#migrants claiming benefits

[munaeem]

Germany's AfD: A Deep Dive into the Controversial Party's Election Manifesto

In a dramatic turn of events, the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party held a recent conference in Reza, Saxony. This has set the stage for a contentious battle in the upcoming federal elections. Roughly 600 members gathered. The party finalized its manifesto and sharpened its stance on migration. They confirmed former Goldman Sachs analyst Alice Weidel as their candidate for Chancellor. The…

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Craig Harrington at MMFA:

The economic policy provisions outlined by Project 2025 — the extreme right-wing agenda for the next Republican administration — are overwhelmingly catered toward benefiting wealthier Americans and corporate interests at the expense of average workers and taxpayers. Project 2025 prioritizes redoubling Republican efforts to expand “trickle-down” tax cuts for the wealthy and deregulation across the economy. The authors of the effort’s policy book, Mandate for Leadership: A Conservative Promise, recommend putting key government agencies responsible for oversight of large sectors of the economy under direct right-wing political control and empowering those agencies to prioritize right-wing agendas in dealing with everything from consumer protections to organized labor activity. [...]

Project 2025 would chill labor unions' abilities to engage in political activity. Project 2025 suggests that the National Labor Relations Board change its enforcement priorities regarding what it describes as unions using “members' resources on left-wing culture-war issues.” The authors encourage allowing employees to accuse union leadership of violating their “duty of fair representation” by having “political conflicts of interest” if the union engages in political activity that the employee disagrees with. [Project 2025, Mandate for Leadership, 2023; National Labor Relations Board, accessed 7/8/24]

Project 2025 would make it easier for employers to classify workers as “independent contractors.” The authors recommended reinstating policies governing the classification of independent contractors that the NLRB implemented during the Trump administration. Those Trump-era NLRB regulations were amended in 2023, expanding workplace and labor organizing protections to previously exempt American workers. [Project 2025, Mandate for Leadership, 2023; The National Law Review, 6/19/23; National Labor Relations Board, 6/13/23]

Project 2025 would reduce base overtime pay for workers. The authors recommend changing overtime protections to remove nonwage compensatory and other workplace benefits from calculations of their “regular” pay rate, which forms the basis for overtime formulations. If that change is enacted, every worker currently given overtime protections could be subject to a slight reduction in the value of their overtime pay, which the authors claim will encourage employers to provide nonwage benefits but would effectively just amount to a pay cut. The authors also propose other changes to the way overtime is calculated and enforced, which could result in reduced compensation for workers. Overtime protections have long been a focus of right-wing media campaigns to reduce protections afforded to American workers. [Project 2025, Mandate for Leadership, 2023, Media Matters, 7/9/24]

Project 2025 proposes capping and phasing out visa programs for migrant workers. Project 2025’s authors propose capping and eventually eliminating the H-2A and H-2B temporary work visa programs, which are available for seasonal agricultural and nonagricultural workers, respectively. Even the Project 2025 authors admit that these proposals could threaten many businesses that rely on migrant workers and could result in higher prices for consumers. [Project 2025, Mandate for Leadership, 2023]

Project 2025 recommends institutionalizing the “Judeo-Christian tradition” of the Sabbath. Under the guise of creating a “communal day of rest,” Project 2025 includes a policy proposal amending the Fair Labor Standards Act to require paying workers who currently receive overtime protections “time and a half for hours worked on the Sabbath,” which it said “would default to Sunday.” Ostensibly a policy that increases wages, the proposal is specifically meant to disincentivize employers from providing services on Sundays as an explicitly religious overture. [Project 2025, Mandate for Leadership, 2023]

[...]

International Trade

Project 2025 contains a lengthy debate between diametrically opposed perspectives on international trade and commerce.Over the course of 31 pages, disgraced former Trump adviser and current federal inmate Peter Navarro outlines various proposals to fundamentally transform American international commercial and domestic industrial policy in opposition to China, primarily by using tariffs. He dedicates well over a dozen pages to obsessing over America’s trade deficit with China, even though Trump’s trade war with China was a failure and as he focused on China, the overall U.S. trade deficit exploded. Much of the rest of Navarro’s section is economic saber-rattling against “Communist China’s economic aggression and quest for world domination.”In response, Kent Lassman of the conservative Competitive Enterprise Institute promotes a return to free trade orthodoxy that was previously pursued by the Republican Party but has fallen out of favor during the Trump era.

The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 agenda would be a boon for the wealthy and a disaster for the working class folk.

See Also:

MMFA: Project 2025’s dystopian approach to taxes

[probablyasocialecologist]

In Hungary, couples are offered a one-off loan upon the birth of their first child, totaling £25,000. Its repayment is delayed if they bear a second child within six years and written off if they bear a third. In Russia, a “maternity capital” grant is made per child — around £6,000. In Poland, an ongoing benefit known as the Family 500+ allocates around £100 per child per month, after the second child. The results of these schemes have been — in demographic terms — unimpressive. Nonetheless, the Right across Europe and the world have praised them. In Italy, the government has mimicked these Eastern European initiatives in the form of the Family Act, a monthly allowance paid per child; in Greece the government has introduced a £1,000 baby bonus paid after birth.An individualized incentive to procreate has become the mainstay of right-wing pronatalist governments across Europe. In Italy and in Greece, the Right and center right have presented pronatalist policies as a response to the rapidly aging population. References to babies as the wage earners and taxpayers of the future is the acceptable face of pronatalism. It has provided a language with which Britain’s right, constrained by the generally liberal outlook of its fellow citizens, has felt comfortable associating itself. Referencing the falling tax revenue of the childless future, Cates said, “if you think things are underfunded now, just wait for what’s coming down the road.” But in Europe, pronatalism has frequently meant white supremacism. This connection has been made the most explicit in Viktor Orbán’s Hungary. At a demography conference in 2020, the far-right conspiracy theory of the “great replacement” was openly referenced by the prime minister and his associates. “There are,” Orbán claimed, “political forces in Europe who want a replacement of population for ideological or other reasons.” To ensure its survival, Europe must, his families’ minister argued, cease to be “the continent of the empty crib.” Cates also, more subtly, talks about the British population falling “below replacement levels,” one of several racist dog whistles in her National Conservatism primetime speech. Pronatalist polices — whether enacted or envisaged — tend to have a quiet twin: anti-immigration lawmaking. In all of Europe’s right-wing states, populist anti-immigration policies have led to militarized borders, ever-decreasing provision for asylum seekers, and the demonization of economic migrants. Poland’s prime minister put it explicitly: “In Germany, billions of euros are spent on support for immigrants, but here these billions of złotys are spent on Polish families.” Cates does so more indirectly: it is immigrants, she claims, who are to blame for the housing crisis leaving “British families” behind. Binding electoral concerns that have tended to speak to women and younger votes — children and homes — to the xenophobic populism of the swaggering masculinity of the Brexit campaign, pronatalism may be a vote winner for the Conservatives.

