an audience member.

I like that you said that I disappear because I don’t really want my personality being linked to this process. It’s not an arrogance. You can just simply leave me out of it. I don’t have to be there. I feel a sort of separation between the music and myself. When I’m playing, sometimes it’s like I have to wait for something to happen. If I am patient and wait long enough, something happens or develops. If I push or try to hard then it mostly just doesn’t work. When I'm playing some patterns and suddenly something changes, for example, I may play a note a little bit earlier, then I allow myself to go with it. I allow it to happen. It’s not magic, but there is a sense of me not being completely in control. There are definitely times when I think my hands are crazy and kind of doing their own thing.

PK: When I listen to your music, I have the impression that the difference and repetition are somehow central elements of your acoustic world. It repeats and shifts. Actually it’s similar to ruling: The patterns lead you somewhere but they aren’t really strict about the direction, rather,  they open imaginary but also real spaces.

SJP: I think it’s quite hard to be at my concert and remain completely aware of everything that I’m doing. You get lost. Your mind wanders sometimes and the sense of time changes somehow. It can move from boring and monotonous into a sort of super attentive awareness of detail. It reminds me of Tarkowski. Some shots in his films last for such a long time. Compare them to most films today in which the editing drives you along, you don’t really have time to reflect, you just keep up with the narrative, keep up with whatever is going on. It’s almost fascist. The idea of giving enough space for the audience to reflect is very important – enough space to allow one to see and enjoy detail.

PK: What about the indirect presence of the overtone?

SJP: That’s something I accidentally found out about. Of course, people were doing overtone music before, but I'd never experienced it by myself nor heard it until after my record was released. One day I realized that I can manipulate these overtones just by the way I voice things. I play some notes louder and some softer – and shift that around. I’m playing the same sequence of notes but changing the colour. The particular acoustic of the venue also plays a role, the way the sound is bounced around the room – it feels kind of independant to what I'm doing at the piano. My solo album Chair was recorded in a Berlin church with a lot of resonance. I did a similar brass piece. In the end you can’t distinguish where the sound is coming from and what the sound is. I like it. Again, it’s part of the not-knowing. And the other thing is that you can’t completely control the overtones, the nature of the sound waves circulating around the space means that sometimes tones are cancelled out and at other times sounds are made more prominent. The overtones are a little bit indeterminant. Which I like.

PK: What is the source of your inspiration?

SJP: Loneliness. I don’t mean necessarily my own loneliness, but loneliness in general. The unavoidable condition of being lonely.

PK: What was your most beautiful detour?

SJP: Probably my son. Fatherhood felt like a detour but now it isn’t anymore. He’s the road.

PK: What about Berlin? Do you have a favourite spot at the moment?

SJP: This cemetery. [Pointing to the Dreifaltigkeitsfriedhof at Bergmannstrasse. Ed.] It sounds really beautiful. You’re in the middle of the city but you hear only a little bit of traffic in the background. It’s very quiet there. There are a lot of birds and squirrels, and you have all the different trees there – each tree sounds differently in the wind. That’s my favourite spot at the moment.

Credits Interview: Peter Koval English editor: Elle Peril Photos: Peter Koval & Simon James Phillips Published with a generous support from ROOM40.

Did you know that you can support Lineatura Magazine by buying the very original Lineatura notebooks? Get the same notebooks that all our interviewees use for their creative ideas and read more inspiring interviews in the future!

[chacusha]

Getting involved in activism

For the past few months, I’ve been involved in a group donating tech skills to activists. Full story here (friends-locked): http://chacusha.dreamwidth.org/156247.html http://chacusha.livejournal.com/158962.html

Brief version: If you're thinking like, "Okay, I wish I could do more than e.g. calling my reps to voice an opinion on a position. Surely people are doing more organized collective action / there is a social group for doing these kinds of things in a sustained way??", that is understandable, and the answer is yes.

If you want to form a Tea Party-style group to pressure one's representatives into obstructing Trump, Indivisible is where you want to start and find a local chapter you can meet up with. But that's just the beginning. There are so many orgs doing work to resist Trump's agenda and push for progressive change at the local level and wherever else possible.

