Petition: Stop a Regional War

 

From Standing Together: More than 300 missiles and drones launched into Israeli territory were not enough for our crazy government -- now, they are talking about Israel's response (to the Iranian regime’s response) that will ignite a regional war -- a war that will put us in shelters for months, will result in mass deaths in Israel and will drag the entire region into destruction. After six months of daily death, when the hostages are still in Gaza and hundreds of thousands of people have been evacuated from their homes, we demand that we not be dragged into a regional war. Instead -- we need to reach a deal that will bring back the hostages, stop the war in Gaza, and cease all the fronts of war -- with Hezbollah, the Iranian Regime, and in Gaza and the West Bank. Add your signature to the petition and spread it far and wide!

SIGN THE PETITION

SIGN THE PETITION

Remembering Harry Hay on His Birthday

 

 

 

Born on this day in 1912: gay rights pioneer Harry Hay. From Wikipedia:

 

"Henry "Harry" Hay Jr. (April 7, 1912 – October 24, 2002) was an American gay rights activist, communist, and labor advocate. He was a co-founder of the Mattachine Society, the first sustained gay rights group in the United States, as well as the Radical Faeries, a loosely affiliated gay spiritual movement."

 

Homophobes like to circulate a picture of Hay at a 1986 pride parade, protesting the exclusion of the North American Man/Boy Love Association. They're trying to exploit the stereotype of gays as sexual "predators" on youth, but conveniently ignore the fact that Hay's perspective, like that of so many others, came from the other side of that relationship. As related in Positive Memories by T. Rivas:

 

"Harry Hay (1912-2002) was a leading American within gay liberation. When he was 14 years old, he met a merchant-seaman of about age 25. Rind writes:

 

"'One evening, when the two walked alongside the moonlit ocean, Hay was swept by the physical sensations. When Hay clasped the man's hand, the boy was afraid the sailor might respond violently. Instead, it turned into Hay's first lovemaking with an adult. When Hay revealed that he was only 14, the sailor panicked for fear of a lengthy prison sentence. Hay desperately tried to settle the man down, and when he did, the man gave the boy tips on how people like us should conduct themselves, which inspired Harry almost as vividly as the erotic memory of [the man].'

 

"Bruce Rind tells us that according to Hay's biographer Timmons, Hay always described it as the most beautiful gift that a fourteen-year-old ever got from his first love!

 

"According to another author quoted by Rind, Hay remarked, 'Wherever he is, I want him to know that my love and gratitude followed him all my days, and all of his.'"

 

(Source: Article by Bruce Rind “Blinded by Politics and

Morality – A Reply to McAnulty and Wright” in Censoring

Sex Research)"

FIRE: College Students Deserve Due Process Protections

From the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression:

This spring, the government is expected to make investigations of campus sexual misconduct less fair and less accurate.

The Department of Education will release new rules on how colleges investigate allegations of sexual misconduct. The rules are likely to deprive students of important rights during the fact-finding process — such as a live hearing, the cross-examination of witnesses, and the ability to have an attorney present.

These are rights that any of us would want in a process designed to determine guilt or innocence. And they’re especially important during high-stakes investigations on serious misconduct like sexual harassment. 

The stakes are high — too high to get wrong. Colleges must punish students guilty of sexual misconduct, and they must not punish students who are innocent. That’s why colleges need to use every tool in the toolbox to get it right and increase the likelihood of uncovering the truth.

And the American people agree. In our survey with IPSOS:

• 63% agreed that interviews conducted through written testimony are less insightful than in-person interviews.
• 68% say schools must conduct a hearing where both the accused and accuser may hear and contest evidence.
• 79% agreed that all students involved in these investigations should have the right to hire a lawyer.

Despite the popularity of these rights for a fair investigation, they’re all on the chopping block.