16 April 2024

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Anne Applebaum :: @anneapplebaum

This was the moment that mattered. Trump's political movement relies on total impunity for liars, and mostly gets it. The lies bind them together, cement their feeling of power.

* * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

October 1, 2024

Heather Cox Richardson

Oct 02, 2024

More than 45,000 U.S. dock workers went on strike today for the first time since 1977, nearly 50 years ago. The International Longshoremen's Association union, which represents 45,000 port workers, is negotiating with the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) employer group over a new contract. The strike will shut down 36 ports from Maine to Texas, affecting about half the country’s shipping. Analysts from J.P. Morgan estimate that the strike could cost the U.S. economy about $5 billion a day. The strikers have said they will continue to unload military cargo.

Dockworkers want a 77% increase in pay over six years and better benefits, while USMX has said it has offered to increase wages by nearly 50%, triple employer contributions to retirement plans, and improve health care options. In the Washington Post, economics columnist Heather Long pointed out that the big issue at stake is the automation that threatens union jobs.

Although the strike threatens to slow the economy depending on how long it lasts, President Joe Biden has refused requests to force the strikers back to work, reiterating his support for collective bargaining. He noted that ocean carriers have made record profits since the pandemic—sometimes in excess of 800% over prepandemic levels—and that executive compensation and shareholder profits have reflected those profits. “It’s only fair that workers, who put themselves at risk during the pandemic to keep ports open, see a meaningful increase in their wages as well,” Biden said in a statement.  

In the presidential contest, the Trump-Vance campaign is trying to preserve its false narrative. In Wisconsin today, Trump accused Vice President Harris of murder—although he appeared to get confused about the victim—and claimed that she has a phone app on which the heads of cartels can get information about where to drop undocumented immigrants. He also said that Kim Jong Un of North Korea is trying to kill him.

When asked if he should have been tougher on Iran after it launched ballistic missiles in 2020 on U.S. forces in Iraq, leaving more than 100 U.S. soldiers injured, Trump rejected the idea that soldiers with traumatic brain injuries were actually hurt. He said “they had a headache” and said he thought the attack “was a very nice thing because they didn’t want us to retaliate.”

Trump also backed out of a scheduled interview with 60 Minutes that correspondent Scott Pelley was slated to conduct on Thursday. 60 Minutes noted that for more than 50 years, the show has invited both campaigns to appear on the broadcast before the election and this year, both campaigns agreed to an interview. Trump’s spokesperson complained that 60 Minutes “insisted on doing live fact checking, which is unprecedented.” Vice President Kamala Harris will participate in her interview as planned. 

The campaign’s resistance to independent fact checking of their false narrative came up in tonight’s vice presidential debate on CBS between Minnesota governor Tim Walz, Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris’s running mate, and Ohio senator J.D. Vance, running mate for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump. CBS Evening News anchor Norah O'Donnell and Face the Nation moderator and chief foreign affairs correspondent Margaret Brennan moderated the debate.

Walz’s goal in the debate was to do no harm to Vice President Harris’s campaign, and he achieved that. Vance’s goal was harder: to give people a reason to vote for Donald Trump. It is doubtful he moved any needles there. 

The moments that did stand out in the debate put a spotlight on Vance’s tenuous relationship with the truth. When Vance lied again about the migrants in Springfield, Ohio, who are in the United States legally, Brennan added: "Just to clarify for our viewers, Springfield, Ohio, does have a large number of Haitian migrants who have legal status."

Vance responded: "The rules were that you guys weren't going to fact-check.”

There were two other big moments of the evening, both based in lies. First, Vance claimed that Trump, who tried repeatedly to repeal or weaken the Affordable Care Act, “saved” it. Then, Walz asked Vance directly if Trump lost the 2020 presidential election. Vance refused to answer, saying he is “focused on the future,” and warned that “the threat of censorship” is the real problem in the U.S. 

Walz said: “That’s a damning non-answer.” 

Former chair of the Republican Party Michael Steele said after the debate: “I don't care where you are on policy…. If you cannot in 2024 answer that question, you are unfit for office.”

It was significant that Vance tried to avoid saying either that Trump won in 2020—a litmus test for MAGA Republicans—or that he lost, a reflection of reality. While this debate probably didn’t move a lot of voters for the 2024 election, what it did do was make Vance look like a far more viable candidate than his running mate. Waffling on the Big Lie seemed designed to preserve his candidacy for future elections.

It seems likely that the message behind Vance’s smooth performance wasn’t lost on Trump. As the debate was going on, Trump posted: “The GREAT Pete Rose just died. He was one of the most magnificent baseball players ever to play the game. He paid the price! Major League Baseball should have allowed him into the Hall of Fame many years ago. Do it now, before his funeral!” 

Former Cincinnati Reds baseball player Rose died yesterday at 83. 

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[dailyanarchistposts]

Author: Anarchist Communist Group Topics: health care, NHS, United Kingdom

Save our NHS?

Healthcare in the UK is by no means “socialised”, as critics in the US claim. Though healthcare in the UK is undoubtedly better than healthcare in the US – just as other countries have better healthcare than the UK – it is still subject to the pressures and dynamics of capitalism, existing as it does in a capitalist society. It has also been increasingly marketised over recent decades, with attacks on both social provision and NHS workers coming under the cover of “privatisation” – the introduction of payment by results has introduced a market in health services, many non-frontline services have been privatised or contracted to companies like DHL, the introduction of wholly privately owned and operated “NHS treatment centres”, the rollout of Private Finance Initiatives etc all represent part of the same project of “rationalising” social provisions to the benefit of the overall capitalist system. Even the NHS in its classic form, as the centrepiece of the post-war welfare state, came as part of the attempt to stave off prewar-style class conflict and integrate the working class more closely into the state following the end of the war, and to provide a healthy working class that could fight and die for the bosses in their wars (our masters struggled to find enough fit cannon fodder for their First World War) and healthy enough to slave for their profits in paid jobs, and in unpaid childcare and housework, as well as from the needs for capitalism to stabilise itself after the turbulence of the 1920s, in a change of tactic well-known as the post-war settlement.

We need to defend health services, but critically. The NHS was never ‘ours’ and it is far from perfect.

