#not a named partner or even a partner! but de facto leader especially here

[jimmyspades]

No one is doing found family trope like them… my best friends from Boston Legal…

[ddwcaph-game]

Party Members

Everyone on this list (except Kuya/Ate Paddy) are available as crush options for the MC! If you're not interested in crushes or puppy love, don't worry! Most friendship scenes will play out similarly, whether you have a crush or not.

The interactive desktop version of the characters page can be found here!

THOMAS RYAN HART DELA CRUZ Level 12 Adventurer

PRONOUNS: He/Him FAVE GENRES: Fantasy, Adventure, Romance

MBTI TYPE: ENFP ENNEAGRAM TYPE: 7w6 ZODIAC SIGN: Pisces

PRIMARY LOVE LANGUAGE: Quality Time IDEAL FRIEND: Silly, Stubborn

The group baby. Wayne is an attention seeker who wants to have fun all the time. He’s the type of friend who will do the stupidest things just because it’s stupid, but he can also be very stubborn when he believes he’s right. For him, there’s always somewhere to explore and something exciting to do.

Wayne lives with his over-protective father, after his mother broke up with him. While silly and very playful, he is also a closet mama’s boy, who loves to write poems and wishes to build a flying ice cream truck someday with his Mommy.

He is the shortest student in your grade, and he says it’s because he’s a leap day baby, and that he spent all his skill points in charisma instead of height. He is a romantic at heart and loves teasing his bestfriend-since-preschool and waltz dance partner, Roselyna.

“Wayne” is actually just a nickname given to him by Roselyna because of an inside-joke between them during preschool.

(You can learn more about Wayne in the MC’s diary in-game.)

PRIMROSE EVELYN AGUSTIN DEL ROSARIO Level 12 Teacher

PRONOUNS: She/Her FAVE GENRES: Fairytales, Fantasy, Romance

MBTI TYPE: ENFJ ENNEAGRAM TYPE: 2w3 ZODIAC SIGN: Pisces

PRIMARY LOVE LANGUAGE: Physical Touch IDEAL FRIEND: Emotional, Altruist, Knowledgeable

The group mom. Roselyna’s motto in life is, “Eat, Pray, Hug!”. Rosie is an altar girl who loves eating sweets (especially ice cream), and likes to describe herself as “huggable and fluffy”. She is a total cuddlebug who doesn’t know the meaning of personal space.

Even though Roselyna is emotionally sensitive and a bit of a crybaby at times, she’s the glue keeping (or hugging) the group together whenever there’s an argument. She likes to please people due to her insecurities, but she can be spoiled and manipulative at times, especially towards her parents, who adopted her after she was abandoned in a church in Samar as a baby.

Roselyna has been bestfriends with Wayne since preschool, and wishes she had a brother like him. Her dream is to be a teacher someday (if she can’t be a fairytale princess, of course).

The nickname ‘Roselyna’ is a portmanteau of her given and middle names. It’s pronounced “row-sel-LEE-na”.

(You can learn more about Roselyna in the MC’s diary in-game.)

LILYANNE PUNZALAN Level 13 Detective

PRONOUNS: She/Her, They/Them (Starting Vol. 5) FAVE GENRES: Sci-Fi, Mystery

MBTI TYPE: ISTP ENNEAGRAM TYPE: 5w6 ZODIAC SIGN: Virgo

PRIMARY LOVE LANGUAGE: Acts of Service IDEAL FRIEND: Honest, Independent

Lily is the de facto leader, as well as the tallest and oldest member of Friends 6Ever, much to JM’s chagrin. She established the group back in Grade 2, after becoming partners with JM in a quiz bee, and meeting Wayne in the Scouting Club.

Lily is the class secretary, and acts as the group’s secret-keeper. She likes to play detective, and tries to spend as much time as possible away from her adoptive mothers, who don’t want her to find out what happened to her birth parents. She has also made up a party game called “The Secret Exchange”, where the birthday celebrant exchanges secrets with the group members.

Lily is an outspoken introvert, but she prefers the term “selectively social”. She frequently engages in a friendly competition with JM, and always teases him whenever she knows something he didn’t.

She is keeping an eye on you. Just kidding. Mostly.

(You can learn more about Lily in the MC’s diary in-game.)

JOHN JESSE MICHAEL MAGBANTAY JR. Level 11 Film Director

PRONOUNS: He/Him, They/Them (Starting Vol. 5) FAVE GENRES: Mythology, Supernatural

MBTI TYPE: ISTJ ENNEAGRAM TYPE: 3w4 ZODIAC SIGN: Aquarius

LOVE LANGUAGE: Words of Affirmation IDEAL FRIEND: Disciplined, Sensible

The group dad and youngest member of the group. Proud class president, student council president and future valedictorian.

JM is your typical overachiever—he often stresses himself out with extra-curricular activities, but he’s mostly doing it to earn his father’s love and trust, who sees him as an unwanted child from his now missing mother. He also lives with his surprisingly not-evil step-mother, and his naughty and nice step-siblings, Brandon and Beatrice.

Although he’s very strict when it comes to enforcing the class rules, he is also very dependable and willing to help and tutor other students. While he only tolerates Wayne and Lily’s antics because they’re friends, he grudgingly admits that school life would be boring without them.

(You can learn more about JM in the MC’s diary in-game.)

BRANDON/BEATRICE GARDNER Level 12 Architect

PRONOUNS: He/Him (Brandon), She/Her (Beatrice) FAVE GENRES: Superheroes

MBTI TYPE: INTJ ENNEAGRAM TYPE: 6w5

PRIMARY LOVE LANGUAGE: Gifts IDEAL FRIEND: Honest, Silly, Emotional

The group’s nemesis and JM’s step-sibling. B’s jealousy of JM’s success in academics and school politics have made them bitter and hostile towards him and the group.

But when a chance encounter with B leads to them admitting that they’re a former member of the group who never wanted to start the rivalry in the first place… Will you trust and help them figure out why they were cast out of the group, or are they just trying to break the group apart?

Brandon and Beatrice are two different characters, but who is which depends on your choice. The other one you don’t pick will be JM’s supportive little step-sibling.

(You can learn more about Brandon/Beatrice in the MC’s diary in-game.)

THEODORE PATRICK/THEODORA PATRICIA VILLANUEVA Level 17 Student

PRONOUNS: He/Him (Patrick), She/Her (Patricia) FAVE GENRES: Fantasy, Adventure, Slice-of-Life

MBTI TYPE: INFP ENNEAGRAM TYPE: 9w1 ZODIAC SIGN: Pisces

PRIMARY LOVE LANGUAGE: Physical Touch IDEAL FRIEND: Warm, Silly, Emotional

The twins’ 17-year-old cousin. They may be a little irresponsible at times, but they treat their twin cousins as their own siblings, mostly because they grew up as an only child. Ever since the twins’ mother left, they’ve been the one telling them bedtime stories, although they’ve been busy with school work recently.

They may seem like a gentle giant at first glance, but anyone who messes with their little ‘goobers’ will quickly learn to regret it.

(You can learn more about Patrick in the MC’s diary in-game.)

CORDIFOLIA JAY MIMIDAE Level 22 Warden

PRONOUNS: She/Her STORY WORLD OF ORIGIN: Wayne's Story World (Vol. 2) SPECIES: Half-Dwarf, Half-Halfling

MBTI TYPE: INFJ ENNEAGRAM TYPE: 1w2 AVIAN STAR SIGN: Psittacine

PRIMARY LOVE LANGUAGE: Gifts, Acts of Service IDEAL FRIEND: Warm, Altruist

Cordifolia (better known as Cordelia) is the daughter of Blueberry Mimidae-Goldberg-Corvidae and Huckle Mimidae, two of the founders of D' Warblings Refugee Camp. While Cordelia has her halfling mother's warm, understanding, and caring nature, she has also her dwarf father's fierce protectiveness and unyielding determination. Although she might appear shy compared to her more outgoing parents, she loves getting to know people and learning what brought them to the camp.

Delia works as a cook and tea brewer at her parents' treehouse, the HuckleBerry Inn and Tavern. While she enjoys the peace and frequent gatherings, she feels uneasy and longs to leave the camp—something her father is adamantly against. She wants to venture out into the world to help other people with her abilities, partly because of the call to adventure, and partly to stop the rising tensions between the dwarves and the halflings that drove her mother to live away from the camp and have another flock.

Delia is an apprentice at the nature and healing branches of Avian magic, which she inherited from her mother. She's not an expert singer like her mother is, so she uses her ocarina instead to harness the healing and protective properties of Avia's winds. Although she views violence as a last resort, she is still very much capable of defending herself, having learned various fighting techniques from her Papa.

She also has a pet cockatoo griffin named Odora, which she unknowingly tamed as a toddler after her father caught one from the wild. Dore grew to be protective of Delia, often taking her and her father together to fly and do tricks around the camp, sometimes recklessly as Dore has come to expect Delia's healing aid. She also tends to a hanging garden in their treehouse, her favorites being two Ardan flytraps she has named Goneril and Regan.

Cordelia is slightly muscular and quite tall for a dwarpling—she is slightly taller than Goldilocks-height MC at 22 cycles old, which is roughly 13 Earth years.

While having crushes isn't necessarily on her mind right now, Delia would love to have a girl (or someone non-binary) to go along with her on her adventures. That's how her parents met, after all (or maybe her Papa was exaggerating again)…

(You will be able to meet Cordelia in Volume 2.)

CHAMYRRHA Level 6000 Angel

PRONOUNS: Any Pronouns (Usually She/Her) STORY WORLD OF ORIGIN: JM's Story World (Vol. 5) SPECIES: Angel

MBTI TYPE: ESFP ENNEAGRAM TYPE: 7w8

PRIMARY LOVE LANGUAGE: Quality Time, Words of Affirmation (Receiving) IDEAL FRIEND: Silly, Altruist

The silliest and most talkative angel you'll ever meet. Chamyrrha may be an angel, but she's more of a mischievous imp when it comes to her personality. Her powers of divine intervention were taken from her long ago for her tendency to disobey rules, as well as granting wishes only meant as a joke.

Since then, she has been wandering the spiritual realms looking for lost souls to comfort and guide into the afterlife. While mostly a thankless job, she has enjoyed doing so for millennia, and she still gets genuinely excited whenever she meets a new person, even if she never meets them again. That's better than being a guardian angel and not being able to do anything fun, anyway.

She can no longer perform miracles, but she has kept most of her abilities as an angel, such as selective invisibility, omnilingualism, and being able to know people's thoughts. In fact, she often forgets that other people can't do that, so she tends to ramble and get distracted talking to a person's thoughts before they even have a chance to speak. She's also of the idea that anything sounds good if you sing it loud enough.

Cham most often presents herself as a young, chubby child wearing a sky blue robe, as she has found out that it's what most people are comfortable with, but they have no problem switching his appearance from person to person as angels don't really have gender. Just don't call her a cherub—cherubim have four faces and multiple wings—and frankly, she gets tired of explaining it all the time. A part of her right wing has been bitten off by a lost Ci Annwn, which has now become her (equally distractable) travel companion.

Although she can be scatterbrained at times, Cham can focus if she really wants to, and she has an impressive memory. Over time, she has grown to be fascinated with magic, weird bugs and critters, and especially machines and clockwork. Through her experiences talking with the lost souls she meets, she has gathered enough knowledge to build gizmos, and even a small biplane, as she has difficulty flying long distances with her broken wing. Besides, if Charon has a boat, why can't she have a biplane?

As a human, Cham appears as a tall and chubby girl with blue eyes, fair skin, and wavy medium-long golden brown hair, although… you might be able to slightly influence her appearance later.

Cham has no preference when it comes to crushes, but that's mostly because she's totally oblivious to it. She knows what it is, he knows why it is, but they don't know how it is. What is this "love" everyone keeps talking about, anyway? How is it the best thing in the world if people fight over it?

(You will be able to meet Chamyrrha in Volume 5, and is available as a poly-crush option together with Wayne. You can read this post for more details.)

***

At least two more crush options will be revealed later!

[cryptocism]

ive been scrolling through ur blog for a while (cuz ur dc opinions are Top Fucking Notch) and i saw what you said abt bart in tt 03 and f:fma and while i totally agree (it killed tt 03 for me lol) im super curious abt how youd do his development if given the opportunity?

I’ve been thinking about this one like A Lot so buckle up this is long: 

it would kind of depend? On whether or not he’d be in an ensemble team like Teen Titans or with his own solo series. 

I understand metatextually why he became Kid Flash in TT, since they needed him to be more mature and a more recognizable character and having him upgrade costumes/codenames is a good shortcut for both. But I’ve already talked about why it didn’t sit right with me. 

So, lets flip the script a little bit - the start of TT would be largely the same. Our boy Bart is on the new Titans team, and things are kind of awkward after YJ disbanded, also Max is gone and Bart’s relationship with Wally is still not doing great. Things are rough, Bart has newfound doubts to deal with, especially now that the world seems to have gotten harsher and everyone seems to have a lot less patience to deal with him. The pressure to be more mature and a recognizable character is coming from other characters now rather than an authorial need: he’s reminded to take things seriously, or that he should know better by now, that he needs to slow down and think more. So Bart decides a change is necessary, and we get the library scene. He reads all the books, he reappears as Kid Flash, saves Tim via bullet catch, disassembles a gun, takes down Slade, etc. etc. Here’s my departure from canon though: it doesn’t work. 

Kid Flash is not a solution, or a magical cure for immaturity. Reading a whole library so he’s miraculously smarter and more mature and capable is, at its core, a pretty naive conclusion. And it makes sense he would think that. But it doesn’t work. He’s still impulsive, distractible, hasty. He can’t put a lid on his own sense of humor. People still think he’s annoying or lazy or careless. And he keeps trying - he knows all this stuff now, he read a whole library! - but he’s still apparently too much the same person as he's always been. And even though he’s trying very hard to live up to the Kid Flash name, it still doesn’t feel like him. Wally doesn’t like it, since Bart is literally just imitating him now, which makes things between the two even worse. And Bart keeps worrying about what’s supposed to come afterwards, since “Kid Flash” is inherently temporary, and while Impulse was only peripherally related to the flash legacy, Kid Flash comes with expectations. 

Bart is trying very very hard to be ‘grown up’ and ‘mature’, but he hasn’t actually learned anything other than a bunch of facts (which are still useful, but) he’s just trying to be who everyone expects him to be. 

And this is what i mean about the ensemble thing, because this arc would be in conversation with the rest of the core four, who are also trying very hard to be people they’re not, but all in different ways. Bart obviously with the codename change, but Cassie, Tim, and Kon all have similar issues, they’re all trying to imitate people. 

Tim is doing his Batman jr. routine, reverting back to the persona he had at the start of YJ. He’s cagey and mysterious and does questionable things without telling anybody, because he’s de-facto leader of the team again, and he has to be better than he is. No more kid stuff, the Titans are serious, he has to treat it like a job, not like a sleepover. And this whole act is putting distance between him and his friends. 

Cassie is trying her hardest to put herself in a support role. Donna’s gone and she has some big shoes to fill (she and Tim could probably bond about that if he weren’t stubbornly trying to brood at all hours of the day) and she’s doing her best to just Be Donna. Cassie and Tim would work better with their team roles swapped, and they both sort of know this - Cassie is naturally charismatic, thinks on her feet, can maintain good PR, and when she’s confident in herself is great at leading. Tim is partial to planning ahead, secrets, and keeping in the shadows, and is better at being a confidant and emotional problem solver among the team (when he allows himself to be open among friends, that is). 

But they’re both trying to fit themselves into what they see as pre-ordained roles: Robin is leader, Wondergirl is a supportive mediator. But Cassie’s got a temper and little patience for people being idiots, and Tim’s not predisposed to spotlights. 

Kon on the other hand has a story that’s less about who he should be and more who he shouldn’t be. The Lex Luthor dad storyline is here (minus the mind control shit, although the threat of it is still brought up) and Kon is doing his level best to do nothing that could be interpreted as something Lex might do. While everyone is doing their best to Not be their own person, Kon has no idea if he ever was his own person. He’s questioning everything he does, wondering if it’s some kind of evil gene showing through when he’s angry or petty or selfish. He’s going through lots of clone angst. 

So they’re all dealing with expectations and who they are or aren’t supposed to be, trying to fit themselves into boxes that don’t suit them and then convincing themselves that this is how it ought to be. Kon ought to avoid feeling or acting in any negative light because any sign of Luthor is a sign of evil, Cassie ought to tone herself down and act like Donna, Tim ought to step up and lead the team and act like Dick, and Bart ought to listen better and be smarter and slow down and grow up and do his level best to just Be Wally. 

Throughout the issues they’d all get a spotlight on their various crises, taking them through complimenting character arcs. Kon would realize through a couple close encounters and chats with ma and pa and talks with his friends and citizens of metropolis that nobody is all good or all bad. Clark can be a real asshole sometimes and Luthor’s actually done a fair bit of good (usually in his own interests, but still we’re gunning for nuance). Turns out he doesn’t have a dark side to be tempted by, he was made from 50% complex person and 50% complex person, just like everyone else. Which means he isn’t destined to be the next Superman, or Superman’s next supervillain. He’s just like, a person. With his own thoughts and feelings that have nothing to do with genetics. 