"Our polling shows that the public overwhelmingly rejects the false choice between protecting victims and upholding due process for the accused," said FIRE Lead Counsel for Government Affairs Tyler Coward. "Americans believe that campus sexual assault is a serious problem, but that scrapping basic standards of fairness and impartiality isn’t the answer."

Happy Birthday, Chip Delany!

 

Today is Samuel Delany's 82nd birthday. As related by Wikipedia, "Samuel R. 'Chip' Delany is an American writer and literary critic. His work includes fiction (especially science fiction), memoir, criticism, and essays on science fiction, literature, sexuality, and society."

This is one of a number of science fiction writers I haven't given as much attention to as I intend; I think the only novel of his I've read so far is Babel-17, which explores the relationship between language and thought. I did get to meet him once rather serendipitously several years ago, while I was running a Meetup group on Psychology and Social Change which was meeting at Robin's Bookstore. He happened to be in the store and saw us there, and we spent some time conversing. I also heard him at Temple University a number of years ago when he introduced a talk by Neil Gaiman, another great writer.

Wikipedia further notes:

"Delany's sustained thematic engagement with difference, normativity, and their potential subversions or reifications ... [place] him as an important interlocutor in the fields of Queer theory and Black studies.

[...]

He has commented that he believes that to omit the sexual practices that he portrays in his writing would limit the dialogue children and adults can have about it themselves, and that this lack of knowledge can be fatal."

This understanding is partially rooted in an experience he and a friend had at the age of six -- which he has described as having been "a big help" later when he was coming to terms with his homosexuality, "when I was seventeen or so" -- which is described in the interview at the url pictured below.

ADD YOUR NAME: Tell RFK Jr. the people deserve an open debate on Palestine!

I've endorsed this call by the Jill Stein presidential campaign.

 

The people have made their position clear: Nearly 75% of Americans want an end to Israel’s genocide in Gaza and a permanent ceasefire.

Joe Biden and Donald Trump have made themselves clear as well. Each of them will continue unconditional support for Israel no matter how many war crimes they commit.

Voters deserve to hear from every candidate and know who represents their interests. So when I heard Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. say that Palestinians are “the most pampered people (by international aid organizations) on the planet” – I challenged him to a debate on Palestine.

ADD YOUR NAME: Tell RFK Jr. the people deserve an open debate on Palestine!

ADD YOUR NAME

I look forward to challenging Kennedy on his assertion that Palestinians are “pampered” and that Gaza should be “leveled.”

After signing, please share this petition widely to make this debate happen and bring these issues to light.

And if you are able, please make a contribution to our campaign to help us reach as many people as possible!

In solidarity and gratitude,

Jill

Review: That’s Funny, You Don’t Look Anti-Semitic

 

This book was written by a Jewish communist named Steve Cohen in 1984, but I only learned of it recently. It’s a look at the history of anti-Semitism on the Left, especially the English Left, and why there’s been so much resistance to fully acknowledging and addressing it.

He sees this largely as having to do with a failure to understand the unique characteristics of modern anti-Semitism as a form of racism, which is not merely prejudice but a totalizing ideological world-view built around a conspiracy theory.

I must admit that before reading this I had no idea of how bad it has gotten in some cases. Not only major English socialist and labor organizations, but some of the great figures such as Marx and Lenin, have apparently been affected – although in Cohen’s view Trotsky was a notable exception.

Perhaps I’ve had less occasion to experience such things since my Jewish ancestry is only on one side and so is less noticeable, but I wonder if perhaps there’s been less of this here in the States than in Britain. I can only think of a few occasions on which I’ve noticed anti-Semitism at Left events, and it was coming from peripheral people, not leaders or organizers. For instance, during the Q & A after a 2004 screening of the film Peace, Propaganda, and the Promised Land, someone asked a question about the influence of “Jewish lobbies,” and one of the co-chairs, at the time a comrade of mine in the socialist group Solidarity, interjected to point out that the problem isn’t “Jewish lobbies” but the Israel lobby (which by the way consists largely of evangelical Christians). In a couple other instances, I’ve intervened myself in response to problematic statements.

