Refugees aren’t strangers walking off a plane — not permanently. One of my mentors was a North African refugee 30 or 40 years before we met, and now cooks spaghetti and hassles me about whether I’m living up to my potential. A college dormmate of mine was part of a family granted asylum after persecution in the USSR; she teased me for watching Twin Peaks seven years after eveyone else. A lost boy of Sudan is a member of my church. I’ve known him for maybe a decade. He’s getting a law degree now. These are my neighbors. This is my America.
So far, horseshoe theory has about the same track record as looking for your keys under the streetlight when you dropped them somewhere else. When the far-left fringe kills us, it’s going to be due to weakened antivax herd immunity and/or the rejection of essential food sources as “toxins.”
There is a third scenario in which I decide I’d rather stop breathing than listen to one more word about chemtrails, but I like to think none of you would do that to me.
Mark says: The actual antivax people I know in my life are all libertarian, so I sometimes think progressives get fingered unfairly for that. But the food issue: absolutely. Enjoy that GMO-free mass starvation.
Romie: By all means, Not All Progressives (or even most). Mainly, I don’t think there’s evidence that “the far left” is just as dangerous as “the far right” when it comes to domestic terrorism, even though earnest lefties keep warning that “it could be us next.” Kind of a waste of energy. There is a lunatic left, but it doesn’t much resemble a paramilitary.
Jacob: Well. The left believes in gun laws. ‘Cause we fear guns. So…that may be a small part of that. And our strength/weakness is our “I’m ok you’re ok” Cat Stevens mentality of our community.
Romie: It’s not just guns. The far left (and the right that’s not batshit) don’t do this:
“Far right raises £50,000 to target boats on refugee rescue missions in Mediterranean” (Mark Townsend, The Guardian)
I keep running into variations of “both extremes are awful, the middle is good” where one extreme is whiny about pronouns and the other extreme fundraises in order to murder tens of thousands of fleeing civilians, predominantly women and children. I thought we’d figured out this “treat both sides equally” thing didn’t work when we allowed climate change denial to go mainstream, and then I thought we’d figured it out AGAIN after “Hillary and Trump are both bad, just in different ways,” but apparently no.
Nic says: When I was younger and first saw the (not particularly great) film Sphere, I was so infuriated at the end when they decide to forget everything because humans aren’t ready for the power. “No!” I shouted at the TV “Just think what you could do with it! Stupid Hollywood pat cop-out endings!” Then a few years ago I was on the internet and it suddenly struck me that I felt about the internet in the exact same way. It’s an amazing power that technology has bestowed on us and much as I’d love us to be, we’re just not ready for it. Wishing it away though is just a Hollywood fantasy, it turns out.
I just mention it here because I feel these kind of ‘theories’ would never reach any kind of critical mass without the internet linking vulnerable and impressionable people together in the absence of any kind of critical intermediary (add to this every ‘alt-right-read-fascist’ echo chamber message board and conspiracy hysteria). The internet has allowed amazing growths of expression and given voice to people who have been genuinely empowered in a way that benefits us all. But I wish we were able to handle the darker side of that power.
Sunday Art: “No Them Banner” by London artist Mark Titchner, 2015. (Photo by artist.) http://marktitchner.com/work/
Really good to see all those “keep the refugees out and save those resources so we can help the poor and sick people who are already here” folks mobilizing hard to make sure endangered American citizens receive healthcare and other humanitarian aid like food and safe housing.
Great “band together and protect our own” hustle, everyone!
P.S. The taxes that have been funding expanded medical coverage are mostly on capital gains – on money people make by owning stock, not by doing anything. Stock market is doing just fine despite this 3.8% surcharge – doing historically wonderfully, making stockholders loads of money. Investment has not been constrained. But, sure, we need to protect those investors from the pain of passively accumulating free money that could be slightly more free money if it weren’t for those darned asthmatic kids.
In stories about brutal anti-gay crackdowns in Chechnya, maybe you’ve noticed Russia tends to get mentioned in the headline – “Russia says,” “Putin says” – even though the alleged atrocities are in Chechnya, not Russia, plus it’s not like we trust the honesty of Putin when it comes to government crackdowns or gay rights. There are three reasons this is being reported as a Russia story: Russia is the political pressure point, it’s where reporters can talk to people, and it’s the bigger fish.
Russia is very, very involved in keeping the current leader of Chechnya in power. They’re the go-between with Chechnya and the rest of the international community – the China to Chechnya’s North Korea.
Chechnya isn’t exactly an independent country – although it’s not exactly NOT an independent country. It’s an autonomous region that’s part of the Russian federation. Think about Scotland or Northern Ireland – they’re part of another country, Great Britain. Chechnya is like that, but moreso. It has its own constitution and government, but is also supposed to follow Russian federal law. But Russia often looks the other way unless Chechen seperatists are openly secessionist (which they often are, bloodily). Basically, how autonomous Chechnya is remains an open question, including within Russia. The current leader is firmly pro-Russia.
