#this is what i imagine went on in the bennet household | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

janeaustentextposts · 5 years ago

Note

Why didnt the Bennets have a governess? Were they unable to afford one or was it not as necessary as Lady Catherine made it seem?

It’s not really said why they don’t have a governess--and to pay the salary for one person to see to the education of five girls would be relatively cheap for the Bennets to get their daughters educated as a package deal (but oh my god that poor woman would not be paid NEARLY enough for all that work,) so I don’t think it was a case of them being unable to afford one. But for female education, especially, families could really pick and choose what level of investment they wanted to make. Elizabeth admits that they had whatever masters they wanted (presumably for dancing/art/music,) and fancy-work could be picked up from female friends and relations, so it doesn’t seem as though they were entirely neglected by Mr. Bennet’s refusal to have them educated in accomplishments; but more that it was very self-directed by the Bennet daughters, and if none of them asked for a governess or bothered Mrs. Bennet to teach them things (and it feels unlikely she’d have the skills or will to do so in the first place, so I doubt any attempts went very far,) they could just...do whatever. Imagine if a house full of girls these days were home-schooled but allowed to set their own curriculum and nobody ever made them take any kind of standardized test.

Elizabeth has eked out her own education by reading--as has Mary, though with different results in what they do with that reading. Elizabeth’s is more for personal enjoyment and enrichment, and Mary’s is more along the lines of making her reading another ‘accomplishment’ to display in how she dispenses her nuggets of wisdom in a performative way for social cachet. Kitty and Lydia no doubt enjoyed their dancing lessons, and do that very well, but everything else has been neglected. The Bennet girls essentially have very little structure, and it is their parents’ fault for leaving their educations to their own wills (and young girls/teens are not very likely to get strict with themselves, especially to apply themselves to subjects they may not enjoy.)

There are probably families who COULD have reasonably well-rounded educations for their daughters at home and without a governess (Austen herself only briefly attended school before illness forced her to return home, and I’ve never heard that the family employed a governess, so her mother and father saw to all other aspects of her education, and encouraged her to read widely.) But without some adult to provide structure and encourage disciplined application to learning, it’s almost entirely up to chance whether a girl could scratch out a meaningful education for herself.

That being said, governesses and schools are hardly a guarantee that a girl will develop into an educated person--but then it depends on your definition of education. The famous dialogue about what makes an Accomplished Woman in Pride and Prejudice rather reveals a lot--the Bingley sisters were educated at a very fine ladies’ school in London, and while they have accomplishments such as the things Caroline Bingley lists, (and to master several languages and talents such as music and art is no mean feat!) the sisters are still not quite on Elizabeth’s level, where Elizabeth’s more self-directed reading has perhaps enabled her to better develop her own critical thinking skills and to think outside the box.

Then there is Mrs. Goddard’s school in Emma, which is an unpretentious place and a very good sort of school for what it is--but the text admits that it is not turning out any particular geniuses or artistic talents, but fitting its girls up to be reasonably appealing and capable managers of middling genteel households. But for all that, it’s described rather lovingly: “Mrs. Goddard was the mistress of a School—not of a seminary, or an establishment, or any thing which professed, in long sentences of refined nonsense, to combine liberal acquirements with elegant morality, upon new principles and new systems—and where young ladies for enormous pay might be screwed out of health and into vanity—but a real, honest, old-fashioned Boarding-school, where a reasonable quantity of accomplishments were sold at a reasonable price, and where girls might be sent to be out of the way, and scramble themselves into a little education, without any danger of coming back prodigies. Mrs. Goddard's school was in high repute—and very deservedly; for Highbury was reckoned a particularly healthy spot: she had an ample house and garden, gave the children plenty of wholesome food, let them run about a great deal in the summer, and in winter dressed their chilblains with her own hands.” It reads as the next best thing to solid instruction at home by a capable and motherly sort of woman, so between this and Austen’s own education I think we can tell of her views on female accomplishments--a certain measure of flexibility and freedom is good for children as they grow, as well as a dignified simplicity which is in stark contrast to the sort of school the Bingley sisters attended in order to become the multi-accomplished beasts they are.

Almost every novel has something to say about female education--Mrs. Elton and Lucy Steele, I think, are school-girls in a similar vein to the Bingley sisters, and they have grown up to be two-faced and supercilious creatures. But then we have Mrs. Smith, who was at school with Anne Elliot, and is one of her truest friends from the beginning. In Mansfield Park we see the difference between the Bertram sisters and Fanny, though they all share the same governess. In these contrasts we can tell that the manner of a girl’s education is as much about developing her social persona in many ways as it is about giving her skills to befit a genteel woman, and the differing notions of what Society thinks an accomplished woman ought to be. Some of Austen’s least ‘educated’ characters are also some of the sweetest and kindest, whose seemingly inborn good sense carries them through difficulties; and some of those who have had a high degree of professional investment in their formal educations have turned out to be the meanest and/or most useless of women.

To bring it back to the Bennets and Lady Catherine, it’s almost certain that Lady Catherine is inquiring about their education and whether or not they had a governess in order to be a snob as well as nosy about Mr. Bennet’s income--hiring a private tutor for one’s child was basically the most expensive educational option available--and while Elizabeth is well-aware of the particular defects in how education has proceeded in her own family, she knows that is more due to her own parents’ lack of structure and discipline, rather than something which could have been fixed by the hiring of a governess. Even if they had one, it seems unlikely Mr. or Mrs. Bennet would exert themselves to make Kitty and Lydia mind the woman and apply themselves to scholarly things. (Other novels make it clear that girls ill-disciplined by their own parents can pretty much get away with murder when it comes to disobeying or ignoring their governesses.) Of course Elizabeth isn’t going to give Lady Catherine the ammunition of admitting that her parents dropped the ball, but she goes as far as she can to defend the general practice of at-home education without a governess, because many families did so (Austen’s included) and their daughters turned out just fine with a little genuine effort, thank you very much.

#Ask Me Anything Austen-Adjacent #AMAAA #Jane Austen #Pride and Prejudice

227 notes · View notes

ljones41 · 6 years ago

Text

"MANSFIELD PARK" (1999) Review

"MANSFIELD PARK" (1999) Review From the numerous articles and essays I have read on-line, Jane Austen’s 1814 novel, "Mansfield Park" did not seemed to be a big favorite among the author’s modern fans. In fact, opinions of the novel and its heroine, Fanny Price, seemed just as divided today, as they had been by Austen’s own family back in the early 19th century.