Tim would wear himself out and hide it from everybody until he killed himself, but it’s only when he sees Cassie also wearing herself out too that his ‘somebody needs somebody’ instincts kick in and they’re actually able to talk about how miserable they both are. Through some trial and error they’re able to figure out a good co-leader system for leading the team, having each other’s backs along the way, which allows for them both being able to help out the other members of their team with their own shit i.e. Kon and Bart’s identity issues. 

Bart is, like Cassie and Tim, wearing himself out trying to be this perfect version of Wally that never actually existed. He actually hates the recognition the new name gives him, because people have expectations for him now, ones he can never seem to live up to. He’s bad at following orders still, which makes him a pretty shit sidekick for Wally, in fact he’s just pretty shit at being a sidekick in general. But, he reasons, he’s supposed to be grown up and responsible now, and responsibility is all about doing shit you hate until you die, so he’s probably on the right track. 

It’s only later, once he gets some support from his friends, who help him deal with things like Max and YJ disbanding and stuff that he’s able to actually sit down and have a heart-to-heart with Wally. Wally confesses that he understands the pressure to live up to a legacy, and how he did his best to just Be Barry when he became the flash. In fact while Bart was trying to live up to Wally and be a good sidekick, Wally was trying to live up to Barry and be a good mentor. Wally’s the one to tell him that Bart’s always done his own thing, and is at his best when he does. They both agree they suck as partners, but maybe they should’ve tried to be family first. And there’s probably a racing metaphor in there somewhere because speedsters love their racing metaphors. 

ANyway Bart returns to Impulse, forging a new path, getting along better with Wally now and hanging out with him just as civilians with no pretense. He learns some valuable lessons about how maturity can’t be learned in a book, and that he’ll get it himself the more he lives and learns from experience. The Titans all get along better now that they’re all sure of their places in the group, and they can all go on just being themselves without worrying about expectations or roles to fill or whatever. 

...If Bart still had his solo series instead though, id actually want it to go in a sort of different direction? The thing about living up to predecessors and trying to be some ideal version of another person works well for the Titans because they can all deal with a similar issue in different ways, but I think it would also be interesting to do the complete opposite. 

Lots of shitty things happened in very quick succession in Bart’s life that he had no control over: Max’s disappearance, having to move in with Jay and Joan (who are nice, but whom he barely knows,) leaving his friends in Alabama, Young Justice breaking up… Basically, things kind of suck for Bart, and all he wants is for them to go back to the way they were. Instead of trying to be grown up or mature or whatever, Bart is resisting every single encroaching thing about coming adulthood. Because all growing up ever seems to mean is that everything changes and either you have to leave the people you love or they have to leave you. 

So this series would focus mostly on that, both in his civilian life; going into high school, not knowing anybody, the few friends he does make are less interested in ‘kid stuff’ and more focused on dating and interpersonal drama, high school itself seems to be geared entirely toward the “what are you going to do with your life” question, when he visits his old friends back in manchester, they’ve all kind of grown up without him. And in hero life; everyone from Young Justice is trying to move on and not talking to each other, his father figure and mentor is gone and he's not really jiving well with the rest of the flash family, and people just seem to have less patience for Impulse now that he’s older. 

Growing up is hard. It’s hard and no one understands. Especially not when you’re also a superhero and have dealt with some quality trauma like losing loved ones and feeling yourself die. So it makes sense that Bart would resist that in every way possible, do his best to pretend like everything is still how it used to be, for once in his life just trying to make everything stay put. He refuses to get rid of his old stuff, he doesn’t want to treat any villainous threats seriously, people in school keep talking about college and jobs and tuition fees and Bart wants none of that, he acts out, refuses responsibility, gets reckless under the pretense that he never used to have to be cautious. 

And this is the part where I’d bring in Inertia, cause Thad was robbed and I want him to have an actual arc that doesn’t end with infant-splosion. Also he can have a good ol companion arc to Bart. Welcome to foils everybody, where two identical boys with opposing life experiences get to thematically compare and contrast with each other as they deal with the trials and tribulations of growing up. 

So, I’m ignoring every appearance Thad ever made after Impulse 1995, picking up instead where his story left off where he swore vengeance on his creators and disappeared into the speed force. And he’s off to do exactly what he said; Thad Thawne II is going to kill his namesake/grandfather/creator - the president of Earthgov. 

But, turns out assassinating the president of a whole fucking planet is a lot harder than he thought - Thad has planned extensively for every moment of his life, so once he starts going off script things predictably go a little off the fuckin rails. Thad fails, obviously. For one because despite how much President Thawne might deserve to die, Thad at this point hasn’t done anything worse than attempted murder, and making him a killer would put a wrench in any kind of redemption arc he could have. Also he’s acting on rage, in a highly emotional state, basically going up against the entire government. Of course he’s going to get caught by the science police and brought into custody. 

Bart, meanwhile is jumping with both feet into any kind of escapism he can find, which involves various time travel shenanigans and lands him in the 30th century. He gets to reunite however briefly with his mom, but the mission he had gets derailed by the appearance of Inertia. 

Every time Bart and President Thawne interact, the president always seems to make a bid to sway Bart to the Thawne side. This never works, which is part of the reason Inertia exists in the first place; a version of Bart that the president could control. When Inertia landed in the 30th century, hell bent on assassinating his creator, the President subdued him and eventually coerced him back over to the Thawne side of the family feud. No longer a rogue agent, Inertia is back to his old self, all about destroying Bart and the rest of the Allens. 

They have a battle, taking place all over the 30th century city, and Bart does his best but Inertia has the entire Earthgov police force on his side, and Bart eventually gets captured. He gets taken to some kind of holding facility, meets with the President who monologues as him while Inertia stands beside him like a good lackey. Then suddenly the speed-inhibiting cuffs or whatever Inertia had put on Bart to stop his speed malfunctions, and Inertia drops the act, now Impulse and Inertia working together to take down the Earthgov people holding them there. 

Turns out as soon as Inertia knew he couldn’t take out the president, what with all the military force President Thawne had on his side, he bided his time until he could. He uses Bart’s help to finally get President Thawne cornered, and the assassination plan is back on track. Except now Bart is the thing stopping him. He makes the argument about how murder bad. Heroes don’t kill, etc. Inertia insists he isn’t a hero. But Bart reminds him that that’s not how Max saw him. 

Inertia hesitates just enough that President Thawne is able to get away, and now the two of them have to make an escape attempt back to the past. Bart insists on trying to take Meloni with them, and they try but ultimately fail somehow (maybe someone has to stay behind to make sure they can make the trip safely, idk. At first Thad is willing to stay behind, since there’s nothing really for him in the past. But Meloni knows that President Thawne would destroy him if he did, and she can’t let harm come to either of her sons - and she does consider Thad her son, just like Bart. She’s had far too little time with either of them, but she loves them all the same. She tells them to take care of each other, and is the first to encourage them to be like, actual brothers.) 

After yet another tearful goodbye, Bart swearing he’ll find a way for them to all be together again, Bart and Thad go back. And they do end up having to lean on each other, because shit’s tough for the both of them. Thad initially wants to apologize and possibly reunite with Max and Helen, and then finds out Max is gone. And Bart has someone who understands exactly what he’s going through. 

Things get a little more lighthearted from here. Bart and Thad don’t get along well at first, since they’re both going through rough times and lots of changes and their first instincts are to lash out at each other. But eventually they form a sort of camaraderie through shared grief, then shared fish-out-of-water experiences. Which evolves into shared inside jokes and video games and comic books and they become slow but steady friends. 

They upgrade into brothers when Bart defends Thad against the repeated (and not entirely undeserved) suspicion he receives from the rest of the Flash family. Jay and Joan take him in, but it’s clear they don’t trust him, and neither does Wally. Bart stands up for Thad, arguing that he’s as much of a Thawne as Thad is, and treating Thad like he’s the next Cobalt Blue is just going to ensure that history never changes and stupid family feuds are forever. After this, Thad starts trusting Bart a little more, and kind of solves Bart’s problems regarding encroaching adulthood with his friendship. Neither of them really had a childhood, and Thad hasn’t experienced 21st century life at all, much less the societal expectations to grow up. So Bart gets to have fun again, and Thad won't judge any of his games or his books or his attitude or interests for being childish or lame because he’s fascinated by the experience of anything regardless of the target audience. 

And from there it's a series about these two becoming brothers and growing up and the different lessons they learn and wacky characters they meet along the way. Thad ironically also puts Bart in a position where he has to take on more responsibility, since even though Thad can imitate heroic actions and is actually pretty good at it, he doesn’t understand what makes them heroic. Bart has to draw on a lot of the things Max taught him and now has to teach them to Thad. 

There’s crossover comics with Superboy, where Bart laments about having to deal with grown up stuff, and Kon gives him a new perspective on the whole “being young forever” thing, since that was a reality Kon actually had to deal with and it sucked. 

Through various misadventures they meet new and familiar characters to give them different perspectives on the whole passage of time thing. Villains who despise children or childish things, villains who embrace it but probably too much. People who talk about growing up as the worst time of their lives, others talking about it like it was the best. Kids and adults alike trying to force Bart and Thad to act a certain way while treating them another. 

The two of them come to opposing conclusions about this; Thad wants to embrace change completely, partly because he wants to experience firsthand all that life has to offer, but also his worldview depends on believing that anyone can change, and anyone can be better, because he has to believe he can be redeemed for all the shitty stuff he did. Bart, on the other hand, knows his life isn’t perfect but thinks, based on recent events, that it’s all just going to get worse from here, and so resists change as much as possible. 

Thad, in his haste to experience everything, sometimes ends up going too far, either burning both of them out, or pushing them into situations that they’re not ready for or are ill-equipped to handle. Bart, on the other hand is so resistant to change or responsibility that he stops them from doing actual necessary things like planning their futures or doing chores or making new friends. This acts as the crux for their main conflict that slowly builds throughout the series, and then in a finale to the arc, they both figure out a way to get Meloni back to the past, and to raise some stakes they have a falling out in the middle of the mission about it. 

Bart accuses Thad of trying to leave him behind, or trying to be the better version of him again, and that old insecurity about Thad replacing him crops up. Thad thinks Bart just can’t handle anything outside his personal bubble and wants to force him to live in the real world. Plus he also feels kind of abandoned by Bart, who often would leave Thad to do the scary adult things on his own. 

Tensions still high, there's suddenly an external threat to deal with - probably president thawne and the science police - and they attempt to continue arguing even while fighting the president. I’m making this up as I go so lets say yada yada big climactic moment it's looking like the two might fail to get Meloni back and they’re both still angry with each other and Bart just… can’t take it anymore. 

He keeps losing people, and the ones he keeps he always seems to screw up with. And at the end of the day he’s just a kid who wants his mom. Is that really so much to ask? So there’s a reversal, a parallel, if you will, of the assassination attempt from the beginning of the series, this time with Bart. Or, because I don’t think many people would buy that Bart would actually ever for real kill someone, maybe he’s finally about to get his mom back, but she doesn’t want to go (since she made that deal with the president that he wouldn’t harm anyone of the Allen family so long as she stayed with him) so he’s trying to force her, risking the lives/well-being of the entire Allen bloodline across all of time. 

This time it’s Thad who has to talk him down, who has to remind him about being a hero, who has to remind him that trying to go back to some magical time in the past where things were better is just going to stop him from learning and growing as a person, and that doing anything and everything possible to get there is just going to lead to Bart doing something he Actually Can’t walk back from. 

Alright but here’s the thing because having Bart be forced to leave his mom again for like the billionth time is tired and overdone, and personally the whole message about heroics involving extreme and damaging amounts of sacrifice can only go so far. So here; Thad and Bart are both right. 

Like on the one hand, yeah, it’s childish and selfish for Bart to want to be with his mom at the expense of literally everyone else in his family. On the other hand, the fact that they can’t be together because some asshole is upholding a stupid grudge is bad and unfair and wrong. The issue needing to be fixed is not the kid who wants his mom, it’s the jackass keeping them apart (and who also wants to kill/imprison people). So Bart convinces Thad that they have to save Meloni, and Thad convinces Bart that there has to be another way - one where they get their mom back and the Allens don’t have to be hunted. 

The whole story would be leading up to the two of them coming to this conclusion; the healthy middle between the two extremes. Where they have the maturity to plan ahead and sort through their differences and figure out the best course of action with the least amount of collateral, but they don’t let go of that adolescent need for justice and fairness - that thing that makes you dig in your heels and say “no. That’s not fair, that’s not right.” 

SO here’s where I’d put the title card: “Bartholomew and Thaddeus Take Down The Government”. How do they do it? No idea! I’m flyin by the seat of my pants here! Do they run for office? Do they publicize the president’s crimes in such a way he gotta go to jail? Do they somehow turn public opinion against him enough to get him out of office? idk!!! And I don’t remember enough about Earthgov’s political situation to put an accurate read on what exactly they might do to disrupt it. 

Either way they don’t kill him, manage to free their mom, and they all go back to the past together. And a new arc would involve the three of them getting settled in the past; Meloni would be a main character now, and hers is a two-pronged fish out of water story where she’s trying to figure out how shit works in the past, with overtones of the struggles of being a single parent. 

And... I’m not going to say any more about that because this is long enough already oof. 

TL;DR I think a coming of age story would be cool for Bart, and having to deal with growing up when he never really had a childhood. Also the comic itself would be aimed at younger audiences, who can probably relate to having a Bad Time in the Teens and wacky hijinks with friends and siblings.

[quilser]

Perfect P2 ~ Choni:

(A/N) Did anyone ask for this? Nope. Does anyone want this? Nope. Do I want to post it just so I can post the two chapters of smut that come after this. Yes. That in fact is the case.

Read on ao3

Pairing: Toni Topaz x Cheryl Blossom

Word Count: 3389

Rating: M (Only for language. Sadly none of the fun stuff in this chapter)

Warnings: Besides some language, this is about as backstory driver as a chapter can get. If you want to read this as a series and understand what’s going on, read this. If you don’t care about plot and are just here for the goods...next chapter my pals. Next chapter ;)

Summary: After two years, two past lovers are reunited. The end result is one neither of them wanted.

Parts: |1| |2| |3| |4| |5| |6| |7| |8| |9|

|~~|

Cheryl sat in the principal’s office for what felt like hours. Of course, only a few minutes had passed due to the principal’s tardiness, but Cheryl could’ve been easily fooled if not for the repetitive ticking of the desk clock in front of her.

She hadn’t been told what the conference was about prior to coming, but she had a good idea what would be discussed. The grave look Kevin had given her when she’d entered the office area was particularly telling. This could only concern one thing, Toni. Cheryl could only think of one thing in her life that had recently concerned that individual.

When Mr. Weatherbee came in, Cheryl couldn’t even meet his eyes. Her head stayed bowed without much want to do anything else.

“Based on your current reaction, I assume you’ve heard what this conference is about.” A shiver travelled through Cheryl when she heard him speak. It was without a doubt certain that she’d been correct concerning the content of this impromptu student conference.

“I regret that you’re so upset with me, but I’m afraid this is what’s best for the school’s image.” That surprised Cheryl. What did she have to be upset with him about? It’s not as if he’d punished her yet or anything. The timing of the phrase caused too much confusion for Cheryl not to raise her head.

Mr. Weatherbee had his back turned to Cheryl seemingly staring absently at the books littering the shelves behind his desk. This allowed him to miss the look of confusion that sat on the face of the one he was addressing.

“You have to understand though. With graduation coming up at the end of this year and the first batch of Southside kids set to graduate, we can’t afford to not show a united front for alumni and potential investors in the school. It might seem strange at first, but I’m certain any differences you have from the Southside kids are material at best.” Weatherbee’s words continued to confuse Cheryl. It was as if he’d forgotten who was in his office and was instead talking to be someone else.

“I don’t know what you mean sir.” Cheryl finally spoke, but her words barely came out above a whisper. Thankfully, Weatherbee was still capable of hearing her as he turned with a look of confusion now settled onto his face.

“Excuse me then. Your actions when I entered made it seem as though you’d already been informed of my decision.” Cheryl leaned forward at the mentioning of a decision being made. Somehow, leaning forward seemed like the fastest way to understand the meaning behind that statement.

“Ah right, you still don’t know what I’m referring to.” Weatherbee chuckled to himself before sitting down into his chair and settling before looking back at Cheryl. “I’ve decided that you and Toni Topaz will be the ambassadors for your class this year. It will be a coming together of different lifestyles in a way and in that it is expected of you two to…” Weatherbee continued to speak, but Cheryl drowned him out. Her mind had been stuck on the mention of Toni.

“Cheryl. Cheryl?” Finally her name reached Cheryl’s ears and she looked up to see a look of concern painted onto the principals face. “Are you alright?” Cheryl nodded her head vigorously before ceasing the motion and paying attention to everything that Weatherbee was saying.