Since the inception of the NHS, consultants were allowed to use NHS time and resources for their private gain, freeloading that the Daily Mail and their mates are happy to ignore. The Health Service treats our illnesses as individual cases, but most of our illness is due to economic and social conditions that we face collectively: unhealthy and dangerous workplaces, overlong hours and night time working, pollution from factories and cars, poor food, unhealthy housing, lack of trees and greenspaces, all exacerbated by racism and sexism for large sectors of the population. In the 1960s and 1970s women highlighted how unequally they were treated, particularly around childbirth. They won some improvements through struggle, but we are still miles from a genuine community health service.

We know that the current Tory government is making massive cuts to health services with closures of hospitals, casualty departments, rationing of services by age, cuts to services for the elderly and people with disabilities, near frozen wages of overworked staff etc. The whole idea of running healthcare as a business is contradictory (treatment based on ability to pay rather than need), and only benefits the well-off who can always pay for treatment, and the drug companies and other corporate vultures who are taking over more and more of the health service. The whole idea of ‘choice’ in this context is similarly a nonsense. We don’t want to choose which doctors or hospital service to use (the one round the corner / or the one 20 miles away?), we need local services, all of which are accessible and good.

Who Is To Blame?

What is causing the ongoing and deepening crisis in the NHS (and) the ‘lack of money’? Is it –

All those old people selfishly ‘bed blocking’ hospital beds rather than going home unwell and dying quickly so that they are no longer ‘a burden’.

The obese smokers and drinkers: no not the rich ones, and as always, blame the consumer, not the producer (the alcohol and tobacco industries have no responsibilities).

Migrant workers and ‘health tourists’ (the first pay taxes too, and the second cost less than the NHS pencil budget, and no, ignore the rich ones)

The rising cost of the NHS – due to an ageing population (as above), all those poor people who are overweight and smoke and drink too much etc.

NONE OF THE ABOVE!

Back in 2005 the now Health Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, co-wrote a pamphlet calling for the replacement of the NHS with a market insurance system, with the heavy involvement of private enterprise. A fox in charge of the hen coop! The policies pursued are obviously part of a death by a thousand cuts /privatisation by stealth strategy. The idea that the slow death of the NHS is just down to the Tories is delusional however. The PFI (Private Finance Initiative) was a Conservative idea they left on the shelf, with little of it being implemented. It was Labour’s Tony Blair and Gordon Brown who activated it when in government: schools and hospitals were built with finance from the private sector (banks etc) who then leased them to back to the government, who paid for them over the long term on a mortgage basis at a much higher cost (40% more). Old hospitals were closed, so overall there were fewer beds. Labour also introduced ‘the market’ into the health service, the equivalent of putting leeches into a blood bank, and introduced Foundation Trusts. These Labour policies left the NHS with debts of £81.6 billion, and they together with massive ongoing cuts are the cause of the crisis.

What Do We Want, And How Do We Get There?

We need to stop hospitals, casualty departments etc being closed, attacks on GPs, staff cuts, freezing of the wages of health service staff (which are cuts as rents, food etc go up). We need to stop the increasing marketisation of the NHS. We need to stop the NHS being run as a business concern, with vastly overpaid administrators at the top, with at least 800 of these on six figure salaries. We need to end the rigid hierarchies in hospitals, where decisions cannot be questioned, as witness the recent revelations about Gosport War Memorial Hospital where over 450 patients died after being prescribed dangerous painkillers and with according to a recent report “patients and relatives powerless in their relationship with professional staff”. We need to end the grip of drug companies on the NHS. In 2016 alone, the NHS payed these companies £1 billion for drugs for arthritis, cancer, MS, etc. The research for these drugs was funded by public money. “Big pharmaceutical companies are ripping us off by taking over drugs developed primarily with public money and selling the drugs back to the NHS at extortionate prices”. Heidi Chow, Global Justice Now.

How we do this is crucial however. If we use the same old tired methods of petitions, relying on union bureaucrats, trusting in political parties (whoever they are) not only will we probably lose, but we will remain powerless, divided, and with an illness service that doesn’t meet our needs or tackle the causes of our ill health. We need methods and organisation that empower us: to organise ourselves, control our own struggles, without leaders, and to use direct action methods: occupations, work-ins, strikes, work to rule etc. We need to break down the barriers between staff and patients, carers and service-users, workers and unemployed to link our struggles.

What do we want? – A free health service controlled and run by the staff and users. An emphasis on empowering people through helping them to educating themselves in groups about their bodies and health (e.g. books and pamphlets such as ‘Our Bodies Ourselves’ and the collective work in the last wave of feminism). Communities working together to tackle the causes of ill health: dangerous and unhealthy workplaces, an unhealthy, car-based transport system, poor food, widespread pollution, lack of green spaces for relaxation, and exercise etc. Move away from processed and unhealthy food, and from the current over-reliance on drugs. Again, self-organisation and direct action are key. But surely this is pie-in-the-sky? No, we are drawing on what people have done, and are doing, both here and abroad. In Greece, massive health cuts have resulted in health workers running hospitals and clinics etc for free, with the support of their local communities.

London Anarchist Communist Group londonacg@gmail.com

[whencyclopedia]

Interview: Scotland & the Flemish People

The Flemish are among the most important and perhaps the most underappreciated immigrant groups to have shaped the history of medieval and early modern Scotland. They came to Scotland as soldiers and settlers, traders and artisans, diplomats, and dynasts, over a period of several centuries. Several of Scotland’s major families – the Flemings, Murrays, Sutherlands, Lindsays, and Douglases for instance – claim elite Flemish roots, while many other families can trace their ties to Flemish people who arrived as craftspeople, mercenaries, and religiously persecuted émigrés.

James II of Scotland and Mary of Guelders

Unknown Artist (Public Domain)

In this interview, James Blake Wiener speaks to Doctor Alexander Fleming and Professor Roger Mason, authors of Scotland and the Flemish People in order to learn more about the many ways the Flemish shaped Scotland’s medieval and early modern history.

JBW: How and why did medieval Flemish and their relationship with Scotland catch your attention?

AF and RM: Very little research has been undertaken on the relationship between Flanders and Scotland. What published research has been done took place a number of years ago (in the 1930s and the 1980s), and some academics have questioned its methodology and conclusions. Moreover, current textbooks on Scottish history make scant reference to the Flemish influence on Scotland in the medieval period, and there was a suspicion that the role of these immigrants has been understated. Hence, we felt that there was a need to review the evidence surrounding the relationship between Flanders and Scotland.

JBW: What were the major factors that led the Flemish to migrate to Scotland in medieval and early modern times? Does one factor stand out more than any of the others?

