#Capitulation

[reading-writing-revolution]

Fail.

[allegorypaintings]

Allegory of the Surrender of Ulm, 20th October 1805

Artist: Antoine François Callet (French, 1741–1823)

Date: n. d.

Medium: Oil painting

Description

Allegorie de la Reddition d'Ulm; General Karl Mack (1752-1828) surrendering to Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821); capitulation of Austrian army to French.

[wardsutton]

"The NFL for removing the words 'End Racism' from the end zone of the Superbowl field so as to not to 'offend' Trump, who will be in the audience?" "Correct!" (Unsold cartoon idea)

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Parker Molloy at The Present Age:

Rep. Sarah McBride's recent interview with Ezra Klein for The New York Times should be required listening for anyone who wants to understand how Democrats managed to lose the public on trans rights so spectacularly. Not because McBride offers any brilliant insights into what went wrong, but because she perfectly embodies the spineless approach to politics that got us here in the first place. In the 90-minute conversation, McBride — the first openly transgender member of Congress — spent most of her time lecturing trans “activists” and advocating for a politics of pure reactivity that would make any competent political strategist want to bang their head against a wall. But it was one particular exchange that really got under my skin, where McBride essentially argued that politicians should just do whatever's popular.

"Public opinion is everything," McBride told Klein. "And if you want us to change, you need to help foster the change in public opinion before you're asking these elected officials to betray the fact that they are, at the end of the day, representatives who have to represent in some form or fashion the views of the people that they represent." This is political malpractice dressed up as pragmatism, and it represents everything wrong with how Democrats have approached trans rights over the past few years. Here's the thing: politicians aren't supposed to be weathervanes, spinning whichever way the wind blows. They're supposed to be leaders who shape public opinion, not prisoners to it. McBride's argument isn't just strategically bankrupt — it's morally cowardly.

[...] Instead of making the moral case for treating trans people with basic dignity and fighting to shift public opinion, Democrats went into full retreat mode the moment they faced political headwinds. Kamala Harris went deer-in-the-headlights when confronted with Trump's anti-trans attacks during the 2024 campaign, infamously demurring whenever asked about her prior pro-trans positions and simply responding that she would “follow the law” if she became president. She couldn't even bring herself to say that trans people should be allowed access to healthcare — the most basic position imaginable. Other Democratic candidates started throwing trans people under the bus to score political points. The party's relative silence created a vacuum that Republicans were all too happy to fill with their own messaging. This isn't some abstract political science debate. There are real consequences when politicians abdicate their responsibility to lead. Trump's anti-trans policies are "stunningly wide-ranging" and "popular," as Klein noted in his interview with McBride. Republicans are plowing ahead with restrictions on trans people in sports, schools, the military, healthcare, and basic participation in public life because Democrats created space for them to do so through their cowardice.

[...]

McBride seems to understand this on some level. She acknowledged that Democrats became "absolutist" and moved too far ahead of public opinion, going to "Trans 201, Trans 301, when people were still at a very much Trans 101 stage." But her proposed solution — making politicians even more subservient to polling — would only make things worse. The real problem isn't that advocates pushed too hard or that politicians took too many progressive positions. The problem is that when the going got tough, Democrats folded like a cheap suit instead of doing the hard work of persuasion and leadership that Johnson and others demonstrated during the civil rights era.

During an interview with Ezra Klein Tuesday, Rep. Sarah McBride (D-DE) suggested that the best approach to fighting for trans rights is to focus on “popularity” instead of what is morally right.

From the 06.17.2025 edition of The New York Times' The Ezra Klein Show:

See Also:

The Advocate: Sarah McBride on why support for trans rights ebbed — and how to build it back up

[pandemic-info]

Tired of masking! how to stay motivated? Tips on negotiating mask/COVID-related differences in relationships?

The above links to a thread with a lot of helpful responses.

[toshootforthestars]

(source)

[eaglesnick]

“The only way to defeat bullies is to speak out and stand up.” — Susan Polis Schutz

It is extremely embarrassing listening to government ministers bending over backwards to avoid saying anything negative about Donald Trump. Clearly, Sir Keir Starmer has issued an Executive Order that criticism of the American president is VORBOTEN.

I think it was a liberal democrat on Question Time last night who summed up Starmer’s position regarding the much heralded trade deal with America. I am paraphrasing but this is roughly what was said.

Sir Keir Starmer is like the little boy who has had his coat taken away from him by the school bully. The bully tells his victim that he can have his coat back but he has first to hand over his dinner money, which the boy duly does. The bully smiles as he counts the money handed to him, while the little boy tells  those around him he has made a new friend.