Apparently, Toni’s position as being a de facto leader of the Serpents, or at least the most recognizable female who was occasionally in charge, had gained the attention of Weatherbee. Supposedly, Riverdale High was attempting to end any stigma going into the new year in regards to the Southside kids that had existed since the group had joined the school. Although there would be no official show of good spirits, Weatherbee hoped that the pairing of the most Riverdale girl out of the students -- aka Cheryl -- and the most Southside girl -- aka Toni -- would show an acceptance and bring an end to the bitter classiest rivalry that remained between the two groups.

Cheryl was beyond shocked by the end of the meeting. How was it that she’d managed to create a potential problem for a project that she hadn’t even known to exist yet? To think that she’d now have to partner up with Toni after everything that had occurred.

Almost immediately after the meeting came to a close Cheryl found herself in her car staring mindlessly into the parking lot in front of her. It was as if no time had passed between now and two years ago and she was back to fearing that the true nature of herself would be revealed once more.

No matter how many times Cheryl attempted to rearrange it in her head, nothing about the situation seemed to make sense. It was as though she was simply in the middle of a nightmare that she couldn’t manage to wake up from.

As she thought about it more, she came to realize that being alone in her car was only scaring her more. She grabbed her phone and scrolled through her contacts until she noticed one in particular.

Without thinking, she immediately dialed Josie and ceased breathing as the phone rang and rang. She started to worry that no one would pick up, but when the ring tone hushed and a small click was heard, Cheryl released a sigh of relief.

“Josie?” Cheryl’s voice cracked as she spoke and although no tears fell, she could tell that they were welling up.

“Cheryl? Girl, what’s wrong? Are you alright?” Josie sounded groggy which made Cheryl feel bad calling her while knowing that the girl, like most high school students, prefered to sleep in on Saturday’s as opposed to being awake, but just hearing the voice of her friend managed to comfort her slightly.

“I fucked up. I fucked up so badly and it's only getting worse and I don’t know what to do Josie.” Cheryl was now allowing tears to fall from her eyes. The paths they made felt as if they cut into the skin they crossed. With every tear, Cheryl felt as though a piece of her fell too.

“Alright just breathe. Where are you? I can come get you.” Josie seemed wide awake now. Though her voice was still laced with a hint of sleepiness, the alertness it carried outweighed the other.

“No. No, I’ll come to you. Are you at home?” Cheryl managed to sniffle back a few tears in order to settle her voice and buckle her seatbelt as she put Josie on speaker phone. She had always been good at concealing things when she needed to and driving didn’t exactly feel like the best time to be blinded by tears.

“Yeah, I’m at home. Just come over and I’ll get some food and we’ll just have a girls day alright?” Cheryl agreed with a hum before hanging up the phone and taking a large breath. She attempted to center herself and when her best had been achieved she sped out of the school parking lot.

When Cheryl arrived at Josie’s house, she barely made it through the door before collapsing onto the floor. The tears she’d pushed back before came even faster than she'd expected and if not for Josie rushing to her side, she might have passed out.

That was one thing she was glad to have changed about herself in the past two years. While she still trusted few, those she did keep around her were people she was somewhat comfortable breaking down in front of. Had things been the same as they were two years prior, Cheryl wasn’t sure what she would’ve done in this moment.

After a while, Josie managed to help Cheryl to her bedroom and make her comfortable while she went to get some food. Whenever Cheryl got like this, she wouldn’t talk until she was ready, so it was just better to keep her distracted until she was ready to deal. Josie knew this from extreme amounts of practice.

Josie and Cheryl sat for hours watching random channels that popped onto the TV from the comfort of Josie’s room. Josie was extremely careful to avoid anything too dramatic in content knowing that Cheryl probably didn’t need any more drama in her life right now.

For the past two years, this had been somewhat of a routine. Whenever either girl felt like the world was closing in around them, they would venture to the other for a distraction at the very least. Cheryl had been there when Josie was having problems with the Pussycats, and Josie was here now. That’s how they worked and had worked for years.

Despite the rocky road both had taken to rebuild their friendship, they were able to be stronger than ever with years together as a starting place.

Cheryl was especially thankful in moments like these for Josie’s understanding and patience which could occasionally contrast with her stubborn and ambitious nature. She was rather adept at choosing the right and wrong times to press Cheryl for information and to Cheryl, no better quality could be achieved in a friend.

The show they’d been watching had been playing reruns for a few hours when Cheryl finally crawled off the couch she’d slowly been sinking into and moved to be facing Josie where she was sitting on the bed. With a tear stained face, she explained everything that had occurred in the past few weeks.

Josie sat silently only making sounds of understanding when necessary. Her face remained neutral and Cheryl was thankful for that. When the recalling of events came to an end, Josie sat in silence for a while longer pondering everything she’d been told.

After a few minutes of silence, Josie looked directly into Cheryl’s eyes and asked the one question that had arisen in her mind during the telling of the story by Cheryl.

“So do you still have feelings for her?”

Cheryl was taken aback by Josie’s words. Though the question had briefly crossed her mind, she’d quickly swept it away with all the other thoughts she hated having.

It wasn’t so long ago that such a question had been able to keep her up at night and distract her during every moment of her life. When Cheryl finally moved past the question’s hold on her, she’d vowed to never allow it to enter her mind again; at least in consideration for a certain individual.

Josie hadn’t uttered another word since asking. She sat silently once more, only staring into Cheryl’s eyes.

“I’m not trying to probe you for answers or anything. If you don’t want to answer you don’t have to. I guess that’s just the only question that could explain why you care so much about this. I get that you’re scared of that video and all because of your mom and the rest of the town, but it’s totally possible that it was just a security camera or better yet just a malfunctioning something or other that some drunken idiot left in the bathroom. Plus, who’d be dumb enough to come for a Blossom with that kind of nonsense”

Cheryl could tell that Josie had taken in all of this rationally. Perhaps her inability to understand the situation in such a way was more telling of her feelings than she’d like it to be, but she couldn’t contemplate that at the moment.

“I don’t know Josie. Honestly, I never expected to see her again, and then I did. Things that haven’t occurred in years happened and now I’m expected to act normally and be all buddy-buddy with her for some stupid school image. I don’t understand how I’m supposed to do that.” Cheryl confessed what was running through her mind. It was no use lying to Josie. She’d know anyway. They’d been through too much.

“I get that this is hard for you girl, but I really have to ask this.” Josie paused and took a breath knowing her question could easily rub Cheryl the wrong way. “Have you considered that this might be even harder on Toni?”

With that Cheryl felt as though a stop sign had been placed within the depths of her mind. It was as if she could no longer think without her thoughts being stripped away or stopped in place.

“If you think about, throughout everything that’s happened between you two, it’s been you getting the better end of the deal. I know it’s probably not my place to say this, as it’s not my life, but if you look at it, Toni was dropped by everyone at school, she had to fight to maintain some semblance of a relationship with friends that would’ve been fairly secured for her if not for them siding with you. She had to be the one left behind by all of us, and especially you. No matter how I think of it, a lot has been done by her to make sure you got it better off.”

Josie was no longer looking at Cheryl. Since she’d began her question and explanation she’d been playing with her fingers attempting to distance herself from Cheryl’s response. She couldn’t see the look of aggravation that had begun growing onto Cheryl’s features. If she had, she would have realized how warranted her fear was.

“You know what Josie, it’s not like I’ve enjoyed this. You think I wanted all that to happen to her? You think I wanted to stop talking to her? You think I wanted to see her have to fight daily like that?” Cheryl was raising her tone more and more and with every word Josie shrunk farther down it seemed.

“I think you wanted to do what was easier for you.” Josie spoke quietly but strength still presented itself in her response.

“Well I’m glad that you see me as such an amazing human being Josie. God, I’m just gonna go.” Cheryl left Josie’s in a hurry. She managed to hold her expression of anger until she got to her car, but once she got inside, the expression fell.

The more she thought about Josie’s words, the more she realized how right she was.

When word had started spreading about a lesbian couple within the school two years prior, and eyes quickly turned to the fast growing “friendship” forming between Cheryl and Toni, Cheryl had felt like only one possible outcome could result if something wasn’t done to handle the situation. Things would come out one way or another and Cheryl knew that it was always better to get ahead of information and spread it yourself.

At first, both Toni and Cheryl had agreed that they would just throw caution to the wind and make a public show of being a couple; consequences come as they may, but as the day neared for them to out themselves to the school, Cheryl began to worry more and more.

Being at the top was all she’d ever known her entire life. Was it really worth risking for a relationship that might not last? If her brother dying had taught her anything it was that even the best of things must come to an end.

In a rash, and rather regrettable decision as Cheryl came to remember it as, Cheryl outed Toni to the entire school without her knowledge, leaving the day when they were suppose to out themselves together to be the day Toni came back to rumors spreading that she’d attempted to come onto Cheryl and hadn’t been friendly when the answer was no. Try as she might, Cheryl couldn’t bring herself to deny such rumors in fear of putting herself at risk of exposure.

The ordeal had caused many of Toni’s friends to turn against her. While Toni wanted to argue against such things, she quickly realized that any attempt to do so would only lead to questions being thrown Cheryl’s way. Not wanting this, Toni denied nothing, not even to her closest friends, and as sophmore year came and went and junior year came into focus, Toni was left alone with no hope of regaining her previous stature.

As time passed, Cheryl had attempted to stay in contact with the girl who’d sacrificed everything for her, but the more she spoke to Toni, the guiltier she felt. The guilt ate at her and affected everything from her school work to her personal life.

Eventually, Cheryl just stopped messaging. Toni attempted almost daily at communication, but after a few months, that too faltered. Part of Cheryl excused away her actions by saying that she was only following the way of the world; the social order that confined her existence. Another part of her understood though that everything being done was of her own selfish ambitions.

Cheryl thought about all of this as she drove her car down the roads of Riverdale. At first she’d been unaware of the location she was heading in, but as her car ran over the noticeable bump of railroad tracks, the thought clicked in her mind.

The notion that Toni would have remained in the same place for the past two years seemed stupid to believe. Cheryl was certain she’d heard rumor of Toni’s grandfather dying in the previous year which made the chances that much smaller. Despite this though, Cheryl had to know.

As Cheryl ventured down the dirt road into the brownish grass that made up the yard of the trailer in front of her, her nerves began to explode. Although she had no intention of turning back until her curiosity was cured, something still pulled at her to turn around and go back to Josie’s, or better yet to her own home.

This didn’t stop her though. With what little courage she could muster, Cheryl allowed her feet to be carried up the stairs of the trailer as her heart pounded more and more in her chest. The sound was almost deafening before it halted abruptly the second Cheryl reached the door she’d been slowly approaching.

Nothing had changed from the first, and only, time she’d been here with Toni. That was a time when she’d thought that being with the girl forever wasn’t a far off possibility, now it seemed like a distant dream. Cheryl couldn’t help but laugh at the irony of it all.

Ignoring the rest of her thoughts, Cheryl ventured to the door in front of her. With a shaky hand, she reached for doorbell that shined dimly given the brightness the afternoon sun was providing.

Cheryl hadn’t realized that she’d pressed the button until the tone was heard from inside of the bell being rung. As Cheryl waited for an answer, she felt silly for being there at all.

What was the point of coming? She hadn’t thought of what to say, or why she’d say she’d come. Nothing had crossed the paths in her mind besides getting there and now that she’d arrived, her head felt blank.

Time seemed to pass in lengthy periods as Cheryl continued waiting for the door to open. It seemed as though she really had been mistaken in coming. After another minute, Cheryl finally gave up. With a small laugh which showed more pain than amusement, Cheryl found herself venturing off the stairs that led to the front door of the trailer and back to her car.

The walk back felt longer than the entire drive there. Cheryl couldn’t shake the feeling that if anyone had been watching her at this moment, they’d be laughing at how much of an idiot she looked like. In hindsight, she probably deserved the humiliation. What right did she have to be comfortable at this point?

As she reached her car, a chill settled over her. The dreariness that the empty land around her held seemed to match her too well in this moment. It scared her.

Thankfully, she was only a door opening away from escaping the large empty space and as her hand extended to open her car door, she almost felt relieved.

As she grasped the door handle, a sigh escaped Cheryl. This was what she deserved, and she knew it, but the pain she felt from being wrong and still acting on it felt worse than doing nothing at all.

“Cheryl.”

[brajeshupadhyay]

Joe Biden names Kamala Harris as running mate to take on Donald Trump, Mike Pence in Nov

If Joe Biden’s selection of Kamala Harris is met with a cold shoulder by some on the Left, she is likely to be embraced by Biden’s most important electoral constituency within the Democratic Party: Black voters

Joe Biden selected Senator Kamala Harris of California as his vice-presidential running mate Tuesday, embracing a former rival who sharply criticised him in the Democratic primaries but emerged after ending her campaign as a vocal supporter of Biden and a prominent advocate of racial-justice legislation after the death of George Floyd in late May.

Harris, 55, is the first Black woman and the first person of Indian descent to be nominated for national office by a major party, and only the fourth woman in history to be chosen for one of their presidential tickets. She brings to the race a far more vigorous campaign style than Biden’s, including a gift for capturing moments of raw political electricity on the debate stage and elsewhere, and a personal identity and family story that many find inspiring.

Biden announced the selection over text message and in a follow-up email to supporters: “Joe Biden here. Big news: I’ve chosen Kamala Harris as my running mate. Together, with you, we’re going to beat Trump.” The two are expected to appear together in Wilmington, Delaware, on Wednesday.

After her own presidential bid disintegrated last year, many Democrats regarded Harris as all but certain to attempt another run for the White House. By choosing her as his political partner, Biden may well be anointing her as the de facto leader of the party in four or eight years.

A pragmatic moderate who spent most of her career as a prosecutor, Harris was seen throughout the vice-presidential search as among the safest choices available to Biden. She has been a reliable ally of the Democratic establishment, with flexible policy priorities that largely mirror Biden’s, and her supporters argued that she could reinforce Biden’s appeal to Black voters and women without stirring particularly vehement opposition on the right or left.

While she endorsed a number of left-wing policy proposals during her presidential bid, Harris also showed a distinctly Biden-like impatience with what she characterised as the grand but impractical governing designs of some in her party.

“Policy has to be relevant,” Harris said last summer in an interview with The New York Times. “That’s my guiding principle: Is it relevant? Not, ‘Is it a beautiful sonnet?’.”

In a Twitter post Tuesday, Harris said she was honoured to join Biden on the ticket. “Joe Biden can unify the American people because he’s spent his life fighting for us,” she wrote.

For all the complexity of Biden’s vice-presidential search, there is a certain foreordained quality to Harris’ nomination. She has been regarded as a rising figure in Democratic politics since around the turn of the century, and as a confident representative of the country’s multiracial future. Harris sought to capture that sense of destiny in her own presidential campaign, announcing her candidacy on Martin Luther King Jr Day in 2019 and paying frequent homage to Shirley Chisholm, the first Black candidate to seek a major party’s nomination.

Throughout her rise, Harris has excited Democrats with a personal story that set her apart even in the diverse political melting pot that is California: She is the daughter of two immigrant academics, an Indian-American mother and a father from Jamaica. Harris was raised in Oakland and Berkeley, attended Howard University and pursued a career in criminal justice before becoming only the second Black woman ever elected to the Senate.

Still, Harris was far from a shoo-in for the role of Biden’s running mate, and some of Biden’s advisors harboured persistent reservations about her because of her unsteady performance as a presidential candidate and the finely staged ambush she mounted against Biden in the first debate of the primary season. Jill Biden, the former second lady, called Harris’ debate stage remarks a “punch to the gut” at a fundraiser in March.

In the end, however, Biden may have come to see the panache Harris displayed in that debate — when she confronted him over his past opposition to busing as a means of integrating public schools — as more of a potential asset to his ticket than as a source of lingering grievance. Indeed, even in the bleaker periods of her presidential candidacy last year, Harris maintained an ability to excite Democratic voters with the imagined prospect of a debate-stage clash between her and President Donald Trump.

Minutes after the announcement, the Biden campaign released what they called a fact sheet — “Biden-Harris: Ready to lead,” read the subject line. Perhaps in recognition of the attention paid to tensions between the Biden family and Harris surrounding the debate stage attack, the release included a section titled, “Kamala’s partnership with Joe Biden”.

The document noted that she served as attorney-general of California when Biden’s son, Beau, was attorney-general of Delaware. “The two grew close while fighting to take on the banking industry,” read one bullet point. “Through her friendship with Beau, she got to know Joe Biden. From hearing about Kamala from Beau, to seeing her fight for others directly, Joe has long been impressed by how tough Kamala is.”

Biden’s choice drew immediate praise Tuesday afternoon from some of his former rivals for the Democratic nomination. Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, herself a onetime candidate for the vice-presidential slot, called it a “historic moment” and praised Harris’ leadership, experience and character.

The Trump campaign responded to Harris’ selection with a statement branding her as “proof that Joe Biden is an empty shell being filled with the extreme agenda of the radicals on the Left”. Katrina Pierson, a spokeswoman for the campaign, attacked the policy stances Harris adopted during her own presidential campaign and highlighted her past attacks on Biden.

“Clearly, Phony Kamala will abandon her own morals, as well as try to bury her record as a prosecutor, in order to appease the anti-police extremists controlling the Democrat Party,” Pierson said.