Meanwhile, Russia is where most gay Chechen men are fleeing, aided by Russian gay-rights ally groups like the Russian chapters of Human Rights Group and International Crisis Group and the Russian LGBT Network, who are collecting most of our information and providing lines of escape. The story about the torture sessions was broken by Novaya Gazeta, a Russian newspaper. Almost any interview you see in a U.S. or British newspaper is with somebody who is in Russia – who either is Russian or fled to Russia. Chechnya doesn’t really have a free press.
Finally, arguably the escalation of persecution in Chechnya was triggered by a Russian group called GayRussia applying for permits to stage a pride march near Chechnya (in Kabardino-Balkaria), even though the permit was not granted. So gay rights groups in Russia aren’t sure whether there will be a similar Russian crackdown and/or whether Chechnya is acting with the approval/encouragement of the Russian government, as a way to put more pressure on Russian gay rights groups – because there has also been a ramp up of anti-gay governance in Russia. Not to the same extent as the violence in Chechnya, but is that a soft pilot? Or is this the moment when Russia is embarassed by the extra attention and steps back?
But yeah, it can sometimes feel like “wait, aren’t we supposed to be talking about Chechnya?” – to which the answer is yes.
Hokay, looks like recuts of that appalling video of “independent Canadian journalist” Eva Bartlett are making the rounds again. Her name is never mentioned, but you may recognize the picture:
It’s propaganda; she’s paid by Russia and Syria, not a newspaper, and her claims are verifiably untrue. Suggest you read Snopes prophylactically and then bookmark it in case you find you need to inoculate someone else.
Or if someone hates Snopes, you have other options:
The amount of desire you have to have, to think that video of aerial bombardments and children in ambulances is easy to fake, but a closeup of one white person in front of a paper background must be honest, even though you’ve never heard her name and she’s “independent” of press credentials…
I know it is hard not to view everything through the lens of US politics if you are in the US, but Syria was not invented by the US and if I hear one more “false flag” claim I’m going to go apeshit.
There is a civil war. It is real. Most observers, including from countries that aren’t the US, don’t think it will end until/unless Assad steps down. He has committed numerous war crimes, which, again, are well-documented, because it’s impossible to do something on this scale and not document it.
There have been other atrocities during the war by other factions, but those other factions are not currently the head of state. Presumably the conflict would also continue if one of them tried to name himself dictator.
Also, the forces of truth and justice, such as they are, are not the ones who have major weapons and an air force, so “let them fight it out” basically means Assad wins. Which is why it’s been going that way with non-intervention.
Maybe you want us to stay out of it. There are any number of good reasons to want that. Maybe you don’t trust the current administration to carry it out. (I mean, look who we’re dealing with here.) Maybe you straight up don’t want us to spend the money for a large-scale intervention. (It’s a lot.) Maybe you look at the situation and think that if we went all in, it would prompt a nuclear strike by Iran or Russia that would kill even more civilians, in even more places. Maybe you have a spiritual committment to nonviolence that makes you disbelieve any violent response, even to extreme violence, is ever warranted.
I could keep going. There are thousands of good reasons not to want war. It’s not like this isn’t thorny. The international response to the Syrian conflict has been confused and strange partly because the situation is a fairly direct challenge to ideas around sovereignty and nationhood; it’s not clear what, in Syria, counts as self-rule. We like the idea that we could just accept the inflow of refugees and write Syria off as a loss, but we want those refugees to assimilate and stop being Syrian. We don’t have the comfort of saying “well, Syria’s always been a mess” because it wasn’t. It was pretty economically stable, with a broad and educated middle class. There’s not a clear outside agitator, but also not a clear “brought it on themselves.”
I get why you have complicated feelings about it. I have complicated feelings. I don’t know an obvious right answer.
What I do know, to circle back, is that the Syrian conflict is not fake, and the arguments around it are not ingenuine. I would appreciate it if everyone could stay in the land of real arguments, instead of the comforting fantasy that this has all been made up – that the only real bad guys are some English-speaking politicians and journalists who you can fight with snarky e-mails and threatening to take your votes elsewhere.
Please see that what you are doing is trying to distance yourself from grief and a sense of guilt that these terrible things are happening and you don’t want to intervene. (Maybe it’s not the time. Maybe it would make things worse.) There’s a reason that “we just didn’t know, couldn’t trust what we were hearing” is a classic from a lot of genocides. It’s emotionally easier to pretend the deaths are lies and fantasies, and you can fight them by hating the politicians you already hate, supporting the social programs you already support, because you are a good person.
Maybe those truly are the best things we can do right now. I don’t have that answer. But I promise you the “false” and “sucker” narrative is the one that makes you feel better, makes you feel like you’ve solved it. If you feel anything other than awful, your understanding of the situation is probably wrong.