Cohen powerfully argues the importance of recognizing and consistently engaging with this problem, first of all simply as a matter of principle for socialists as humanists and working-class internationalists, but also because the failure to do so both discourages many Jewish people from identifying with socialism and cedes propaganda ground to Zionism. Before I read this book I was already pondering the failure to have public events responding specifically to recent incidents of anti-Semitism in Philadelphia, and after reading it I feel that I should do so myself if I hear about any more, even if it’s just me holding a vigil, simply to remind people how it’s done.

Thanks to my friend Nancy Lebovitz for bringing this book to my attention. Thanks also to my friends in Platypus Philadelphia for telling me about Moishe Postone’s essay, “Anti-Semitism and National Socialism,” which offers a persuasive analysis of the origins and unique characteristics of anti-Semitism in terms of Marxian concepts, and may help explain why the Left hasn’t done a better job of combating it.

Free Julian Assange! (Petition)

This message comes from independent Presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.:

Our nation stands at a critical juncture, where the very essence of democracy and free speech hangs in the balance.

Individuals like Daniel Ellsberg, John Kiriakou, Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden, and Julian Assange have bravely exposed government corruption, shedding light on injustices that threaten the core principles of our society.

But instead of honoring these truth-tellers, our government has chosen to persecute them.

As a staunch advocate for freedom of speech and transparency, I am reaching out to you today with an urgent plea: join us in demanding the immediate release of Julian Assange.

Julian Assange, a journalist and publisher, has languished behind bars for 13 years for his role in uncovering the truth about governmental wrongdoings, from torture at Guantanamo Bay to anti-democratic actions by the DNC.

It's a travesty that exposing crimes has become a greater offense than the crimes themselves. We cannot allow this injustice to continue.

Sign the Petition

On my first day in office, I pledge to pardon Julian Assange and launch a thorough investigation into the corruption and crimes he has exposed. Additionally, I will issue an executive order to put an end to any attempts by federal agencies to silence political speech.

But I cannot do this alone. I need your support.

By signing our petition, you'll join a chorus of voices demanding justice for Assange and protection for whistleblowers everywhere.

Together, we can ensure that the voices of truth are heard and that those who dare to speak out against injustice are not silenced.

Please take a moment to add your name to our petition and share it with your friends, family, and colleagues. Every signature brings us one step closer to securing Julian Assange's freedom and safeguarding our fundamental rights.

Thank you for your unwavering commitment to justice and liberty.

Sign the Petition









Sincerely,


Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

The American Creed and Revolutionary Regeneration

This evening I took part in a lively Braver Angels Film Club discussion of the film American Creed. I made several interventions in the chat, of which I consider the first the most important. In this, I took off from the words of one schoolchild in the film who said he thinks freedom means "no one can boss you around," observing that today most Americans don't enjoy freedom in this sense. I used this point to relate the Declaration of Independence's twin themes of individual self-determination -- "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" --  and collective self-determination -- "the right of the people to alter or to abolish" their form of government "whenever it becomes destructive of these ends" -- to Platypus's analysis of capitalism as a contradiction of bourgeois society that negates the emancipatory values of the bourgeois revolution, pointing beyond itself toward the revival of those values through socialist revolution.

FIRE to Supreme Court: Stop Government Bullies from Intimidating Social Media Platforms

In a new friend-of-the-court filing, FIRE asks the Supreme Court to prevent government officials from coercing private social media platforms into censoring speech.

From https://www.thefire.org/news/fire-supreme-court-stop-government-bullies-intimidating-social-media-platforms

In Murthy v. Missouri (formerly referred to as Missouri v. Biden), a federal court of appeals held officials from the White House and other executive agencies violated the First Amendment by urging — from both the bully pulpit and behind the scenes — private social media companies like Facebook and Twitter to block, delete, downgrade, and deplatform users and posts that expressed disfavored views on controversial topics, including COVID-19, election fraud, and Hunter Biden’s laptop. The court blocked various Biden administration officials from continuing to do so. The Biden administration has — for good reason — taken a shellacking for pressuring social media platforms into squelching online speech.