After leaving the presidential race in December, Harris turned her attention back to the Senate and found new purpose amid a wave of nationwide protests this spring against racism and police brutality. She marched beside protesters and forcefully championed proposals to overhaul policing and make lynching a federal crime, often speaking with a kind of clarity that had eluded her in the presidential primaries on economic issues like health care and taxation.

Harris is likely, however, to face some scepticism from the Left — and attacks from Trump — over her record as district attorney of San Francisco and attorney-general of California. She has struggled in the past to defend her handling of some highly sensitive cases, including one involving a death-row inmate seeking to obtain DNA evidence for his case, as well as her decision to defend California’s death penalty in court despite her stated opposition to capital punishment.

In perhaps her worst moment of the 2020 primary race, Harris during a debate appeared entirely unable to rebut searing criticism from an obscure rival, Representative Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii, who demanded that Harris apologise for having prosecuted so many people for marijuana infractions. At other times, Harris struggled to articulate clear positions on litmus-test issues like single-payer health care.

But if Biden’s selection of Harris is met with a cold shoulder by some on the Left, she is likely to be embraced by Biden’s most important electoral constituency within the Democratic Party: Black voters.

Indeed, his choice reflects an emphatic recognition of the diversity of the Democratic political coalition and the foundational role that Black women in particular play within the party. Black women are among the most loyal Democratic constituencies, and without their overwhelming support Biden would have been unlikely to secure the Democratic nomination in the first place. By nominating a Black woman for national office, Biden appears to be acknowledging the immensity of that political debt.

He considered at least five Black women for the job, including Susan Rice, the former national security advisor to former President Barack Obama, and Representative Karen Bass, before ultimately settling on Harris. While Biden never described race as a central criterion in his decision-making, he stressed repeatedly throughout the process that he was reviewing a highly diverse group of candidates, including Latina and Asian-American candidates.

Biden faced only limited pressure from voters and Black elected officials to select an African-American running mate, and polls found that even liberals and Black voters themselves mostly believed that race should not be a factor in his decision. But the political atmosphere that took hold after the killing of Floyd in Minneapolis seemed to demand a running mate who could speak with great authority on matters of racism, law enforcement and social inequity — and there is little doubt that Harris will be called upon to do just that.

Some Democratic leaders also urged Biden to choose a Black running mate for purely strategic reasons, arguing that an increase in Black turnout across the South and Midwest could improve both Biden’s chances of winning the Electoral College and his party’s odds of winning a majority in the Senate. Still, it remains an open question how much Harris will help Biden and his party in that respect: Last year, she never garnered strong support in the diverse primary states of South Carolina and Nevada, and opinion research conducted by Biden’s team in recent weeks suggested she was not especially compelling to Black voters.

The question of Biden’s potential running mate was an urgent issue even for his core admirers, some of whom supported him in the Democratic primaries because they believed he could win the election but worried about whether he would be able to generate passionate enthusiasm for his candidacy. Part of Harris’ task now may be to stir the energy of Biden’s coalition in a way he has seldom managed to do himself.

The immediate political impact of Harris’ selection could be relatively muted in a campaign shaped so heavily by forces of extraordinary scale, most of all a global pandemic that has claimed many tens of thousands of American lives and pushed the economy into a painful recession.

Yet it has been clear for months that Biden’s vice-presidential decision would have unusually weighty implications for the Democratic Party, and for national politics in general. If he wins in November, Biden would become the oldest president ever to hold the office, and few senior Democrats believe he is likely to seek a second term that would begin after his 82nd birthday.

As a result, when Democrats formally approve Harris as Biden’s running mate this month, they may well be naming her as a powerful favourite to lead their party into the 2024 presidential race.

Biden’s age — 77 — also may have heightened the importance of finding a running mate with thoroughly convincing political credentials. Biden himself seemed sensitive to that reality, reiterating often that he wanted a vice president who would be ready to assume the top job immediately.

“The first and most important attribute is, if something happens to me, the moment after it does, that that person is capable of taking over as president of the United States of America,” he said at a fundraiser in May.

The vice-presidential search was at once highly public — involving tryouts on television and in online campaign events for more than half a dozen candidates — and surprisingly discreet for a campaign that has weathered a sizeable number of leaks over the past 15 months.

Much of the process was carried out by a committee of four trusted advisors named by Biden in late April: Former Senator Chris Dodd of Connecticut, Representative Lisa Blunt Rochester of Delaware, Mayor Eric Garcetti of Los Angeles and Cynthia Hogan, Biden’s former chief counsel.

Aided by a team of lawyers, this group held interviews with a range of vice-presidential prospects and delved into their political records, personal finances and private lives before referring a smaller number of them for interviews with Biden.

The field of women considered was certainly the most diverse array of vice-presidential candidates in history, beginning with a pool of more than a dozen contenders that included governors, senators, members of the House, a former UN ambassador, the mayor of Atlanta and a decorated combat veteran. The group included two Asian-American women and the first openly gay person elected to the Senate. Dodd in particular is said to have pressed for a large list with some unconventional names on it, to give Biden maximum flexibility in his choice.

By the end of June, a smaller cluster of candidates had emerged as strong contenders, impressing the screening committee in interviews and reaching a point in the process that involved extensive document requests from Biden’s lawyers. Among that group were Harris, Senators Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, Representative Val Demings of Florida, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico, Bass of California and Rice, the former national security advisor and UN ambassador.

Yet more than in any other recent vice-presidential process, it was also plain enough from the start that this one would be decided by one person, and one person alone, with an unusually well-developed sense of the vice presidency and firm convictions about how to do the job right. After all, Biden is the first presidential candidate in 20 years to choose a running mate after serving as the vice-president himself.

On the campaign trail, Biden constantly fielded inquiries about a possible vice-presidential pick, leading him to craft a well-honed answer about his criteria. In addition to being able to assume the presidency immediately, if necessary, Biden’s running mate must be “simpatico” with him on critical issues of the day, as well as on a broader vision for how to lead the nation.

Biden’s running mate should also balance him out with “some qualities that I don’t possess,” he has said.

Perhaps most importantly, he has emphasised the need to select a vice-president with whom he could have the same trusting, candid relationship that he had with Obama.

“We disagreed on some tactical approaches,” Biden recalled at a fundraiser in April, describing the lunches he and Obama had “where everything was on the table.” But, he went on, “It has to happen in private. You always have to have the president’s back.”

Alexander Burns and Katie Glueck c.2020 The New York Times Company

Find latest and upcoming tech gadgets online on Tech2 Gadgets. Get technology news, gadgets reviews & ratings. Popular gadgets including laptop, tablet and mobile specifications, features, prices, comparison.

The post Joe Biden names Kamala Harris as running mate to take on Donald Trump, Mike Pence in Nov appeared first on Shri Times News.

from WordPress https://ift.tt/3fVB5sA via Blogger https://ift.tt/3ajOKbm

[drjacquescoulardeau]

THE MAN IN THE HIGH CASTLE   FRANK SPOTNITZ – PHILIP K. DICK – THE MAN IN THE HIGH CASTLE – 1962 – TV SERIES – 2015 (Review August 10, 2017)  

The novel from which this TV series is adapted is an old dystopic novel of 1962, entirely positioned in an alternative world in same year. But first of all let’s speak of the novel itself.

 This book is an old book, in fact a classic, rather confidential at the time of its first publication and even when recently republished because of its theme, but it has been brought to new awareness in the public because Amazon has just decided to produce an adaptation of it for video streaming. Is it a good decision to bring it back to fame, because it will be fame this time? We’ll see right now why it should not have been kept more or less confidential for more than fifty years.

 The genre is difficult because it is RETROSPECTIVE SCIENCE FICTION. Science fiction is supposed to imagine what the future will be or may be according to one or two parameters that are changed in our present in absolute or relative value. Of course you can cheat the way “Back to the Future” did at least three times, and we may regret it does not go on at least one more time, but things are what they are and life is a truck full of manure as we all know. Here the author imagines in 1961-62 what the world would have been if in 1945 Germany and Japan had won the war. It is the basic hypothesis so many people work in their minds or in bar and saloon discussions: what the world would be if… And there is no limit to these IF’s. As they say in Paris the Eiffel Tower could be put in a bottle if… and the same for the Empire State Building or the Chrysler Building in New York if …, and for the >Washington Monument in Washington DC if … And after every presidential election in the world people imagine what it would be or would have been if the loser had won. Follow my eyes and read my lips.

 But what is the main and basic interest of this book?

First the world is cut in two with Japan on one side and Germany on the other side. The Communists have disappeared due to a strict eradication of all Slavs by Germany. The racial problem has also disappeared by the elimination of all black people in the world and first of all in Africa by Germany. In the same way the holocaust of Jews was continued though here the Japanese refused to cooperate. Imagine the world without Black people even in Africa, with maybe a few survivors surviving since it would be their only function as absolute slaves to be used, and abused, by any one of a paler complexion including children and even babies. I regret the book does not expand on this subject as much as it does on Jews, and particularly the few Jews who managed to get out of the influence of Germany and be de facto protected by the Japanese.

 But the most frightening part is that Germany is in the hands of the few people who were leading Germany in the war. In spite of the fact that Hitler is dead in 1961, it is his direct lieutenants and underlings that have taken over and are fighting for dominance, Goebbels first of all. The book is quite explicit on what happens in such a totalitarian state that is like a pot with a dozen spiders locked up in it who can only manipulate the crowds of people through the glass wall that protects them (the leaders only) and of course they have their legions outside that can eliminate all those who have to be eliminated for the dominating underling(s) to remain dominant, and at the same time these legions can go on some blood baths of their own for the fun of shedding and drinking the red stuff we call blood and they call a delicatessen though the Jews would consider it to be the soul of man, the divine part of man.

 And yet the book is fascinating for other reasons. It explores the very contemplative and oracular culture of the Japanese who have some kind of portable oracle in two volumes they consult regularly to know the meaning of the present and try to cope with the future. It provides the believers with Hexagrams that are both sibylline and enlightening in the shape of Haikus of six or about six lines. But the inner psychology of these Japanese is explored in depth: contemplative, extremely civil and polite, courteous and maybe even servile, but never revealing their true feelings and avoiding expressing any emotion and sensation. Cold for sure and yet tremendously empathetic, but unexpressed and unaired empathy. It is this very quality that makes them resist the German Nazis because they are able to communicate with the deepest forces in the universe, what every geological element carries, atomic forces and the power of any design, the design of molecules, or human-created designs and there we have a tremendous surprise. Two people launch a jewelry production unit in San Francisco and the main worker of the two is a Jew running incognito under a false name and under the de facto protection of the Japanese, a little bit more at the end of the book. And it is this Jew who is the creative jeweler, the creative artist, the craftsman who is producing with his hands the world of tomorrow as the Japanese main character tells us over and over again.

 That would symbolically tell us the German Nazis tried to eradicate the Jews because they represented the future and the Nazis represent the past. Simple, symbolical but is it really cathartic? There I cannot answer because anti-Semitism is slightly more complex than just a simile or a metaphor. It has to do with the fear that developed somewhere in the Middle East some 10,000 years ago in the vast confrontation of three cultures emerging from the ice age and trying to invent the future of the planet: The Turkic peoples, the Semitic peoples and the Indo-European (Sumerian) peoples. We are still living on that heritage, the heritage of an anthropological rivalry that became the differentiation of three linguistic families, and of three cultures with three religions, and what’s more the Semitic community got split in two along a social differentiation (exploiter and exploited) and a religious antagonism (Judaism and Islam). Christianity is the third religion branching out of Judaism and it is more or less assumed as part of the European, hence Nazi definition. The Christian religion is vastly absent from the book.

Of course in this book the Arabs and beyond them the Muslims are totally ignored and unconsidered, being replaced by the fourth human group that never had any role to play in the previous triad, the Buddhist and Confucian human family who are also from another linguistic family, isolating languages, here represented by the Japanese. That’s the main element that is absent from this book. Northern Africa, Egypt were essential at the end of the Second World War and still enormously influential in 1962, but yet the Arabs and Muslims are just not considered at all. That’s the shortcoming of the book in our modern times because since 1960-62 it is the community that has emerged most strongly from the initial triad and today the Asian isolating family is no longer represented by Japan but China. But of course this book did not aim at telling us its future which is our present, but only the present in 1961 if …

 The last element I would like to show is that the book has no end, precisely because of what I have just said. It does not open on the future in 1961 so it cannot have any end. It is coming to several open-ended dead ends, open-ended because we can imagine what we like, but dead ends since it does not tell us anything about what may happen after 1961. That’s the doom of retrospective science fiction. It is dramatic, frightening but at the same time it leads to no vision of the future. It is some kind of castrated science fiction that cannot tell us anything about our real world, the world of the real readers of the book, particularly those who read it a long time after the writing time. And that’s where the video adaptation will be fascinating since it will have to be adapted for today’s and tomorrow’s publics. But we’ll have to wait for it to be available in the whole world to add a paragraph, in fact a few paragraphs, to this review.

 Let the few who can access the video adaptation celebrate! God Bless the Child! (Review published on December 23, 2015, See further down for the original)

 Now let’s move to the TV series.

 The TV Series, the Blessed Child I have just mentioned, whose first two seasons are only available so far, is an expanded vision and the expansion seems to be changing quite a few details, especially since television must be visually acceptable and it does not have to be logically or even concretely possible. The Man in the High Castle is apparently making disturbing films that describe the world the way it developed after the victory in WW2 against Germany and Japan and his “studio” is a big warehouse somewhere in the San Francisco area, at least till he decides to move on and to torch his film producing “high castle.” We are not told then where he decides to move to.

 The second remark is that the TV series can easily jump from San Francisco and the Japanese Pacific states, to New York and the Greater Nazi Reich and to Berlin, the capital of this Greater Nazi Reich. To enable this, some characters have to be invented and the series becomes the story of these characters.

In San Francisco the central character is Juliana Crain who moves to the Neutral Zone, a buffer zone between the Japanese Pacific States and the Greater Nazi Reich, in fact Canon City, Colorado, after her sister is killed by the Japanese police, leaving her partner Frank Frink behind. She will come back and later she will move to New York as a refugee from the Pacific States where she is wanted by the Japanese. Frank Frink is also essential in San Francisco because of the role he plays little by little with the resistance against the Japanese. Frank is surrounded by several other characters and he is very complex since he is connected to the Japanese mafia who manages to liberate him and later his friend Ed McCarthy from the accusation of having shot the Japanese Crown Prince, though it was done by a Nazi agent. And on the Japanese side you have one more character (apart from the police and the general organizing the production of an atom bomb), the Trade Minister who is lost between the reality of these Japanese Pacific States, the recollection of his wife before this time (she is dead) and for him the alternative world of Kennedy’s USA in 1962 and the Cuban crisis with the Soviet missiles. He is able to navigate from one level to the other thanks to some kind of typical Zen meditation.

 San Francisco then is divided between the Resistance, the Japanese and the Americans who try to survive and strive in this colonized situation, with the Neutral Zone behind and direct bus lines used by the Japanese to transport uranium from the Neutral Zone to San Francisco, unprotected and thus killing all the “American” passengers, which does not count for anything for the Japanese since they are “American” and this ruse enables the uranium to be transported unnoticed by the Germans.

 New York is not in any way simpler since it has been totally expurgated like Europe of all the Semites, meaning the Jews, and of all the Blacks since all Africans have been sent back to Africa which is a big German colony, meaning a slave territory for all kinds of work. The main Nazi master of New York and the American Nazi states is a certain SS Obergruppenführer John Smith, and his family. We discover them from the inside because of Juliana Crain who is integrated into the Nazi elite by John Smith himself because he thinks she has some inner information about the resistance and the man in the high castle. The Nazi Reich practices total eugenics and John Smith’s son has the genetic disease John Smith’s brother had. He has to be eliminated. But John Smith is cheating with the system with the plan of sending his son on a patriotic trip in Latin America where he will be kidnapped by some “Semites” and thus will be able to remain alive.

But John Smith is trying to get another young person, Joe Blake, into the position of a special agent but it is difficult because when Joe Blake was sent to Canon City in Colorado he came across Juliana and another Nazi agent who had the order to get the film she was transporting and kill her. Joe Blake saves her and the result is the death of the Nazi agent and the delivery of the film (in fact two because Joe Blake was also transporting one to enter in contact with the resistance) to the resistance represented locally by a black man, Lem Washington. And after that “encounter” entirely based on unshared secrets they go their separate ways though the next mission of Joe Blake will take him to San Francisco to recuperate another film and he will escape the Japanese police thanks to Juliana who manages him to be taken on a boat to Mexico, and he will escape the resistance thanks to a Nazi bribe of the resistance people on the boat who are transporting him to Mexico, but the bribe delivered by air is poisoned and the black people on the boat will all die, both as criminals and as black people, hence duly eliminated from the surface of the earth. The Nazis seem to be waiting for the death of Hitler to seize power, or rather to start fighting to seize power. Himmler started too early so he is killed by Smith. But Hitler does die and the power chase starts.

