ReligiousLeftLaw.com

On “passive resistance”

“Passive resistance” is an awful term: it is not a true oxymoron in the sense that it might be “surprisingly true,” but rather close to a conceptual and practical contradiction insofar as it is both descriptively and normatively misleading. We need not accept Gandhi’s stark contrast between “principled nonviolence” (i.e., satyāgraha) and what he called “nonviolence of the weak,” that is, “passive resistance,” to see this, for strategic or tactical nonviolence need not denote or imply weakness in either one’s methods or in the character of or power wielded by those who’ve chosen such means and methods from motivations that differ from those intrinsic to the political morality crafted by Gandhi (which does not, in turn, efface the value of a conceptual or moral distinction between principled and strategic nonviolence). There are different ideals and models of nonviolent theory and praxis that reflect different kinds of political motivation and political morality: so, different types of nonviolent resistance, none of which is truly “passive.”

This unusual little address this morning, by Prince Charles on religious persecution and the plight of refugees, is surprisingly moving. And of course it couldn't be more timely. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-38401857

Rex Tillerson, Climate Change, and the State Investigations of Exxon

Proposed Secretary of State and Exxon CEO Rex Tillerson’s ties to Russia deserve to be explored, but so does the issue whether Exxon has deceived investors and consumers regarding climate change. The Attorney Generals of Massachusetts and New York are investigating Exxon, the largest oil company in the world, regarding possible false and misleading statements in this area. As counsel for the Attorney General of Massachusetts put it, it appears that “Exxon knew by at least July, 1977 from its own scientists that the continued burning of fossil fuels was causing global temperatures to increase, that the impacts could be catastrophic, and that changes in strategies would be needed. Nonetheless, it appears that Exxon continued to advise investors that its business model, heavily reliant on continued burning of fossil fuels, was sound, and continued to market its fossil fuel products to consumers without adequately disclosing the climate risks to the public.”

Both New York and Massachusetts have initiated discovery demands from Exxon in their states, and Exxon in a dazzling display of chutzpah is suing in the federal district court in Northern Texas to halt these investigations. Exxon denies wrongdoing and claims that the investigations impair its First Amendment rights. But it bears emphasizing that there is no First Amendment right to make materially false statements misleading investors, and there is no First Amendment right to make false or misleading statements about the harm associated with a company’s product. There is no “political” exception to the securities laws or the consumer protection laws.

There already is prize winning published material indicating that there is a foundation for the investigations (see https://insideclimatenews.org/content/Exxon-The-Road-Not-Taken). Whether Tillerson has participated in a campaign to deceive investors and consumers is surely a matter that deserves to be explored in his confirmation hearings. President elect Trump dispenses false and misleading statements like candy, but it is not a virtue. If Tillerson can not provide satisfying responses, hopefully, we will again come to the day that embarking on a campaign of distortion is a disqualification for high office.

The Media and Donald Trump's Illegitimate Presidency

Republican FBI Director Comey and Russian intervention alone will make Donald Trump an illegitimate President. That is, he will have the power, but he has gained that power only because the democratic process has not been respected by the Director of the FBI and has been sideswiped by a foreign power. Moreover, Trump has won the job by appealing to racist values that are alien to what the Constitution stands for. This is not new for Republicans, but this time it has been far more blatant. From a political perspective, Hillary Clinton should have not referred to the large basket of deplorables among Trump supporters, but virtually all of those supporters were aware of the racist (and sexist) appeals and voted to achieve their objectives either because of them or despite them.

The point of this post is to decry the media coverage of the campaign. A friend of mine used to work as an editor at the New York Times. He recalled that every election the editors would begin by saying that they would cover policy this time and not just the horse race. And every election, the horse race dwarfed policy. This time scandals dwarfed the horse race, and the horse race dwarfed policy. The media allowed the Clinton e-mail mole hill to grow into a mountain. That mole hill played a mountain size role in its coverage of the Clinton campaign. The daily story, of course, was the ever growing scandals of Donald Trump. They deserved coverage, but they drowned out policy discussions.

The horse race got covered. And, it is possible that coverage affected the election. Everyone was sure Clinton would win. And that certitude enabled young voters to vote for third party candidates and many Trump voters (who thought he was unqualified) to vote for him as a protest vote. I don’t know if that affected the outcome, but there are savvy strategists who think that it did.

Of course, policy was left far behind. I take immigration policy as representative because it played such an important role in the rhetoric of the campaign. To be fair, the media did cover the impossibility of throwing 11 million people out of the country; it properly ridiculed the wall, and it decried the racism of his immigration appeals. But, for the most part (there was some good reporting, but not enough), it left Trump free to publicly imagine a picture of millions of Mexicans crossing our southern border.

The fact is that undocumented Mexicans in the United States are down by a million since 2007 and ½ million since 2009. The number of illegal crossings is not in the millions; it is about 100,000. And Mexican departures exceed arrivals (a fact only fleetingly reported). Far from opening employment positions that American citizens will take, employers in hotel, agriculture, and restaurant industries are having trouble filling jobs. In May, according to the Wall Street Journal online (Nov. 24, 2016 – subscription required) there were 700,000 unfilled vacancies. On the data, see also Pew Research Studies here  and here.

From the perspective of employers in those industries and in construction, we need more Mexican immigrants, not fewer.  

Would it have made a difference to the election if the media had given this data the coverage it deserved? I don’t think so. But political discussion should be more than a theater of and about polls and lies.    

Blacks on the (Radical) Left: A Select Bibliography

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My latest bibliography, Blacks on the (Radical) Left, is available here. What follows is the introduction:

This compilation was inspired by a blog post—and the excellent suggestions in the comments appended thereto—of the African American Intellectual History Society by Terrell Jermaine Starr. The original list, which was not intended to be exhaustive, focused on “African Americans and Communism,” while this compilation is—hence the title—broader than what motivated Starr’s list. By “radical Left” is meant those individuals and groups committed to more or less Marxist, Communist (and communist), and/or Socialist moral principles, political ideas and values, and their corresponding methods and means of praxis. I welcome suggestions for possible additions to this list. As with most of my bibliographies, this one has two main constraints: books, in English. Because I have a separate bibliography on the Black Panther Party, I have not included titles that would otherwise be added here, given the Panthers’ “socialist core.” Readers may be interested in a handful of other lists loosely related to this one: (1) Africana and African American Philosophy; (2) After Slavery & Reconstruction: The Black Struggle in the U.S. for Freedom, Equality, and Self-Realization; (3) Pan-Africanism, Black Internationalism, & Black Cosmopolitanism; (4) Marx & Marxism; and (5) Philosophy and Racism.