#political decisions

[dreamstz1]

Exploring the Relationship Between Politics and Economics: A Deep Dive

The connection between politics and economics is both intricate and inseparable. These two domains, though distinct, profoundly shape one another. In this post, we explore how politics influences economic policies, and how economic forces, in turn, affect political decisions. Understanding this relationship is key to grasping the broader socio-political landscape.How Politics Shapes Economic…

[mapecl-stories]

Children's Rights: The Wings of Change

In the modern city of Flensburg, there lived a boy named Marcus. He was a lively, curious, and empathetic boy who always had an open ear for his friends and classmates. Marcus knew that children had rights, but he sensed that these rights were not adequately respected and protected.

One day, while sitting in school, Marcus listened to his teacher talking about children's rights. She explained that children had the right to protection, education, health, play, and much more, but despite Germany's ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1992, these rights were still not sufficiently enshrined in the constitution. Marcus found it unfair that children's rights still played only a secondary role in political decisions.

Determined to make a change, Marcus decided to take action himself. He wanted to advocate for the recognition that children's rights deserved in Germany. With a strong sense of responsibility, he started educating himself about children's rights and connected with other like-minded children.

Together with his friends, Marcus founded the "Children's Rights Movement of Flensburg." They created posters and organized informational events to enlighten their fellow students about the importance of children's rights. Marcus was amazed at how many children and teenagers joined the movement and were eager to stand up for their rights.

The "Children's Rights Movement of Flensburg" quickly gained momentum. They wrote letters to politicians, requested meetings, and demanded the explicit inclusion of children's rights in the constitution. Marcus and his friends were determined to have their voices heard and to give children's rights the priority they deserved.

The movement received support from adults, including parents, teachers, lawyers, and local activists. Together, they formed a strong community advocating for children's rights.

Marcus and the Children's Rights Movement organized a demonstration where hundreds of people marched through the streets of Flensburg to fight for children's rights. The media covered their concerns, and the message spread throughout the city and beyond.

The attention of politicians could no longer be ignored. Marcus and his friends were invited to a meeting with representatives of the parliament. They had the opportunity to share their perspectives and explain why the explicit inclusion of children's rights in the constitution was crucial.

The meeting became a turning point. The politicians were impressed by the children's passion and knowledge. Marcus and his friends succeeded in raising awareness about children's rights and putting the issue on the political agenda.

Some time later, a constitutional amendment was proposed that recognized children's rights as independent rights and ensured their consideration in political decisions and administrative processes. Marcus and the Children's Rights Movement of Flensburg were overjoyed that their efforts bore fruit.

Children's rights were now enshrined in the constitution, and Marcus felt a profound satisfaction. The "Children's Rights Movement of Flensburg" had managed to improve the lives of children in their country and finally give their voices the attention they deserved.

The story of Marcus and the Children's Rights Movement of Flensburg reminds us that children are not only the future but also the present. When children raise their voices and stand up for their rights, they can bring about real change and create a more just society where the well-being of children is a top priority. Marcus and his friends had proven that children can be a powerful force that changes the world for the better.

[howdoesone]

How does one examine the ethical implications of political decisions related to genocide and war crimes?

The study of political decisions related to genocide and war crimes raises important ethical considerations. Political leaders and decision-makers hold significant power and responsibility in preventing, responding to, and addressing these heinous crimes. Examining the ethical implications of their actions is crucial for understanding the moral dimensions of political decisions and their impact…

[vyeoh]

(The Washington Post)

For those who don't know, the US Supreme Court just ruled that states are allowed to enforce trans healthcare for minors. Undoubtedly, this will trigger a wave of other states that either hope to pass or have already passed policies to do the same. This is going to kill children, and harm more in long-lasting ways.

So, how can you help?

FUCKING VOTE. I don't care if you don't like Biden, he's not the only one on the ballot. Vote representatives into your city council who will turn our city into a sanctuary city. Vote for governors and state reps who will, even if they don't pass new protections, oppose bans being pushed through. Chsllenge and kick out conservative incumbents who are banking on their races being obscure enough for people to not vote in.