 Berlin is of course the heart of the Nazi Reich and we discover it by following Joe Blake there. He is summoned to Berlin by his father, the main minister of the Reich, and he discovers little by little who he is. Not only the son of his mother who eloped to New York with him, but the genetically selected son of both his parents who could have been raised in a special institution to produce the next generation of SS fighters if his mother had not escaped away from Berlin, probably though not entirely clear with the assent of the father who was already an important character in the Nazi regime. He thus discovers his birth place and early infancy institution (closed by then in 1962) with his father, who he hates. But his father puts a young woman his age and coming from the same selective program as him, and the chemistry of hormones and common experience brings them together and though at first he wants to go back to New York where he has a life partner and a son, he decides against his father’s will, after he had been appointed acting Chancellor waiting for the official announcement of Hitler’s death, to stay and be sworn into the SS. He thus endorses the role he was playing in one of the films he has actually viewed and delivered to the Nazis: in this film he is an SS officer who shot the surviving resisting people after San Francisco is flattened by an atom bomb, and among those he shot there was Frank and several other people we have met.

 In our present times of tension between the USA and Asia (not only North Korea but the whole of Asia, including Russia of course) the debate about the use of nuclear weapons to conquer the half of America either the Japanese or the Nazis have or do not have is particularly welcome. In the film the Germans already have atom bombs, but the Japanese have to build one and they received the blue print of such a device from a German high-ranking officer who betrayed the Nazi Reich, in the name of equilibrium, peace and the deterring power of nuclear weapons, under a fake British identity and then a fake Japanese diplomatic visa. He was captured in New York by John Smith. The series is slightly light on the question of the use of nuclear weapons that have not been used yet in the dystopic world, though the Japanese Trade Minister in his “trip” to our real world in 1962 discovers about Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They deal with nuclear warfare in the dystopic world as a matter of need: strike first and conquer the Pacific States, first meaning before the Japanese have a nuclear weapon of their own. Of course the real world of 1962 and the possible use of nuclear weapons against Cuba is set in parallel with the dystopic world. There is a peace movement in the USA against the use of nuclear weapons in Kennedy’s time, but there is no peace movement in the dystopic world, just a resistance that is not really concerned by the use of nuclear weapons and on the Nazi side the inner conflict to seize power after Hitler’s death.

We have to think twice about this debate. Only terroristic and dictatorial regimes can actually use nuclear weapons in the TV series, and yet it is the USA who used such weapons twice in our real history. True enough Truman had not been elected President but only Vice-President under Roosevelt. But will a fully elected President of the USA use nuclear weapons against a country that has managed to develop such nuclear weapons and the ICBM necessary to deliver them who knows where? Will a fully elected President of the USA take the risk of a nuclear war just because one little country is challenging his narcissistic authority? I will not answer these questions. Only history will answer them though it is obvious for anyone who is not a narcissistic person that negotiating is always, absolutely always better than using force: think of Afghanistan and Iraq and Syria to wonder what two wars started to answer a foolish terrorist attack from Al Qaeda have led to. Certainly not a viable and sustainable democratic and peaceful situation and the coming decade or even decades will not solve the “problem” and bring things back to “normal.”

 In short then a visionary novel turned into a deeply reflexive series that we should all watch to just ponder on the question of the use of force and forceful ideologies to conquer the world rather than the use of negotiations to develop and improve the same world.

 PHILIP K. DICK – THE MAN IN THE HIGH CASTLE – 1962 (December 23, 2015)  

This book is an old book, in fact a classic, rather confidential at the time of its publication and even recently for a classic because of its theme, but it has been brought to new awareness in the public because Amazon has just decided to produce an adaptation of it for video streaming. Is it a good decision to bring it back to fame, because it will be fame this time? We’ll see right now why it should not have been kept more or less confidential for more than fifty years.

The genre is difficult because it is retrospective science fiction. Science fiction is supposed to imagine what the future will be or may be according to one or two parameters that are changed in our present. Of course you can cheat the way “Back to the Future” did at least three times and we regret it does not go on at least one more time, but things are what they are and life is a truck full of manure as we all know. Here the author imagines in 1961-62 what the world would have been if in 1945 Germany and Japan had won the war. It is the basic hypothesis so many people work in their minds or in bar and saloon discussions: what the world would be if… And there is no limit to these IF’s. As they say in Paris the Eiffel Tower could be put in a bottle if… and the same for the Empire State Building or the Chrysler Building in New York if … And after every presidential election in the world people imagine what it would be or have been if the loser had won.

 But what is the main and basic interest of this book?

 First the world is cut in two with Japan on one side and Germany on the other side. The Communists have disappeared due to a strict eradication of all Slavs by Germany. The racial problem has also disappeared by the elimination of all black people in the world and first of all in Africa by Germany. In the same way the holocaust of Jews was continued though here the Japanese refused to cooperate. Imagine the world without Black people even in Africa, with maybe a few survivors surviving since it would be their only function as absolute slaves to be used, and abused, by any one of a paler complexion including children and even babies. I regret the book does not expand on this subject as much as it does on Jews and the few Jews who managed to get out of the influence of Germany and be de facto protected by the Japanese.

 But the most frightening part is that Germany is in the hands of the few people who were leading Germany in the war. In spite of the fact that Hitler is dead in 1961, it is his direct lieutenants and underlings that have taken over and are fighting for dominance, Goebbels first of all. The book is quite explicit on what happens in such a totalitarian state that is like a pot with a dozen spiders locked up in it who can only manipulate the crowds of people through the glass wall that protects them (the leaders only) and of course they have their legions outside that can eliminate all those who have to be eliminated for the dominating underling(s) to remain dominant, and at the same time these legions can go on some blood baths of their own for the fun of shedding and drinking the red stuff we call blood and they call a delicatessen though the Jews would consider it to be the soul of man, the divine part of man.

And yet the book is fascinating for other reasons. It explores the very contemplative and oracular culture of the Japanese who have some kind of portable oracle in two volumes they consult regularly to know the meaning of the present and try to cope with the future. It provides the believers with Hexagrams that are both sibylline and enlightening in the shape of Haikus of six or about six lines. But the inner psychology of these Japanese is explored in depth: contemplative, extremely civil and polite, courteous and maybe even servile, but never revealing their true feelings and avoiding expressing any emotion and sensation. Cold for sure and yet tremendously empathetic, but unexpressed and unaired empathy. It is this very quality that makes them resist the German Nazis because they are able to communicate with the deepest forces in the universe, what every geological element carries, atomic forces and the power of any design be it natural, the design of molecules, or human-created and there we have a tremendous surprise. Two people launch a jewelry production unit in San Francisco and the main worker of the two is a Jew running incognito under a false name and under the de facto protection of the Japanese, a little bit more at the end of the book. And it is this Jew who is the creative jeweler, the creative artist, the craftsman who is producing with his hands the world of tomorrow as the Japanese main character tells us over and over again.

 That would symbolically tell us the German Nazis tried to eradicate the Jews because they represented the future and the Nazis represent the past. Simple, symbolical but is it really cathartic? There I cannot answer because anti-Semitism is slightly more complex than just a simile or a metaphor. It has to do with the fear that developed somewhere in the Middle East some 10,000 years ago in the vast confrontation of three cultures emerging from the ice age and trying to invent the future of the planet: The Turkic peoples, the Semitic peoples and the indo-European (Sumerian) peoples. We are still living on that heritage, the heritage of an anthropological rivalry that became the differentiation of three linguistic families, and of three cultures with three religions, and what’s more the Semitic community got split in two along a social differentiation (exploiter and exploited) and a religious antagonism (Judaism and Islam).

 Of course in this book the Arabs and beyond them the Muslims are totally ignored and unconsidered, being replaced by the fourth human group that never had any role to play in the previous triad, the Buddhist and Confucian human family who are also from another linguistic family, the isolating family, here represented by the Japanese. That’s the main element that is absent from this book. Northern Africa, Egypt was essential at the end of the war but then the Arabs and Muslims are just not considered at all. That’s the shortcoming of the book in our modern times because since 1960-62 it is the community that has emerged most strongly from the initial triad and today the Asian isolating family is no longer represented by Japan but China. But of course this book did not aim at telling us its future which is our present, but only the present in 1961 if…

The last element I would like to show is that the book has no end, precisely because of what I have just said. It does not open on the future in 1961 so it cannot have any end. It is coming to several open-ended dead ends, open-ended because we can imagine what we like, but dead ends since it does not tell us anything about what may happen after 1961. That’s the doom of retrospective science fiction. It is dramatic, frightening but at the same time it leads to no vision of the future. It is some kind of castrated science fiction that cannot tell us anything about our real world, the world of the real readers of the book, particularly those who read it a long time after the writing time. And that’s where the video adaptation will be fascinating since it will have to be adapted for today’s and tomorrow’s publics. But we’ll have to wait for it to be available in the whole world to add a paragraph to this review.

 Let the few who can access the video adaptation celebrate! God less the Child!

Dr. Jacques COULARDEAU

[digital-strategy]

https://ift.tt/2PmXUcB

by Frederic Filloux

Photo by Randy Colas on Unsplash

The social network is built on values that are so shady that it can’t be trusted to address fake news issues. Some countries already suffer from it. (This is part 2 of a series on misinformation. Part I is here).

When it comes to fighting misinformation, Facebook doesn’t have a technical problem. It has a problem of will and resolve, which is deep-rooted in the questionable set of values the company is built upon. The good news: it can be reversed. The bad news: not with the current management of the company.

Let’s take a closer look.

1 . The absolute leader syndrome

In fall 2016 at Stanford, I took a class on international politics given by Francis Fukuyama, titled Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (which is also the name of the institute Fukuyama runs at Stanford). One of the lectureswas about the inner structures of semi-democracies, authoritarian regimes, and totalitarian systems.

All of them share the same building blocks:  —��Strong ideology  — Hyper-centralized and tightly held leadership  — Long-term vision   — Cult of Personality  — Will of controlling all aspects of the society  — Little tolerance for any dissenting opinion, suppression of any internal opposition.

Listening to Fukuyama and his guest lecturers developing these ideas, I couldn’t help but think about Facebook. When looking at the social network, we have all the ingredients of an authoritarian system:

— The company professes the ideology of absolute transparency (except for its leaders) with the mantra “We connect people” being deployed at the cost of people’s privacy.

— Mark Zuckerberg is the embodiment of a highly centralized power. As anecdotal it sounds, you can feel it when walking through the premises of the company in Menlo Park, California. Almost at the geometric center of Building #20 sits the desk of the leader and, and twenty feet away, his glass-walled conference room. It’s like watching the spider in its web. The feeling is awkwardly enhanced by a communication person saying that “Mark” wanted this setting as a reminder of the necessary transparency, and by the way, she says, the unfinished aspect of the building is done on purpose: “Mark wants us to remember that the company is at 5 percent of what it will be” — scary, when you think about it.

— Facebook’s cult of Zuck is not accidental. It is actually staged. When the CEO is visiting “flyover country”, he has a former White House photographer trailing behind him. Entertaining the mystique of the threatened visionary (precisely an autocrat’s fixture), the company leaks the amount it allegedly needs to spend to protect its CEO (ten million bucks a year). It is difficult to understand what makes Zuckerberg so different than Bill Gates at the height of his power, Apple’s Tim Cook or Google’s founders and current CEO Sundar Pichai. All of them are global leaders who don’t need nor seek such attributes of power.

— There is no doubt that Mark Zuckerberg engineered his grip over his company. Retaining 16 percent of the shares but 60 percent of the voting rights, and cumulating the title of chairman and CEO, makes him the undisputed ruler of his world (which is, unfortunately, no longer a metaphor). A year ago, Zuck even tried to get more when he asked for the issuance of Class-C shares that would have granted him an ad vitam control over the company, even if he sells 99% of his holdings. After some uproar, he balked. (About the “pros and cons of dictatorship” in corporate governance, read this interesting analysis by Stefan Petry, a finance lecturer at Manchester University, in The Conversation.)

— As for control of every aspect of society, it is ingrained in Facebook’s fabric. The high-performing advertising machine is hunting down every glimpse of our privacy. Over the last years, Facebook has built the ultimate surveillance apparatus and this is far from over; just look at Facebook’s know-how in facial recognition or its recent attempt to access our banking data or the finally admitted tracking of non-Facebook users. We’ll never be able to say that we didn’t know.

— This hyper-centralized culture has tangible consequences in the decision-making process of the company. In Facebook’s system, all the country delegations are systematically deprived of any initiative, almost to a comical point: each time a sensitive issue is raised in a meeting outside Menlo Park, execs will quickly shield themselves behind the necessity of reaching out to headquarters. It is worth remembering that five years ago, Google had exactly the same flaw. It has since corrected it by giving more power to its local representatives to work more independently with business partners. In doing so, Google made tremendous gains in speed and efficiency.

2 . Combine the Ford Pinto Syndrome + the “R.O.W.” Factor and you get Facebook Misinformation Policy

For those who don’t remember, in the ’70s, Ford sold a car whose fuel tank had the propensity to explode in the event of a rear-end collision. Instead of quickly doing a complete recall of the Ford Pinto, some beancounters in Dearborn, Michigan, found out that it would be less expensive to deal with lawsuits resulting from accidents than making the necessary change on the cars. (The best read on that matter is 1978: Ford Pinto Recall, in this abstract of Engineering Ethics: An Industrial Perspective).

When it comes to fighting misinformation Facebook is making exactly the same kind of calculation, augmented by the R.O.W. factor. In Silicon Valley jargon (and in most American accounting practices), the Rest of the World item encompasses countries that do not belong to the big money- making league (North America, Europe, China).

For good measure, Facebook added another sub-segmentation to the R.O.W. group, that is markets that are really insignificant in terms of ARPU (Average Revenue per User), like Myanmar. Olivia Solon, the San Francisco correspondent for The Guardian, put it in rather harsh terms when she recounted last week a recent phone briefing with Facebook on the Myanmar deadly blooper :

“This is the latest in a series of strategic mishaps as the social network blunders its way through the world like a giant, uncoordinated toddler that repeatedly soils its diaper and then wonders where the stench is coming from. It enters markets with wide-eyed innocence and a mission to “build [and monetise] communities”, but ends up tripping over democracies and landing in a pile of ethnic cleansing.”

For more on the matter, also read this compelling report by Steve Stecklow from Reuters:

OK. Most of the readers of the Monday Note (70 percent of you are in the US, folks) don’t give a rat’s ass about Myanmar and the Rohingya. But let’s think about it in a different way. Countries like Myanmar or the Philippines are the model Facebook wants to impose on the world (especially the developing one): become the de facto internet by subsidizing access for the poor.

With such grandiose ambitions might come great responsibilities, but Facebook doesn’t care.

A year ago at a conference in Sydney, I met a woman I admire enormously. Maria Ressa is the courageous founder of The Rappler, the largest independent website in the Philippines (a nation of 106 million people of which 70 percent are on Facebook.) Applying rigorous journalistic standards, Ressa and her team relentlessly stand up against the abuses of Filipino President Rodrigo Duterte. She explained to me how she and her newsroom were harassed by the dictator’s supporters who called to “rape [her] to death”, using Facebook ad nauseam. Last December, the journalist Lauren Etter published this excellent piece in Bloomberg.

In many instances, Maria met with Facebook execs (including Zuckerberg himself) and sent countless emails like this one, quoted in the Bloomberg’s article:

“Please take a closer look at the Philippines. While you’ve taken action in Europe, the danger is far worse for us, and Facebook is the platform they use to intimidate, harass, and attack. It is dangerous. I fear where this may lead. Best, Maria.”

In reply to her request for comment, the reporter from Bloomberg got this from Facebook:

“We are committed to helping ensure that journalists around the world feel safe on Facebook as they connect their audiences with meaningful stories. We permit open and critical discussion of people who are featured in the news or have a large public audience based on their profession or chosen activities, but will remove any threats or hate speech directed at journalists, even those who are public figures, when reported to us.”

Facebook’s DNA is based on the unchallenged power of an exceptional but morally flawed — or at least dangerously immature — leader who sees the world a a gigantic monetization playground. In Mark Zuckerberg’s world, the farther from home, the more leeway he feels to experiment with whatever comes to his prolific mind. Yielding on the Ford Pinto syndrome, he feels little incentive to correct the misuse of the tools he created. And he managed to have no one standing against him. • • • In a future Monday Note, we’ll look at an objective constraint Facebook is facing when it comes to fighting misinformation: whatever the measure taken, it will collide with the company business model. Tough choices need to be made.

— frederic.filloux@mondaynote.com

via Monday Note

[newstfionline]

Turkey Has Made a Quagmire for Itself in Syria

By Borzou Daragahi, Foreign Policy, July 13, 2018

AFRIN, Syria--Murmurs of kidnappings for ransom hung in the air, and shootings and bombings continued just outside the city. Two women walked along the street adjacent to the government compound. “I’m scared to speak because of there,” one said, pointing to the collection of buildings from which Turkey and its local allies run the Afrin enclave. “There’s no safety. There’s no security.”

Inside the compound, Turkish officials and Syrian allies cited some good news about Afrin during a tour for international journalists sponsored by the Turkish government. Numerous major Turkish charities are operating inside Afrin, helping distribute aid, establish democratic governance, and train local security forces.