But coercing social media companies based on the content of users’ posts is not unique to the Biden administration. Plenty of Republican officials — including former President Trump and even the two government plaintiffs in this case — are guilty of the same.

On Feb. 9, FIRE filed an amicus curiae — “friend of the court” — brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to prevent any government official from coercing or significantly encouraging private companies to censor disfavored views, regardless of that official’s political affiliation. FIRE was joined on the filing by the National Coalition Against Censorship and the First Amendment Lawyers Association.
When do officials cross the line from permissible persuasion to unconstitutional coercion?

FIRE filed its brief on Supreme Court review of a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that held several Biden administration officials violated the First Amendment in two ways: First, some officials unlawfully bullied and intimidated social media platforms into changing their content moderation policies, and second, other officials became so entangled with the companies’ moderation processes that those companies were no longer making their own independent decisions. Under Supreme Court precedent the first violation constitutes coercion, and the second significant encouragement of censorship. FIRE’s brief explains to the Court why the Fifth Circuit’s approach strikes the right balance between allowing legal communications between government and social media platforms, and protecting those same platforms from unconstitutional influence.

As FIRE said last year, “The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit’s decision in Missouri v. Biden is an important victory for freedom of expression” that “strongly reaffirmed the primacy of the First Amendment and the fundamental bar it imposes on government officials seeking to limit what we can say.” We are thus urging the Supreme Court to uphold that decision.

To prove coercion, the Fifth Circuit adopted a four-part test based on the Supreme Court’s holding in Bantam Books v. Sullivan and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit’s holding in NRA v. Vullo (another case on appeal to the Supreme Court, FIRE’s blog on which is here.) To distinguish between mere persuasion and unconstitutional coercion, the test examines four factors: the government speaker’s word choice and tone; whether the government official’s speech was perceived as a threat by the private party; whether the government speaker had regulatory authority when speaking; and whether the government speaker threatens adverse consequences should the private actor not do as requested.

This test has much to commend it. It examines the entire context of communications to determine whether an exchange was truly threatening or mere puffery. It gives government speakers plenty of leeway to advocate so long as they do not use their speech to bully or intimidate. And most importantly, the test is viewpoint neutral. It applies to any government official, regardless of political affiliation. That is why FIRE has urged the Supreme Court to adopt this test and apply it to rule against the government in both this case and in Vullo.

To prove significant encouragement of censorship, the Fifth Circuit relied on the Supreme Court’s reasoning in Blum v. Yaretsky and held that there must be “some exercise of active (not passive), meaningful (impactful enough to render them responsible) control on the part of the government over the private party’s challenged decision.” That can be shown with proof that the government is either entangled in a private party’s independent decision-making, or if the government becomes directly involved in carrying out the private party’s decisions.

Again, this approach is a good one, and FIRE’s brief urges the Supreme Court to adopt it. This test punishes government actors only when they become so involved with a private company’s content moderation that they effectively insert themselves into private editorial decisions. At that point, the government actors become “responsible” for those decisions to censor, and they violate the First Amendment.

A monumental term for freedom of expression

Murthy v. Missouri is but one of several major First Amendment cases the Supreme Court is currently considering that involve the abuse of governmental power.

In NRA v. Vullo, the Court will consider whether a similar instance of government coercion violates the First Amendment. In that case, the head of New York’s Department of Financial Services made a series of thinly veiled threats against regulated banks and insurance companies to pressure them to sever ties with the NRA because the official opposes the NRA’s political advocacy. FIRE’s brief explained that informal censorship actions are nothing more than tactics by which state actors seek to bypass First Amendment scrutiny and evade the rule of law.

