The significance of different attitudes and policies on migration has been on my mind for some time. The anti-immigrant rhetoric and actions of the current occupant of the White House are deeply distressing – worse and worse, it seems, and without any end to the disregard of human rights and rejection of humanitarian standards. The impasse on reforming immigration laws in the US is aggravated by this erratic and inflammatory figure who happens to be President. But then comes Aquarius! And here we are in France, coping with yet another set of complexities (and barriers) to resolving the suffering of current migrant populations. Things are not so clear-cut, in either place, the US or France. But we start with our French vantage point before moving on to the broader picture. Continue reading “The Aquarius Challenge to France”
It is such a pity that the flawed administration in the White House aggravated its flawed approach to responsible governance by choosing not to reappoint Janet Yellen to Chair the US Federal Reserve. On the first day in office of her successor, Jerome Powell (whose policies were not expected to be a significant departure from hers) the stock market went into a nose dive of record proportions. There were many reasons for this turbulence – bond prices were up, wages were up, inflation fears, bonuses to workers in major corporations as part of the “benefits” of corporate tax reform – many possible factors have been cited. What if? What if Janet Yellen had not been displaced? Might the very continuity of her presence have helped to calm things down? Continue reading “Reflections on Janet Yellen and Bill and Melinda Gates”
There is a scene in the film Alice’s Restaurant, one of those anti-war films from the Vietnam War era, where an overly zealous police officer brings “27 8X10 color glossy photos” of a minor crime scene (the unlawful dumping of garbage) to a court proceeding presided by a judge who turns out to be blind. It is a tale of overstating the seriousness and engaging in too many steps to prove the crime. The photos have no use to the judge, who then levies a $50 fine on the defendant. We understand that the main characters here – the “criminal”, the judge and the police chief all play themselves in the film, which contributes to its ironic punch. The film was built around a folk song about a “massacree” at this same “Alice’s Restaurant”, performed by Arlo Guthrie (the “criminal”), describing a Thanksgiving gathering with a bunch of bohemians in an abandoned church in small-town New England. Continue reading “Personal Reflections on Conflict of Interest”
Reflections on the ACLU: It would take me a while to search for the legal history on which case it was that Ruth Bader Grinsburg criticized the timing of the carefully crafted legal strategy during an ACLU Board debate on the ACLU’s Women’s Rights Project. Sometime in the 1970s – perhaps 1973? It was a case, she argued, that disrupted that strategy to build towards an interpretation of the 14th Amendment through case law that could essentially eliminate the need for an Equal Rights Amendment. Something to do with Oklahoma sticks in my mind. As a new member of the ACLU Board by virtue of being a representative from the North Carolina affiliate, I remember being amazed by her stance and awestruck by her sophisticated arguments. It was quite a lesson in how constitutional law can be influenced by a deliberate strategy – not just through one case but through a series of cases if they are deliberately chosen and sequentially developed to move the judicial interpretation in a certain direction. Here are some reflections on a dramatic change in ACLU strategy today, but I start with a historical perspective.
I have long been a defender of civil liberties for all groups, as long as they do not condone or engage in violence, but we were horrified by the evil on display in Charlottesville, Virginia. And we were further offended by the damage of a failed American president whose words and behavior were so lacking of a moral compass to condemn in no uncertain terms the fundamental evils of what these groups were advocating – and doing! To suggest that there were “fine people” on “many sides” of this confrontation is shocking, indeed.
The American Civil Liberties Union, of which I am a member, has a broad view about free speech, on the premise that it is only through freedom to speak as one chooses that flawed views can be effectively discredited. However, I do believe that the “Antifa” movement or the anarchistic groups against globalization who have mobilized groups and individuals to engage in destructive acts are a challenge to deal with. The idea that one has the right to oppose an abhorrent view with violence is contrary to the basic right of free speech, even where the abhorrent view is itself against that right. It is frustrating that these groups and/or individuals have infiltrated peaceful protests. Seattle in 1999 comes to mind, but also Geneva in 2004 among protestors against the G7 Summit in nearby Evian that year, or the G20 protestors in Hamburg this year. On the other hand, these are not advocates of the kind of racist, xenophobic and neo-Nazi views that we have heard from the groups that marched so aggressively in Charlottesville.
The Carrefour de la Liberté is a traffic circle near our vacation home in Southern France. We have seen this traffic circle grow from a modest intersection in the 1980s into the substantial traffic circle that it is today. Five busy roads feed into the traffic circle, and its large grassy center features abundant displays of seasonal flowers and colorful iron sculptures of felines. To one side of the traffic circle, there is a World War II memorial. (To another side of the traffic circle, there is a permanently parked pizza truck – actually a double-decker bus – but that’s for another story.)