Whether you’re interested in:

Fighting racism

Climate change

Supporting refugees

Supporting immigrants

LGBTQ rights

Civil liberties

Criminal justice reform

Helping labor unions

Voting rights

Supporting free media

Public education

Access to healthcare

Affordable housing

Reproductive rights

Political organization

...there's a group working on it. I have a doc listing tons of activist organizations in my city, which might provide some inspiration - message me if you want a link. Some tips:

Show up with a buddy. Participating in these things for the first time is awkward, and it can really help to have someone to defuse that awkwardness and be a conversation buddy when there's a lull in activity.

A lot of activism happens when people Just Show Up. If you're intimidated about getting involved, Just Show Up. You don't have to sign up to do anything, you don't have to make a commitment to joining an organization or showing up every meeting or doing something new for the first time. Just show up and learn what the organization's got going on.

A lot of people want to use/donate their talents to an organization. That's great. A lot of organizations will find a way to put those skills to use. As one organizer said in a meeting I went to, "Some people are good at writing. We could use people who write quickly. You like kids? We provide childcare at our meetings, and we need volunteers for that! Whatever you can contribute, we will find a use for those skills." It's often not clear what skill sets organizations can actually make use of, but some brainstorming will often turn something up (but like I said, you can also contribute a lot just by being present.)

Finally, given the recent DNC chair vote, I would like to recommend people who want to get involved in leftist politics consider joining the DSA.

[itsfinancethings]

New world news from Time: Facebook’s Ties to India’s Ruling Party Complicate Its Fight Against Hate Speech

In July 2019, Alaphia Zoyab was on a video call with Facebook employees in India, discussing some 180 posts by users in the country that Avaaz, the watchdog group where she worked, said violated Facebook’s hate speech rules. But half way through the hour-long meeting, Shivnath Thukral, the most senior Facebook official on the call, got up and walked out of the room, Zoyab says, saying he had other important things to do.

Among the posts was one by Shiladitya Dev, a lawmaker in the state of Assam for Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). He had shared a news report about a girl being allegedly drugged and raped by a Muslim man, and added his own comment: “This is how Bangladeshi Muslims target our [native people] in 2019.” But rather than removing it, Facebook allowed the post to remain online for more than a year after the meeting, until TIME contacted Facebook to ask about it on Aug. 21. “We looked into this when Avaaz first flagged it to us, and our records show that we assessed it as a hate speech violation,” Facebook said in a statement to TIME. “We failed to remove upon initial review, which was a mistake on our part.”

Thukral was Facebook’s public policy director for India and South Asia at the time. Part of his job was lobbying the Indian government, but he was also involved in discussions about how to act when posts by politicians were flagged as hate speech by moderators, former employees tell TIME. Facebook acknowledges that Thukral left the meeting, but says he never intended to stay for its entirety, and joined only to introduce Zoyab, whom he knew from a past job, to his team. “Shivnath did not leave because the issues were not important,” Facebook said in the statement, noting that the company took action on 70 of the 180 posts presented during the meeting.

Eric Miller—World Economic ForumShivnath Thukral at the Moving to Better Ground session during the India Economic Summit in Mumbai, November, 2011.

The social media giant is under increasing scrutiny for how it enforces its hate speech policies when the accused are members of Modi’s ruling party. Activists say some Facebook policy officials are too close to the BJP, and accuse the company of putting its relationship with the government ahead of its stated mission of removing hate speech from its platform—especially when ruling-party politicians are involved. Thukral, for instance, worked with party leadership to assist in the BJP’s 2014 election campaign, according to documents TIME has seen.

Facebook’s managing director for India, Ajit Mohan, denied suggestions that the company had displayed bias toward the BJP in an Aug. 21 blog post titled, “We are open, transparent and non-partisan.” He wrote: “Despite hailing from diverse political affiliations and backgrounds, [our employees] perform their respective duties and interpret our policies in a fair and non-partisan way. The decisions around content escalations are not made unilaterally by just one person; rather, they are inclusive of views from different teams and disciplines within the company.”

Facebook published the blog post after the Wall Street Journal, citing current and former Facebook employees, reported on Aug.14 that the company’s top policy official in India, Ankhi Das, pushed back against other Facebook employees who wanted to label a BJP politician a “dangerous individual” and ban him from the platform after he called for Muslim immigrants to be shot. Das argued that punishing the state lawmaker, T. Raja Singh, would hurt Facebook’s business prospects in India, the Journal reported. (Facebook said Das’s intervention was not the sole reason Singh was not banned, and that it was still deciding if a ban was necessary.)

Read more: Can the World’s Largest Democracy Endure Another Five Years of a Modi Government?