AF and RM: Flemish knights took part in the invasion of Britain in 1066. They were initially given land in England as a reward for participating in the invasion. On becoming King of Scots in 1124 David I of Scotland brought numbers of Flemish up from England to assist him in the economic and social transformation of the country. From the 12th century onwards Scotland benefited from the migration and settlement of Flemish craftspeople and farmers, as well as elite fighting men and merchants. The burgeoning wool trade with Flanders had brought to Scotland the merchants as well as other specialists associated with sheep rearing.

In the 16th century, the Spanish response to the Protestant Reformation in Continental Europe led to the persecution of Protestants in the Low Countries. Many Protestants, some from Flanders, therefore, fled to England, and some may have moved up to Scotland. This was likely a much less significant source of migrants than the other two aforementioned, which were at root stimulated by economic factors – a quest for land in the case of the early knights and economic opportunity in the case of merchants and craftsmen.

JBW: I suspect that many readers tend to think of the Flemish by virtue of their commanding role in the economic, social, and cultural affairs in late-medieval Europe – during the era of the Burgundian State – and later when Antwerp emerged as the capital of early-16th century European finance. Why is public awareness of their impact minimal in Scotland and elsewhere? I suspect the Flemish themselves know relatively little about their role in early Scottish history as well.

AF and RM: As noted above, much of the existing literature relating to the Flemish involvement in Scotland is very dated and has, in any case, not been easily accessible to the public at large. Furthermore, there had not been a comprehensive, readable history prepared on the topic up until now. Putting that aside, our research found that the Flemish influence was brought to bear over a quite extensive period – perhaps in the order of 600 years – so while they had an impact of some significance, elements of which can still be seen today, it was not easily discernible year upon year. The Flemish migrants were very adaptable and quickly became absorbed into Scottish society, a process of 'Scotticisation', as we call it in our book. This process also has tended to shroud the Flemish influence on Scotland.

JBW: I have read previously that it was Flemish or Dutch émigrées who brought the game of golf to Scotland, however, I had no idea that the Flemish left their imprint with regard to medieval and early modern urban planning. Could you tell us more about their contributions therein?

AF and RM: This question is best addressed by citing specific examples. A notable Flemish immigrant was Mainard the Fleming, who was brought to Scotland by David I in the mid-12th century. He was initially placed in Berwick-upon-Tweed, where he was credited with laying out its plan. He was then moved to St. Andrews, an ancient religious site on Scotland’s Fife coast, that was emerging as the ecclesiastical capital of the country. Mainard was then credited with developing and implementing a master plan for St. Andrews. This east-west, wedge-shaped plan became the town's defining characteristic and remains so to this day.

St Andrews, Scotland

Bill Boaden (CC BY-SA)

Our book also sets out the Flemish architectural influence on a number of Scottish churches. Furthermore, in certain parts of Scotland, and most notably in a number of Fife villages bordering the Forth River, some domestic architecture has distinct Flemish/Dutch features. Such features are 'crow stepped' gables and roofing of red and gray clay pantiles.

JBW: Were there any periods of pervasive discrimination against Flemish in Scotland? Or did the Scots see the Flemish as desirable migrants because of their craftsmanship and capital?

AF and RM: This is a difficult question to answer. Some of the early Flemings brought into Scotland by David I may have been used to pacify parts of the country, the presumption being that their presence may not have been totally welcome by the inhabitants in these areas. However, what evidence there is points to the Flemish being well-received and not the object of discrimination.

The Flemish merchants and craftsmen were highly regarded by the Scots. The former helped to stimulate the wool trade between Scotland and Flanders, thus leading to significant economic benefit. The latter, the craftspeople – notably the weavers – were held in high regard, and in the late 16th century, the Scottish government even provided incentives to bring Flemish weavers to Scotland to provide what we today would describe as 'technical assistance'. Those who chose to remain in Scotland were absorbed seamlessly into Scottish life with no evidence of discrimination.

JBW: Did the Scots not form émigré communities in Flanders and Holland, too? Especially after the marriage of James II of Scotland and Mary of Guelders, I imagine there was a great uptick in traffic between Scotland and Flanders.

AF and RM: Given that much of Scottish wool exports went through the Flanders port of Bruges it is not perhaps surprising that a community of Scots sprung up in that town, oiling the wheels of trade. There is evidence that this community also had its own place of worship. We are fortunate that the ledger of the late 15th-century Scottish merchant, Andrew Halyburton, has survived. Largely based in Middelburg, he had extensive links with Bruges and Antwerp and acted as a factor for the Scottish elite, sourcing and supplying the luxury goods that Flanders was famed for. Halyburton married Cornelia Bening, the daughter of the Scotto-Flemish artist and illuminator Alexander Bening, who had close family and professional links with Hugo van der Goes and the Bruges-Ghent artistic community. Van der Goes’ famed Trinity Altarpiece (now in the Scottish National Gallery) was a product of these interconnections.

Trinity Altarpiece Panels

Hugo van der Goes (Public Domain)

JBW: While it may be an exaggeration to say that up to a third of the current Scottish population has Flemish ancestors, it is undoubtedly true that the medieval and early modern contributions of the Flemish to Scotland are profound. In your own words then, why is it important that we acknowledge their impact and legacy?

AF or RM: There is undoubtedly a significant number of Scottish people whose families have their roots in medieval Flanders. Many will not be aware of this fact, so one of the goals of the Scotland and the Flemish People project, and the book of the same name, was to raise awareness on this topic among the population at large. It is important that we acknowledge the impact and legacy of the Flemish in Scotland as this has not been properly appreciated in existing works of Scottish history.

In our book, we have sought to rectify this deficiency. The Flemish who came to Scotland between the 12th and 16th centuries have left indelible traces on the Scottish landscape, its language and culture, as well as its social and political identity. It has been important that, for the first time, the facts pertaining to the long relationship between Flanders and Scotland have been examined, assessed, and set out in a form that is accessible to historians and the public at large.

JBW: Many thanks for speaking with us about an intriguing subject – I wish you both many happy adventures in research.

Alexander Fleming is an economist who held positions at the Bank of England, University of St Andrews and the World Bank. He was awarded an Honorary LLD from the University of St Andrews in 1999.

Roger Mason is Emeritus Professor of Scottish History at the University of St. Andrews. He has published widely in the field of late medieval and early modern Scottish political thought and culture.

Continue reading...

[tomorrowusa]

Gov. Kristi Noem, a Trump lickspittle, is banned from 15% of her state of South Dakota. She is one of the contestants for the number two position on Trump's national ticket.