But even some working for the local authorities described lingering hostilities between the enclave’s Kurds and Arabs, as well as between those who came here to settle from other parts of Syria and those who are natives. Adding to the tensions have been a steady spate of attacks by the Kurdish-led forces who ran Afrin--a drab jumble of low-lying buildings and dilapidated roadways surrounded by hilltops--until they were ousted by Turkish forces in late March as part of a two-month military operation called Olive Branch. Turkey succeeded at driving its Kurdish enemies away from its own border and at connecting swaths of Syria controlled by Ankara’s Syrian partners to the east and south of Afrin.

But Turkey, without quite realizing it, also made itself the de facto ruler of this part of Syria. The responsibility seems more of a quagmire than the Turkish government originally expected.

“When the Turks invaded, they basically signed up to govern the place,” said Aaron Stein, a Turkey and Syria specialist at the Atlantic Council, a Washington think tank. “They are now on the hook for everything from delivering water, picking up trash, administering health and education. Security is not very good. There are clearly the indications of an insurgency. For now, it’s manageable. But talk to me in five years.”

As with nearby Jarablus and Azaz to the east, which it has also occupied, Turkey hopes to shape Afrin into a livable enclave to draw back Syrian refugees--including more than 3 million who have settled in Turkey--and give itself more leverage over the future of Syria. Perhaps 140,000 Syrians have arrived in the Afrin region since the Turkish takeover, not least because of the successful distribution of humanitarian aid. But the Turks are clearly eager to pull out of Afrin and leave the region to be run by local allies.

Meanwhile, local violence remains a challenge and appears to be accelerating. The Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) claimed a July 7 attack on Turkish soldiers outside the city of Afrin. The same day, at least 10 people were severely wounded in a car bomb that struck Jarablus. Several people, including two children, were killed and injured in a July 8 motorcycle bomb that struck the nearby city of Bab. In recent days, Turkish warplanes and artillery struck alleged YPG positions on Afrin’s outskirts, local media reported.

The YPG has claimed involvement in some of the attacks. But locals attribute some of the security troubles to Turkey’s Arab and Turkmen allies--the Free Syrian Army units that took part in the war to oust the Kurdish militia and rebel units relocated from other parts of Syria to Afrin in deals with the regime in Damascus. One Kurdish resident of Afrin said the rebel units pin portraits of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, who sprayed chemical weapons against Kurds, to their vehicles.

A June report on Afrin by the United Nations cited “high levels of violent crime, with civilians falling victim to robberies, harassment, abductions, and murder,” especially targeting those perceived as sympathetic to the Kurdish-led forces. The report also warned of “reports of lawlessness and rampant criminality” committed by rebel groups under the control of Turkish forces, naming several units of the Free Syrian Army.

A Kurdish resident of Afrin told Foreign Policy that more than 200 people have been detained by Free Syrian Army brigades that include the Shamiya (or Levant) Front, Ahrar al-Sharqiya, and the Hamza Division. Relatives pay ransoms of up to $20,000 to get loved ones released from makeshift detention centers at the rebel groups’ headquarters. Residents must also sometimes make payments of up to $5,000 to get motor vehicles back. Human Rights Watch last month accused the Syrian rebels of pillaging the homes of Afrin’s Kurdish residents.

“The rebels are trying to set up local protection rackets to pay their underling fighters,” Stein said. “They have high operating costs to keep their fighters on side.”

Those critical of Afrin’s post-YPG status quo tended to blame the problems on remnants of the Free Syrian Army, rather than Turkish forces seeking to take a hands-off approach to governance and policing. But confusion and chaos appear to be inching up. One of the two women walking alongside the government compound said she didn’t care who ran the enclave so long as they could provide security. “We hear explosions and gunfire,” she said. “We don’t know who’s responsible.”

Stein argued that Turks may be stuck in northern Syria, unable to fully pull out for domestic political reasons. “They can’t leave because security will deteriorate,” he said. “Security deteriorates, and people move back across the border. You’ve signed yourself up for a long-term occupation.”

[usnewsaggregator-blog]

Germany Plunged Into Political Crisis After Coalition Talks Fail

New Post has been published on http://usnewsaggregator.com/germany-plunged-into-political-crisis-after-coalition-talks-fail/

Germany Plunged Into Political Crisis After Coalition Talks Fail

The collapse of talks reflected the deep reluctance of Ms. Merkel’s conservative bloc and prospective coalition partners — the ecologist-minded Greens and pro-business Free Democrats — to compromise over key positions. The Free Democrats quit the talks late Sunday, citing what they called an atmosphere of insincerity and mistrust.

“There is no coalition of the willing to form a government,” said Thomas Kleine-Brockhoff, director of the Berlin office of the German Marshall Fund. “This is uncharted territory since 1949. We’re facing a protracted period of political immobility. Not only is this not going to go away soon, there is no clear path out.”

Calling new elections is not a straightforward procedure in Germany. Written with the unstable governments of the 1920s and 1930s and collapse of the Weimar Republic in mind, the German Constitution includes several procedural hurdles that would ensure a prolonged and difficult process.

Some were quick to link Germany’s disorder to a broader crisis of democracy in the West. “The unthinkable has happened,” said Christiane Hoffmann, deputy head of the Berlin bureau of Der Spiegel, a German magazine. In that sense, she said, “This is Germany’s Brexit moment, its Trump moment.”

Others said Germany’s troubles were in many ways just a sign that the country was becoming more normal, not less. Having had only four chancellors since 1982, the country has known only a string of centrist governments that governed by consensus.

The crisis erupted seven weeks after the last election, which brought the right-wing Alternative for Germany, or AfD, into Parliament, and in some ways represented the return of politics to a country long deprived of debate and policy disagreements.

“It’s just another step in the long learning of democracy of Germany since World War II, going from a very stable proportional system to something more messy,” said Henrik Enderlein, dean of the Hertie School of Governance in Berlin.

Continue reading the main story

The bigger question, he said, was whether Ms. Merkel’s pragmatic governing style had reached its limit in an era where people crave the clash of a wider spectrum of policies. “Her über-pragmatism is reaching its end,” he said. “It’s hard to see a scenario where she returns to her previous position of power.”

Ms. Merkel met in private on Monday with President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, who as head of state is charged with trying to break the deadlock in coalition talks. He could appoint a chancellor to lead a minority government or, failing that, set in motion the process for new elections.

The potential for instability in Germany would be a major blow to the European Union. Ms. Merkel has been the region’s dominant political figure of the past decade, credited with guiding the bloc through the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis and, more recently, providing a powerful counterpoint to populists across the Continent and beyond.

Financial markets reacted calmly to the turmoil in Berlin, calculating that the German economy could power through the uncertainty. After opening lower, the DAX index of major stocks closed the day higher. The euro fell slightly.

But some economists warned that the longer-term effects could be more severe. A weak government might be unable to agree on needed improvements to infrastructure and the education system, for example.

“The economic situation is very good,” Christoph M. Schmidt, chairman of the German Council of Economic Experts, said in a statement. “But over the mid and long term there are big challenges, especially the demographic shift, digitalization, sensible development of the European Union, and climate change.”

The political instability stems from the elections in Germany on Sept. 24, when Ms. Merkel’s Christian Democrats finished first. But their share of the overall vote dropped significantly, while the far-right Alternative for Germany scored a record vote, entering Parliament for the first time as the third-biggest grouping.

Even so, political analysts had expected Ms. Merkel to form a new coalition government that would have allowed her to remain as chancellor. That may still happen, but it will be harder now, and it is unlikely to happen soon, experts say.

Elsewhere in Europe, the possibility of a weakened Ms. Merkel and of an inward-looking Germany alarmed some leaders. The chancellor canceled a meeting in Berlin with Prime Minister Mark Rutte of the Netherlands. In Paris, President Emmanuel Macron of France said that Ms. Merkel’s difficulties were a serious hurdle to the partnership between their two countries.

Continue reading the main story

France has “no interest in a worsening of the situation” in Germany, Mr. Macron said in a statement on Monday. “Our wish is that our main partner, for the sake of Germany and Europe, remains strong and stable, so that we can move forward together,” he added.

Even if Ms. Merkel’s problems leave Mr. Macron as Europe’s de facto strongest leader — with weak domestic opposition in France, a strengthening economy, and a good record so far on driving through economic overhauls — the French president had been counting on Ms. Merkel as an ally in his push to make changes to the European Union.

Mr. Macron will be aware that his agenda for the bloc, which includes a common defense force, a strengthened euro, and a joint finance minister, stands no chance without German backing.

Ms. Merkel had originally set Friday as the deadline for reaching an agreement with the Free Democrats, the Greens, and the Christian Social Union, which forms a conservative bloc with the chancellor’s Christian Democrats. From the outset, all of those parties had differed markedly on key issues, notably migration and climate policies, resulting in strained talks that led to open sniping.

After they agreed to take talks into overtime, negotiators and party leaders failed to produce any breakthroughs over the weekend, and the Free Democrats quit the talks.

Ms. Merkel could try to approach the Social Democrats about forming another grand coalition. But the center-left party has served as the junior coalition partner to the Christian Democrats since 2013 and on Monday, the party’s leader, Martin Schulz, said his group had no interest in another round.

As for new elections, the president can set the process in motion by proposing Ms. Merkel as chancellor, which would be put to a vote in Parliament.

If Ms. Merkel were to win a majority in the first round of voting, the president could then name her as chancellor. If not, lawmakers would vote again, within 14 days.

Continue reading the main story

If Ms. Merkel failed to win a majority in a second vote, then lawmakers would vote a third time and the candidate with the most votes would win. At that point, the president could name that person chancellor or simply dissolve the Parliament and order new elections, which would take place within 60 days.

But there is no guarantee that elections would improve the situation: Recent opinion polls predict that a new vote would bring little change, compared to the result in September. A Forsa poll released last week showed Ms. Merkel’s conservatives at 32 percent, the Social Democrats on 20 percent, the Free Democrats at 12 percent, the Greens 10 percent and the AfD 12 percent.

Some worry that the AfD could benefit from the current chaos and increase its share of the vote. But even if it did, that share remains far below that of populist movements in other countries.

“Germany is not leaving the E.U. and it did not elect Donald Trump,” said Mr. Kleine-Brockhoff. “It was unable to form a government on its first attempt. That’s bad. It causes instability. But it’s not the end of the world.”

Correction: November 20, 2017

An earlier version of this article misstated the name of the right-wing party that won seats in the September parliamentary elections. It is Alternative for Germany, not Alliance for Democracy.

Continue reading the main story

Original Article:

Click here

[clubofinfo]