Those business prospects are sizeable. India is Facebook’s largest market, with 328 million using the social media platform. Some 400 million Indians also use Facebook’s messaging service WhatsApp — a substantial chunk of the country’s estimated 503 million internet users. The platforms have become increasingly important in Indian politics; after the 2014 elections, Das published an op-ed arguing that Modi had won because of the way he leveraged Facebook in his campaign.

But Facebook and WhatsApp have also been used to spread hate speech and misinformation that have been blamed for helping to incite deadly attacks on minority groups amid rising communal tensions across India—despite the company’s efforts to crack down. In February, a video of a speech by BJP politician Kapil Mishra was uploaded to Facebook, in which he told police that unless they removed mostly-Muslim protesters occupying a road in Delhi, his supporters would do it themselves. Violent riots erupted within hours. (In that case, Facebook determined the video violated its rules on incitement to violence and removed it.)

WhatsApp, too, has been used with deadly intent in India — for example by cow vigilantes, Hindu mobs that have attacked Muslims and Dalits accused of killing cows, an animal sacred in Hinduism. At least 44 people, most of them Muslims, were killed by cow vigilantes between May 2015 and December 2018, according to Human Rights Watch. Many cow vigilante murders happen after rumors spread on WhatsApp, and videos of lynchings and beatings are often shared via the app too.

Read more: How the Pandemic is Reshaping India

TIME has learned that Facebook, in an effort to evaluate its role in spreading hate speech and incitements to violence, has commissioned an independent report on its impact on human rights in India. Work on the India audit, previously unreported, began before the Journal published its story. It is being conducted by the U.S. law firm Foley Hoag and will include interviews with senior Facebook staff and members of civil society in India, according to three people with knowledge of the matter and an email seen by TIME. (A similar report on Myanmar, released in 2018, detailed Facebook’s failings on hate speech that contributed to the Rohingya genocide there the previous year.) Facebook declined to confirm the report.

But activists, who have spent years monitoring and reporting hate speech by Hindu nationalists, tell TIME that they believe Facebook has been reluctant to police posts by members and supporters of the BJP because it doesn’t want to pick fights with the government that controls its largest market. The way the company is structured exacerbates the problem, analysts and former employees say, because the same people responsible for managing the relationship with the government also contribute to decisions on whether politicians should be punished for hate speech.

“A core problem at Facebook is that one policy org is responsible for both the rules of the platform and keeping governments happy,” Alex Stamos, Facebook’s former chief security officer, tweeted in May. “Local policy heads are generally pulled from the ruling political party and are rarely drawn from disadvantaged ethnic groups, religious creeds or castes. This naturally bends decision-making towards the powerful.”

Some activists have grown so frustrated with the Facebook India policy team that they’ve begun to bypass it entirely in reporting hate speech. Following the call when Thukral walked out, Avaaz decided to begin reporting hate speech directly to Facebook’s company headquarters in Menlo Park, Calif. “We found Facebook India’s attitude utterly flippant, callous, uninterested,” says Zoyab, who has since left Avaaz. Another group that regularly reports hate speech against minorities on Facebook in India, which asked not to be named out of fear for the safety of its staffers, said it has been doing the same since 2018. In a statement, Facebook acknowledged some groups that regularly flag hate speech in India are in contact with Facebook headquarters, but said that did not change the criteria by which posts were judged to be against its rules.

Read more: Facebook Says It’s Removing More Hate Speech Than Ever Before. But There’s a Catch

The revelations in the Journal set off a political scandal in India, with opposition politicians calling for Facebook to be officially investigated for alleged favoritism toward Modi’s party. And the news caused strife within the company too: In an internal open letter, Facebook employees called on executives to denounce “anti-Muslim bigotry” and do more to ensure hate speech rules are applied consistently across the platform, Reuters reported. The letter alleges that there are no Muslim employees on the India policy team; in response to questions from TIME, Facebook said it was legally prohibited from collecting such data.

Facebook friends in high places

While it is common for companies to hire lobbyists with connections to political parties, activists say the history of staff on Facebook’s India policy team, as well as their incentive to keep the government happy, creates a conflict of interest when it comes to policing hate speech by politicians. Before joining Facebook, Thukral had worked in the past on behalf of the BJP. Despite this, he was involved in making decisions about how to deal with politicians’ posts that moderators flagged as violations of hate speech rules during the 2019 elections, the former employees tell TIME. His Facebook likes include a page called “I Support Narendra Modi.”