When director-writer Patricia Rozema was offered the assignment to direct a film adaptation of "Mansfield Park", she had originally rejected it. She claimed that she found both the novel and the Fanny Price character unappealing. In the end, she changed her mind on the grounds that she wrote her own screen adaptation. The result turned out to be an adaptation filled with a good deal of changes from Austen’s original text. Changes that have proven to be controversial to this day. One obvious change that Rozema had made centered on the heroine’s personality. Rozema’s script allowed actress Frances O’Connor to portray Fanny as a talented writer with a lively wit and quick temper. Mind you, Rozema’s Fanny continued to be the story’s bastion of morality – only with what many would view as sass. Rozema also allowed the Edmund Bertram character to become romantically aware of Fanny a lot sooner than the character did in the novel. Because of this revision, actor Jonny Lee Miller portrayed an Edmund who seemed a bit livelier and slightly less priggish than his literary counterpart. Characters like the Crawfords’ half-sister and brother-in-law, the Grants, failed to make an appearance. Fanny’s older brother, William Price, ceased to exist. And in this adaptation, Fanny eventually accepted Henry Crawford’s marriage proposal during her stay in Portsmouth, before rejecting it the following day. But the biggest change made by Rozema had involved the topic of slavery. The writer-director allowed the topic to permeate the movie. Austen’s novel described Fanny’s uncle by marriage, Sir Thomas Bertram, as the owner of a plantation on the island of Antigua. Due to a financial crisis, Sir Thomas was forced to depart for Antigua for a certain period of time with his oldest son as a companion. Upon his return to England and Mansfield Park, Fanny asked him a question regarding his slaves. Sir Thomas and the rest of the family responded with uncomfortable silence. Rozema utilized the Bertrams’ connection to African slavery to emphasize their questionable morality and possible corruption. She also used this connection to emphasize Fanny’s position as a woman, a poor relation, and her semi-servile position within the Mansfield Park household. Rozema used the slavery connection with a heavier hand in scenes that included Fanny hearing the cries of slaves approaching the English coast during her journey to Mansfield Park; a discussion initiated by Sir Thomas on breeding mulattoes; Edmund’s comments about the family and Fanny’s dependence upon the Antigua plantation; oldest son Tom Bertram’s revulsion toward this dependence and graphic drawings of brutalized slaves. These overt allusions to British slavery ended up leaving many critics and Austen fans up in arms. One aspect of "MANSFIELD PARK" that impressed me turned out to be the movie’s production values. I found the production crew's use of an abandoned manor house called Kirby Hall to be very interesting. Rozema, along with cinematographer Michael Coulter and production designer Christopher Hobbs, used the house's abandoned state and cream-colored walls to convey a corrupt atmosphere as an allusion to the Bertrams’ financial connection to slavery. Hobbes further established that slightly corrupted air by sparsely furnishing the house. I also found Coulter’s use the Cornish town of Charlestown as a stand-in for the early 19th century Portmouth as very picturesque. And I especially enjoyed his photography, along with Martin Walsh’s editing in the lively sequence featuring the Bertrams’ ball held in Fanny’s honor. On the whole, Coulter’s photography struck me as colorful and imaginative. The only bleak spot in the movie’s production values seemed to be Andrea Galer’s costume designs. There was nothing wrong with them, but I must admit that they failed to capture my imagination. I cannot deny that I found "MANSFIELD PARK" to be enjoyable and interesting. Nor can I deny that Rozema had injected a great deal of energy into Austen’s plot, a bit more than the 1983 miniseries. Rozema removed several scenes from Austen’s novel. This allowed the movie to convey Austen's story with a running time of 112 minutes. These deleted scenes included the Bertrams and Crawfords’ visit to Mr. Rushworth’s estate, Sotherton; and Fanny’s criticism of Mary Crawford’s caustic remarks about her uncle. I did not miss the Sotherton outing, but I wish Rozema had kept the scene regarding Mary’s uncle, since it did serve to expose Fanny and Edmund’s hypocrisy. Other improvements that Rozema made – at least in my eyes – were changes in some of the characters. Fanny became a livelier personality and at the same time, managed to remain slightly oppressed by her position at Mansfield Park. Both Edmund and Henry were portrayed in a more complex and attractive light. And Tom Bertram’s portrayal as the family’s voice of moral outrage against their connection to black slavery struck me as very effective. In fact, I had no problem with Rozema’s use of slavery in the story. I am not one of those who believed that she should have toned it down to the same level as Austen had – merely using the topic as an allusion to Fanny’s situation with the Bertrams. Austen had opened Pandora’s Box by briefly touching upon the topic in her novel in the first place. As far as I am concerned, there was no law that Rozema or any other filmmaker had to allude to the topic in the same manner. However, not all of Rozema’s changes had impressed me. Why was it necessary to have Henry Crawford request that he rent the nearby parsonage, when his half-sister and brother-in-law, the Grants, resided there in the novel? If Rozema had kept the Grants in her adaptation, this would not have happened. Nor did I understand Sir Thomas’ invitation to allow the Crawfords to reside at Mansfield Park, when Henry had his own estate in Norfolk. I suspect that Sir Thomas’ invitation was nothing more than a set up for Fanny to witness Henry making love to Maria Bertram Rushworth in her bedroom. Now, I realize that Henry is supposed to be some hot-to-trot Regency rake with an eye for women. But I simply found it implausible that he would be stupid enough to have illicit sex with his host’s married daughter. And why did Maria spend the night at Mansfield Park, when her husband’s own home, Sotherton, was located in the same neighborhood? And why was Fanny in tears over her little"discovery"? She did not love Henry. Did the sight of two people having sex disturb her? If so, why did she fail to react in a similar manner upon discovering Tom’s drawings of female slaves being raped? Many fans had complained about Fanny’s acceptance of Henry’s marriage proposal during the visit to Portmouth. I did not, for it allowed an opportunity for Fanny’s own hypocrisy to be revealed. After all, she claimed that Henry’s moral compass made her distrustful of him. Yet, upon her rejection of him; Henry exposed her as a liar and hypocrite, claiming the real reason behind her rejection had more to do with her love for Edmund. Unfortunately . . . Rozema seemed determined not to examine Fanny’s exposed hypocrisy and dismissed it with an intimate scene between her and Edmund; the revelation of Henry’s affair with Maria; and Edmund’s rejection of Henry’s sister, Mary Crawford. This last scene regarding Edmund's rejection of Mary revealed how truly heavy-handed Rozema could be as a filmmaker. In Austen’s novel, Edmund had rejected Mary, due to her refusal to condemn Henry for his affair with Maria and her plans to save the Bertrams and Crawfords' social positions with a marriage between Henry and the still married Maria. Mary's plans bore a strong resemblance to Fitzwilliam Darcy's successful efforts to save the Bennet family's reputation following Lydia Bennet's elopement with George Wickham in "Pride and Prejudice". In "MANSFIELD PARK", Edmund rejected Mary after she revealed her plans to save the Bertrams from any scandal caused by the Henry/Maria affair – plans that included the potential demise of a seriously ill Tom. The moment those words anticipating Tom's death poured from Mary’s mouth, I stared at the screen in disbelief. No person with any intelligence would discuss the possible demise of a loved one in front of his family, as if it was a topic in a business meeting. I never got the impression that both the literary and cinematic Mary Crawford would be that stupid. In this scene, I believe that Rozema simply went too far. The director’s last scene featured a montage on the characters’ fates. And what fate awaited the Crawfords? Both ended up with spouses that seemed more interested in each other than with the Crawford siblings. I suppose this was an allusion to some fate that the Crawfords deserved for . . . well, for what? Okay, Henry probably deserved such a fate, due to his affair with Maria. But Mary? I would disagree. Ironically, both Rozema and Austen shared one major problem with their respective versions of the story. Neither the Canadian writer-director nor the British author bothered to develop Fanny and Edmund’s characters that much. In fact, I would say . . . hardly at all. "MANSFIELD PARK" revealed Edmund’s penchant for priggish and hypocritical behavior in scenes that featured his initial protest against his brother’s plans to perform the "Lover’s Vow" play and his final capitulation; his argument against Sir Thomas’ comments about breeding mulattoes (which Fanny expressed approval with a slightly smug smile) and his willingness to accept his family’s dependence on slave labor; and his support of Sir Thomas’ attempts to coerce Fanny into marrying Henry Crawford. The above incidents were also featured in the novel (except for the mulatto breeding discussion). Not once did Fanny criticize Edmund for his hypocritical behavior – not in the movie or in the novel. Instead, both Rozema and Austen allowed Fanny to indulge in her own hypocrisy by turning a blind eye to Edmund’s faults. Worse, she used Henry Crawford’s flaws as an excuse to avoid his courtship of her and later reject him. Henry’s angry reaction to her rejection was the only time (at least in Rozema’s movie) in which Fanny’s hypocrisy was revealed. Yet, not only did Fanny fail to acknowledge Edmund’s flaws, but also her own. For me, the best aspect of "MANSFIELD PARK" proved to be its cast. How Rozema managed to gather such a formidable cast amazes me. Unfortunately, she did not use the entire cast. Two members – Justine Waddell (Julia Bertram) and Hugh Doneville (Mr. Rushworth) certainly seemed wasted. Rozema’s script failed to allow the two actors to express their talent. Waddell’s presence barely made any impact upon the movie. And Doneville seemed nothing more than poorly constructed comic relief. I almost found myself expressing the same belief for actress Lindsay Duncan, despite her portrayal of two of the Ward sisters – Lady Bertram and Mrs. Price. Her Lady Bertram seemed to spend most of the movie sitting around in a drug-induced state from the use of too much laudanum. However, Duncan had one memorable moment as Fanny’s mother, Mrs. Price. In that one scene, she gave emphatic advise to Fanny about Henry Crawford by pointing out the consequences of her decision to marry for love. Victoria Hamilton fared better in her nuanced performance as the spoiled, yet frustrated Maria Bertram. She effectively conveyed how her character was torn between her pragmatic marriage to Mr. Rushworth and her desire for Henry Crawford. Frankly, I believe that Austen gave her an unnecessarily harsh ending. James Purefoy gave an interesting performance as the Bertrams’ elder son and heir, Tom. He expertly walked a fine line in his portrayal of Tom’s disgust toward the family’s involvement in slavery and penchant for a wastrel’s lifestyle. The late actress Sheila Gish gave a slightly humorous, yet sharp performance as Fanny’s other aunt – the tyrannical and venomous Mrs. Norris. I believe that the movie’s best performances came not from the leads, but from three supporting actors – Alessandro Nivola, Embeth Davidtz, and the late playwright-actor Sir Harold Pinter. The literary Henry Crawford had been described as a seductive man that quite enjoyed flirting with or manipulating women. Nivola certainly portrayed that aspect of Henry’s character with great aplomb. But he prevented Henry from becoming a one-note rake by projecting his character’s growing attraction to Fanny and the hurt he felt from her unexpected rejection. Embeth Davidtz gave an equally compelling performance as Henry’s vivacious sister, Mary. She skillfully portrayed Mary’s more endearing traits – humor and sparkling personality – along with her cynical views on authority and talent for cold-blooded practicality. However, not even Davidtz could overcome that ludicrous rip-off from 1988’s "DANGEROUS LIAISONS", in which her Mary briefly stumbled out of the Bertrams’ drawing-room, mimicking Glenn Close, following Edmund’s rejection. It seemed like a flawed ending to a brilliant performance. For me, the film’s best performance came from Sir Harold Pinter. His Sir Thomas Bertram struck me as one of the most complex and multi-layered film portrayals I have ever come across. I find it astounding that this intimidating patriarch, who considered himself to be the family’s bastion of morality, was also responsible for the corruption that reeked at Mansfield Park and within the Bertram family. And Pinter made these conflicting aspects of the character’s personality mesh well together. Rozema added an ironic twist to Sir Thomas’ story. After being shamed by Fanny’s discovery of Tom’s drawings of abused slaves, Sir Thomas sold his Antigua estate and invested his money in tobacco. However, since U.S. states like Virginia, North Carolina and Kentucky were the world’s top producers of tobacco at the time, chances are that the Bertrams’ benefit from slavery continued. I suspect that if actress Frances O’Connor had portrayed the Fanny Price character as originally written by Jane Austen, she would have still given a superb performance. O’Connor certainly gave one in this movie. Despite Rozema’s refusal to openly acknowledge Fanny’s flaws in the script (except by Henry Crawford), the actress still managed to expose them through her performance. Not only did O’Connor did a great job in portraying Fanny’s wit and vivacity, she also revealed the social and emotional minefield that Fanny found at Mansfield Park with some really superb acting. I first became aware of Jonny Lee Miller in the 1996 miniseries, "DEAD MAN’S WALK". I found myself so impressed by his performance that I wondered if he would ever become a star. Sadly, Miller never did in the fourteen years that followed the prequel to 1988’s "LONESOME DOVE". But he has become well-known, due to his performances in movies like "MANSFIELD PARK", "TRAINSPOTTING" and the recent miniseries, "EMMA". In "MANSFIELD PARK", Miller portrayed the younger Bertram son, who also happened to be the object of Fanny Price’s desire. And he did a top-notch job in balancing Edmund’s virtues, his romantic sensibility and his personality flaws that include hypocrisy. I realize that Edmund was not an easy character to portray, but Miller made it all seem seamless. Considering that Austen’s "Mansfield Park" is not a real favorite of mine, I am surprised that I managed to enjoy certain aspects of this adaptation. I will be frank. It is far from perfect. Patricia Rozema made some changes to Austen’s tale that failed to serve the story. Worse, she failed to change other aspects of the novel – changes that could have improved her movie. But there were changes to the story that served the movie well in my eyes. And the movie "MANSFIELD PARK" possessed a first-rate production and a superb cast. More importantly, I cannot deny that flawed or not, Rozema wrote and directed a very energetic movie. For me, it made Austen’s 1814 tale a lot more interesting.