Expert: Over 17.1 million live in a socially democratic, secular state, the Syrian Arab Republic, ravaged by overt and covert imperialist machinations supported by Turkey, the Gulf autocracies, and the Western capitalist states. Their government is led by the National Progressive Front (NPF), with its most foremost party the Arab Socialist Ba’ath Party which is joined by numerous radical and socially progressive parties. The NPF’s majority in the Syrian’s People’s Council, the Syrian parliament, was reaffirmed in the April 2016 elections by the Syrian people, elections which were predictably boycotted by the Western-backed opposition and predictably declared “unfree” by Western capitalists. President Donald Trump dealt the rationally-minded Syrians a blow that goes beyond his ill-fated show of strength manifested in the cruise missile attacks last month: direct US support of the Syrian Kurds who consist and are related to Rojava, officially called the “Democratic Federal System of Northern Syria” (NSR), “Syrian Kurdistan” or “Western Kurdistan,” to give a few names. It is part and parcel of those in the Western and even international “left” to declare that the Rojava Kurds are “revolutionary” or somehow “liberated.” Here is a sampling from their arguments in favor of such a group when challenged on a radical left-leaning subreddit: (1) the Kurds are “very prudent” to get support from the West, (2) they aren’t against the Syrian government, they have “liberated people under ISIS control,” (3) the national borders were drawn by imperialists so “Kurdistan should have been a country in the first place,” and (4) Rojava have stated that they believe “a federal system is ideal form of governance for Syria.”1 This article aims to prove that such pro-Rojava perspectives are an unfounded and dangerous form of international solidarity. US imperialist support for the Kurdish cause Only a few days ago, Trump approved a Pentagon plan which would “directly arm Kurdish forces fighting in Syria,” specifically the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) comprised of the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) and Syrian Arab Coalition (SAC), all of which are elements of Rojava.2 The US plans to use these groups to “mount an assault on Raqqa,” the de facto capital of Daesh, called ISIS in the West, which sits in the heart of Syria. The arming of such forces is a reversal of Obama-era policy but only to an extent. The armed support, according to one account, would consist of “small arms, machine guns, ammunition, armored vehicles, trucks and engineering equipment.” Another account added that these fighters would receive “U.S.-manufactured night-vision goggles, rifles and advanced optics,” all of which are used by US special operations forces. As a result, YPG fighters would begin to “bear strong similarities to other American-trained foreign special forces.”This support may relate to possibly imminent “massive invasion of Syria” by US and Jordanian forces in an effort to support their Free Syrian Army (FSA) proxies and enter areas adjacent to those controlled by the Syrian Arab Army (SAA). The US claimed it had been in “constant contact” with the Turks to assure them the Kurdish troops would not have “any role in stabilizing or ruling Raqqa after the operation,” with “local Arabs” (undoubtedly those chosen by the US and the West) governing the city afterwards. The Turks, who want the Western-backed FSA to lead the offensive, have been engaging in military strikes on PKK (Kurdish Worker’s Party) and YPG fighters within Iraq and Syria, which affects US special ops forces directly helping theses groups. The Deputy Prime Minister of Turkey, which has a complicated but still imperial inter-relationship with the US, Nurettin Canikli, showed his anger on May 10 when he said that “the supply of arms to the YPG is unacceptable. Such a policy will benefit nobody.” This position isn’t a surprise since the Turks see the YPG as a branch of the PKK and are undoubtedly strongly anti-Kurd. Predictably the announcement of direct armament was received well by the Rojava forces. A SDF spokesman said that “the US decision to arm the YPG… is important and will hasten the defeat of terrorism” and Saleh Muslim, co-chair of the Democratic Union Party (PYD), another Rojava element, declared that “the Raqqah campaign is running in parallel with the international coalition against terrorism. It’s natural that they would provide weapons” to such Kurdish forces. Keep in mind this is the same person who called for the US to expand its military strikes on the Syrian government to other groups with purported chemical weapons, saying that Trump’s cruise missile attack will “yield positive results.” Anyone with sense knows he is wrong. Arming of these Kurds will be cheered by the editorial boards of the bourgeois Chicago Tribune and Bloomberg News, former imperial diplomat Antony “Tony” John Blinken, and the president of the Kurdistan National Assembly of Syria (KNAS), Sherkoh Abbas, among many others.3 The same day that the organs of US imperialism announced that these Kurds would get arms directly from the war machine, Trump declared a “national emergency” in regard to Syria.4 He called the country’s government an “unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States” saying that it supported terrorism, undermined US and international efforts to “stabilize” Iraq, brutalized the Syrian people, generated “instability throughout the region,” and called for regime change, saying that there should be a “political transition in Syria” that will benefit the US capitalist class. This declaration in particular, released the same day as similar reauthorizations of other Obama era “national emergency” orders for the Central African Republic and Yemen, buttressed a 2012 executive order which delineated sanctions on the state of Syria! All in all, the Western imperialists know that Syria does not constitute this “threat” but they choose to portray it that way in order to justify continued massive war spending, which comprises at least half of the US federal budget. Beyond these declarations, the US support for the “good” Kurds (“Good” by Western standards) is nothing new, mainly since 2014. The bourgeois media has reported, especially since January, about the “U.S.-Kurdish alliance” consisting of the US support of the SDF and YPG as effective front forces to “fight ISIS,” angering the Turks who consider such forces to be utterly hostile since they see it as an extension of the PKK, but the US imperialists care little about this gripe.5 The US is supporting these forces with 500 US special ops forces (half of the 1000 US troops stationed in the country), armored vehicles, and warplanes as “air support” for their offensives, along with some arms, even prior to the recent announcement. Some call these forces, which have been attacked by Turkey in the past and “accidentally” by US bombs, as “the vanguard of U.S. proxy forces on the ground” in Syria, undoubtedly dismaying two deluded Marxists who thought they were fighting for an “egalitarian utopia.”6 Such individuals should not be surprised. After all, a top US commander has defended YPG actions, claiming that they did not attack into Turkey, almost serving as a de facto spokesperson of the group. Lest us forget a press conference just last month where US Colonel John Dorrian, spokesperson for the US-led coalition bombings in Iraq and Afghanistan, slyly admits that the YPG, Peshmerga, PKK, and SDF/SAC are partners in their “anti-Daesh” bombing efforts. Additionally, such Kurdish forces have gained other avenues of support from settler-colonist Canada (also see here) and from the Russian Federation, which has given them, according to reports, money, equipment, and a seat at the negotiating table. Russian support is interesting since they are also supporting the Syrian government in its fight against terrorism, making one possibly wonder if their support for these Kurds is for some unspoken reason. It gets worse. “Good” Kurdish leaders have said behind the scenes that they are willing to cooperate with Israel, the apartheid and murderous Zionist state which has given limited military support to Iraqi Kurds and bought millions of barrels of their oil, in line with Mr. Netanyahu’s declaration that “we should … support the Kurdish aspiration for independence…[the Kurds are] a nation of fighters [who] have proved political commitment and are worthy of independence” and Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked who also called for an independent Kurdistan. These feelings add to their cooperation with the NATO criminals. It is evident that with the “help of US airpower” the YPG, along with SDF, has been able to take “control of an estimated 26,000 sq km (10,000 sq miles) of Syria,” including a 250 mile “stretch of territory along the Turkish border,” all of which constitutes Rojava.7 It is even more suspicious that US soldiers are advising and assisting SDF and YPG soldiers. They are, according to one report, assisting them in “targeting ISIS positions with mortars and laser guided air strikes,” with the YPG’s media office even telling local journalists, initially, to “not take video footage of the U.S. Special Forces” so people won’t know they are backed by ruthless imperialist foot soldiers.8 Even so, local fighters of the YPG are reportedly “pleased with the American presence.” In 2016, the State Department openly admitted such cooperation. Mark Toner declared that “coordination continues” with the YPG and SDF against the “common enemy” of Daesh. Spokesperson John Kirby said that the US had “provided a measure of support, mostly through the air” for such groups, “and that support will continue,” adding that “we have said that these Kurdish fighters are successful against Daesh…and we’re going to continue to provide that support” and spoke of a “partnership with Kurdish fighters.” More than these blanket statements, Talal Silo, a former SAA colonel and official spokesperson of the SDF, said the following, which shows that they are deeply tied to US imperial objectives: It’s forbidden to negotiate with the Russians because we seek for an alliance with the United States. It’s impossible to communicate with any other party and to not lose the credibility of the international coalition. Of course, we are free, but we can not attack if there is not signal from the Americans. We will not unite with the Syrian army against ISIS because our forces operate only with the forces of the international coalition led by the United States. We are partners of the United States and the coalition. They make decisions. There can’t be a coordination between the Russians and us. Because first of all we have a strategic partnership with the international coalition led by the United States. That’s not all. The US has also provided support to the Peshmerga, militia of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, part of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), and escorted a PKK senior leader, Ferhad Şahin or Şahin Cilo, with over a 1 million bounty on his head by the Turkish government, through a crowd.9 The support for the Peshmerga also increased dramatically in recent days. The US State Department approved the Pentagon sending $295.6 million “worth of weapons, vehicles and other equipment” which includes but is not limited to “4,400 rifles, 113 Humvees and 36 howitzers.”10 These armaments, which only need simple congressional approval, assured in this political climate, would be used to arm two brigades of Peshmerga light infantry and two artillery battalions to assist such units. While few governments are on the record as publicly supporting independent or autonomous states in Syria or Iraq, apart from hawkish John McCain, the Peshmerga have been armed by Western European countries such as France and Germany, along with the Turks, while British special forces reportedly lurk within Syria in an effort to achieve imperial objectives.11 Earlier this month, there was another development in this realm: a plan to link Rojava with the Mediterranean Sea. This action, for which they will ask the US to support them politically (and implied militarily), the SDF forces would “push west to liberate the city of Idlib” which Hediya Yousef, a high-ranking official in Rojava said is part of their “legal right” to have access to the Mediterranean, from which he claimed “everyone will benefit.”12 Such an action would possibly empower such “good” Kurds even more, even as it would outrage Turkey, and would require agreement with the Syrian government along with the Russian Federation, which is unlikely. If Rojava achieved access to the sea, they would be an even more “effective” imperial proxy group since Western capitalist states could bring their military supplies to the coastline, rolling in heavy machinery, tanks, and maybe even set up a base of some type. It would be chaos and disaster for Syria of the highest proportions, helping in the disintegration of the region into a divided mess that could be easily manipulated by Western imperialists. Is Rojava revolutionary? Many have claimed that Rojava is “revolutionary.” One article by Wes Enzinna, an editor at the White hipster/”dudebro”/trash website, Vice Media, is an example of this. He writes that neither the UN, NATO, or the Syrian government recognize the “autonomous status” of the area, but says that this area, with over 4.6 million people by his count, enacts “radical direct democracy” on the streets, in his perception.13  He goes on to say that the territory is a “utopia” that is governed by an affiliate of the PKK, which includes, but is not limited to, six political parties, including the PYD and Kurdistan Democratic Party of Syria (KDPS). Additionally, apart from the Syrian Democratic Council (SDC), the Self-Defense Forces (HXP), YPG and all-female protection units, YPJ, protect the region from threats, with the latter two organizations, along with the PYD, major allies for the US in the region. Most interesting is the presence of Abdullah Öcalan, one of the PKK’s founding leaders, with his philosophy used throughout Rojava where he, as Mr. Enzinna claims, “looms as a Wizard-of-Oz-like presence.” It is worth pointing out that Mr. Öcalan, who has been hounded by the Turkish government since 1998, “repudiated the armed struggle and…the independence of Kurdistan,” with the PKK dropping its demand for an independent Kurdistan when he went into jail. He also asked Kurds to lay down their arms and went even further by declaring that there should be a “democratic union between Turks and Kurds.”14 According to reports, he clearly favors anarchist and anti-Marxist Murray Bookchin, Michel Foucault, French historian Fernand Braudel, and US sociologist Immanuel Wallerstein (the only one of the four with credibility), among a litany of other authors he read in prison, which is troublesome. Hence, he called for “democratic confederalism” in 2005, a model used in Rojava. Mr. Enzinna isn’t the only one who makes such claims. Reuters‘s Benedetta Argentieri declared that the region values “gender equality,” especially in its military forces and has its “ideological foundations…laid by Abdullah Öcalan,” while others have declared there was an “ecological society” in place.15 Many examples of such perspectives, showing that the perception of  Rojava is “radical” and “liberatory” is widespread. Articles favoring this approach are in publications such as the Financial Times, the New York Times, The Guardian, Open Democracy, Slate, Dissent, Roar Magazine, Deutsche Welle, AFP, CeaseFire magazine, Telesur English, and Quartz.16 Writers have gone on to dub the region “a thriving experiment in direct democracy,” “a precious experiment in direct democracy,” “a remarkable democratic experiment,” “a revolution in consciousness,” and “a Kurdish region…ruled by militant feminist anarchists.” Others echo the same sentiment, calling it “a liberated area in the Middle East” (which is used in the title of this article), “political and cultural revolution,” “a social and political revolution,” “a participatory alternative to the tyrannical states of the region,” “the safest place in Syria,” and “a new radical society.” Beyond this, AK Press’s A Small Key Can Open A Large Door: The Rojava Revolution, if it is to be believed at all, argues that the PYD launched a plan for the economy of the region which levies no taxes on the populace and abolished “traditional” private property such as “buildings, land, and infrastructure” but this did not extend to commodities such as automobiles, machines, electronics, and furniture. Even this book admits that only about a third of the worker councils have been set up in the region and that there is vagueness on how this region will relate to “other economies inside and outside of Syria.” After all,  much of the economic activity in the region comes from, as the book argues, “black market oil…sold outside the region” and as a result there are looming questions about the mechanics “trading relationships between other governments” if the embargo levied on them by the Turks is lifted. By saying all of this about Rojava, some supporters may be cheering, saying that they were right all along. In fact, they can’t be more wrong. For one, European Parliamentarians are chummy with the PYD, who says that Turkey still supports Daesh, even as they claim that their meeting with legislators of Western capitalist states is not a form of propaganda. This political party, the PYD, was even left out of Syrian peace talks originally, but later was allowed in, with the Russians, in their illegal and unconscionable draft for the Syrian constitution, decentralized powers, which could be seen as “a potential concession aimed to gain the favor of the de-facto autonomous Kurdish cantons of northern Syria.”17 This is only the tip of the iceberg. The co-chair of the PYD, Mr. Saleh Muslim, has spoken at the British Parliament and has met with the Catalan parliament, where he declared that they are mainly at “war” with Daesh, not dismissing hostile actions toward the Syrian government. He further declared that they do not want to continue “under the old model of nation-state,” which he claims exists in Iraq and Syria, and said “we want to be part of Syria, but part of a democratic Syria.” If this doesn’t sound in line with imperialist goals, then I don’t know what is. It is also worth pointing out that the PYD attended a conference in Western Europe, in Belgium, eight Rojava legislators had a six-day visit to Japan, high-ranking YPJ and PYD officials talked to the Italian parliament and met senior Italian officials. Additionally, Rojava representatives attended a “conference in Athens…to mark the 17th anniversary of the capture of Abdullah Ocalan” and met with French representatives (along with the YPJ). The latter is important to note since the French have supported these “good” Kurds on the battlefield, just like Albania, and even want to open a cultural center in Rihava. Then there’s the undeniable fact that Rojava has representative offices in numerous Western capitalist countries: Sweden, the Netherlands, Germany, and France. Other news notes that the PYD has an office in Russia and has received support from Finland, which has begun “financing projects with development funds allocated to non-governmental organizations to strengthen Syrian Kurdish Region governance.” The only country that has rescinded diplomatic ties with Rojava is the Czech Republic, where a representative office opened in April but was shut down by December even as a story the previous month said that other than Albania, “the Czech Republic is one of the main sources of weapons flowing to the YPG via the US-led coalition against IS.” The representative office, as a story reported, was shut down because “it failed to win the recognition of Czech politicians” and the office seems to have faced problems related to security threats and diplomacy. Also, the “Turkish embassy in Prague [tried]…to undermine the activities of the office” even as Czech politicians see support of Rojava as a way to support an independent, autonomous Kurdistan, undermining the status of this office within the country. The relationship between the “good” Kurds and Turkey is complicated. In 2013 and 2014, Turkey favorably received the PYD. However, as it currently stands, Turkey has an economic blockade on Rojava, as they attempt to diplomatically isolate them, opposes US support of the YPG, and supports anti-Rojava terrorists including Daesh.18 Turkey has gone even farther than just these measures. They’ve reportedly shelled Rojava, such as the settlements of Zur Maghar and Afrin, which has led to numerous civilians being killed, as Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) expand their military operations within Syria.19 In response, their actions were condemned not only by Germany but by Russia and neocon McCain. If Turkey engaged in such actions, they likely have public support. While Selahattin Demirtas, an imprisoned Kurdish leader of the “Kurdish-dominated People’s Democratic Party” or HDP, who has met with the President of the European Parliament, Martin Schulz, and the Russian and US governments, has argued for countries to recognize Rojava, the Turkish public may think differently.20 Conspiracy theories purportedly dominate the Turkish political discourse and the Kurds, more often than not, are seen as part of a plot against the Turkish nation, leading to support for never-ending war against the PKK and seeming stagnation of political discourse. * Other arguments ranged from claims that (1) Rojava wants some “degree of autonomy” while not fighting the Syrian government, (2) an independent Kurdistan could be anti-imperialist, (3) Rojava aren’t “disintegrating the region” but are rather “liberating people” from Daesh and will “unify with the Syrian government in the future,” that (4) such people are fighting “a battle for a better life way of living” while using available resources at their disposal, that (5) they have no choice but to ally with the West, (6) claims that Russia is imperialist, (7) that accepting weapons from the West forms “a positive relationship, in the hope for protection from Turkey,” and (8) that “Syria is by no means anti-imperialist.” The claims of Russia being imperialist is clearly incorrect by any reasonable measure, while saying that Syria is not anti-imperialist is a sentiment that hurts international solidarity. The one argument that accepting weapons from the West forms a “positive relationship” says it all. * Missy Ryan, Thomas Gibbons-Neff and Karen DeYoung, “In blow to U.S.-Turkey ties, Trump administration approves plan to arm Syrian Kurds against Islamic State,” Washington Post, May 9, 2017. * Editorial Board, “Fixing Syria, Step 1: Arm the Kurds,” Chicago Tribune, September 23, 2016; The Editors, “Arm the Kurds,” Bloomberg View, August 5, 2014; Antony J. Blinken, “To Defeat ISIS, Arm the Syrian Kurds,” New York Times op-ed, January 31, 2017; Ariel Ben Solomon, “Are Syrian Kurds the missing ingredient in the West’s recipe to defeat Islamic State?,” Jewish News Service (JNS), March 23, 2017. Also, the New Republic (“One Group Has Proven It Can Beat ISIS. So Why Isn’t the U.S. Doing More to Help Them?”), Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Ed Royce, The Telegraph (“Water is not enough, we must arm the Kurds”), New York Post (“It’s time to really arm the Kurds”), The Guardian (“Arming the Kurds may help break up Iraq – but the alternatives are worse”), National Review (“Recognize Kurdistan and Arm It, against ISIS in Northern Iraq”), among others, support arming the Kurds, specifically those who support US objectives, of course. * Declaring a national emergency gives the President power to deal with “any unusual and extraordinary threat…to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States.” Furthermore, such a declaration gives the President the power to “…investigate, regulate, or prohibit…any transactions…transfers of credit or payments…the importing or exporting of currency,” invalidate acquisitions by certain foreigners and even “confiscate any property” of foreigners coming from a country the US is at war with and are accused of planning, aiding, engaging, or authorizing hostilities against the United States. * Louisa Loveluck and Karen DeYoung, “A Russian-backed deal on ‘safe zones’ for Syria leaves U.S. wary,” Washington Post, May 4, 2017; Associated Press, “Tensions rise after Turkish attack on Syrian Kurds,” Washington Post, April 26, 2017; Philip Issa, “Turkey threatens further strikes on US-allied Syrian Kurds,” Associated Press, April 30, 2017; Matthew Lee, “US criticizes Turkey for striking Kurds in Iraq, Syria,” Associated Press, April 25, 2017; Karen DeYoung and Dan Lamothe, “U.S.: Kurds will participate in some form in attack on Raqqa,” Washington Post, March 1, 2017; Matthew Lee, “US criticizes Turkey for striking Kurds in Iraq, Syria,” Associated Press, April 25, 2017; Karen DeYoung and Dan Lamothe, “U.S.: Kurds will participate in some form in attack on Raqqa,” Washington Post, March 1, 2017; Kareem Fahim and Adam Entous, “No decision yet on arming Kurds to fight Islamic State, Trump tells Turkish leader,” Washington Post, February 8, 2017.; Ishaan Tharoor, “The Russia-Turkey-U.S. tussle to save Syria will still get very messy,” Washington Post, May 4, 2017; Ishaan Tharoor, “What you need to know about Turkey and the Trump administration,” Washington Post, March 30, 2017;  Liz Sly, “Turkey’s Erdogan wants to establish a safe zone in the ISIS capital Raqqa,” Washington Post, February 13, 2017; Sarah El Deeb, “Turkey, Kurds, Russia, U.S. forces make up a confusing, violent pageant in Syria,” Chicago Tribune, March 11, 2017; Agence France-Presse, “Pentagon chief praises Kurdish fighters in Syria,” March 18, 2016. * Liz Sly, “How two U.S. Marxists wound up on the front lines against ISIS,” Washington Post, April 1, 2017; Karen DeYoung and Kareem Fahim, “Turkey deports foreigners working with Syrian refugees,” Washington Post, April 26, 2017; Loveday Morris and Kareem Fahim, “Turkey expands strikes against Kurdish militants in Syria and Iraq,” Washington Post, April 25, 2017; Thomas Gibbons-Neff and Missy Ryan, “U.S.-led coalition accidentally bombs Syrian allies, killing 18,” Washington Post, April 13, 2017; Liz Sly, “With a show of Stars and Stripes, U.S. forces in Syria try to keep warring allies apart,” Washington Post, March 8, 2017; Karen DeYoung and Kareem Fahim, “As a new relationship is tested, Turkey keeps high hopes for Trump,” Washington Post, March 9, 2017; Orhan Coskun, Tulay Karadeniz and Tom Perry, “Turkey’s Syria plans face setbacks as Kurds see more U.S. support,” Reuters, March 9, 2017. * BBC News, “Syria conflict: Kurds declare federal system,” March 17, 2016; Liz Sly and Karen DeYoung, “Ignoring Turkey, U.S. backs Kurds in drive against ISIS in Syria,” Washington Post, June 1, 2016. * Nancy A. Youssef and Wladimir van Wilgenburg, “U.S. Troops 18 Miles From ISIS Capital,” The Daily Beast, May 26, 2016; Jiyar Gol, “Syria conflict: On the frontline in battle for IS-held Manbij,” BBC News, June 15, 2016. * Suzan Fraser, “Turkey strikes Kurds in Iraq, Syria, drawing condemnation,” Associated Press, April 25, 2017; Martin Chulov and Fazel Hawramy, “Ever-closer ties between US and Kurds stoke Turkish border tensions,” The Guardian, May 1, 2017; Mahmoud Mourad and Ulf Laessing, “Iraq’s Shi’ite ruling coalition opposes Kurds’ independence referendum,” Reuters, April 20, 2017; Loveday Morris and Kareem Fahim, “Turkey expands strikes against Kurdish militants in Syria and Iraq,” Washington Post, April 25, 2017. * Eric Walsh, “U.S. approves $295.6 million military equipment sale to Iraq: Pentagon,” Reuters, April 19, 2017; UPI, “US State Department approves arms sale for Peshmerga forces,” April 20, 2017; Tom O’Connor, “U.S. Military Set to Make $300 Million Deal to Arm Kurds Fighting ISIS in Iraq,” Newsweek, April 20, 2017. * Karen Leigh, Noam Raydan, Asa Fitch, Margaret Coker, “Who Are The Kurds?,” Wall Street Journal, August 31, 2016; BBC News, “Germany to supply arms to Kurds fighting IS in Iraq,” September 1, 2014; Agence France-Presse, “Pentagon chief praises Kurdish fighters in Syria,” March 18, 2016. * Mark Townsend, “Syria’s Kurds march on to Raqqa and the sea,” The Guardian, May 6, 2017. * Wes Enzinna, “A Dream of Secular Utopia in ISIS’ Backyard,” New York Times Magazine, November 24, 2015. * BBC News, “Kurdish rebel boss in truce plea,” September 28, 2006. * Anna Lau, Erdelan Baran, and Melanie Sirinathsingh, “A Kurdish response to climate change,” OpenDemocracy, November 18, 2016; Benedetta Argentieri, “One group battling Islamic State has a secret weapon – female fighters,” Reuters blogs, February 3, 2015. * Carrie Ross, “Power to the people: a Syrian experiment in democracy,” Financial Times, October 23, 2015; Carne Ross, “The Kurds’ Democratic Experiment,” The New York Times opinion, September 30, 2015. Ross is “a former British diplomat and the author of “The Leaderless Revolution: How Ordinary People Will Take Power and Change Politics in the 21st Century,” is working on a forthcoming documentary film, “The Accidental Anarchist.””; David Graeber, “Why is the world ignoring the revolutionary Kurds in Syria?,” The Guardian, October 8, 2014; Jo Magpie, “Regaining hope in Rojava,” Open Democracy, June 6, 2016; Michelle Goldberg, “American Leftists Need to Pay More Attention to Rojava,” Slate, November 25, 2015; Meredith Tax, “The Revolution in Rojava,” Dissent magazine, April 22, 2015; Evangelos Aretaios, “The Rojava revolution,” Open Democracy, March 15, 2015; New Compass, “Statement from the Academic Delegation to Rojava,” January 15, 2015; Jeff Miley and Johanna Riha, “Rojava: only chance for a just peace in the Middle East?,” Roar Magazine, March 3, 2015; Felix Gaedtke, “A Kurdish Spring in Syria,” Deutsche Welle, May 22, 2013; AFP, “Syrian Kurds give women equal rights, snubbing jihadists,” November 9, 2014; Margaret Owen, “Gender and justice in an emerging nation: My impressions of Rojava, Syrian Kurdistan,” CeaseFire magazine, February 11, 2014; Benedetta Argentieri, “These female Kurdish soldiers wear their femininity with pride,” Quartz, July 30, 2015; Marcel Cartier, “‘The Kurds’: Internationalists or Narrow Nationalists?,” Telesur English, April 20, 2017. * John Irish, “Syrian Kurds point finger at Western-backed opposition,” Reuters, May 23, 2016. * Meredith Tax, “The Rojava Model,” Foreign Affairs, Oct. 14, 2016; Graham A. Fuller, “How Can Turkey Overcome Its Foreign Policy Mess?,” LobeLog, February 19, 2016; David L. Phillips, “Research Paper: ISIS-Turkey Links,” Huffington Post, September 8, 2016; Natasha Bertrand, “Senior Western official: Links between Turkey and ISIS are now ‘undeniable’,” Business Insider, July 28, 2015. * AFP, “Turkey accused of shelling Kurdish-held village in Syria,” The Guardian, July 27, 2015; Christopher Phillips, “Turkey’s Syria Intervention: A Sign of Weakness Not Strength,” Newsweek, September 22, 2016. * Ishaan Tharoor, “The U.S. should accept a Syrian Kurdish region, says Turkish opposition leader,” Washington Post, May 2, 2016. http://clubof.info/