Anyone telling you voting is useless is either lying to you or grossly uninformed and think saying this is the edgy new take that will make them look hip and informed. Yes, the system is broken. But short of burning the whole thing to the ground (which personally I'm not a fan of as I quite enjoy having like. Roads and the FDA) what we can do is to change it for the better, by starting with the local races and working our way up.

[reasonsforhope]

THANK FUCKING GOD

"The Supreme Court on Thursday [June 13, 2024] unanimously preserved access to a medication that was used in nearly two-thirds of all abortions in the U.S. last year, in the court’s first abortion decision since conservative justices overturned Roe v. Wade two years ago.

The nine justices ruled that abortion opponents lacked the legal right to sue over the federal Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the medication, mifepristone, and the FDA’s subsequent actions to ease access to it. The case had threatened to restrict access to mifepristone across the country, including in states where abortion remains legal.

Abortion is banned at all stages of pregnancy in 14 states, and after about six weeks of pregnancy in three others, often before women realize they’re pregnant.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who was part of the majority to overturn Roe, wrote for the court on Thursday that “federal courts are the wrong forum for addressing the plaintiffs’ concerns about FDA’s actions.”

The opinion underscored the stakes of the 2024 election and the possibility that an FDA commissioner appointed by Republican Donald Trump, if he wins the White House, could consider tightening access to mifepristone, including prohibiting sending it through the mail...

Kavanaugh’s opinion managed to unite a court deeply divided over abortion and many other divisive social issues by employing a minimalist approach that focused solely on the technical legal issue of standing and reached no judgment about the FDA’s actions...

While praising the decision, President Joe Biden signaled Democrats will continue to campaign heavily on abortion ahead of the November elections. “It does not change the fact that the right for a woman to get the treatment she needs is imperiled if not impossible in many states,” Biden said in a statement...

About two-thirds of U.S. adults oppose banning the use of mifepristone, or medication abortion, nationwide, according to a KFF poll conducted in February. About one-third would support a nationwide ban...

More than 6 million people [in the U.S.] have used mifepristone since 2000. Mifepristone blocks the hormone progesterone and primes the uterus to respond to the contraction-causing effect of a second drug, misoprostol. The two-drug regimen has been used to end a pregnancy through 10 weeks gestation...

Biden’s administration and drug manufacturers had warned that siding with abortion opponents in this case could [have] undermined the FDA’s drug approval process beyond the abortion context by inviting judges to second-guess the agency’s scientific judgments. The Democratic administration and New York-based Danco Laboratories, which makes mifepristone, argued that the drug is among the safest the FDA has ever approved."

-via AP, June 13, 2024

--

Note: A massive relief and a genuine victory - this will preserve access to the medication used in 2/3rds of abortions last year, for at least another 2 years. (Probably minimum time it will take Republicans to get their next attempt before the Supreme Court.)

Still, with this, a sword that has been hanging over our heads for the last two years is gone. There will be a new one soon, but we just bought ourselves probably at least 2 years. The fight isn't over, but this is absolutely worth celebrating.

[lady-raziel]

Not to talk about the watcher thing again as I’ve already kind of said my piece, but one of the most batshit insane parts of this whole unbelievable situation is that for some reason they decided that for some fucking reason the BEST time to announce this highly controversial decision was literally DAYS before they would be going on an international tour and having to face irate fans IN PERSON. Guys. What the hell. At least have the sensibility to announce a move that you HAD to have known would make people upset AFTER one of the few times you actually interact in person with your fanbase.

I hope you’re ready to investigate the Tower of London for ghosts, because I have a feeling the Londoners will be more than happy to acquaint you with the building later this week.

Insane move after insane move. Truly.

[hollygl125]

Nearly 14,000 Nevada voters must verify their identity with election officials to cure the signature on their mail-in ballots or their votes won’t count in what was expected to be a close presidential race, according to the secretary of state.

The deadline for voters to cure their ballots is 5 p.m. Nov. 12, officials said. [. . .]

Ballots need to be cured if the signature on file with the elections department doesn’t match, or if the voter failed to sign their mail ballot.

When there is a signature issue, the Clark County Election Department notifies voters by telephone, email, and U.S. mail. The phone call from Clark County will come from 702-455-8683, officials said.