As South Dakota governor Kristi Noem vies for a top position in a second Trump White House, she appears to be more focused on shoring up her vice-presidential chances than on making allies at home — to the point that she is no longer welcome in around 15 percent of the state she governs. Over the past few months, Noem has made several comments about alleged drug trafficking on Native American reservation lands, infuriating a number tribes in the state. In February, the Oglala Sioux Tribe banned her from the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, the fifth largest in the United States, for claiming without evidence that drug cartels were connected to murders on the reservation. The ban did not dissuade her from making more incendiary remarks. In March, Noem said at a community forum in Winner that there are “some tribal leaders that I believe are personally benefiting from cartels being there and that’s why they attack me every day.” When tribal leaders demanded an apology, Noem doubled down, issuing a statement to the tribes to “banish the cartels.” In response, the Cheyenne River Sioux forbade Noem from setting foot on their reservation, the fourth largest in the U.S. On Wednesday, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, the sixth largest in the U.S., banned her as well. On Thursday, a fourth tribe, the Rosebud Sioux, followed suit.

So far, four tribes are banning Noem:

Oglala Sioux

Rosebud Sioux

Cheyenne River Sioux

Standing Rock Sioux

Alleged drug cartels on tribal lands in South Dakota are the local equivalent of millions of migrants illegally voting in 2020. Bullshit is not just a GOP specialty but a dedicated lifestyle.

[darkeagleruins]

Sheriff Mark Lamb Exposes The US Department Of Homeland Security Is Responsible For Creating The App To Import Illegal Migrants

The Cartel Is Using It To Make A Fortune Trafficking Illegals

“Who created that app?”

“The DHS, Department of Homeland Security. Department of Homeland Security. And they love it, by the way.”

“CBP One App”

“An app where now people can claim asylum from their home country, and we will actually fly down there and pick them up and bring them here.

This administration having flown, like, what, 300,000 Haitians into our country directly. Even if you fix the border issue, they're still gonna be flying people in from other countries because they filed they went through the CVP1 app.

The cartels have completely learned how to abuse and use the CBP One app to benefit them.

They extort people and say, hey. Look. We'll help you get through the CBP One app, tell you what you do, there's how much you have to pay us.”

[eaglesnick]

“If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it. It really is public brainwashing and misinformation.” - Robert Kane Pappas

Nigel Farage never misses a chance to turn on immigrants, this time aiming his sights at legal immigration, suggesting that rather than boosting our economy legal immigrants actually cost the country money.

'Shameful!' Nigel Farage blasts figures that show only ONE in five legal migrants are working."  (GB News: 03/12/24)

Is this true and does it really matter? 

For year ending June 2024 1.16 million visas were issued for work, study or family reasons, including dependents. (GOV.UK: Immigration system statistics, year ending June 2024.)  Of these 286,382 were work visas.

So, of the total number of immigrant visas issued, just over 25% of these were work related. This contradicts Farage’s claim that only “one in five legal migrants are working” but lets forgive the bad math for the moment  and burrow a little deeper into the figures.

Of the total number of legal immigrants for year ending June 2024, 446,000 were on overseas student visas. Students are here to study and therefore cannot be counted as not working. For Farage to include such a large proportion of legal migrants in his “not working” figures is misleading at best and a deliberate deceit at worst.

What is more, foreign students PAY for their university education and in so doing make a massive contribution to the UK economy.

“International students boost UK economy by £41.9 billion” (universitiesuk.ac.uk: 16/05/23)

 If we take overseas student numbers from the 1.16million visas issued we are left with 714,000 legal migrants who are here either to work or as dependents. Of these 286,382 had work visas, leaving 427,618 immigrants with no right to work or study. In short, 36.863% of the total number of visa issued. 

Again, the math shows  Farage as either bad with figures or a man bent on deceit.  36.8% of legal migrants not working is far short of Farage’s 80%. But lets look even deeper at the numbers.

The visas issued were for students, workers and dependents. As we have accounted for student and worker numbers it is fair to assume the remaining 36.8% of visas issued are for dependents, which is just over one third of all visas issued. Breaking the numbers down further we can see the ratio of worker visas to dependent  visas is 246,382: 427,618: or put more simply 1:1.7

In other words, on average, every migrant issued a work visa brings with them 1.7 dependents. This figure of 1.7 dependents is exactly the number of dependent children the average household in England and Wales supports. (Office of National Statistics: Average number of dependent children per family in England and Wale, 2020 and 2021) The galling truth for Farage is that the average legally working migrant, if they bring dependents with them, incurs no more cost on the British economy than the average English or Welsh worker with dependents. Even more damaging of Forages misinformation campaign is the fact that migrant men are more likely to be in work than UK born men, and therefore less likely to claim unemployment benefit.

[drumpfwatch]

The Final Plea: Trump's Gone Full Hitler

Originally I was going to write this huge, multi-part essay about how Trump is bad and how Project 2025 is evil and how he’s definitely going to do it but I don’t need to. Thanks to Trump’s big stupid mouth, and his recent dive into dementia-driven madness, I think I have something that any sane person can’t hear without being worried about.

Trump says immigrants are 'poisoning the blood of our country'

This? This is unacceptable. He is literally saying the exact same thing about immigrants that Hitler did about the Jews.  If you have any moral fiber whatsoever, this should be the thing that gets you to see Trump for what he is. A fascist.

“But,” you say, “what if he’s just talking? He obviously doesn’t believe that! They’re just words!” And with all do respect I do not fucking care. There are only two possibilities here: either Trump is an actual honest to god fascist who legitimately sees the “pure blood of the American people” being threatened by the existence of brown people who want to breed us out of existence, or he knows his fan base does and is happy to rile them up with this kind of talk. And at the end of the day, that is a distinction without difference.

This sort of rhetoric breeds anger and violence, and keeps him nice and distant. He can claim that all he did was tell people to protest “peacefully and patriotically” ignoring the two months he spent before that lying and riling them up. Stochastic terrorism at its finest, on display at its worst on January 6th. It’s funny how many republicans I can encounter who can identify, say, Alex Jones’ rhetoric as inflammatory and inciting but immediately shut their brain off when Trump starts doing the exact same thing. 

Honestly the fact that he’s cultivated a following like that should’ve told you all you needed to know in the first place. No other President’s fan base has attacked a federal building and interrupted government actions about their candidate losing. No President has been so butthurt by a loss that he shot over 60 frivolous lawsuits off that were all pretty quickly defeated because his people wouldn’t tell the lies they told to you under oath. You don’t get that kinda crazy by accident, you cultivate that.

Even if Trump himself were a good guy (he’s not), and had no intention of putting immigrants in camps (which he already did), his base - those lunatics he counts on to commit insurrections for him - are more than happy to do the dirty work. 