[usnewsaggregator-blog]

Germany Plunged Into Political Crisis After Coalition Talks Fail

New Post has been published on http://usnewsaggregator.com/germany-plunged-into-political-crisis-after-coalition-talks-fail/

Germany Plunged Into Political Crisis After Coalition Talks Fail

The collapse of talks reflected the deep reluctance of Ms. Merkel’s conservative bloc and prospective coalition partners — the ecologist-minded Greens and pro-business Free Democrats — to compromise over key positions. The Free Democrats quit the talks late Sunday, citing what they called an atmosphere of insincerity and mistrust.

“There is no coalition of the willing to form a government,” said Thomas Kleine-Brockhoff, director of the Berlin office of the German Marshall Fund. “This is uncharted territory since 1949. We’re facing a protracted period of political immobility. Not only is this not going to go away soon, there is no clear path out.”

Calling new elections is not a straightforward procedure in Germany. Written with the unstable governments of the 1920s and 1930s and collapse of the Weimar Republic in mind, the German Constitution includes several procedural hurdles that would ensure a prolonged and difficult process.

Some were quick to link Germany’s disorder to a broader crisis of democracy in the West. “The unthinkable has happened,” said Christiane Hoffmann, deputy head of the Berlin bureau of Der Spiegel, a German magazine. In that sense, she said, “This is Germany’s Brexit moment, its Trump moment.”

Others said Germany’s troubles were in many ways just a sign that the country was becoming more normal, not less. Having had only four chancellors since 1982, the country has known only a string of centrist governments that governed by consensus.

The crisis erupted seven weeks after the last election, which brought the right-wing Alternative for Germany, or AfD, into Parliament, and in some ways represented the return of politics to a country long deprived of debate and policy disagreements.

“It’s just another step in the long learning of democracy of Germany since World War II, going from a very stable proportional system to something more messy,” said Henrik Enderlein, dean of the Hertie School of Governance in Berlin.

Continue reading the main story

The bigger question, he said, was whether Ms. Merkel’s pragmatic governing style had reached its limit in an era where people crave the clash of a wider spectrum of policies. “Her über-pragmatism is reaching its end,” he said. “It’s hard to see a scenario where she returns to her previous position of power.”

Ms. Merkel met in private on Monday with President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, who as head of state is charged with trying to break the deadlock in coalition talks. He could appoint a chancellor to lead a minority government or, failing that, set in motion the process for new elections.

The potential for instability in Germany would be a major blow to the European Union. Ms. Merkel has been the region’s dominant political figure of the past decade, credited with guiding the bloc through the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis and, more recently, providing a powerful counterpoint to populists across the Continent and beyond.

Financial markets reacted calmly to the turmoil in Berlin, calculating that the German economy could power through the uncertainty. After opening lower, the DAX index of major stocks closed the day higher. The euro fell slightly.

But some economists warned that the longer-term effects could be more severe. A weak government might be unable to agree on needed improvements to infrastructure and the education system, for example.

“The economic situation is very good,” Christoph M. Schmidt, chairman of the German Council of Economic Experts, said in a statement. “But over the mid and long term there are big challenges, especially the demographic shift, digitalization, sensible development of the European Union, and climate change.”

The political instability stems from the elections in Germany on Sept. 24, when Ms. Merkel’s Christian Democrats finished first. But their share of the overall vote dropped significantly, while the far-right Alternative for Germany scored a record vote, entering Parliament for the first time as the third-biggest grouping.

Even so, political analysts had expected Ms. Merkel to form a new coalition government that would have allowed her to remain as chancellor. That may still happen, but it will be harder now, and it is unlikely to happen soon, experts say.

Elsewhere in Europe, the possibility of a weakened Ms. Merkel and of an inward-looking Germany alarmed some leaders. The chancellor canceled a meeting in Berlin with Prime Minister Mark Rutte of the Netherlands. In Paris, President Emmanuel Macron of France said that Ms. Merkel’s difficulties were a serious hurdle to the partnership between their two countries.

Continue reading the main story

France has “no interest in a worsening of the situation” in Germany, Mr. Macron said in a statement on Monday. “Our wish is that our main partner, for the sake of Germany and Europe, remains strong and stable, so that we can move forward together,” he added.

Even if Ms. Merkel’s problems leave Mr. Macron as Europe’s de facto strongest leader — with weak domestic opposition in France, a strengthening economy, and a good record so far on driving through economic overhauls — the French president had been counting on Ms. Merkel as an ally in his push to make changes to the European Union.

Mr. Macron will be aware that his agenda for the bloc, which includes a common defense force, a strengthened euro, and a joint finance minister, stands no chance without German backing.

Ms. Merkel had originally set Friday as the deadline for reaching an agreement with the Free Democrats, the Greens, and the Christian Social Union, which forms a conservative bloc with the chancellor’s Christian Democrats. From the outset, all of those parties had differed markedly on key issues, notably migration and climate policies, resulting in strained talks that led to open sniping.

After they agreed to take talks into overtime, negotiators and party leaders failed to produce any breakthroughs over the weekend, and the Free Democrats quit the talks.

Ms. Merkel could try to approach the Social Democrats about forming another grand coalition. But the center-left party has served as the junior coalition partner to the Christian Democrats since 2013 and on Monday, the party’s leader, Martin Schulz, said his group had no interest in another round.

As for new elections, the president can set the process in motion by proposing Ms. Merkel as chancellor, which would be put to a vote in Parliament.

If Ms. Merkel were to win a majority in the first round of voting, the president could then name her as chancellor. If not, lawmakers would vote again, within 14 days.

Continue reading the main story

If Ms. Merkel failed to win a majority in a second vote, then lawmakers would vote a third time and the candidate with the most votes would win. At that point, the president could name that person chancellor or simply dissolve the Parliament and order new elections, which would take place within 60 days.

But there is no guarantee that elections would improve the situation: Recent opinion polls predict that a new vote would bring little change, compared to the result in September. A Forsa poll released last week showed Ms. Merkel’s conservatives at 32 percent, the Social Democrats on 20 percent, the Free Democrats at 12 percent, the Greens 10 percent and the AfD 12 percent.

Some worry that the AfD could benefit from the current chaos and increase its share of the vote. But even if it did, that share remains far below that of populist movements in other countries.

“Germany is not leaving the E.U. and it did not elect Donald Trump,” said Mr. Kleine-Brockhoff. “It was unable to form a government on its first attempt. That’s bad. It causes instability. But it’s not the end of the world.”

Correction: November 20, 2017

An earlier version of this article misstated the name of the right-wing party that won seats in the September parliamentary elections. It is Alternative for Germany, not Alliance for Democracy.

Continue reading the main story

Original Article:

Click here

[usnewsaggregator-blog]

Germany Plunged Into Political Crisis After Coalition Talks Fail

New Post has been published on http://usnewsaggregator.com/germany-plunged-into-political-crisis-after-coalition-talks-fail/

Germany Plunged Into Political Crisis After Coalition Talks Fail

The collapse of talks reflected the deep reluctance of Ms. Merkel’s conservative bloc and prospective coalition partners — the ecologist-minded Greens and pro-business Free Democrats — to compromise over key positions. The Free Democrats quit the talks late Sunday, citing what they called an atmosphere of insincerity and mistrust.

“There is no coalition of the willing to form a government,” said Thomas Kleine-Brockhoff, director of the Berlin office of the German Marshall Fund. “This is uncharted territory since 1949. We’re facing a protracted period of political immobility. Not only is this not going to go away soon, there is no clear path out.”

Calling new elections is not a straightforward procedure in Germany. Written with the unstable governments of the 1920s and 1930s and collapse of the Weimar Republic in mind, the German Constitution includes several procedural hurdles that would ensure a prolonged and difficult process.

Some were quick to link Germany’s disorder to a broader crisis of democracy in the West. “The unthinkable has happened,” said Christiane Hoffmann, deputy head of the Berlin bureau of Der Spiegel, a German magazine. In that sense, she said, “This is Germany’s Brexit moment, its Trump moment.”

Others said Germany’s troubles were in many ways just a sign that the country was becoming more normal, not less. Having had only four chancellors since 1982, the country has known only a string of centrist governments that governed by consensus.

The crisis erupted seven weeks after the last election, which brought the right-wing Alternative for Germany, or AfD, into Parliament, and in some ways represented the return of politics to a country long deprived of debate and policy disagreements.

“It’s just another step in the long learning of democracy of Germany since World War II, going from a very stable proportional system to something more messy,” said Henrik Enderlein, dean of the Hertie School of Governance in Berlin.

Continue reading the main story

The bigger question, he said, was whether Ms. Merkel’s pragmatic governing style had reached its limit in an era where people crave the clash of a wider spectrum of policies. “Her über-pragmatism is reaching its end,” he said. “It’s hard to see a scenario where she returns to her previous position of power.”

Ms. Merkel met in private on Monday with President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, who as head of state is charged with trying to break the deadlock in coalition talks. He could appoint a chancellor to lead a minority government or, failing that, set in motion the process for new elections.

The potential for instability in Germany would be a major blow to the European Union. Ms. Merkel has been the region’s dominant political figure of the past decade, credited with guiding the bloc through the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis and, more recently, providing a powerful counterpoint to populists across the Continent and beyond.

Financial markets reacted calmly to the turmoil in Berlin, calculating that the German economy could power through the uncertainty. After opening lower, the DAX index of major stocks closed the day higher. The euro fell slightly.

But some economists warned that the longer-term effects could be more severe. A weak government might be unable to agree on needed improvements to infrastructure and the education system, for example.

“The economic situation is very good,” Christoph M. Schmidt, chairman of the German Council of Economic Experts, said in a statement. “But over the mid and long term there are big challenges, especially the demographic shift, digitalization, sensible development of the European Union, and climate change.”

The political instability stems from the elections in Germany on Sept. 24, when Ms. Merkel’s Christian Democrats finished first. But their share of the overall vote dropped significantly, while the far-right Alternative for Germany scored a record vote, entering Parliament for the first time as the third-biggest grouping.

Even so, political analysts had expected Ms. Merkel to form a new coalition government that would have allowed her to remain as chancellor. That may still happen, but it will be harder now, and it is unlikely to happen soon, experts say.

Elsewhere in Europe, the possibility of a weakened Ms. Merkel and of an inward-looking Germany alarmed some leaders. The chancellor canceled a meeting in Berlin with Prime Minister Mark Rutte of the Netherlands. In Paris, President Emmanuel Macron of France said that Ms. Merkel’s difficulties were a serious hurdle to the partnership between their two countries.

Continue reading the main story

France has “no interest in a worsening of the situation” in Germany, Mr. Macron said in a statement on Monday. “Our wish is that our main partner, for the sake of Germany and Europe, remains strong and stable, so that we can move forward together,” he added.

Even if Ms. Merkel’s problems leave Mr. Macron as Europe’s de facto strongest leader — with weak domestic opposition in France, a strengthening economy, and a good record so far on driving through economic overhauls — the French president had been counting on Ms. Merkel as an ally in his push to make changes to the European Union.

Mr. Macron will be aware that his agenda for the bloc, which includes a common defense force, a strengthened euro, and a joint finance minister, stands no chance without German backing.

Ms. Merkel had originally set Friday as the deadline for reaching an agreement with the Free Democrats, the Greens, and the Christian Social Union, which forms a conservative bloc with the chancellor’s Christian Democrats. From the outset, all of those parties had differed markedly on key issues, notably migration and climate policies, resulting in strained talks that led to open sniping.

After they agreed to take talks into overtime, negotiators and party leaders failed to produce any breakthroughs over the weekend, and the Free Democrats quit the talks.

Ms. Merkel could try to approach the Social Democrats about forming another grand coalition. But the center-left party has served as the junior coalition partner to the Christian Democrats since 2013 and on Monday, the party’s leader, Martin Schulz, said his group had no interest in another round.

As for new elections, the president can set the process in motion by proposing Ms. Merkel as chancellor, which would be put to a vote in Parliament.

If Ms. Merkel were to win a majority in the first round of voting, the president could then name her as chancellor. If not, lawmakers would vote again, within 14 days.

Continue reading the main story

If Ms. Merkel failed to win a majority in a second vote, then lawmakers would vote a third time and the candidate with the most votes would win. At that point, the president could name that person chancellor or simply dissolve the Parliament and order new elections, which would take place within 60 days.

But there is no guarantee that elections would improve the situation: Recent opinion polls predict that a new vote would bring little change, compared to the result in September. A Forsa poll released last week showed Ms. Merkel’s conservatives at 32 percent, the Social Democrats on 20 percent, the Free Democrats at 12 percent, the Greens 10 percent and the AfD 12 percent.

Some worry that the AfD could benefit from the current chaos and increase its share of the vote. But even if it did, that share remains far below that of populist movements in other countries.

“Germany is not leaving the E.U. and it did not elect Donald Trump,” said Mr. Kleine-Brockhoff. “It was unable to form a government on its first attempt. That’s bad. It causes instability. But it’s not the end of the world.”

Correction: November 20, 2017

An earlier version of this article misstated the name of the right-wing party that won seats in the September parliamentary elections. It is Alternative for Germany, not Alliance for Democracy.

Continue reading the main story

Original Article:

Click here