Former Facebook employees tell TIME they believe a key reason Thukral was hired in 2017 was because he was seen as close to the ruling party. In 2013, during the BJP’s eventually successful campaign to win national power at the 2014 elections, Thukral worked with senior party officials to help run a pro-BJP website and Facebook page. The site, called Mera Bharosa (“My Trust” in Hindi) also hosted events, including a project aimed at getting students to sign up to vote, according to interviews with people involved and documents seen by TIME. A student who volunteered for a Mera Bharosa project told TIME he had no idea it was an operation run in coordination with the BJP, and that he believed he was working for a non-partisan voter registration campaign. According to the documents, this was a calculated strategy to hide the true intent of the organization. By early 2014, the site changed its name to “Modi Bharosa” (meaning “Modi Trust”) and began sharing more overtly pro-BJP content. It is not clear whether Thukral was still working with the site at that time.

In a statement to TIME, Facebook acknowledged Thukral had worked on behalf of Mera Bharosa, but denied his past work presented a conflict of interest because multiple people are involved in significant decisions about removing content. “We are aware that some of our employees have supported various campaigns in the past both in India and elsewhere in the world,” Facebook said as part of a statement issued to TIME in response to a detailed series of questions. “Our understanding is that Shivnath’s volunteering at the time focused on the themes of governance within India and are not related to the content questions you have raised.”

Now, Thukral has an even bigger job. In March 2020, he was promoted from his job at Facebook to become WhatsApp’s India public policy director. In the role, New Delhi tech policy experts tell TIME, one of Thukral’s key responsibilities is managing the company’s relationship with the Modi government. It’s a crucial job, because Facebook is trying to turn the messaging app into a digital payments processor — a lucrative idea potentially worth billions of dollars.

In April, Facebook announced it would pay $5.7 billion for a 10% stake in Reliance Jio, India’s biggest telecoms company, which is owned by India’s richest man, Mukesh Ambani. On a call with investors in May, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg spoke enthusiastically about the business opportunity. “With so many people in India engaging through WhatsApp, we just think this is going to be a huge opportunity for us to provide a better commerce experience for people, to help small businesses and the economy there, and to build a really big business ourselves over time,” he said, talking about plans to link WhatsApp Pay with Jio’s vast network of small businesses across India. “That’s why I think it really makes sense for us to invest deeply in India.”

Read more: How Whatsapp Is Fueling Fake News Ahead of India’s Elections

But WhatsApp’s future as a payments application in India depends on final approval from the national payments regulator, which is still pending. Facebook’s hopes for expansion in India have been quashed by a national regulator before, in 2016, when the country’s telecoms watchdog said Free Basics, Facebook’s plan to provide free Internet access for only some sites, including its own, violated net neutrality rules. One of Thukral’s priorities in his new role is ensuring that a similar problem doesn’t strike down Facebook’s big ambitions for WhatsApp Pay.

‘No foreign company in India wants to be in the government’s bad books’

While the regulator is technically independent, analysts say that Facebook’s new relationship with the wealthiest man in India will likely make it much easier to gain approval for WhatsApp Pay. “It would be easier now for Facebook to get that approval, with Ambani on its side,” says Neil Shah, vice president of Counterpoint Research, an industry analysis firm. And goodwill from the government itself is important too, analysts say. “No foreign company in India wants to be in the government’s bad books,” says James Crabtree, author of The Billionaire Raj. “Facebook would very much like to have good relations with the government of India and is likely to think twice about doing things that will antagonize them.”

The Indian government has shown before it is not afraid to squash the dreams of foreign tech firms. In July, after a geopolitical spat with China, it banned dozens of Chinese apps including TikTok and WeChat. “There has been a creeping move toward a kind of digital protectionism in India,” Crabtree says. “So in the back of Facebook’s mind is the fact that the government could easily turn against foreign tech companies in general, and Facebook in particular, especially if they’re seen to be singling out major politicians.”

With hundreds of millions of users already in India, and hundreds of millions more who don’t have smartphones yet but might in the near future, Facebook has an incentive to avoid that possibility. “Facebook has said in the past that it has no business interest in allowing hate speech on its platform,” says Chinmayi Arun, a resident fellow at Yale Law School, who studies the regulation of tech platforms. “It’s evident from what’s going on in India that this is not entirely true.”