#jane austen #mansfield park #mansfield park 1999 #patricia rozema #frances o'connor #jonny lee miller #harold pinter #alessandro nivola #embeth davidtz #victoria hamilton #lindsay duncan #justine waddell #hugh bonneville #sophia myles #anna popplewell #james purefoy #sheila gish #period drama #costume drama

18 notes · View notes

nataliesnews · 3 years ago

Text

The law tearing Palestinian families apart 5.7.2021

The law tearing Palestinian families apart

The controversial Citizenship Law is supposedly about maintaining Israel’s security. In reality, it’s a tool to engineer Israel’s population.

BySamah SalaimeJuly 2, 2021

Palestinian women wait to cross Qalandiya checkpoint as an Israeli security officer stands guard outside the West Bank city of Ramallah August 28, 2009. (Issam Rimawi/Flash90)

In 2003, at the height of the Second Intifada, the Israeli government passed an emergency order titled “The Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law (Emergency Order).” Since then, the legislation has taken on many names: the family reunification law, the demographic balance law, the “security threat” law. But the goal of this law has remained the same: to prevent Palestinians in the West Bank or Gaza from marrying Arab citizens of Israel, and thus obstructing their path to Israeli citizenship.

The so-called Citizenship Law harms thousands of Palestinian families in Israel. It has been renewed every year since its passing — until this year. The order is set to expire on July 6, and currently the government does not have the parliamentary majority to re-extend it. While several MKs from the center-left Meretz and Labor parties have made their opposition to the order clear, it is unclear how they will vote next week when the law comes up for a vote in the Knesset.

Asmahan Jabali is one of those affected by the law. She was born in Taybeh inside the Green Line, but her parents were from Tulkarem in the occupied West Bank and were never registered as Israeli citizens or residents. As such, Jabali was registered as a West Bank resident, even though she has only ever lived in Israel. She married her partner, also from Taybeh, 26 years ago, and they have three children together. But her legal status in Israel was never sorted out. She has been undocumented, an “unlawful resident,” her entire life.

“Every year at around this time, I feel unwell, physically and mentally. I break down,” Jabali says. “Deep down, I know that the law will pass, but there’s also always a spark of hope that humanity will win out, and that someone in the Knesset will come to their senses and understand how much their voice can affect my life and the lives of thousands of women.”

Jabali is intimately familiar with the hardships caused by this law. She knows that children who are out of status can only attend school as guests, that they cannot receive matriculation grades, and that they cannot go on to attend college in Israel. She describes what it is like to try and run a household under the shadow of this law, and sets out the agonizing path people like her need to take in order to pass the law’s many “steps:” from being undocumented to becoming a temporary resident, then getting an ongoing residence permit, then full residency, and finally citizenship, which is never granted to any Palestinian from the West Bank or Gaza.

Each of these steps has profound implications on everyday life. There is a drastic difference between a residence permit that doesn’t allow for a driving license and one that does, or one that grants the right to work and one that does not. If someone works without the proper permits, tax and insurance payments reach unmanageable sums.

“It’s not just that I couldn’t go to college or earn a living, I’m also completely dependent on my partner, and I’m not alone in that respect,” says Jabali. “I’m lucky, as I have a partner who can support the family alone. What can a vulnerable woman who is less fortunate do with a partner who is violent or unemployed?

“Deep down, I know that the law will pass, but there’s also always a spark of hope that humanity will win out,” says Asmahan Jabali, an undocumented Palestinian affected by the Citizenship Law. (Courtesy of Asmahan Jabali)

“Imagine that your child falls over at school and shows up at the hospital bleeding, and you need to sign paperwork in order for them to undergo surgery,” Jabali continues. “Then they tell you that you are not your child’s guardian and that they can’t take your signature. What do you do when your child is waiting to have surgery and because of the ‘emergency order’ the doctors won’t treat them? I experience these situations every day in the shadow of this law. Then there’s the fact that as a family we don’t have the right to fly abroad together. I’m not allowed to fly out of Israel with my children, we can’t have ‘family holidays.’”

Jabali acknowledges that her situation is, relatively speaking, better than that of women who pay exorbitant sums for health insurance, yet who nonetheless discover that they are still not entitled to expensive treatments, such as cancer therapies.

And it’s not just medical treatment that is expensive. In order to settle their children’s legal status, every mother has to take a paternity test to prove that the father of her children is the person she is seeking to live with. This places a heavy burden on families, who need to pay thousands of shekels for each test, and sometimes repeat tests for the same child. No matter that it seems logical to do a paternity test for just one child in order to prove that both parents and their offspring deserve to live under the same roof.

Israeli soldiers obstruct a symbolic wedding party in protest of the controversial Citizenship Law, near the Hizma in the occupied West Bank, between Jerusalem and and the Palestinian city of Ramallah, on March 9, 2013. (Issam Rimawi/Flash90)

Hilda Qadesa, a 48-year-old resident of Lydd who is also affected by the law, describes how the “emergency order” strips couples of the right to public housing if one of the partners is a resident of the occupied territories. And even if both partners work, they are not entitled to a mortgage.

For the past 22 years, Qadesa has been married to a man from Ramallah, and she is an activist against the citizenship law. Her partner was supposed to become a citizen just before the law passed in 2003, and the process has been stalled ever since, forcing the family to begin the application process from scratch.

Three years ago, as part of then-Interior Minister Aryeh Deri’s attempts at alleviating the situation, the government issued 1,500 residence permits — including the rights to work, drive, and obtain social security and health insurance — to those who began the naturalization process prior to 2003. Qadesa is not, however, getting worked up about the compromise currently being proposed, which would similarly issue residence permits including the right to work and drive to those who applied for citizenship before 2003.

“The previous interior minister did this, and then MK Osama Saadi [Joint List] helped us present the most difficult cases,” Qadesa says. “The minister can grant these permits at any time, with no need to do favors for Mansour Abbas [Ra’am]. The humanitarian committee they’re talking about is always running, and they didn’t [give out any permits]. This [compromise] is idle talk to allow Ra’am and Meretz to go back on their word. Qadesa is referring to the “humanitarian committee” that was appointed as part of the passage of the 2003 law, and which has the authority, in exceptional circumstances, to grant legal status to those affected by the law. Adi Lustigman, legal counsel for Physicians for Human Rights — Israel, has represented hundreds of families in their legal battles with this law. She confirms that many women are negatively impacted by this law, and that the humanitarian committee almost never confers legal status, even in the most drastic cases in which women are in life-threatening danger and have nowhere to go in the West Bank. According to Lustigman, both the right and the left have rejected thousands of petitions filed on humanitarian grounds.

Prime Minister Naftali Bennet with with head of the Ra’am party Mansour Abbas in the assembly hall of the Israeli parliament on June 21, 2021. (Olivier Fitoussi/Flash90)

Only those with family in Israel can petition the committee. It can grant temporary residence or a temporary identity card which confers rights upon the holder. But Lustigman notes that the committee almost never wields this authority, except for in cases that reach the courts and which put pressure on the Interior Ministry. And the committee cannot grant citizenship or permanent residence status.

The law has a profound impact on Palestinian women whose partners are undocumented or who are undocumented themselves. It can sabotage relationships and a couple’s ability to have a normative and functioning family. Sumaya Abu Zar, also from Lydd and who married her cousin from Gaza 20 years ago, says that he insisted on being present at the birth of their third child, even though he did not have a residence permit.

“One of the nurses realized that he couldn’t fill out the forms and that he didn’t have a blue [Israeli] identity card, so she called the police who arrived and arrested him, even as I was experiencing severe labor pains,” Sumaya says. “I gave birth alone, and went into a deep depression. I had three children and didn’t see my husband for two years, until he managed to leave Gaza and enter the West Bank, and from there came back to us.

“My baby didn’t have a father for the first two years of her life, and it continues to be traumatic for the whole family. My husband is a diligent worker, a talented gardener, I opened a business in my own name, and drove him around for years because he was barred from driving,” Sumaya continues. “That was my role — morning, noon, and night — to take him around from place to place, and take care of our children in between. Since we received the residence permit, my life as a woman and a mother has completely changed.”

Lustigman is representing a family in which the woman has been living in Ramle for almost 30 years, but continues to only have temporary status due to the law. Her son was seriously injured by Israeli Jews in a nationalist attack and another daughter has a severe disability. But because of the law she needs to renew her permits every year. She struggles to visit her parents who emigrated abroad, and the humanitarian committee is yet to respond to her.

Palestinian women cross the Qalandiya checkpoint, outside of the West bank city of Ramallah, on June 23, 2017. (Hadas Parush/Flash90)

The state argues that Palestinians who have been naturalized through family reunification have been involved in hostile activities. But Lustigman has been grappling in court with this claim for years. “The data has never backed up the law’s supposed security rationale,” says Lustigman. Rather, she adds, the law has always been about demographics, meaning, maintaining a Jewish majority.

“No effort has been made in the past few years to support the security claims [of this law],” Lustigman continues. “The law is causing serious and sweeping harm to [people’s] basic rights, in all areas of life. Its existence is unacceptable in a supposedly democratic country. It’s no wonder that nowhere else in the world has a similar law that discriminates according to people’s origin.”

Israel claims that it knows how to identify Palestinians who are security “threats,” and it deploys this so-called expertise when it issues work permits to tens of thousands of Palestinians every day. There is nothing preventing the state from applying these methods to similar adjudications regarding Palestinian couples, who have lived in Israel for decades and present no security threat whatsoever.

It’s unclear why the state cannot grant citizenship to women and mothers who pose no danger other than being possessed of a womb. They “threaten” only the population registry and the Jewish character of the state. If the law is required to maintain the security of the Jewish state, how can extreme-right Knesset members oppose ratifying it? How dare they harm national “security?”

We need to call things by their name. The purpose of this law is to control Palestinians and engineer the terms of their citizenship and presence in this country. It preserves and perfects 2021-style apartheid, which maintains a hierarchy of people who live here: at the top are the pure Jewish citizens, below them undocumented Palestinians, and perhaps beneath them asylum seekers and migrant workers. That, in my view, is the essence of the law. Demographics, and nothing else.

