Someone made a comment about how some republicans may not go along with what states like Texas are doing with voting rights and abortion, but they're too afraid to speak up because of the possible ramifications. So they disagree in silence. That's been stuck in my craw for a bit.
As a human response, I kind of get that. Fear can be paralyzing, overwhelming, and no one wants to lose, all including their lives. And, if you have children who will care for and look after them should something happen to you? It seems like an impossible choice.
Who wouldn't be concerned? Everyone of sound mind would be, and should be.
That's the point.
That's why on the other hand, as a matter of the survival, of defending themselves, their families, and of defending democracy, the choice of silence - and it is a choice - is BS.
If is fascinating how Black and brown people have always fought for their rights at the threat and peril of death - always - for generations, and that remains true even today. Many people have been killed doing just that. They looked death in the eye and they did it anyway.
And often the danger of doing that wasn't just a function of angry, violent opposition of the citizen mob, but from alleged the peace officers with the state sanction and power to serve and protect those protesting for the rights to which they were entitled yet denied.
Nevertheless, while the very foundation of the nation is being stripped away, some folks are too afraid to speak up, not from the streets, but even from the comfort of their own homes. They pretend as if they stay silent and just blend it, it will all pass over.
It won't.
A big part of the reason the problem is now a crisis is they have blended in all along.
But if they are too afraid to even speak out about the democracy that they claim to love, why do they even deserve it? WHY DO YOU DESERVE ANYTHING YOU CLAIM TO LOVE, BUT WON'T DEFEND?
For some people, the act of simply going to the store for a carton of milk for their families can be a death sentence. They live in a society where the credo is "all men are created equal," and where liberty is paramount. Yet some people are more equal and more free than others.
So they live with the knowledge of the inequities, but they do it anyway. And yet those same people are willing to protest and demand to be treated as humans and full citizens because they know that if they don't do it now, no one will do it for their children or communities.
Most people believe that putting on a uniform and entering military service is an act of patriotism, and it is. It's an act that the vast majority of citizens choose to not perform. Thus we thank them for their service, deservingly so, because we know that debt can't be repaid.
But patriotism is more than that. It's the willingness of all citizens to participate in the maintenance and upkeep of the government. It assures orderliness and control in society by electing trustworthy and honest brokers to pull the levers of government for good governance.
It's ensuring and protecting your neighbors' rights because by ensuring their, you ensure your own. By extension, you reserve and preserve those rights and protections for your children, and your children's children.
It is demanding change when it is required, either through the peaceful transition of voting, or loudly protesting and petitioning change through protest when that government doesn't comport with the needs of the masses. And, sometimes making those demands comes with risks.
How then is anyone considered a patriot or even a citizen when they are are silent, acquiescent, and unwilling to make an effort when their voice is needed the most? Why are they worthy of the sacrifices of others that they aren't willing to make themselves?
How do they claim to love democracy when they are unwilling to defend it? And, why do they deserve the benefits of a democracy they are too afraid of speaking up in its defense?
Try that with your spouses or partners.
When democracy dies, it won't return without the shedding of blood. It will not be reacquired without a fight. That will not be the time to lament its passing, especially when too many of us have paid the price of blood just to live in "democracy" as it is, for what it's worth.
People who were - and still are - denied democracy and full citizenship can suffer and die trying to acquire it simply because they love the ideal of democracy and citizenship, and have gone to war not even being treated as full citizens defending it to their deaths.
But they nonetheless continue to aspire to that notion of democracy and citizenship for themselves, and their children. Then what's wrong with those who have always lived in peace, tranquility and comfort of that democracy, and have never ventured any risks or sacrificed a thing?
How can anyone claim ownership of something for which they have never worked, invested, or sacrificed a thing? Why isn't claiming democracy, patriotism and citizenship purchased with the sacrifices of others a form of theft, deceit, and exploitation based on sheer entitlement?
Silence is complicity. It was the silence of those same people that allowed the of their choosing government to wreck havoc on society today.
Their choices have caused until harm and stripped rights, freedoms, and even the lives of countless others while they pretend to not know, or knew but simply didn't care. They didn't say a word. Their silence permitted the accrual of personal benefits while the getting was good.