Facebook says it is working hard to combat hate speech. “We want to make it clear that we denounce hate in any form,” said Mohan, Facebook’s managing director in India, in his Aug. 21 blog post. “We have removed and will continue to remove content posted by public figures in India when it violates our Community Standards.”

But scrubbing hate speech remains a daunting challenge for Facebook. At an employee meeting in June, Zuckerberg highlighted Mishra’s February speech ahead of the Delhi riots, without naming him, as a clear example of a post that should be removed. The original video of Mishra’s speech was taken down shortly after it was uploaded. But another version of the video, with more than 5,600 views and a long list of supportive comments underneath, remained online for six months until TIME flagged it to Facebook in August.

from Blogger https://ift.tt/2YEtUyQ via IFTTT

[newstechreviews]

In July 2019, Alaphia Zoyab was on a video call with Facebook employees in India, discussing some 180 posts by users in the country that Avaaz, the watchdog group where she worked, said violated Facebook’s hate speech rules. But half way through the hour-long meeting, Shivnath Thukral, the most senior Facebook official on the call, got up and walked out of the room, Zoyab says, saying he had other important things to do.

Among the posts was one by Shiladitya Dev, a lawmaker in the state of Assam for Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). He had shared a news report about a girl being allegedly drugged and raped by a Muslim man, and added his own comment: “This is how Bangladeshi Muslims target our [native people] in 2019.” But rather than removing it, Facebook allowed the post to remain online for more than a year after the meeting, until TIME contacted Facebook to ask about it on Aug. 21. “We looked into this when Avaaz first flagged it to us, and our records show that we assessed it as a hate speech violation,” Facebook said in a statement to TIME. “We failed to remove upon initial review, which was a mistake on our part.”

Thukral was Facebook’s public policy director for India and South Asia at the time. Part of his job was lobbying the Indian government, but he was also involved in discussions about how to act when posts by politicians were flagged as hate speech by moderators, former employees tell TIME. Facebook acknowledges that Thukral left the meeting, but says he never intended to stay for its entirety, and joined only to introduce Zoyab, whom he knew from a past job, to his team. “Shivnath did not leave because the issues were not important,” Facebook said in the statement, noting that the company took action on 70 of the 180 posts presented during the meeting.

Eric Miller—World Economic ForumShivnath Thukral at the Moving to Better Ground session during the India Economic Summit in Mumbai, November, 2011.

The social media giant is under increasing scrutiny for how it enforces its hate speech policies when the accused are members of Modi’s ruling party. Activists say some Facebook policy officials are too close to the BJP, and accuse the company of putting its relationship with the government ahead of its stated mission of removing hate speech from its platform—especially when ruling-party politicians are involved. Thukral, for instance, worked with party leadership to assist in the BJP’s 2014 election campaign, according to documents TIME has seen.

Facebook’s managing director for India, Ajit Mohan, denied suggestions that the company had displayed bias toward the BJP in an Aug. 21 blog post titled, “We are open, transparent and non-partisan.” He wrote: “Despite hailing from diverse political affiliations and backgrounds, [our employees] perform their respective duties and interpret our policies in a fair and non-partisan way. The decisions around content escalations are not made unilaterally by just one person; rather, they are inclusive of views from different teams and disciplines within the company.”

Facebook published the blog post after the Wall Street Journal, citing current and former Facebook employees, reported on Aug.14 that the company’s top policy official in India, Ankhi Das, pushed back against other Facebook employees who wanted to label a BJP politician a “dangerous individual” and ban him from the platform after he called for Muslim immigrants to be shot. Das argued that punishing the state lawmaker, T. Raja Singh, would hurt Facebook’s business prospects in India, the Journal reported. (Facebook said Das’s intervention was not the sole reason Singh was not banned, and that it was still deciding if a ban was necessary.)

Read more: Can the World’s Largest Democracy Endure Another Five Years of a Modi Government?

Those business prospects are sizeable. India is Facebook’s largest market, with 328 million using the social media platform. Some 400 million Indians also use Facebook’s messaging service WhatsApp — a substantial chunk of the country’s estimated 503 million internet users. The platforms have become increasingly important in Indian politics; after the 2014 elections, Das published an op-ed arguing that Modi had won because of the way he leveraged Facebook in his campaign.