But how do I know that? Because they already have. After Trump broadcasted the story about Haitian Immigrants eating dogs and cats, those places supporting them received bomb threats. Bomb threats that would continue for two days and be followed by the homes of those immigrants being vandalized. Threats so serious and numerous the children needed police protection just to go to school. Haitian immigrants who are there legally, by the way. Haitian Immigrants who were invited to Springfield, by Springfield, to take up jobs that the white folk there are apparently too good for. Jobs that benefit the community. These are people who have already suffered immensely and now they have a target on their back because of a bullshit racist story that isn’t even true. That’s right, the person who started this whole mess admitted they made the whole thing up! But the MAGAts don’t care, and neither does Trump, because he keeps spewing this god damned lie. 

Why? Why would he do that? Why push this fake story so hard? Because Trump wants to scare you into voting for him, and whether or not he actually holds to the Nazi Propaganda of the Great Replacement, he is absolutely fine with all the suffering it’s causing as long as it helps build up the Fear Wave he’s hoping to ride into the White House on. 

It’s the same reason he keeps lying that we’re in the worst crime wave of all time, ever, when crime is the lowest it’s been in 50 years. There is no migrant crime wave because migrants are, as a whole, less likely to commit crime. 

That’s why I say if you have any moral fiber what so ever, you’d have dumped him. You’re willing to sacrifice the wellbeing of over 70% of the population of women, blacks, LGBT people and other minorities on the altar of Trump, and for what? 

No, really. For what? The economy?

Trump only cares about the economy in as much as it helps him. That’s why the man who promised to drain the swamp of financial corruption appointed the freaking CIO of Goldman Sachs as his Secretary of the Treasury. No, it’s not because Mnuchin knew what he was doing, he had never worked with public funds once in his life. It was because he knew how to get rich people more money. That’s why the only thing that benefited from him was the stock market. Which, by the way, is doing even better under Uncle Joe. Every other measure of wealth indicated hard times for the middle class specifically. The unemployment rate, the deficit, housing prices and more. All of these things were worse under Trump.

Now, I understand that the economy is complicated. A whole bunch of things affect it and not every bad thing that happened under Trump was his fault (in the same way that not everything that happened under Biden was his either). COVID in particular really screwed everything over, and while he didn’t exactly handle the crisis well he didn’t exactly manufacture the disease for funsies either. That said, if Trump gets to take responsibility for the $1.00 gas prices that happened during lockdown because people weren’t driving all that much, then he also gets to take on the responsibility of the hundreds of thousands of jobs that were lost because of it too. 

And that’s the crux. If Donald Trump were truly actually good for the economy, there’d be no room to equivocate. A healthy economy raises all ships, and his did not. That’s what you’re willing to summon at that altar. Mediocrity.

Besides, we know for a fact that some of the things he specifically did were bad. Those tariffs on China hurt American manufacturing arguably more than they hurt China. After all, tariffs end up being a tax on the consumer. All those promises he made to rebuild and protect American industries? He never did any of that, because that would require tax money and empowering workers, and his rich friends really don’t like either of those things. I know, a politician lied, truly a shocker! But if he actually gave a damn about the poor and working class, if he actually cared about the economy, he would’ve done something besides making his merchandise in China. But he doesn’t care about the working class except for how he can abuse them to get what he wants out of them. Every Trump Supporter who isn’t directly working for him is, in his mind, a gullible mark who exists purely to be a tool. Trump does not care about you.

And, you know, even if it were true - that Trump were great for the economy - you know who was? HITLER. While he was chancellor Germany had a 100% employment rate! Of course that was partly because they kicked all the Jews and women out of their jobs and had the unemployed men take them over, but that’s still a pretty impressive success. He also generated an astounding amount of wealth for his people by fueling his Wehrmacht and invading other countries. It was this stability he offered, contrasted with the horrific death of the Papiermark after the First World War, that allowed him to get enough people behind him to seize power. Because most Germans didn’t actually want to exterminate all Jews, but they did want to buy a loaf of bread for less than a bajillion dollars and were willing to look the other way for the sake of that.

Now, I’m not saying Trump is Hitler, or that we’re in as equally perilous a situation. 1920s Germany was 1920s Germany, Hitler was Hitler and there will never be another monster like him. But Trump is his own monster, and whatever color his soul is, whatever he actually believes, he has surrounded himself with people who are all too eager to commit treason in his name. 

Literally, is that worth it to you? What price could possibly be worth putting the worst thing to happen to American Human Rights since Dredd-Scott into office? What good does he bring that are worth the continued strength of our democracy? What policies has he enacted that make supporting him worth it? The death of Roe v Wade, the Muslim Travel Ban, the decreasing enrollment of minorities due to the peeling back of affirmative protections, the encouragement of book banning, the aggressive attacks on free press that accurately report on his crimes? The violent use of police to silence peaceful protests? The Supreme Court that gave him the powers of a King while stripping power from other branches?

Or maybe you’re excited for what he plans to do! Like restoring the Alien and Sedition Acts to evict migrants. You know, those horrible blights upon our country? The ones that allowed us to imprison innocent Japanese citizens in camps just because they were Japanese, or allowed the government to restrict the free press because it didn’t say what they wanted it to? Don’t pretend that he won’t, or that he can’t. It’s happened before so it can happen again, and now that the guard rails are gone, there’s no stopping him. This country has done darker things under better presidents than he, and if you think the lackies he’s going to staff as much of the government as he can with are going to stop him this time, then you are a gullible tool. 

That’s right! If Trump’s in office, expect, at the very least, rigged trials against his opponents, terrifying police oppression of non-violent protests and crimes! So many crimes! Crimes from Trump! Crimes from his friends, his family, his loyal mooks! Crimes for everyone! Crimes that are immediately pardoned - or even pardoned beforehand! How exciting! And if he does even part of what is in Project 2025 - which he’s very likely to - then expect wonderfully horrible stupid things like total federal bans on birth control, females getting arrested for crossing state lines while pregnant and teachers being put in jail for calling their student “Sam” instead of “Samuel” because their parent never signed a permission slip for that. 

This is not hyperbole, this is not conjecture of a potential future, these are things that have already happened because of Trump, and things he has said he was going to do. Do you believe him? Because it’s the one thing I believe him on, because he did them all before and people like Trump only ever get worse.

What reason do you have to support this man? Do you think Harris is going to be worse, somehow? Harris, the most pliable politician we’ve had in decades - for better or worse? What, is she gonna let the woke mob take over America? The woke mob that barely exists? How terrible, people might have to treat Transfolk with the respect they deserve! Truly, a nightmare! 