Hassan Jabareen, the general director of Adalah, which has submitted countless petitions against this “emergency order,” says that the law is one of the three most racist pieces of legislation in Israel, alongside the Absentee Property Law and the Jewish Nation-State Law. “The state has repeatedly struggled to address the fact that no other country in the world that bars entry to a couple because [one of them is] of a different nationality,” Jabareen says.

Even apartheid South Africa, Jabareen adds, lost a famous court case involving a Black woman whom it had banned from her white boyfriend’s neighborhood. “The right to family unity won out over apartheid laws, which segregated Black and white [South Africans],” he says.

Jabareen believes that the issue of the citizenship law will be examined by a special UN Human Rights Council committee, which is also supposed to investigate the most recent war on Gaza and the accompanying violence against Palestinian citizens in May. “This is the first time that an international body is getting involved in [matters concerning] Palestinian citizens of Israel, and not just the West Bank and Gaza,” he says. “The testimonies of those affected by the citizenship law will provide important material for opposing Israel’s policies against Palestinians wherever they are, and perhaps then we can start discussing the real question, which has persisted for 73 years: Is Israel a democratic state or an apartheid state?”

I’m a woman who loves people and stories about simple folks like myself. They are the protagonists of the stories I write. You’ll hear a lot of criticism from me about Israel’s leadership but also creative solutions to problems that affect us all. Things that I’ve learned from life, in no particular order: sewing, criminology, cooking, social work, gender, fashion design, education and administration, embroidery and a little law — at least until I started dozing off in class. You’ll hear more about the connections between all of those things eventually. I can proudly say that I enlisted in the most gentle — and largest — army in the world, which tries to lead the longest and quietest revolution in human history: the feminist revolution. As a first step I started the AWC (Arab Women in the Center) NGO, which I manage pretty much on a volunteer basis. I was born 40 years ago to a refugee family Sajara in northern Israel (known today as Ilaniya), and most of my close family live in refugee camps in every corner of the world. I dream of the day when there is peace, some of them return, and we can build a home. We will have calm Jewish neighbors with whom we fight only about the question of whose dog (the Jew or the Arab) made a mess on our shared street. Until then I will be living in Neve Shalom/Wahat al-Salam raising my three boys together with my partner Omar, and no, we don’t have a dog.

Since you’re here…

A lot of work goes into creating articles like the one you just read. +972 Magazine is nonprofit journalism based on the ground in Israel-Palestine. In order to safeguard our independent voice, we are proud to count you, our readers, as our most important supporters.

Become a member of +972 Magazine with a monthly contribution, so that we can keep our journalism as a strong, independent, and sustainable force changing the global discourse on Israel-Palestine.

BECOME A MEMBER

More About Local Call

Jewish parties ‘compromise’ against Palestinians and call it democracy

Negotiations over a settlement outpost and a racist law show that Zionist parties of all stripes will find common ground to deny Palestinian rights.

By Orly Noy July 1, 2021

Inside Beita’s protests: ‘The settlers didn’t understand who they were dealing with’

For weeks, Palestinians in Beita have been burning tires, shining lasers, and defying army violence day and night to resist an Israeli settlement outpost.

By Oren Ziv June 29, 2021

‘Open Gaza immediately,’ says manager of Israel-Gaza crossing

The Erez Crossing manager debunks myth that restrictions on Gaza uphold security, believes Israel should engage directly with Hamas.

By Meron Rapoport June 21, 2021

Jewish parties ‘compromise’ against Palestinians and call it democracy

Negotiations over a settlement outpost and a racist law show that Zionist parties of all stripes will find common ground to deny Palestinian rights.

ByOrly NoyJuly 1, 2021

Prime Minister Naftali Bennett sits with Labor Party head Merav Michaeli in the plenum hall of the Knesset, Jerusalem, June 2, 2021. (Olivier Fitoussi/Flash90)

Sometimes you need to give credit where it’s due. And to the credit of Israel’s center-left parties, they had prepared their constituents in advance for the fact that entering the new government — which, in any composition, was going to rely on a clear right-wing majority — would have to involve making serious compromises.

A few days before the last election, Health Minister and Meretz head Nitzan Horowitz himself said “we will agree to make compromises to send Bibi home.” In the name of that same compromise, Labor chair Merav Michaeli agreed to relinquish top portfolios in order to sit in a government headed by a right-winger who once represented the settler movement, and who won the same number of seats as her party.

Meretz and Labor were required to foot the bill earlier than expected. Only two weeks after its inauguration, the government has already shown how far it is willing to go in order to reach a compromise with the outlaws of the Eviatar outpost in the occupied West Bank, in a shameful surrender that has once again rewarded the criminal behavior of the settler movement.

Political compromises are intended to enable the promotion of one’s core ideological demands, while making certain concessions on less critical issues. And to do this, red lines must be drawn. I am not a Meretz voter, but it seems to me that the party’s voters are entitled to a clearer understanding of its leadership’s red lines, particularly given their disgraceful silence in the face of the Eviatar compromise. If deepening the theft of Palestinian land, expanding the occupation, and complete contempt for all legal or moral norms are not beyond their red lines, it is unclear what is.

Minister of Health and Meretz head Nitzan Horowitz arrives to the President’s Residence in Jerusalem, June 14, 2021. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)

Is religious coercion — one of the party’s foundational values — a red line? What about Netanyahu’s removal from power? Liberal Israelis could have easily voted for Avigdor Liberman, a right-wing nationalist who touts his liberal credentials, instead of Meretz and would not have noticed a difference when it comes to policy. If within only two weeks since the inauguration of this government, the differences between Meretz and Liberman have blurred almost beyond recognition, we are facing a very big problem.

But the crucial point in this story is not the compromise in the Eviatar affair, but the very essence of compromise in Israeli politics. In general, political compromises tend to be made by the strong toward the weaker party: men “compromise” over women’s rights, straight people “compromise” over LGBTQ rights, and in Israel, above all, Jews “compromise” over Palestinian rights.

In their moment of truth, the center-left Zionist parties — who during election cycles passionately court the Arab voice (Meretz’s last campaign focused heavily on opposing the occupation and the settlements), while promising to take care of their Arab interests — feel completely comfortable sitting around the table with other Israeli Jews and negotiating the extent to which the most basic rights of Palestinians can be denied.

Israeli settlers seen walking through the settlement outpost of Eviatar, West Bank, June 21, 2021. (Sraya Diamant/Flash90)

This goes beyond the occupation. The Knesset will next week vote on the family unification law, a “temporary order” that for 18 years has been renewed in order to ban Palestinians from the West Bank or Gaza who marry Israeli citizens from living permanently in Israel with their spouses, while denying them a path to citizenship. This order has turned the lives of thousands of Palestinians into a daily hell and presents them with the inhuman decision between tearing apart family members or leaving their land entirely.

At best, Israeli Jews will yet again sit on both sides of the table and negotiate over the right of Palestinians to fall in love, marry, and lead a normal family life in their homeland. Although Meretz saved some of its dignity and has announced that it will not support the law, others will certainly keep their mouths shut in the name of that sacred compromise.

The recent decision by a number of leading human rights organizations to declare that Israel maintains a single apartheid regime between the river and the sea, including within its official borders, was received with anger by the Israeli public and the political establishment. But one must be voluntarily blind not to see how deeply these intra-Jewish “compromises” on Palestinian rights are a profound expression of the apartheid logic that undergirds Israel’s regime of Jewish supremacy.

This goes far deeper than the denial of the rights of citizens in the occupied territories: the Citizenship Law deprives Palestinian citizens within the State of Israel — those who supposedly enjoy its glorious democracy — of the most basic right that is naturally reserved for every Jewish citizen of the country, and even Jews abroad.

Palestinians present their documents to Israeli Border Police members as they make their way through Israeli Qalandia checkpoint, West Bank. April 16, 2021. (Flash90)

This shameful racist law, whose supporters have tried to disguise its demographic aspirations under the cloak of “security,” is further proof that under Israel’s apartheid regime, as far as the Palestinian public is concerned, the distinction between national and civil demands is meaningless. A young woman from Nazareth who falls in love with a man from Ramallah and wants to build a life with him does not do so as a political statement. She is simply demanding the basic right that every Jewish citizen of Israel enjoys. After all, the neighbor of that young Palestinian, a Jewish woman living in a nearby town who falls in love with a Jewish man from the settlement of Ofra near Ramallah, can marry him and live with him in her town without trouble.

If Israel insists on scrutinizing the security aspect of granting citizenship, then — as Joint List MK Ahmad Tibi noted at a recent Knesset committee meeting on occupation and apartheid — the number of Jews who were granted citizenship under the Law of Return and who committed acts of terrorism against Palestinians in fact far outweighs the Palestinians who were granted Israeli citizenship and committed acts of terrorism against Jews.

Israel’s proclaimed logic would therefore require the immediate abolishment of the Law of Return. But an apartheid logic that seeks to establish Jewish supremacy — including demographic supremacy — means there is one law for Jews and another for Palestinians. All of this takes place within the tradition of internal Jewish compromises over Palestinian lives, and with the approval of the Supreme Court of the Jewish apartheid regime.

Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid (right) and Ra’am Mansour Abbas attend a discussion in the Knesset, July 01, 2021. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)

One cannot understand these compromises without taking into account the positions and compromises of the Islamist Ra’am party, which opted to join the government last month. It is true that Ra’am also has to make difficult compromises to ensure the continued existence of this government. The party’s Knesset members remained silent in the face of the Eviatar agreement, although one can only assume they were not pleased with it. But without criticizing or supporting Ra’am’s decision to back the government, it is worth examining the list of demands it put forward before entering the coalition — not only to understand the party’s red lines, but to learn something about the reality that forces a Palestinian party in Israel to remain silent while the rights of Palestinians are trampled upon.

In exchange for equitable education budgets; the possibility of receiving building permits; the recognition of villages, some of which existed before the establishment of the state; and an end to home demolitions of Arab citizens, Ra’am must stay mum on Palestinian rights in the occupied territories. In exchange for these basic rights, which should be a given for every citizen of every democratic state, the MKs of Ra’am are required to allow the government to do whatever it pleases to their brethren across the Green Line. This is not called political compromise. This is called apartheid.

A version of this article was first published in Hebrew on Local Call. Read it here.