In two companion cases, NetChoice v. Paxton and Moody v. NetChoice, the Court will consider whether states may impose direct control over social media platforms’ private moderation decisions. While Murthy v. Missouri involves informal, backroom pressure on private companies, the NetChoice cases involve formal legislation regulating what content social media companies must permit on their sites. But as FIRE’s brief in the NetChoice cases identified, the “overriding issue” is “whether the government or private actors shall have the predominant role” in oversight of social media platforms’ content moderation decision.

Finally, in Lindke v. Freed and O’Connor-Ratcliffe v. Garnier, the Court will decide when an individual government official’s use of a social media platform becomes state action. FIRE’s briefs in both cases explain why public officials’ actions should be subject to the First Amendment when they use their private social media accounts to conduct public affairs. Like this case, Lindke and O’Connor-Ratcliffe involve government officials seeking to evade First Amendment requirements when they conduct government business.

These cases and Murthy demonstrate government officials’ increasing willingness to use both formal and informal methods to try to escape the strictures of the First Amendment. It also proves their willingness to flip-flop on free speech to satisfy political ends. In a case of inadvertent irony, two of the plaintiffs in Murthy v. Missouri — the Attorneys General of Missouri and Louisiana — advocated in favor of overt government censorship in the NetChoice cases, despite arguing against backroom government censorship in their own case against the Biden administration.

But in Murthy and the other cases this term, the Supreme Court has the opportunity to stop them in their tracks. As FIRE’s brief states:


Political actors use the First Amendment as a club when convenient, then ignore it when it gets in the way of their own ambitions. But the great virtue of the First Amendment is its neutrality. This Court should send the same clear message in this case as in the others on the docket this Term: The First Amendment is not a weapon for government actors to wield in the culture wars.

FIRE and its allies urge the Supreme Court to affirm the Fifth Circuit.

Standing Together Fourth National Convention in Haifa

This news from Standing Together, the binational Israeli-Palestinian peace and justice movement:
 

On Friday over 1000 Jewish and Palestinian citizens of Israel came together for our fourth National Convention! We voted for our national leadership and discussed the need to build a new path - toward justice, equality and peace in Israel/Palestine.

We started the day with a performance from the Jerusalem Youth Choir, an Israeli-Palestinian choir that sings in Hebrew and Arabic, speeches from members of the Standing Together leadership, and a performance by Luna Abu Nassar, a local Palestinian singer. We then broke into four different panel discussions under the following topics:
 

SUPPORT STANDING TOGETHER

JOIN FRIENDS OF STANDING TOGETHER



We’re over three months into this gruesome war. Over 20,000 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed, including over 10,000 children. There are still 132 Israeli hostages in captivity, with 27 of them believed to be killed.

Throughout the day, movement members submitted digital votes for candidates running for the national leadership, and at the end of the convention, the national leadership was announced. We are so pleased to have such an inspiring and diverse national leadership, of which 13 are women, 12 are men, 13 are Jewish and 12 are Palestinian citizens of Israel.

It gives us hope to know that even amid this extreme crisis, there are masses of people who believe that there is another way, people who refuse to give into despair and are determined to build a better future. The convention was a huge success, and we are filled with renewed energy for the long fight that lies ahead of us.

Residents of northern Israel near the Lebanon border are still displaced or living under dangerous circumstances, and on an almost daily basis, we hear of more Israeli soldiers dying and being severely injured in combat. We know that this war has not and will not bring us long-lasting security. The only thing that is capable of bringing us safety and security is peace - a peace that guarantees justice, freedom, and safety for all Palestinians and Jews in Israel/Palestine.


SUPPORT OUR CALL FOR PEACE
 

JOIN FRIENDS OF STANDING TOGETHER  

We need your support for the long run - join friends of Standing Together! When you become a Friend of Standing Together, you support us with a monthly donation, join a global community of Standing Together supporters, and gain access to exclusive content, online events, and mentoring. Our Friends of Standing Together community helps us to become more financially stable, enabling us to rely more on small donations from our community.