But Facebook and WhatsApp have also been used to spread hate speech and misinformation that have been blamed for helping to incite deadly attacks on minority groups amid rising communal tensions across India—despite the company’s efforts to crack down. In February, a video of a speech by BJP politician Kapil Mishra was uploaded to Facebook, in which he told police that unless they removed mostly-Muslim protesters occupying a road in Delhi, his supporters would do it themselves. Violent riots erupted within hours. (In that case, Facebook determined the video violated its rules on incitement to violence and removed it.)

WhatsApp, too, has been used with deadly intent in India — for example by cow vigilantes, Hindu mobs that have attacked Muslims and Dalits accused of killing cows, an animal sacred in Hinduism. At least 44 people, most of them Muslims, were killed by cow vigilantes between May 2015 and December 2018, according to Human Rights Watch. Many cow vigilante murders happen after rumors spread on WhatsApp, and videos of lynchings and beatings are often shared via the app too.

Read more: How the Pandemic is Reshaping India

TIME has learned that Facebook, in an effort to evaluate its role in spreading hate speech and incitements to violence, has commissioned an independent report on its impact on human rights in India. Work on the India audit, previously unreported, began before the Journal published its story. It is being conducted by the U.S. law firm Foley Hoag and will include interviews with senior Facebook staff and members of civil society in India, according to three people with knowledge of the matter and an email seen by TIME. (A similar report on Myanmar, released in 2018, detailed Facebook’s failings on hate speech that contributed to the Rohingya genocide there the previous year.) Facebook declined to confirm the report.

But activists, who have spent years monitoring and reporting hate speech by Hindu nationalists, tell TIME that they believe Facebook has been reluctant to police posts by members and supporters of the BJP because it doesn’t want to pick fights with the government that controls its largest market. The way the company is structured exacerbates the problem, analysts and former employees say, because the same people responsible for managing the relationship with the government also contribute to decisions on whether politicians should be punished for hate speech.

“A core problem at Facebook is that one policy org is responsible for both the rules of the platform and keeping governments happy,” Alex Stamos, Facebook’s former chief security officer, tweeted in May. “Local policy heads are generally pulled from the ruling political party and are rarely drawn from disadvantaged ethnic groups, religious creeds or castes. This naturally bends decision-making towards the powerful.”

Some activists have grown so frustrated with the Facebook India policy team that they’ve begun to bypass it entirely in reporting hate speech. Following the call when Thukral walked out, Avaaz decided to begin reporting hate speech directly to Facebook’s company headquarters in Menlo Park, Calif. “We found Facebook India’s attitude utterly flippant, callous, uninterested,” says Zoyab, who has since left Avaaz. Another group that regularly reports hate speech against minorities on Facebook in India, which asked not to be named out of fear for the safety of its staffers, said it has been doing the same since 2018. In a statement, Facebook acknowledged some groups that regularly flag hate speech in India are in contact with Facebook headquarters, but said that did not change the criteria by which posts were judged to be against its rules.

Read more: Facebook Says It’s Removing More Hate Speech Than Ever Before. But There’s a Catch

The revelations in the Journal set off a political scandal in India, with opposition politicians calling for Facebook to be officially investigated for alleged favoritism toward Modi’s party. And the news caused strife within the company too: In an internal open letter, Facebook employees called on executives to denounce “anti-Muslim bigotry” and do more to ensure hate speech rules are applied consistently across the platform, Reuters reported. The letter alleges that there are no Muslim employees on the India policy team; in response to questions from TIME, Facebook said it was legally prohibited from collecting such data.

Facebook friends in high places

While it is common for companies to hire lobbyists with connections to political parties, activists say the history of staff on Facebook’s India policy team, as well as their incentive to keep the government happy, creates a conflict of interest when it comes to policing hate speech by politicians. Before joining Facebook, Thukral had worked in the past on behalf of the BJP. Despite this, he was involved in making decisions about how to deal with politicians’ posts that moderators flagged as violations of hate speech rules during the 2019 elections, the former employees tell TIME. His Facebook likes include a page called “I Support Narendra Modi.”

Former Facebook employees tell TIME they believe a key reason Thukral was hired in 2017 was because he was seen as close to the ruling party. In 2013, during the BJP’s eventually successful campaign to win national power at the 2014 elections, Thukral worked with senior party officials to help run a pro-BJP website and Facebook page. The site, called Mera Bharosa (“My Trust” in Hindi) also hosted events, including a project aimed at getting students to sign up to vote, according to interviews with people involved and documents seen by TIME. A student who volunteered for a Mera Bharosa project told TIME he had no idea it was an operation run in coordination with the BJP, and that he believed he was working for a non-partisan voter registration campaign. According to the documents, this was a calculated strategy to hide the true intent of the organization. By early 2014, the site changed its name to “Modi Bharosa” (meaning “Modi Trust”) and began sharing more overtly pro-BJP content. It is not clear whether Thukral was still working with the site at that time.