For the record, no one has been arrested for any trans discrimination law. Because most of those laws simply add transpeople to the list of people who are considered valid targets for discrimination/hate crimes. So if you weren’t planning on burning down a transperson’s house or denying them a job because they’re trans, you don’t have to worry about being arrested/fined for not liking transpeople. You’re allowed to be a bigot in your own house, just like bigots always have been, that hasn’t changed. I promise no one’s going to arrest you for deadnaming and misgendering a trans person. The fact that people won’t LIKE you for doing that, well, that’s a problem you just have to deal with if you really believe in free speech, now isn’t it? 

What other reasons are there to think Kamala is worse than Trump? Do you think she’s a Marxist? I’ve heard people call her that before and it’s fucking hilarious to me because it displays either a profound ignorance of what Marxism is, a profound ignorance of who she is, or both. Yes, Kamala’s dad was a Marxist. He also barely talks to her - Kamala refers to their relationship as “strained but cordial,” - in part because his daughter is an avid participant in the free market. If you want to know who's a Marxist, you ask a Marxist. And if my experience has taught me anything, it’s that most of the Marxists don’t like Harris at all.

Of course people like Jordan Peterson have twisted the meaning of the word around so hard that it doesn’t mean anything anymore anyway. I’ve heard people call DEI initiatives Marxist because they don’t like it when people don’t agree with them? Because they don’t understand that calling an action racist doesn’t mean the one who did it was racist? Look, this stuff is complicated and I’m not going to litigate it right now, but the whole point of DEI isn’t to brainwash people into believing white people are all secretly evil. It’s meant to spread awareness so that people don’t accidentally say stupid, hurtful stuff because not everyone has the time of day to research the entire history of racism in America. The more important point here is that whatever you wanna call it, it’s not Marxism just because both Marx and your DEI speaker both get mad at you for disagreeing with them, and no one is teaching Critical Race Theory to children in school.

But to be clear - if we define Marxism as “extremely to the left,” she’s not. Entire progressive cultures are furious that Joe stepped down because Kamala turned her back on them. They felt they had a chance with Joe, but they definitely don’t think they do with her. A lot of leftists are disappointed in her. You should’ve seen how pissed they got when she said she’d appoint republicans to her cabinet. Anyone putting her in the same category as Angela Ocasio-Cortez or Bernie Sanders is either ignorant or malicious. Conversely, if by Marxist you mean  the economic system by which the means of production are owned and controlled by the working class and that profit thereof is evenly distributed amongst all beneficiaries, be it at the company level or the governmental level, Kamala Harris does not believe that, never has, and probably never will. The PACs who back her campaign are way too interested in continuing the status quo to let her do that. 

And that’s what this is about, isn’t it? I’ll admit it, Kamala Harris may be a change in the Democratic Party, appealing to patriotism in ways the democrats haven’t in a long time, breaking with certain party lines where it’s convenient but she’s not ever going to completely contradict party orthodoxy, not at this point. She chose Tim Walz instead of Josh Shapiro like the party wanted her to, but she didn’t choose, say, Bernie Sanders or even Pete Buttegig. She still plays the system, and at this point I think both sides can agree the system is broken. 

And hey, Trump does offer a new system! But that new system is fascism, and if that’s what you want, then, well, I guess I can’t stop you. But if it’s not what you want, if you want to guarantee American democracy will prosper as democracy, vote for someone else. And if you want that vote to matter, vote for Kamala.

You have the right to vote for whoever you want. I can’t stop you, and I won’t. This essay doesn’t exist to deny you that right. But I want everyone who reads this to know that if Trump wins, his track history shows that he’s going to do the terrible things he says he’s going to do, especially now that he’s kicked out all the people who would stop him and has perfect immunity.

Or maybe not. Maybe he won’t. Maybe Trump will have a miraculous change of heart, realize that he actually has a responsibility when wielding all that power, tell the Supreme Court to reverse their decisions on immunity and tell the people behind Project 2025 to go eat bricks instead of pretending like he hasn’t heard about it for the 500th time this week. Maybe every one of his previous actions was just part of some super-uber-complicated 4D Chess game with the Deep State of The They™ that totally exists and is actively trying to evilly keep him out of power so the evil space lizard jews can continue to drink the blood of sexually abused orphans and destroy things with natural-disaster making space lasers. 

And maybe I’ll win every single state lottery on the same day with the same numbers.

I feel like a crazy person, sometimes. It seems so strange to be staring down the loaded gun of a dictatorship, but history tells us this is how it always goes. But we have a chance to stop it this time. And hey, maybe I’m wrong about all of this. It wouldn’t be the first time. But I’d like to think I’ve grown up from my foolish days believing every conspiracy theory I found online, and feel that I’ve brought sufficient evidence to the table. Trump has done nothing but lie, be stupid, and step on whatever is in his way to get what he personally wants, damn the consequences. And at the end of the day, people tend to do more of what they’ve done, except occasionally more. So ask yourself, before you check that box, what has Trump done? In what ways has he helped this country and in what ways has he hurt it? And are you willing to risk more, or worse, of that harm? And if so, for what? Whose wellbeing are you potentially putting on that altar? Because if I’m right, and he wins, I did warn you.

[darkmaga-returns]

Vice President Kamala Harris has confirmed that she would support mass amnesty of illegal immigrants if elected as president in the upcoming election.

In an interview with Julio Vaqueiro of Noticias Telemundo on Oct. 22, Harris shared her views on immigration reform and her stance on deportations. During the interview, Vaqueiro claimed there is a lack of discussion on pathways to citizenship and immigration relief. He added that Democrats do not talk about the benefits that migrants are bringing into the country.

Harris said she would talk about it. "I am… I am talking," Harris told Vaqueiro. She then provided a garbled vision of her immigration policy. "America is a country that was built in part by immigrants." When Vaqueiro asked her about people who are "talking about mass deportations," Harris said, "I'm not." (Related: Kamala Harris promises to keep giving green cards to Afghan refugees despite terrorism concerns.)

In other words, she will not implement mass deportations if elected. Instead, she intends to secure a "pathway to citizenship" for millions of illegal immigrants in the U.S. through mass amnesty.

"We need smart, humane immigration policy in America that includes a pathway to citizenship, putting more resources at the border in terms of security, honoring America's history as a country of immigrants, not vilifying people who are fleeing harm, but instead, creating an orderly system for them to actually be able to make their case. That's where I stand. I stand on the principle that we should not be talking about immigrants as 'poisoning the blood of America,'" Harris said.

[head-post]

Refugee camp near Dublin’s Grand Canal tripled in size in days

The camp of migrant tents on the Dublin side of the Leeson Street Bridge grew from 15 to more than 40 over the weekend, Irish media reported.

The tents, some of which are covered with tarpaulins to protect the occupants from rain, are on a footpath opposite the bank of the Grand Canal, which has been fenced off to prevent similar camps.