Thank you so much for being part of this journey with us, your support makes all of this possible!

Our mailing address is:
info@standing-together.org

RQ Requiem Issue Release Party

Root Quarterly is releasing another issue.

The details:

ISSUE RELEASE PARTY REQUIEM ISSUE

Cover Art
Synthesis #8 by John Singletary. 40 x 41, 2012

SATURDAY FEB 10

‘Requiem’ Issue Release Party
7 - 10 p.m.
Old Swedes’ (Gloria Dei Church)
927 S. Water Street
Philadelphia, PA 19147
Join us for cocktails, art, music, and lively conversation.
Kids table with drawing supplies available.
Free parking in lot adjacent to church
Register on Eventbrite

USE CODE
“WINTER”
AT CHECKOUT FOR $10
OFF YOUR TICKET
UNTIL FEBRUARY 5TH!

Today's Free Speech Hypocrites: Bill Ackman and Larry Summers

In the latest "free speech" hypocrisy, Bill Ackman and Larry Summers attack the Jewish historian appointed to head Harvard's antisemitism task force.

https://fstube.net/w/8QPv8NN13CYSYvY3qtDXiS

Trump’s Iowa Victory Marks Total Establishment Collapse

I've never been a Trump supporter, but I'm disgusted at how the establishment is trying to interfere with the democratic process in his case. In this video, independent liberal Glenn Greenwald discusses Trump's unprecedented blowout victory in the Iowa caucuses and the establishment's inability to digest it:

https://fstube.net/w/vkFQ5YMbzvWEexZdcXCHUC

If you don't like the manipulations of corporatists and the surveillance state, consider supporting independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. I don't agree with him on every issue, but he's a very consistent defender of free speech and civil liberties. I also believe he's unbought, and that his campaign represents the best opportunity in the immediate future to break the grip of the corrupt Duopoly.

Penn Faculty for Justice in Palestine | Announcement statement of Palestinian solidarity chapter formation

"The movement for justice in Palestine has become crucial to the defense of academic freedom."

This appeared in yesterday's Daily Pennsylvanian:

"We write to announce the formation of Penn Faculty for Justice in Palestine (PFJP), a collective of those who support the teaching and research mission of the University, including faculty, lecturers, staff, and graduate employees. We have constituted ourselves in solidarity with the ongoing and ever-urgent struggles of Palestinians resisting occupation, warfare, and displacement. 

"The Israeli occupation of Palestine is one of the great moral and political issues of our time. At this moment, Palestinian life in Gaza is in dire crisis; the sheer scale of destruction demands an ethical response from all educators and concerned citizens. University trustees and administrators, under extreme pressure from private donors and right-wing federal legislators, are now subjecting teachers and students who are members of different Palestine solidarity movements to surveillance and, in some cases, to criminalization. Thus, for educators, the movement for justice in Palestine has become crucial to the defense of academic freedom, the preservation of open expression, and the integrity of scholarly inquiry and research in our universities. PFJP insists on the necessity of shared campus governance, in which administrators work with faculty, students, and staff to reject Islamophobic, anti-Arab, antisemitic, and other racist attacks and harassment by organizations both on and off campus. 

"Most recently, President Liz Magill, in response to hostile and uninformed questions from partisan members of Congress, resigned from her position after having failed to deny that there had been calls for “the genocide of Jewish people” on our campus. Nowhere did this happen. Rather than reject, or correct, the deliberate misreading of key events and terms, the President then pledged to “clarify and evaluate” acceptable speech on our campus, which indicates that our Open Expression guidelines will be rewritten. PFJP will join AAUP-Penn to defend our rights to unfettered scholarly research, debate, and critical thought and expression. We will also defend the right of our colleagues and students to protest and advocate for the non-violent principles enunciated by the US Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (USACBI). 