In a statement to TIME, Facebook acknowledged Thukral had worked on behalf of Mera Bharosa, but denied his past work presented a conflict of interest because multiple people are involved in significant decisions about removing content. “We are aware that some of our employees have supported various campaigns in the past both in India and elsewhere in the world,” Facebook said as part of a statement issued to TIME in response to a detailed series of questions. “Our understanding is that Shivnath’s volunteering at the time focused on the themes of governance within India and are not related to the content questions you have raised.”

Now, Thukral has an even bigger job. In March 2020, he was promoted from his job at Facebook to become WhatsApp’s India public policy director. In the role, New Delhi tech policy experts tell TIME, one of Thukral’s key responsibilities is managing the company’s relationship with the Modi government. It’s a crucial job, because Facebook is trying to turn the messaging app into a digital payments processor — a lucrative idea potentially worth billions of dollars.

In April, Facebook announced it would pay $5.7 billion for a 10% stake in Reliance Jio, India’s biggest telecoms company, which is owned by India’s richest man, Mukesh Ambani. On a call with investors in May, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg spoke enthusiastically about the business opportunity. “With so many people in India engaging through WhatsApp, we just think this is going to be a huge opportunity for us to provide a better commerce experience for people, to help small businesses and the economy there, and to build a really big business ourselves over time,” he said, talking about plans to link WhatsApp Pay with Jio’s vast network of small businesses across India. “That’s why I think it really makes sense for us to invest deeply in India.”

Read more: How Whatsapp Is Fueling Fake News Ahead of India’s Elections

But WhatsApp’s future as a payments application in India depends on final approval from the national payments regulator, which is still pending. Facebook’s hopes for expansion in India have been quashed by a national regulator before, in 2016, when the country’s telecoms watchdog said Free Basics, Facebook’s plan to provide free Internet access for only some sites, including its own, violated net neutrality rules. One of Thukral’s priorities in his new role is ensuring that a similar problem doesn’t strike down Facebook’s big ambitions for WhatsApp Pay.

‘No foreign company in India wants to be in the government’s bad books’

While the regulator is technically independent, analysts say that Facebook’s new relationship with the wealthiest man in India will likely make it much easier to gain approval for WhatsApp Pay. “It would be easier now for Facebook to get that approval, with Ambani on its side,” says Neil Shah, vice president of Counterpoint Research, an industry analysis firm. And goodwill from the government itself is important too, analysts say. “No foreign company in India wants to be in the government’s bad books,” says James Crabtree, author of The Billionaire Raj. “Facebook would very much like to have good relations with the government of India and is likely to think twice about doing things that will antagonize them.”

The Indian government has shown before it is not afraid to squash the dreams of foreign tech firms. In July, after a geopolitical spat with China, it banned dozens of Chinese apps including TikTok and WeChat. “There has been a creeping move toward a kind of digital protectionism in India,” Crabtree says. “So in the back of Facebook’s mind is the fact that the government could easily turn against foreign tech companies in general, and Facebook in particular, especially if they’re seen to be singling out major politicians.”

With hundreds of millions of users already in India, and hundreds of millions more who don’t have smartphones yet but might in the near future, Facebook has an incentive to avoid that possibility. “Facebook has said in the past that it has no business interest in allowing hate speech on its platform,” says Chinmayi Arun, a resident fellow at Yale Law School, who studies the regulation of tech platforms. “It’s evident from what’s going on in India that this is not entirely true.”

Facebook says it is working hard to combat hate speech. “We want to make it clear that we denounce hate in any form,” said Mohan, Facebook’s managing director in India, in his Aug. 21 blog post. “We have removed and will continue to remove content posted by public figures in India when it violates our Community Standards.”

But scrubbing hate speech remains a daunting challenge for Facebook. At an employee meeting in June, Zuckerberg highlighted Mishra’s February speech ahead of the Delhi riots, without naming him, as a clear example of a post that should be removed. The original video of Mishra’s speech was taken down shortly after it was uploaded. But another version of the video, with more than 5,600 views and a long list of supportive comments underneath, remained online for six months until TIME flagged it to Facebook in August.