Zionist Left

Local Call

Citizenship Law

Ra'am

Meretz

Orly Noy is an editor at Local Call, a political activist, and a translator of Farsi poetry and prose. She is a member of B’Tselem’s executive board and an activist with the Balad political party. Her writing deals with the lines that intersect and define her identity as Mizrahi, a female leftist, a woman, a temporary migrant living inside a perpetual immigrant, and the constant dialogue between them.

Since you’re here…

#The law tearing Palestinian families apart 5.7.2021

0 notes

teaching-diary · 4 years ago

Photo

Reflecting on Pride and Prejudice

A) P&P is a novel that is rich in its descriptions of characters. Choose a female and a male character and copy here the paragraph where they are being described. Have a close look at the vocabulary and make sure you know what the vocabulary means.

B) Then describe those two characters using words we'd be using now. Keepthemeaningofcourse!

C) We have also said that P&P is a novel heavily loaded with cultural issues. Choose one aspect of culture that interests you (food, drink, dance, homes, habits, beliefs ...etc) and discuss how they are being dealt with in the novel. Approx 200 words. Please use quotestojustifyyourchoices.

D) Reply to Darcy's second proposal. Record yourself (audio or video). Don't read it. Please be as natural as possible

E) Imagine you live in that village. Tell the story of Elizabeth and Mr Darcy in your own words.

Mr. Bennet: “Mr. Bennet was so odd a mixture of quick parts, sarcastic humour, reserve, and caprice, that the experience of three-and-twenty years had been insufficient to make his wife understand his character.”(Chapter 1)

Mrs. Bennet: “Her mind was less difficult to develop. She was a woman of mean understanding, little information, and uncertain temper. When she was discontented, she fancied herself nervous. The business of her life was to get her daughters married; its solace was visiting and news.” (Chapter 1)

Jane & Elizabeth about Mr. Bingley: ‘He is just what a young man ought to be," said she, "sensible, good-humoured, lively; and I never saw such happy manners!-so much ease, with such perfect good breeding!"

"He is also handsome," replied Elizabeth, "which a young man ought likewise to be, if he possibly can. His character is thereby complete."

"I was very much flattered by his asking me to dance a second time. I did not expect such a compliment." ’ (Chapter 4)

Mr. Bennet: He embodies the patriarch of the family; he has a sarcastic and cynical sense of humour that he uses to irritate Mrs. Bennet.

Mrs. Bennet: She is Mr. Bennet’s wife. A gossip, foolish, noisy woman whose only goal in life is to see her daughters married.

Mr. Bingley: He is a cute, sensible boy with good manners and well-educated. He is a gentleman, well-intentioned, easygoing; who is unconcerned about class differences.

“Pride & Prejudice” takes place in the period of British Regency during the beginning of the 19th century, characterized by a stratified society, in which social mobility was restricted and class-consciousness was strong. It was a tendency that class divisions were related to family connections and wealth. Jane Austen portrays the landed gentry and their social status. Women had no right to inherit land or to have a certain kind of wealth. Thus, it was better to be married to a wealthy man: “It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife.” (Chapter 1)

By those times, marriage had always been a goal between women from the middle and upper social classes. It was the only honourable hope for well-educated young women of small fortune. The novel is full of criticism towards marriage. For its sarcastic tone, the author shows her distrust toward the institution of marriage. Jane austen herself never married.

Elizabeth and Darcy marry because they love each other, but not everyone has that privilege. Mr. Collins, on the contrary, wants to marry her to advance in his career and economic situation. Besides, even while Elizabeth seems disregarded with Darcy’s wealth when she initially rejects and eventually accepts him, it cannot be helped how convenient this union is to her. Not only because she is going to be rich, but she will also be able to support her sister.

Marriage was the only career option for women. The result in those times was: sensible women who are married to dull and foolish men; or unmindful girls, either ruining their chances of a stable life or being attached to men who do not care for them.

It was a nice day when my neighbour, Mrs Bennet, came up with the news: a rich young man, named Mr Bingley, had rented a mansion next to our household called “Netherfield Park”. This situation caused a great stupor in the Bennet’s house. My neighbours, the Bennets, were made up of five daughters, Jane, Lizzy, Mary, Kitty, and Lydia, (all unmarried) and Mrs. & Mr. Bennet. Mrs. Bennet was desperate to see them all married. That was their only chance to inherit a State and to have a prosperous life. By those times, marriage was a solid institution to which women could only aspire.

A few days later, the Bennets attended a private Ball at which Mr. Bingley was present. Jane danced with the eligible bachelor and spent the whole of the evening with him. He brought his close friend, Mr. Darcy, to that event. Darcy was less pleased with the evening and refused to dance with Elizabeth, which made her think that he was a snobbish, foolish guy. Elizabeth started to hate him… how can he dare to be such a disrespectful creature? The days passed through, and however Lizzy wanted Mr. Darcy to disappear, he started to find himself attracted to Lizzy’s appeal and intelligence. On the contrary, Jane started a good friendship with Mr. Bingley. One day, Jane visited Bingley’s mansion. On her journey to the place, she got stuck in a terrible storm and became ill, forcing her to stay at Netherfield Park for several days. In order to save her sister from the Bingleys, Elizabeth walked through muddy fields and arrived with a dirt dress, which caused the rejection of the snobbish Miss Bingley, Mr. Bingley's sister.

When Elizabeth and Jane went back home, they found that Mr. Collins was visiting their house. Mr. Collins was a young clergyman who was trying to inherit Mr. Bennet’s property. By this time, there were severe rules about inheritance, that it can only be passed to males. Mr. Collins was such a fool… he made a proposal of marriage to Elizabeth... without knowing her. She felt so disgusted, he almost forced her to do it but… her honour was stronger. She wounded his pride.

After that, the Bennet girls became friends with military officers that were staying at a town that was near. They had met Mr. Wickham, a handsome soldier who liked Elizabeth. They became close friends. One day he told her that he had known Darcy before and that he had cheated on him, letting Wickham out of an inheritance.

Time passed through, and I had found that the Bingleys and Darcy left Netherfield Park and returned to London… Jane was devastated.

After a while, Mr. Collins achieved his goal: he married Charlotte, Lizzy’s best friend. Elizabeth visited Charlotte, Mr. Collins’ spouse, who lived near the home of Mr. Collins’s patron, Lady Catherine de Bourgh, who was also Darcy’s aunt. Darcy visited Lady Catherine and met Elizabeth… he started to visit frequently due to Lizzy’s presence.

One day, Darcy made a proposal to Lizzy, who instantly refused. She told him that she considered him arrogant, snobbish and unpleasant; then claimed that he took Bingley away from Jane and disinherited Wickham.

After that, he left and sent a letter to her saying that he pushed Bingley to distance himself from Jane… but established that he did so because he thought their love was not serious. Regarding Wickham, he told Elizabeth that he was a liar and that the real cause of their discord was Wickham’s try to elope with his young sister, Georgiana. This letter made Elizabeth rethink her feelings about Darcy. She went back home and acted distant toward Wickham. The militia left town, which distressed the man-mad Bennetts.

Lydia gained permission from her father to spend the summer with a former colonel in Brighton, where the Wickham regiment was. Elizabeth went on another journey with the Gardiners (Bennets’ relatives). They went North and casually… to the neighbourhood of Pemberley, Darcy’s estate. She went to Pemberley, after making sure that Darcy was not there. Suddenly, Darcy arrived and acted cordially to Lizzy… such a sweet and gentleman man!

In the meantime, a letter arrived from Lizzy’s home, telling Elizabeth that Lydia had eloped with Wickham and that the couple had disappeared. Desperately, Elizabeth went back home. Mr. Gardiner and Mr. Bennet went off to search for Lydia, but Mr. Bennet returned home without a solution. When there was no hope, a letter arrived from Mr. Gardiner saying that the couple had been found and that Wickham had agreed to marry Lydia in exchange for an annual income… The Bennets thought it was Mr. Gardiner who paid off Wickham, but Elizabeth realized that Darcy made the arrangement. Wickham and Lydia return to Longbourn married. They then went for Wickham’s new assignment in the North of England.

Shortly after, Bingley returned to Netherfield and continued his relationship with Jane. Darcy went to stay with him and visited the Bennets. Bingley, on the other hand, proposed to Jane. Mrs Bennet was full of joy.

After that, Lady Catherine de Bourgh visited Longbourn. She warned Elizabeth and said that she had heard that Darcy, her nephew, was planning to marry her. She thought that a Bennet was an unsuitable match for a Darcy. Elizabeth refused, saying that she was not engaged to Darcy... but she would not promise something against her own happiness.

Later, Elizabeth and Darcy went for a walk together and he told her that his feelings had not altered since the last time they had spoken. She accepted his proposal… and they lived happily ever after.

0 notes

the-fox-knows · 4 years ago

Text

Passing of Time

Prelude to Change (1)

Everyone has their thing. That specific detail of their life that defines more than just their personality and their likes and dislikes. It is something that resonates within them, giving a sort of meaning that only they alone can understand. It is something that has always been around, but with the rise of pop culture it has become bountiful as well as instantaneous. What I speak of are stories.

Stories have been something that have been in existence since the dawn of time; influencing and inspiring those that it touches. For some it is charging the Black Gates of Mordor with Members of the Fellowship; or travelling through space and time in a curious blue box; or perhaps sipping tea with stiff upper lips in the company of the Dowager Countess Grantham.

For me, it is sharing the walks of Elizabeth Bennet and experiencing all the changeable emotions that carry her through the book until the very end when she and Mr. Darcy come together in blissful union. All expectations of happiness and love fulfilled.

The only problem with that is it has altered my perception of reality, thus ruining my love life. When men like Mr. Darcy, Knightley, and Tilney are lingering in my mind it’s hard to not compare them to men of my general acquaintance. Especially those who are brave enough to ask me out. Not to say I'm a particular catch, in fact I’m quite the reverse as I am the proud owner of a reputation that precedes me. While I may not be as extreme as Jane Hayes from Austenland nor guilty of having hallucinations of the back of my shower being a doorway leading to the Bennet’s household, I am known to be a most . . . enthusiastic fan of the Austen era. To summate the meaning of my dedication to the long dead authoress and her equally inanimate heroes the blokes that do take me to the pub around the corner are not quick to repeat the offer in any way, shape, or form.