But now their choices have gone sour. Now the government that they chose, then sat back silently while it ran amok harming others, has turned its teeth on them. They're afraid. So they resort to the only thing they've ever known and have ever done. They remain silent.
Only children and the infirm get to be omitted and excused. It is for them that everyone else has to double their efforts because they can't do it themselves. For all others, wither you are rowing the same direction against the tide, or you are part of the problem.
So I wholly and completely reject the notion that some people don't speak up because they are too afraid. They created the monster. Now they expect to sit back idly while others either bring it to heel, or put it down.
So you are being called out. At a minimum, either you speak out against what you helped to create, or understand that your silence makes you an ally and a vessel of that monster, too.
If you look at how the DoJ and FBI handled the failed Epstein investigations years ago, then fast forward to the the Nasser investigation in 2015, then KAVANAUGH in 2018, There is a deep cultural problem with how the Justice Department ignores rape, sex and child trafficking.
That's in spite of the fact that there are federal laws on the books to combat those specific issues. Right now it appears that each time the public becomes aware a a failure, a piecemeal review is done treating each incident as a standalone situation with no depth or results.
The reality is the lack of seriousness that the DoJ and FBI apply to those investigations IS as big a problem as the rapes and trafficking itself. It's a deep, systemic, cultural problem, and it requires a deep root cause analysis - and criminal charges for officials - to fix it.
The entire role of States is to govern the residents therein. If states delegate and abdicate their governing and enforcement duties, then there is effectively no state. If anyone can enforce the law on anyone, there's no need for police departments, or state governments.
That is anarchy.
Thus states are chartered with that responsibility as states. Individuals have no inherent right to enforce or deny the rights of other individuals. That power to individuals is nonexistent and can't even be granted by the state.
That's what makes SCOTUS's non-decision decision in the Texas abortion law case such a silly, embarrassing, cowardly sham. The court called the scheme "novel." It's not. But it is craven and nefarious. And it demonstrates the courts willingness to be overtly blind and dishonest.
There are many valid reasons for Biden to expand the court - and for Manchin and Sinema to get out of the way. So far they have given little to no reason which betrays and highlights their underlying position of obstructing Biden purely because they are venal and craven.
But, someone will sue over mandates announced today. I believe SCOTUS will then seize the opportunity to block him, because they have run amok. Because it is a national emergency, if they do, I hope he takes the opportunity to expand the court and shut down the conservatives.
At that point, whether or not tens of thousands will continue to get sick and die will then not be on the republican who have made their position clear. It will be completely on Manchin and Sinema.
In the midst of a pandemic that's still spreading, and testing is still an expensive bottleneck, it seems criminally negligent for inexpensive home testing kits, which take a few minutes, to not be available for every home in America when they already exist.
Meanwhile, PCR tests which take days can still cost $100 or more, far more. That is almost completely unusable and no good for parents or teachers who are responsible for kids who still can't be vaccinated.
I'm glad that Biden is pushing hard for the availability of in-home testing, but I want to know why the tests seem to be held up on the market when they've been in existence for months? And who, specifically, are the beneficiaries of not making them more widely available?
The women of Afghanistan don't need the Taliban, but the people of Afghanistan, including the Taliban need Afghanistan's women. Maybe this view is contrary to the conventional view for some here in the US, but maybe it's time for the conventional to change?
For an entire generation while the Taliban was chasing across the country trading hostilities with the US, the women of the nation were developing knowledge, skills, abilities, and experience in a multitude of things and areas.
Not only did women participate in national governance and administration, they helped develop commerce, run businesses including a variety of media, were involved in provincial administration affairs, participated in local government, and in the judiciary,
There still seems to be some confusion about the difference between the John Lewis Voting Rights Act and the For The People Act, and why they're both necessary.
There are at least two separate and discrete - but connected - issues that have to solved to protect voting and elections. The first deals with the specific processes and procedures of the act of voting and running elections.
Those are essentially the who, what, when, where, and how to specifically cast and count votes, and to do so fairly. Those policies were overseen by the Voting Rights Act until it was largely gutted. Those protections must be restored and extended, and that's the John Lewis Act.