Officials urge voters to check if their ballot was accepted by using the state's online tool.

[lotus-pear]

FUCK this country

[happyheidi]

to everyone who feels underrepresented, misrepresented or unrepresented; everyone who can’t express themselves, their gender and/or sexuality in a manner that feels comfortable to them; to everyone who experiences dysphoria, who is misgendered and deadnamed every day; to everyone who’s closeted because they’re not ready or they don’t feel safe; to everyone who’s flag isn’t on this post: I see you. You are loved!

𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙢𝙤𝙣𝙩𝙝 𝙞𝙨 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙮𝙤𝙪 !!

Happy Pride! 🌈

flag collage source

[mediocreclementine]

[zanmor]

Using Your Vote Strategically

Your vote doesn’t matter (probably). Luckily you can make it do a bit more.

Your vote is one of a few hundred million game pieces. Knowing how best to use it requires you to understand your place on the game board. Let’s take a look at that board.

Current polling has the following ten states (yellow on the above map) as highly competitive in this year’s presidential election: Maine, New Jersey, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Virginia, Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Nevada, and Georgia. Realistically those first three have only gone to Democrats since at least 2000 so speculation is more focused on the last seven (and even New Hampshire has been solidly Democrat since it voted for Bush in 2000).

If you’re one of the roughly 37.5 million voters who lives in one of those states, congratulations! Your vote will actually help decide who wins the presidency in November. As such you should probably vote for one of the major parties. To the other 82% of the electorate, it’s time to think a little harder about how you’ll utilize your vote in the fall.

Meanwhile there are 35 states that solidly belong to one of the two parties and that ain’t changing. They’re blue and red on the map above.

These states have only given electoral votes to their respective party since at least 2000 and current polling (according to 270towin.com) shows that they will do that again this year, well beyond any margin of error in the polls. California for instance is currently polling heavily in favor of the Democratic candidate and has voted for a Democratic candidate since 2000. Obviously that’s not about to change. That’s the case with these other 34 states as well. Which means if there’s any way to “throw your vote away” then it’s by blindly tossing it in with the millions of others that will not impact the electoral college or party platforms in any way.

The states where your vote matters least are:

California, Texas, New York, Illinois, Indiana, West Virginia, Alaska, Missouri, Hawaii, Louisiana, Kansas, Nebraska, South Carolina, South Dakota, Montana, Oklahoma, Kentucky, Idaho, Tennessee, Utah, Arkansas, North Dakota, Wyoming, Mississippi, Alabama, Washington, Massachusetts, Maryland, Oregon, Connecticut, Vermont, Delaware, Washington DC, Rhode Island, and New Mexico.

If you live in one of these states I have no qualms about advising you to vote third party in the general election. It will not change the electoral college outcome. But it can have important benefits you wouldn’t see by simply tossing another ballot on the mountain. I’ll talk below about those benefits. First, the last part of the game board.

The following six states (green on the above map) are technically polling within the margin of error where they could potentially go either way. I personally think it’s unlikely they’ll flip but you can make your own call on that and vote accordingly. If you live in North Carolina, Arizona, Florida, Iowa, Ohio, or Colorado, I think you’re likely to get more use from your vote giving it to a third party candidate based on current polling.

As I said above, I don’t expect that third party voting will impact the electoral college outside of those few truly competitive states.

So what does voting third party do?

If enough people vote third party it can do two helpful things: 1. if a party’s candidate receives over 5% of the popular vote then they can get federal matching funds in the next election, helping spread messages currently relegated to the sidelines, and 2. the major parties are more likely to take note of these votes and try to adjust their platforms to grab these voters in later elections. Voting for one of the two major parties doesn’t send any sort of message. What little utility your vote has in that regard is lost.

Voting for a candidate like Jill Stein of the Green Party can accomplish both of the above goals. Her platform is incredibly progressive. Across the board it’s a lot of things that leftists have been clamoring for. It will show establishment Democrats that there is voting support for those policies.

By supporting a third party candidate (not an independent solo candidate) we could see her get 5% of the popular vote and gain federal matching funds in 2028. It’s not about if she would be a good president or if you like her personally—she is not and never will get elected. It’s about hitting that 5% and showing the establishment that if they cater to the folks who like this platform that they can win votes.