I don't consider it much of a loss. I have my hopes for men more romantic then the sole aim to get me to the nearest ale house and then, well...

Though, I suppose I'm not being fair. There was one who was different from the others. But it was finished with my mistake.

Mum worries though; she's always been one for grandchildren and as I’m her only child all her hopes rest on my reproductive organs. Every now and then, when I visit, she'll bring out my old cot for a 'dusting' as she tells me of the new couples that are filling the flats around hers. I usually keep my thoughts to myself at these points in time. At least she's not like Mrs. Bennet. She doesn't arrange blind dates for me or push me to get close to my GP or some of the other things that would be the norm of a modern day Mrs. B. My mum let's me do things in my own time, though she does like to give me little reminders of the ticking clock.

I can't help remind myself of that same ticking clock, but I'm stubborn and have high expectations. What woman doesn't after a generous dollop of Jane Austen. In all fairness, it's that lady’s fault.

I reckon I should properly introduce myself seeing as I'm rambling to strangers about the goings on of my personal life. You should at least have a name. It's Sophie Devon, named after my great-aunt on my dad's side. I've never met her, but I'm told that I have similar features to her so I guess inheriting her name is fitting. I'm a 23, almost 24, year old Londoner with a life not unlike thousands of others; not even my obsession of Austen is unique, though when not with like minded people it can sometimes feel like I am the only one who appreciates the lady’s writings in this modern age. And since it is rare that I am with like minded people I feel myself clinging to my dreams and imaginings stronger and stronger.

When I am forced to detach myself from my telly, filled of Mr. Darcy glowering at all he sees, I can be found working my days in an office — HR to be exact — and what more can I say on that subject other than - Agh! I complain but it's not all bad. My mate, Jules, works just a few desks down within talking distance and is my polar opposite. She has no qualms with men in general, pubs round the corner, or the ...

But you know what they say about opposites and attraction.

The day was Friday and when I had woken that morning nothing suggested itself to me of a mystical nature. Everything was as it had been everyday before and, to my mind, it would continue in that fashion.

It was December and the annul office Christmas party was that night. It was a thing of mild excitement. I avoided it, but some around the office have assured me that it has improved since the last time I attended.

"Sophe, you going to the office party tonight?" Jules asked across a few drooping heads.

My computer screen showed me that I shouldn't, that I should prepare myself for a long night and wake up tomorrow with the workload considerably lighter and my weekend freer.

"Are you going?" I looked up. She shrugged and spun lazily in her chair. Our co-workers were in varying states of attention. Slack hands holding up nodding heads and drooping eyes only staying open by the sprightly voice of Jules. Friday's were never fast around here.

"I was thinking of it. Dan will be there." She mentioned the name with something of playfulness in her voice.

"Dan is always at those things. It's not surprising," I said, bringing my eyes back to the lit screen. Jules, however, had caught the scent and was intent on pursuing it.

"He said he'd look out for you. Maybe save you a dance."

I gave her a look which she only laughed at. "Fine. Don't dance with Dan. Break his heart some more."

"Keep your voice down, would you," I whispered, darting my eyes around to make sure that no one was paying too much attention to our conversation. I really wished Jules understood the concept of 'there's a time and a place.' Unfortunately for me, she was yet to make that discovery.

"Please, they're all half dead anyway," she motioned widely with an arm.

"Yes, but it's the other half that you have to watch out for," came the quiet voice of Jonny. He sat in the corner of the wide office space and was one of the few who was still diligently working. He paused his typing fingers to look over at us with a smirk. Jules was highly amused by this and let out a crowing laugh as she spun in a full circle, sitting slouched in her chair. I too, found myself smiling.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

"So, is it a yes or a no?"The glass doors of the building opened for us and we were hit with a cold blast of air. Winter was well on its way and people all around were bundled snugly. I had my own scarf wrapped tightly around my neck while my hat was pulled low over my ears. I groaned in answer to her question.

"Oh, come on, Sophe. If it's because I teased you about Dan, I'm sorry. But don't let it stop you coming and having a good time."

I stopped and had to give her an arch look. "An office party? A good time?"

"Hey, for you that would be living it up." She hooked her arm through mine and forced me to keep walking.

"Why the sudden urge to go to this Party? You've never been this keen before."

Jules was capable of many things; running every morning before work, applying make-up flawlessly in under five minutes, fooling co-workers into covering for her while she slipped off to treat herself for a longer lunch break. The one thing she was not able to do was lie to me and she knew it.

"Look, I'm worried for you."

I sighed but she went on more strongly. "Ever since you and Dan split you've become more of a recluse."

"I have not," I interrupted. Now it was her turn to give me a look, though it smoothed quickly into one of sympathy.

"I understand. You were never easy to please with all your 'Austen Standards,' and then Dan happens and you began acting like a regular human being.”

I snorted.

"But it’s been six months. That's half a year," She implored.

"I am aware of the amount of time that six months elapses," I mumbled.

"So don't you think it's time to start testing the waters again?"

I didn't answer her straight away and after a huffy sigh, she didn't push for a response. We got onto the tube and remained silent, each contemplating our own matters. She had probably dropped the argument thinking it hopeless. I, on the other hand, was repeating her words through my mind. Everything she said was true. Dan had been great and I had relinquished (somewhat) my grip-hold on Pride and Prejudice and the implacable gentleman that was Fitzwilliam Darcy.

But then I had screwed it up and let my own obsession cloud my judgement. Trying to change someone, especially when that person doesn't need changing, is always a mistake. A horrible mistake.

Jules and I got off the tube and walked the few yards it was to the flat we shared. The jingle of my keys alerted Jax to our presence and, as per usual, we walked in to see him siting right in front of the door, swishing his fluffy white tail.

"Hi Jax," I greeted. The dainty cat ran over and arched his back, happy to accept the petting. Jules walked past and dumped her purse on the chair nearest the front door; her clacking pumps leading her to the small kitchen.

She and Jax had never seen eye to eye. I had found him sheltering under the flap of a damp cardboard box in the pouring rain looking very forlorn. He had clearly been underfed and had no tags so I had no apprehensions in tucking him under the safety of my raincoat and bringing him back home.

Two years later he's my shadow and sleeps gratefully on the edge of my pillow.

"And how have you been today?" I cooed in a voice I knew annoyed my flatmate. He nuzzled his head against my hand and let out a loud purr.

"Yes. Let's get you some dinner."

I unwrapped my scarf and doffed my hat, adding it to the pile on the chair; my handbag acting as the cherry on top before I followed Jules to the kitchen. Jax trailed behind, rumbling like a little motor.

"Ugh. Does he have to walk all over the worktop?" she asked, distastefully eyeing the white fluff that had jumped up and was pacing beside the sink.

"Come on, Jax. Down." I clapped my hands and motioned for him to jump to the floor. He did as he was told and began twining in an out of my legs.

"You should really teach him not to do that," Jules said, scooting out of the kitchen. "You'll trip over him."

A second later the telly was on and I heard the tune to EastEnders fill the flat.

"I won't trip over you, will I?" I smiled. He only pawed at my leg, entreating me to hurry with his food. I grabbed a can from the cupboard, popped the lid, and served the cat food in Jax's personal bowl.

"I'm going to take a shower," I called out to Jules. She mindlessly waved her hand in acknowledgement.

After a weeks work of the same routine - point A to point B and back to point A - it was nice to just sit a moment with my eyes closed, lying on my bed.

The weekends to me always presented possibilities. My time spent during the week always seemed so formal, so laid out with a lack of possibilities of alterations. My job was a senseless one. It was automatic with a ready made solution to any problem that may arise. There was no testing my abilities nor a need for my brain to think past the boundaries of the four walls of the office. I wanted something different - only I didn't know what it was yet. But it was out there, just like my Mr. Darcy. Patience is all that is required.

With one thought leading to another in a hazy circle of remembering all that had happened that week and what I needed to do to prepare for the next, I opened my eyes and stared up at the ceiling. Jax came up a moment later, joining me as he fit himself in the nook of my shoulder and neck. Idly, I stroked his fur.

‘Perhaps I should go to the party,’ the thought snuck its way into my considerations. It wouldn't hurt and if Jules was entering the realms of being 'worried' then it would be a step closer to putting her anxieties to rest. And if Dan does come and ask for a dance (though, I'd wager it was only Jules saying that) then I'll deal with it in the mature way that I know I'm capable of. After all, I work in bloody HR. I have ready material in dealing with other humans.

With my mind made up, I discarded my clothes and stepped into the shower. The warm water soothed my chilled skin and once I had lathered my body with soap I stood under the spout letting the streams of water run down my shoulders and back. It was numbingly pleasant to just stand there and feel the hot steam build in the room creating a faux sauna that I hoped would seep to the rest of the flat.

When I had finally finished I could hear Jules rummaging around both our cupboards, no doubt searching for something to wear. "You can wear my blue top if you want," I called as I squirmed into my robe and switched on the hairdryer, blasting the warm air into my face. The sooner I warmed up, the better.

"The one with the sweetheart neck?"

"Yeah."

I ruffled my medium length hair, aiming the warm air at the nape of my neck, sending a jolt of gooseflesh down my arms.

"What do you think?" Jules appeared at the door holding up a pair of slim black trousers and the blue sweetheart neck-lined blouse.

"Nice."

"Oh," She slumped her arms, frowning.

"More than nice," I amended, shouting over the droll of the machine in my hand. "The blue will really bring out your eyes."

Said eyes lit up as she examined her outfit. I examined her with furrowed brows.

"You're really putting an effort into tonight," I commented nonchalantly. My hair was becoming relatively dry so I turned the hairdryer off and put it away.

"Well, you know, it's good to make an appearance to show..." she looked up for a second but immediately brought her gaze back down to the clothes as I watched, amused, as she struggled for the word that could possibly explain why she was so eager for an office party.

"...togetherness," she came up with at last.

I turned away, trying my best to hide the grin that was widening fast. "Togetherness," I repeated. From the corner of my eye I saw Jules shift uncomfortably. She was on the verge. Just a second longer.

"Oh, shut up. It's Henry, alright," she blurted.

Sweet victory.

"Henry Ellis from I.T.?"

"Yeah," she came in and sat on the closed lid of the toilet.