While the leaders of China, Canada, Australia, France and the EU call out Trumps bullying tactics, our Prime Minister, appeases him, signing a deal that leaves Britain worse off than before tariffs were introduced. While British exporters (other than for steel and aluminium)  still have a 10-blanket tariff imposed on all goods, including cars, the US has bullied Starmer into accepting tariff-free American beef, tariff free ethanol exports, and opening up   UK markets for US tech and AI firms, including a reduction in the UK’s digital sales tax on US tech giants. This benefits American businesses significantly, while UK firms see fewer direct advantages.

In the words of Kemi Badenoch, Britain has been “shafted" by Starmer’s new trade deal. What is more he has sent a message to Trump that his bullying tactics work, and that Britain under Starmer will always capitulate when push comes to shove.

Yesterday witnessed the 80th anniversary of VE Day, where the country came together to commemorate the bravery of the men and women who stood up to tyranny during the Second World War. Such a shame that Starmer has not honoured their legacy by standing up to bullyboy Trump.

[xtruss]

Nobel Prize Winner Joseph Stiglitz Denounces Columbia’s Apparent Capitulation To Trump

Stiglitz, Perhaps the Most Renowned Columbia Professor, Gave an Exclusive Interview to The Intercept on Academic Freedom, Deportations of Students, and More.

— Meghnad Bose | Tuesday April 15 2025 | The Intercept

Columbia University Professor Joseph Stiglitz at a Campus Protest, on April 14, 2025, in New York City. Photo: Meghnad Bose

Nobel Prize-Winning Economist Joseph Stiglitz, one of Columbia University’s most renowned professors, denounced the institution where he has taught for more than two decades over its recent capitulations to the Trump administration.

After Donald Trump withdrew some $400 million in federal funding from the university and issued a list of demands, Columbia entered negotiations that concluded with the school caving to pressure from the White House. Among other concessions, the school made concessions about faculty appointments and placing the Middle East studies department under review.

“I worry that our university may have capitulated to some of the demands coming out of the Trump administration,” Stiglitz told The Intercept on Monday. “Academic freedom means that we have the right to criticize any government, anywhere, the American government or the government of any other country. We have to do it with decorum, conviction, and research, but the notion of academic freedom means that we have to maintain those rights.”

Stiglitz reserved his harshest rhetoric for the attempts to deport current and recent Columbia students, including the arrests of Mahmoud Khalil on March 8 and Mohsen Mahdawi earlier Monday in Vermont.

“What is clear is that it appears that there’s a pattern of intimidation,” he said, “a pattern where they’re trying to discourage people to protest, and a pattern that they’re particularly going after Palestinians.”

Speaking to The Intercept about the apparent struggle between protecting the university’s academic independence versus the attempts to regain the $400 million in revoked federal funding, Stiglitz said, “Obviously, the university cannot continue without money, but what is most important is academic freedom. If we lose our academic freedom, we have lost everything. And so at this moment, we have to decide what our priority is. To me, our priority is academic freedom and the defense of our community.”

Stiglitz, 82, was awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences in 2001 and was a lead author of the 1995 Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize. At Columbia, Stiglitz was named a university professor, the school’s highest academic honor.

What Follows is a Transcript From The Intercept’s Exclusive Interview with Stiglitz, Conducted in Two Parts at Columbia’s Campus.

Joseph Stiglitz: So, I’m Joe Stiglitz, university professor. I teach at the Department of Economics in the Business School, and School of International and Public Affairs. I won the Nobel Prize in 2001. I’ve spent my life studying what makes for good societies, for good economies — and democracy is essential. An essential part of democracies is free media and strong universities. Strong universities are important because they provide the critique, to evaluate what governments are doing, to ascertain when there’s an encroachment on democracies, to criticize it when they are doing things that are against the interests of people, when there are conflicts of interest. That’s why anti-democratic forces always begin the attack on the media and on universities. And that’s what’s been happening in America today.

Professors have been given the right of tenure. There’s a reason for this tenure. It’s about academic freedom, that we have the freedom to assess what is going on, to talk about it, talk out. But with that right comes obligations. And so, it is our obligation to talk about what is going on, how the attacks on science, on our students, are undermining not only Columbia University and universities throughout our country, but are undermining our democracy and our standing in the international community, and threaten the future of our democracy and of our economy.

Meghnad Bose: Professor Stiglitz, could you answer the question, who is the university? Because a lot of questions are being raised as to how the university will respond if there’s a consent decree that’s demanded. Who is the university, according to you?

Joseph Stiglitz: The university is a community. It is a community of students, scholars, researchers, where we have shared governance. Obviously, the ultimate responsibility is with the trustees, but the trustees have a fiduciary responsibility, and that fiduciary responsibility is not just about money. Obviously, the university cannot continue without money, but most important, most important is academic freedom. If we lose our academic freedom, we have lost everything. And so at this moment, we have to decide what our priority is. To me, our priority is academic freedom and the defense of our community.

Meghnad Bose: Do you believe the university has capitulated to the Trump administration’s demands?