Five percent of the 2020 election would have been just under 8 million votes. Four million Californian voters could have voted Green Party and Biden still would have won the state by over a million votes. We can definitely find 4 million votes in the other 40 states that otherwise are unlikely to impact the election. And we should.

[mollysunder]

I know Heimerdinger's Christian Linke's favorite character, and I sort of tolerated it in s1, but now it feels like things are a little too indulgent. Heimerdinger gets to team up with Ekko to launder his reputation through Ekko and the Firelights. Heimerdinger gets the first narrative game and second character teaser in the promotional cycl. Heimerdinger gets to SING A SONG that's included on the s2 Arcane soundtrack (Spin the Wheel).

Maybe I'd be less annoyed if the show at least did more to acknowledge Heimerdinger's failings as a leader, but his character description can't even do that. This is how the official Arcane website describes Heimerdinger:

"Heimerdinger warned the Piltover Council about the dangers of using magic without tangible solutions for safeguarding its use. Learning from his mistakes with Jayce, Heimerdinger inspires Ekko to keep looking for a solution and works with him to solve the problem, instead of just offering advice."

That's not Heimerdinger's main problem! The problem is the fact he's the person most singularly responsible for the state of Zaun and Piltover. It feels like the show and the cast are just dancing around the fact that Heimerdinger technically has the highest body count in the show (Day of Ash, pollution, extreme poverty, etc). The one time someone puts him to task (Jayce), the show makes it seem like Jayce is wrong or overstepped, and yeah he did do it for Viktor's sake, but Jayce was right! Heimerdinger's bad at his job, he shouldn't be in a leadership position if he's a bad leader.

[marvelsmostwanted]

The Supreme Court really said we’re going to put you at a structural disadvantage for getting into college, but if you do get in you will need to take out loans that will also put you at a structural disadvantage when you get out of college. Happy 4th

[ignitesthestxrs]

there's something about the way people talk about john gaius (incl the way the author writes him) that is like. so absent of any connection to te ao māori that it's really discomforting. like even in posts that acknowledge him as not being white, they still talk about him like a white, american leftist guy in a way that makes it clear people just AREN'T perceiving him as a māori man from aotearoa.

and it's just really serves to hammer home how powerful and pervasive whiteness and american hegemony is. because TLT is probably the single most Kiwi series in years to explode on the global stage, and all the things i find fraught about it as a pākehā woman reading a series by a pākehā author are illegible to a greater fandom of americans discoursing about whether or not memes are a valid way of portraying queer love.

idk the part of my brain that lights up every time i see a capital Z printed somewhere because of the New Zealand Mentioned??? instinct will always be proud of these books and muir. but i find myself caught in this midpoint of excitement and validation over my culture finding a place on the global stage, frustration at how kiwi humour and means of conveying emotion is misinterpreted or declared facile by an international audience, frustrated also by how that international audience runs the characters in this book through a filter of american whiteness before it bothers to interpret them, and ESPECIALLY frustrated by how muir has done a pretty middling job of portraying te ao māori and the māoriness of her characters, but tht conversation doesn't circulate in the same way* because a big part of the audience doesn't even realise the conversation is there to be had.

which is not to say that muir has done a huge glaring racism that non-kiwis haven't noticed or anything, but rather that there are very definitely things that she has done well, things that she has done poorly, things that she didn't think about in the first book that she has tacked on or expanded upon in the later books, that are all worthy of discussion and critique that can't happen when the popular posts that float past my dash are about how this indigenous man is 'guy who won't shut up about having gone to oxford'

*to be clear here, i'm not saying these conversations have never happened, just that in terms of like, ambient posts that float round my very dykey dash, the discussions and meta that circulate on this the lesbian social media, are overwhelmingly stripped of any connection to aotearoa in general, let alone te ao māori in specific. and because of the nature of american internet hegemony this just,,,isn't noticed, because how does a fish know it's in the ocean u know? i have seen discussions along these lines come up, and it's there if i specifically go looking for it, but it's not present in the bulk of tlt content that has its own circulatory life and i jut find that grim and a part of why the fandom is difficult to engage with.