"He's been helping me with my computer, as you know, and I don't know. I hadn't really looked at him before - he's not re-"

"Really your type," I finished for her.

"But he's been very sweet," she continued, "and I was hoping that tonight - "

"Tonight you might have the chance to see what he shaves with tomorrow?" I interrupted again.

"No," she said immediately. Then she cringed a little. "Well, maybe a bit. But I don't want it to be just one night. I -" she hesitated.

"Yes?" I stopped my flossing and stared at Jules's reflection in the mirror. She looked up, shrugging her shoulders.

"I want to know him."

I didn't answer at first. I wasn't at a loss of words, but I knew Jules and I knew her temperament. If I gave her a sweet sappy line she'd huff to cover up her moment of vulnerability. Strange ways does the mind work. So I waited for her to follow up.

"That's one of the reasons I wanted you to come tonight."

I tossed the floss into the rubbish bin, slid my tongue smoothly over my clean teeth, and turned to face my uncomfortable friend on the toilet.

"Not to worry, dear one," I playfully patted her head, "I'm coming with you." I then pranced out, leaving her on the throne and went to search for something decent to wear.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

My memory of the last office party was a pathetic one. Half the people were drunk and the other half were on their way there. The dancing had been non-existent unless you counted bodies loosely pressed together moving in a lazy circle, looking more like two forms just trying to keep each other propped up. The food had been passable but the music was the playlist of a fifteen year old hormonal teenager.

That was three years ago. Presently, I had to admit that improvements had been made. There was a tolerable amount of alcohol but not enough to get the entire gathering inebriated; actual couples were dancing in rhythm to the music, which was, thankfully, pleasant to the ears. The only thing that remained the same was the food. But still everyone had something in their mouths; eating mainly because it was there rather than anything else.

Jules, never a timid one, and bolstered by my accompanying her, had succeeded in getting Henry to ask her to dance. Though he seemed very willing. She winked at me with a flirtatious smile spreading winningly across her face as they passed by me. I rolled my eyes and turned away. Best not to encourage any bad behaviour on her part.

Night stood guard at the windows; dark, yet brilliantly illuminated by the added lights of the season, providing its glow even to us who were on the seventh floor. Pedestrians, cars, double-deckers, and all the rest of the multitudes that made up London’s lifeblood looked incredibly small from this height.

As of yet, I'd seen no hint of Dan. I nearly convinced myself that I wasn't looking for him, but by the time the doors leading to the hall opened for the tenth time and my head spun around to see who it was coming in, I knew that, despite my best efforts, I was anticipating him.

My plastic cup was in need of refilling so I slowly took my time to the punch table. There was only one other person there handling the ladle but they were quick with filling up their cup and walking away. I stepped forward and reached for the handle when my hand collided with someone else's.

"Oh, sorry. I didn't see - " I looked up to be met with a grinning Dan. He was the same as ever; great hair, charming smile, big blue eyes and all it did was remind me of how stupid I had been.

"Hi Dan," I attempted calm, therefore it was unwise of me to reach for the ladle again. You would think that I'd be used to seeing him as we work in the same building, but our offices are on different floors so our paths rarely crossed. With neither of us seeking each other out as we used to, we could go a good month before we caught sight of each other.

"Hey Sophe," he gently pulled the ladle from my clumsy grip and poured out the punch into my waiting cup. He then did the same for himself.

"How are you?" he asked, not looking at me.

"I'm good. You?"

"Oh, you know. I'm always fine." He deposited the ladle and took a sip of the warm liquid.

"I see Jules is still making her conquests." He motioned with his cup towards the pair now with their arms completely wrapped around each other. I couldn't help but laugh, feeling much lighter as I did so.

"Yes, well, she claims her intentions are entirely honourable. I guess we'll just have to take her word for it."

"Ooh, always a dangerous thing to do," he said. Setting down his cup, he extended his open hand to me. I looked at it blankly.

"Care to?" he asked. I raised my eyes to his - thinking. He watched the wheels turning just beyond the barrier of flesh and bone, waiting with a slow smile touching just the side of his lips. Steeling myself, I hastily placed my cup beside his and accepted his hand.

He led us to the side of the dancing, no doubt remembering my shyness in the area of 'movin' and groovin'. The song currently playing came to an end and was succeeded by a much slower one. I gulped inconspicuously as I felt his hand come round my waist while his other held my right hand in a firm hold. We swayed slightly, moving in an easy circle. I kept my attention on the dancers, too nervous to look up into Dan's face. I knew he had his eyes on me, I could feel it and it just brought back old emotions and feelings that stung with a prevalence that brought a guilty flavour to my mouth.

The hand on my waist tugged me just a tad closer and I put my hands softly on his chest; finally looking up at him.

"I'm sorry, but I can't. I'm just...not ready yet." All my HR training left me to deal with my personal life. Suppose fair's fair when I never liked the job anyway.

He dropped his hold on me and nodded once, an accepting expression appeared on his face that wasn't quite a grin, but he tried nevertheless. Step by step I retreated, continuing to apologize.

"I'll see you around," I finished weakly. He let out a good-humoured bark and shook his head.

"You won't. But it was nice to see you tonight, Soph."

I smiled. "You too."

I slipped behind some dancers and went in search of Jules. I found her and Henry sitting closely together at a table in the corner. They were oblivious to the rest of the room and were completely unaware of my presence standing not a foot away.

"Ahem," I dramatically cleared my throat.

"Sophe," Jules tore her attention away from Henry, an apparently difficult task to accomplish.

"I think I'm going to go home," I told her. That gained a larger portion of her attention."

"What? Why?"

"Headache," I lied. "I'll see you later." I saw that she was of two minds; she clearly wanted to get the truth from me, but neither did she want to let Henry slip away.

"Alright, see you later then," she decided, though her eyes told me that she'd be asking later. I nodded, bid the pair goodnight, and then began the trek home.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Jax was cuddled up snugly in my arms, purring contentedly. I couldn't say I shared his ease of mind. Though I did have a remedy for it.

Pride & Prejudice was loading within the antique chambers of our dated television; a mug of hot cocoa was held comfortably in both my hands, and my favorite red blanket was draped over my knees. The expansive sofa was as comfy as ever.

"Ahh," I sighed, already relaxing as the first notes of the 1995 theme of the mini-series played out of the telly. Time past and I was on the third episode, wishing that I could enter that world and escape from all things modern; jobs; relationships; food (well, some food), when my bladder made itself known. Jax was none to pleased at having to depart from his warm spot, but he didn't have much say in the matter.

I slid down the cramped hall in my socks and consequently nearly lost my balance. With my duty done, I washed up and was just walking back into the sitting room when I unexpectedly tripped over something and came tumbling to the floor. My head painfully grazed the side of the wall and I saw stars momentarily. When my vision cleared I looked to see what it was that had tripped me.

"Jax!" I exclaimed. An ironic laugh escaped my lips as I thought back to Jules's earlier comment just this day.

"Our flatmate may have some hidden powers Jax. Unless it's only that you can understand us and thought it would be a good idea to prove her right."

I scooped him up, bringing ourselves back to the sofa. My head spun suddenly, though, and I had to shut my eyes as I dropped down on the cushions. Jax squirmed out of my arms and went somewhere behind me. I lowered my head into my hands and grumbled out Jax's name in a very accusatory tone. My only response was a loud purr.

"Well this won't do."

I opened my eyes and cautiously made my way to the kitchen in search of some paracetamol. Finding my target, I turned the cold tap on and filled a glass to the brim. Popping the tablet into my mouth, I had the water chase it down.

Meanwhile, I noticed the suspect lounging luxuriously on my red blanket, grooming himself with gusto, utterly unaware of my glaring eyes. I turned the telly off, yanked the blanket from under him and stumbled to my room, catching the shocked growl. I smirked.

My bed welcomed me while my pillow enveloped my spinning head in soft comfort. The edge of my mattress dipped slightly, announcing the disgruntled presence of Jax. Though a bit miffed, he still curled himself up by my head.

"Night, night Jax," I murmured.

Sleep claimed me swiftly, yet my dreams were turbulent with shifting images of Jules, Dan, Henry, Pride & Prejudice, and a shadowy version of Mr. Darcy made up entirely of animate sentences — everything that had been swirling in my subconscious for the past twenty-four hours. The strangest part came when I appeared to be in a dark, circular tunnel moving fast. I could see nothing distinguishable to prove this, although there was a whip-like wind rushing into and past my face. The speed almost became overwhelming and I felt myself starting to waken.

But suddenly there was a light coming from the other end of the tunnel. I watched as it seemed that this light and myself would collide, though I was surprisingly calm about it. The light grew closer and from its glow I saw a figure flying towards me. It was a young woman, probably near to my own age, with rich brown hair and shining eyes. I didn't notice much else as she and I were about to crash. We both saw the other and looks of astonishment passed our features before all went black and my sleep continued undisturbed.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The sun streamed into my room, sprawling across my bed and shining strongly onto my closed eyelids. I lifted my arm to cover my face and rolled on my side reaching for Jax.

"Jax?"

I moved my hand around with my eyes still shut. When I couldn't feel him, I opened my eyes and looked around.

I was struck immediately by the foreign room I was currently lying in. The furniture were all antiques, though to my untrained eyes, the pieces were in wonderful condition. There was a wash stand in the corner and an ewer sitting beside it. A small writing desk was positioned near a display of windows and the bed that I lay stunned in was a four poster with sheets and covers that were definitely not mine.

I blinked. Then blinked again. I rubbed my eyes and another wave of shock hit me. Instead of the loose jumper and baggy trousers I wore to bed, I was presently dressed in a nightgown with flared cuffs.

"What?!" I breathed.

There was no sign of my red blanket nor Jax. But one thing at a time. Gingerly, I uncovered my legs and swung them out of the bed. Crumpled slippers lay waiting to be worn so I complied and stood shakily on my feet. My head felt better in regards to the fall last night, but with my new surroundings an all new sort of dizziness was coming over me.

'Maybe I'm still dreaming,' I thought. I pinched myself.

"Ow!"

Not dreaming then.

I rubbed the sore skin on my arm as I warily walked over to the writing desk. There were a couple of quills, a spare nib and an ink stand, but no papers. Pulling open the drawers I found a trove of letters. Before I scanned any of them my attention was caught by the view provided outside the window.