Joseph Stiglitz: I worry that our university may have capitulated to some of the demands coming out of the Trump administration. Academic freedom means that we have the right to criticize any government, anywhere, the American government or the government of any other country. We have to do it with decorum and conviction, research, but the notion of academic freedom means that we have to maintain those rights.

“There’s A Pattern of Intimidation, A Pattern Where They’re Trying To Discourage People To Protest, And A Pattern That They’re Particularly Going After Palestinians.”

Meghnad Bose: Professor, do you want to talk a little bit about these arrests and attempted deportations of Columbia students that have happened—first with Mahmoud Khalil on March 8, and the latest with Mohsen Mahdawi, who was arrested today, just minutes before we speak right now.

Joseph Stiglitz: I don’t want to speak about each of the individual cases. What is clear is that it appears that there’s a pattern of intimidation, a pattern where they’re trying to discourage people to protest, and a pattern they’re going after particularly Palestinians. Obviously, anybody concerned about democratic rights has to be concerned about this kind of intimidation. The most disturbing to me were some cases where people have been detained, sometimes with people without clear identity. And you realize then at that moment, that could have been you. These individuals’ rights were abrogated. But if that had been me, my rights would have been abrogated.

Meghnad Bose: Now, all of this is happening as part of the Trump administration’s supposed fight against antisemitism on college and university campuses, but as part of the demands that the Trump administration laid out was the demand that the Middle Eastern, South Asian, and African Studies Department at Columbia be placed into academic receivership, essentially that the control of the department be placed outside the department, outside the faculty of the department, for a minimum of five years. Columbia, while not exactly agreeing word by word to that, effectively agreed to it by announcing that it would appoint a senior vice provost whose job primarily, first of all, would be to ensure “fairness” and “balance” in Middle Eastern studies. Do you see the federal government demanding this of a private university, and one department of a private university, without even substantiation as to why it’s doing so as an impingement on academic freedom?

Joseph Stiglitz: Very much so. It is a very big impingement. The withdrawal of funds from science without any due process, without proof of the allegations, with disproportionate responses to the allegations even were they proved, is clearly a violation.

Meghnad Bose: Which allegations are you talking about?

Joseph Stiglitz: Whatever the allegations that they put forward for discontinuing the science grant[s]. The question is, the law is fairly clear — that there are supposed to be hearings, there are supposed to be proportionate responses to violations. This is violating every one of them.

“Of All The Institutions Who Have Worked The Hardest To Undo Discrimination Have Been Our Universities.”

Meghnad Bose: My final question is, do you feel satisfied with the way that the university administration has responded to the Trump administration over this past month and a half?

Joseph Stiglitz: I worry a lot that the concession on turning over oversight to a set of departments is a violation, a fundamental violation of academic freedom. I worry that what is being called antisemitism goes beyond what reasonable people would call antisemitism. All of us are concerned about antisemitism, just like we’re concerned about xenophobia, discrimination against African Americans, discrimination in every form. But of all the institutions in our society that have worked hardest to deal with discrimination which is pervasive in our society against all, [in] many, many forms — but of all the institutions who have worked the hardest to undo discrimination have been our universities. And among the universities that has had a long history of fighting antisemitism has been Columbia University. So the charges do not ring through.

Meghnad Bose: Thank You So Much, Professor.

[bigdadskypilot]

[allegorypaintings]

Allegory of the Surrender of Ulm, 20th October 1805

Artist: Antoine François Callet (French, 1741–1823)

Medium: Oil painting

Description

Allegorie de la Reddition d'Ulm; General Karl Mack (1752-1828) surrendering to Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821); capitulation of Austrian army to French.

[rbhsoregon]

Schumerlain (3/19/25)

[thefreethoughtprojectcom]

In our recent interview with Jeremiah Harding, we tackled the tired trope that Trump is a Christian and broke down all the evidence showing otherwise. Spoiler: the facts aren’t in his favor.

Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/6tIe8QuG2XFtDgNzziqTVS

Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/guest-jeremiah-hardin-part-2-culture-wars-the-price/id1439014279?i=1000679749402

#TheFreeThoughtProjectPodcast

[sharkspez]

Tumblr Biography: Napoleon 🇫🇷

🏳️ Surrendering to the Allied Force in 1814, Napoleon’s 💪🏻 power seemed to be waning. But was this truly the 🔚 end of his 👑 reign❓

[culturefrancaise]

[reading-writing-revolution]

ABC also signaled that Trump might be correct about a lot of other things he has accused ABC and the rest of the mainstream media of reporting falsely about him — that he lied when he said the 2020 election was stolen from him, for example, or that he lied when he claimed he did not provoke the rioters on January 6, 2021, or when he characterized it as a “peaceful” protest, or said President Biden was behind his prosecutions for trying to reverse the outcome of the 2020 election and making off with classified documents.

Nevertheless, Trump still committed the crimes he's been found guilty of. He's a rapist and a fraud.