While on Friday there were 15 tents in the camp, this morning the number had risen to 42, stretching from Lower Leeson Street to Wilton Terrace. The number of homeless international protection applicants is expected to reach 2,000 in the coming days.

On Friday, figures from the Department of Integration showed there were 1,966 international protection applicants without accommodation.

Taoiseach Simon Harris said Irish people were compassionate and “full of common sense” towards migration. He also claimed at the RDS elections count centre:

I believe that people right across this country are two things when it comes to migration: I believe they’re compassionate and I believe they’re full of common sense. And they want to see government policy bring those two things together. They want to help people in need. They recognise the benefit of migration to our economy and society. But they also want to know that there’s a common sense approach in terms of rules, in terms of welfare, in terms of deportations, processing times. And I absolutely expect that the people in this country will want to see me as their Taoiseach work with colleagues to manage this situation and to put a sustainable migration system in place and that’s what I intend to do.

Read more HERE

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Rachel Leingang at The Guardian:

To hear Donald Trump tell it, America’s cities are in dire shape and in need of a federal intervention. “We’re going to rebuild our cities into beacons of hope, safety and beauty – better than they have ever been before,” he said during a recent speech to the National Rifle Association in what has become a common refrain on the campaign trail. “We will take over the horribly run capital of our nation, Washington DC.” Trump has for years railed against cities, particularly those run by Democratic officials, as hotbeds for crime and moral decay. He called Atlanta a “record setting Murder and Violent Crime War Zone” last year, a similar claim he makes frequently about various cities.

His allies have an idea of how to capitalize on that agenda and make cities in Trump’s image, detailed in the conservative Project 2025: unleash new police forces on cities like Washington DC, withhold federal disaster and emergency grants unless they follow immigration policies like detaining undocumented immigrants and share sensitive data with the federal government for immigration enforcement purposes.

Project 2025’s Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, an extensive document breaking down each part of the federal government and recommending changes to be made to advance rightwing policy, was created by the Heritage Foundation, with dozens of conservative organizations and prominent names contributing chapters based on their backgrounds. This part of the project is another Republican attempt at a crackdown on so-called “sanctuary” cities, places around the country that don’t cooperate with the federal government on enforcing harsh immigration policies.

[...]

The threat of withholding federal funds

Republicans, cheered on by Trump, have worked to make immigration a key issue in cities across the country by busing migrants from the US-Mexico border inland, to places run by Democrats like New York, DC and Chicago, overwhelming the social safety net in these cities. The idea of using federal funds granted by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema) to force immigration changes are included in a chapter about the Department of Homeland Security, written by Ken Cuccinelli, Trump’s former deputy secretary of homeland security.

The chapter’s initial recommendation is to dismantle DHS entirely, create a border-focused agency comprised of other immigration-related organizations and farm out the rest of its components to existing agencies (or privatize them, in the case of the Transportation Security Administration). It’s not directly clear whether the aim is to use all Fema funds – including those that help cities and states in the immediate aftermath of an emergency like a tornado or flood – or large grant programs for things like emergency preparedness. One line in the chapter says “post-disaster or nonhumanitarian funding” could be exempt from the immigration policy requirements. The chapter also suggests that cities and states should take on more of the burden of financially responding to disasters.

[...]

One of the conditions Project 2025 suggests is requiring states or localities to share information with the federal government for law and immigration enforcement, and specifies that this would include both department of motor vehicle and voter registration databases. This is of particular interest in many cities because 19 states and Washington DC allow undocumented people to get drivers licenses, the Niskanen Center, a thinktank that delved into the project’s immigration aims, points out. These licenses help with public safety by decreasing the potential for hit-and-runs and increasing work hours, among other benefits, the center writes. If a city or state is forced to choose between issuing licenses and then sharing this information for use by immigration authorities, or accessing emergency funds for their whole population in a crisis, it’ll be tough for them to deny Fema money, said Cecilia Esterline, an immigration research analyst at the Niskanen Center.

Donald Trump’s war on urban cities is part of the wretched far-right Project 2025 plan, including crackdowns on sanctuary cities.

See Also:

The Guardian: What is Project 2025 and what does it have to do with a second Trump term?

[pulquedeguayaba]

So so tired of seeing US people (mostly white queers) telling everyone to rally behind the Democrats no matter what.

I guess the dems have given you more crumbs regarding your rights (while never ensuring they become benefits that can't be taken away later, seriously think about that.) I guess it's to keep y'all on a leash precisely when these things are happening.

But for all of us outside the US and from the global south, both parties are exactly the same and both have committed numerous crimes against humanity, OUR humanity, and I'm only counting from Bush Sr. onwards. Look up Operation Condor.

Sure, Trump disrespected our previous president and made horrendous remarks about us, but guess who has been actually investing billions on the wall while also keeping ICE policies in place, and using my country as a second wall to keep out and terrorise migrants while also fueling our war on terror (something started by a democrat btw), and that has taken the lives of at least 100 000 people, leaving thousands of children orphaned in an increasingly violent and precarious situation.

I'd like you all to tell Pakistanis and Syrians how you suck on Biden and co cos they're "the lesser evil" when it was NOBEL PEACE PRIZE OBAMA that droned the shit out of those countries leaving generations of children scared forever of the blue sky.

You keep claiming genocide when you can't even recognise it, even though it has been staring at you from your screens for the last month.

Are the anti lgbt policies awful? Yes, but why are us outside the US the ones to pay the price for something that isn't a certainty, won't benefit us, and isn't gonna stop the carnage the US has been enacting on the rest of us for decades?

What about you actually organise and propely fight those legislations? How about you try to put 2 grams of imagination outside your extremely imperfect and very undemocratic 2 party system? How about you realise how selfish and comfortable is your position in the underbelly of the imperial core and the opportunity it represents, not only for your own self interests (and again a highly hypothetical one, wonder how often you complain about this with poor black and brown lgbt people in the US), but for the rest of us?

Death to America could set ALL OF US free, but no, you're still in your high horse crying about your YA fantasy novel bs scenario.

[handweavers]

thinking about rrr and hindu nationalism in general and it rly is crazy how hindutvas will quite literally erase the sikh identities of people whose accomplishments they want to claim as theirs bc doing so benefits their ideology vs emphasize the sikh identities of people who they want to distance themselves from in order to proclaim us to be brutal, savage, terrorists, etc. and some will try to do that dance to appeal to hindutvas bcuz they want to materially benefit from perceived closeness to hinduism while throwing everyone else under the bus (not an uncommon phenomenon, you see this happen in other communities not just in south asia but elsewhere) but ultimately either way we lose & those who face the consequences the hardest are always the working class, migrants, and those from scheduled castes