The city was gone. Buildings, lights, noise - vanished and replaced with the quiet calm of the country.

"What the -?" My voice scratched but I ignored it. Before allowing myself to freak out fully I picked up a letter, unsent by the look of its creaseless body,on the very top. It was addressed to a ‘Dear aunt’ but it was the signature at the bottom that numbed my fingers and had me seriously questioning my sanity.

Your loving niece

~Elizabeth Bennet

"Elizabeth Bennet?" I whispered. The letter fell from my hand with a quiet shuffle as I spun around to observe the room anew. Quaint, simple, elegant, things generally acquainted with the heroine. Atop the wash stand there was a mirror and I tripped over to it.

I thought I might scream. Not only was the city gone - I was gone. This face that stared at me in the reflection was not my own. The brown hair, the big brown eyes belonged to somebody else. The curving lips and pert nose were the expressions of another person entirely.

"What?!"

Hands that were not mine obeyed my thoughts and brought the limbs up to clasp the face of the stranger's, pulling it in every direction.

"What the hell is happening?" I said a tad louder. The hands grasped the throat and the big brown eyes widened. It wasn't even my voice!

I stumbled back until the back of my knees met the curve of the bed and I sat down, or, should I say the body sat down.

I was scared. I was scared of where I was. I was scared to leave the room. I didn't know what may be out there, so I deliberated. I thought of last night and a torrent of memories flooded back of all the strange dreams I had had.

That tunnel with that girl.

It was her!

That was Elizabeth Bennet?!

"That means," I said aloud, marveling at the strange tone that emitted from me, "I'm in Elizabeth Bennet's body!"

Once spoken my mind reeled and I had no choice but to fall back and pass out.

#pride&prejudice #OC #timetravel #fanfiction #mr.darcy #regency #regencyera #lizzybennet #janebennet #mrs.bennet #pride&prejudicefic

0 notes

muabannhadatdananggiare · 5 years ago

Text

Trusting in a business income tax cut alone to come up with innovation and boost productivity may be the thinking about days gone by.

A business cut that is tax-rate all business assets more valuable, causing a more impressive come back to investment in spite of how it really is utilized. Within our globalized and financialized economy, however, it is as prone to cause stock buybacks as it’s to spur the construction of brand new US factories.

It doesn’t need certainly to work because of this. Supply-side theory—that increased investment benefits workers into the long run—only works if investment really increases. This is exactly why, inside our 2015 taxation plan, Senator Mike Lee of Utah and I also argued that the very best concern of income tax reform should always be capital investment that is encouraging. Which is why i am going to quickly introduce a strategy to grow and work out permanent the provisions that are full-expensing last year’s tax-law work and end the taxation code’s favoritism for businesses that invest their income tax cuts on stock buybacks.

The value of investments that are tied to American labor by allowing businesses to immediately deduct their investment in improving their products and workers, full-expensing better increases. The Heritage Foundation called it the “most important reform for financial development” because “it advantages companies which are earnestly spending and producing jobs into the U.S.”

It is not at all times into the economic interest of nationless corporations to increase their investment in US workers. Changing which will need a stay glued to come with the carrot of full-expensing. At the moment, Wall Street benefits companies for participating in stock buybacks, temporarily increasing their stock rates at the trouble of effective investment. While businesses should really be absolve to purchase their stock that is own should be no income tax benefit for stock buybacks over other designs of money allocation, whilst the deferral of capital-gains taxes presently permits.

Taxing stock buybacks in the exact same rate as dividends would make sure that corporations aren’t reducing their investment simply for income tax purposes. A company that wants to use its tax cuts to build a new factory could deduct the costs of the facility, but a company that wants to use its tax cuts to buy back its own stock wouldn’t get any additional tax benefit for doing so under my proposal.

The main-stream knowledge among business administration and investors today is the fact that buybacks don’t come at the cost of investment, since they get back money to investors to be placed to raised usage somewhere else. This objection misses the purpose. Whenever a firm makes use of its earnings buying back once again stock, it really is earnestly determining that coming back money to investors is an improved task for company than spending within the ongoing company’s product or workforce. The income tax choice for buybacks tilts the scale in this way, making a bias against effective investment.

We have ton’t be astonished that the economy that encourages indefinite financialization over confidently making big wagers on building the long run has yielded a work life this is certainly fractured, unstable, and paying that is low. To reassert the dignity of work, we have to begin to build an economy that invests with its employees therefore the plain things they generate. Making American corporations function just like the motorists of investment they used to be could be a begin.

There was possibly no greater expression that is cultural of we give consideration to dignified work as compared to priorities of our training system. We praise the accomplishment of a four-year-college degree, but look down upon technical-skill certifications. We count absurd classes on pop music tradition as credits toward university levels, although not lumber store. We subsidize high-end universities’ tuitions and endowments, but taxation the paychecks of young employees experience that is gaining the industry.

Advanced schooling went from being an accelerator of opportunity, because it ended up being after World War II, to being a principal motorist of financial and inequality today that is social. The status quo model of degree stifles competition, encourages tuition that is soaring, traps competent prospective workers in unproductive scholastic bureaucracies, and limitations possibilities for nontraditional students, such as for example working moms and dads. Families and students require a method that embraces the latest methods individuals can discover and get abilities and never have to get the standard four-year-college-degree track.

The bigger Education Innovation Act, that we introduced with Democratic Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado, would begin to deal with these challenges.

It proposes an alternate certification system that would allow brand new organizations to generally meet students’ requirements with innovative academic items. Imagine some high-school seniors thinking about becoming aircraft mechanics. Hands-on learning supplemented by low-cost online engineering courses might match them a lot better than a far more costly old-fashioned level built around a core curriculum.

We have to reform figuratively speaking, too. We could increase transparency for borrowers by abandoning the existing interest-based model, which hides the real price of the mortgage and decreases incentives for universities to carry their tuition costs down. If pupils alternatively spend an individual, upfront loan-financing cost, that could be disseminate through the time of the mortgage, they are able to see from the front end what they’d be stepping into, while preventing the trap of ever-growing interest re re payments that delay graduates’ financial power to begin a family and create a life after college.

I’ll readily admit that those entrenched within the higher-education system and the ones who will be reluctant to adjust stand to get rid of from reforms such as for example these. That’s partly the idea. We just cannot manage to waste our cash and young peoples’ future you can try this out work lives in the complex that is four-year-degree-industrial.

The old opinion, which produced a college degree a necessity to achieve your goals, has harmed young Us americans and their dignity, shoving them away from a reputable day’s work and in to the complicated realm of ambiguous abilities and debt that is unambiguous. We have to change it right into a well-trod way to success when it comes to numerous.

A ny conversation associated with dignity of work should mention unions. Hardly any other US companies occupy exactly the same space that is unique work unions, which straddle the line between jobs and community. At their regional levels, unions have actually historically offered as an integrating force for the dignity of work.

It has perhaps not been the instance for big-name arranged work for a while now, and employees understand it. Since 1983, the amount of private-sector union users dropped by about 37 per cent, from about 12 million to 7.6 million. Just 7 per cent associated with the private-sector workforce is unionized. The majority that is overwhelming of Labor’s political activities are dedicated to assisting Democrats, while a growing share of their membership votes Republican. Time and time again, whenever because of the possibility to form a vintage adversarial-model union, employees have actually opted against doing this.

This is actually the unsurprising upshot of a labor-organization model that no further represents the interests of their employees. However the decrease of unions, insofar because they represented essential places for employees and their loved ones to secure the conditions associated with the American dream, just isn’t one thing become celebrated.

Certainly one of my earliest memories that are political of marching the picket line with my dad, a gambling establishment bartender in Las vegas, nevada at that time, in a Culinary Workers Union attack. I did son’t know the dilemmas included then, but We knew my dad plus the employees during the other resorts had been asking to simply be addressed fairly due to their work. This concept—that they created value when it comes to resort and had the right to fairly share in that value—is perhaps perhaps not radical.

To own labor businesses that represent employees’ passions again, we must get back to the fundamentals.

As my dad comprehended then, so when many employees realize today, employees are effective with regards to their companies. They are able to organize to make sure that their payment is commensurate with their value, like my father’s union did for the reason that strike, but in addition to increase their value, like by giving an excellent community that is american my immigrant household, or in building the abilities of young employees.

Labor businesses could nevertheless provide these valuable functions today, if perhaps we’d abandon a vintage type of legislation that does not. The backbone of work legislation continues to be the nationwide work Relations Act of 1935, and lots of of this law’s major conditions have actually remained unchanged since 1947. It enshrines a model of work relations that pits worker against manager, by which federal federal government legislation informs employees whatever they should value and success is described as gaining energy within the other part, irrespective of the worth employees and companies might create together.

Federal work law is reformed to create feasible an even more effective relationship between employees and companies. The Once and Future Worker, this could take the form of new labor “co-ops” in the model of Germany’s sectoral workers’ groups, which negotiate wages and benefits, and provide training and apprenticeships for their workers as Oren Cass proposes in his book.

These voluntary, dues-paying businesses and their connected worker representatives could get federal charters that could permit them to administer advantages such as for instance jobless insurance and worker-training programs. They would be prohibited through the style of institutional organization that is political work is now bogged straight straight down in and might have the flexibleness to negotiate beyond the level of federal labor legislation in a few areas.

Rebuilding the dignity of work means fighting for a work life that suits the requirements of our employees. By acknowledging the genuine value of work businesses and adopting ideas for restoring their value in workers’ everyday lives, we could better align the passions of our economy aided by the dignity of workers.

The twenty-first century provides a real possibility to reconstruct the great middle class that is american. By simply making organizations and employees more effective, assisting students be better prepared, and enhancing the working everyday lives regarding the class that is working we could produce industries and companies that never existed before, offering jobs and jobs that spend decent wages and supply stability to working families.

Bài viết Trusting in a business income tax cut alone to come up with innovation and boost productivity may be the thinking about days gone by. đã xuất hiện đầu tiên vào ngày Nhà Đất Đà Nẵng.

source https://muabannhadat.danang.vn/trusting-in-a-business-income-tax-cut-alone-to-2403.html

0 notes