[reasonsforhope]

"Palestinian plaintiffs and their legal representatives on Friday [January 26, 2024] presented a powerful case in federal court accusing President Joe Biden and other top US officials of complicity in Israel's genocide in Gaza.

People around the world tuned in for the long-awaited hearing in Oakland, with plaintiffs appearing in person and over Zoom in an unprecedented effort to hold the Biden administration accountable for its actions in Gaza.

The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) filed the lawsuit in November 2023 on behalf of Defense for Children International–Palestine, Al-Haq, and eight Palestinians in the US and Palestine. The complaint accuses President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin of failing to live up to their legal responsibilities under the 1948 Genocide Convention and the 1988 Genocide Convention Implementation Act.

The United Nations convention classifies complicity in genocide, or the intentional destruction of a people in whole or in part, as a crime under international law and requires that states take measures to prevent such atrocities.

[Note: This is a big reason why politicians almost never call it a genocide, btw. Because if a country recognizes that it's a genocide, then they actually are legally required to do a bunch of things to stop it, under international law.]

The historic lawsuit contends that the Biden administration has failed to uphold its obligations by continuing to provide diplomatic and military support for Israel's brutal campaign in Gaza. Plaintiffs are asking the court to stop Biden from sending more weapons and munitions to Israel that are being used to kill Palestinians en masse.

The hearing before the US District Court for the Northern District of California took place just hours after the International Court of Justice issued provisional measures against Israel in a landmark case brought by South Africa.

-via TAG24, January 26, 2024. Article continues below.

Court contends with questions of jurisdiction and responsibility

In evaluating the allegations, questioning in Friday's hearing revolved around the so-called political question doctrine, by which federal courts regularly refrain from ruling on political matters seen as best resolved by the president and Congress.

The Department of Justice argued that according to the doctrine, the court has no jurisdiction to rule in the case.

"If the court condemns United States foreign policy toward Israel, it could cause international embarrassment and undermine foreign policy decisions in the sensitive context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict," defense counsel Jean Lin told Senior District Judge Jeffrey S. White.

Katherine Gallagher of the CCR countered that the court does, indeed, have a responsibility to step in: "Here, the question is a legal one, whether the actions undertaken by the United States failed to uphold the obligation to prevent genocide, and that is an active obligation that requires that the United States not provide the means by which a genocide is being furthered."

"There is no discretion for any state to evade its obligations, its legal obligations. These are not policy decisions," she said.

Palestinian plaintiffs share powerful testimonies before the court

After legal arguments in the case, Judge White heard two hours of gut-wrenching testimony from Palestinian plaintiffs and a renowned Holocaust and genocide expert.

Rubin Presidential Chair of Jewish History at Wake Forest University Dr. Barry Trachtenberg shared his remarks before the court in spite of vehement US government opposition.

"To have an event fall under the 1948 Convention on Genocide requires both action and intent, and here we see that very, very clearly in a way that seems really quite unique in history," he stated, noting that there is now an opportunity to stop Israel's unfolding genocide in real time to prevent further loss of lives...

Judge White said he would take the testimonies to heart as he evaluates his constitutional responsibilities, describing the case as "the most difficult judicial decision" he has ever had to make."

-via TAG24, January 26, 2024

-

Note: I know a lot of people are really not gonna appreciate that last line. I'm not thrilled with it either. But it is worth noting that having a federal court overrule the US president's huge foreign policy and military decisions would be an absolutely massive deal/precedent

This is a case that deserves to be ruled on with an incredible amount of seriousness, if only because if you're a federal judge who's going to make that call, your written decision/legal justification needs to be unimpeachable

That said, if the judge uses jurisdiction to pass the buck here and avoid his legal and human responsibility to do what he can to stop a genocide, I'm gonna be pissed

[hollygl125]

Allison Janney in THE WEST WING (1999-2006), “College Kids” (04x03) Insp.

There is a feeling like the clenching of a fist There is a hunger in the center of the chest There is a passage through the darkness and the mist And though the body sleeps, the heart will never rest (*)

Decisions are made by those who show up. You gotta rock the vote!