"We condemn all acts of terror and genocide. We decry any and all antisemitic actions as we do all threats directed against Palestinian students, faculty, and staff on our campus. For this reason, we are troubled by the one-sided rhetoric used in official University statements (many of which have since been deleted from Penn’s website) about campus life in the wake of the crisis in Palestine/Israel. Rather than work with faculty who have expertise on these issues, administrators have issued statements decrying antisemitic acts on our campus while ignoring the harassment of Palestinian, Arab, and Muslim students. Further, the University has paid little attention to violent threats directed at colleagues who have expressed solidarity with Palestinian life. Instead, the University has publicly aligned itself with the Anti-Defamation League and with the controversial definition of antisemitism issued by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA). The University has refused to condemn the racist hate speech directed against faculty, staff, and students who are calling for justice for Palestine and an end to the catastrophic killing of tens of thousands of civilians. Administrative actions and inaction have served to exacerbate tensions on campus and enable the targeted harassment of anti-Zionist voices. PFJP will work to counter such tensions, and to inform, to counsel, and to bridge campus divides. 

"We have witnessed the Penn administration deny permission to a progressive Jewish student group, Penn Chavurah, to screen a documentary film critical of Zionism, Israelism, made by two Jewish filmmakers. It is a testament to the strength and commitment of our students that they screened the film and conducted a long, civil discussion after the viewing. The refusal of official permission to screen the film led to the resignation of the faculty director of the Middle East Center, who had agreed to sponsor the event. In this and other instances, such as the five-week Freedom School sit-in, our students are shouldering the work that should be central to the educational mission of our university. PFJP supports such activities and will develop similar educational initiatives. 

"PFJP is also deeply concerned about the inequality that structures the Penn administration’s formation of two separate task forces, one to investigate antisemitism, the other to investigate “the interconnectedness of antisemitism and other forms of hate, including Islamophobia.” In its insistence on seeing antisemitism and Islamophobia as discrete types of racism, the former more worthy of investigation than the latter, the University administration has not only ignored the long history that regards them as intertwined but has also further entrenched a false dichotomy between religions. In addition, this dichotomy ignores discrimination against Palestinians, Arabs, and other allies who are neither Muslim nor Jewish. More so, in numerous public statements, the University administration has inappropriately conflated opposition to Zionism with antisemitism. This is a scholarly and political error, and PFJP will work to counter its effects, especially in the context of suppressing speech and dissent during a time of war, mass killing, and displacement. 

"We refuse the false premise — and red herring — that the conflict is principally religious in nature (Jewish, Muslim, or non-Muslim), although religious and cultural differences undoubtedly play a critical role. Rather, the issues remain largely political (a matter of state violence, colonialism, anti-Palestinian racism, and genocide). Critiques of state policy and militarism, U.S., Israeli, or otherwise are not only valid but also imperative in this moment of humanitarian crisis. 

"PFJP pledges to join and support the work of Palestinian solidarity groups at Penn, in Philadelphia, and across the nation. We welcome the formation of the Penn Alumni for Palestine (PA4P), a collective of Penn graduates committed to supporting free speech on Penn’s campus and protecting students, faculty, and staff who are advocating for freedom and justice for Palestine. We applaud and support their campaign denouncing the recent “delegation” of Penn faculty’s visit to Israel. We join them in their urgent call to the Penn administration to clarify the nature of the delegation and its affiliation with the University. PFJP is committed to working in solidarity and close collaboration with PA4P’s efforts to advocate for Palestinian voices and those in solidarity with Palestinians on Penn’s campus and to demand broader, more informed, and equitable perspectives on Palestine. 

"Together, we call on all Penn faculty to uphold academic responsibility in their actions and decisions. We call on this administration or any future administration and the Board of Trustees to uphold the principles of academic freedom for all in our community. In the absence of institutional support, we will work to ensure the safety of all members of our campus community who stand in solidarity with movements for Palestinian justice. We will advocate for colleagues who fear discriminatory actions when they exercise their right to open expression as they speak for justice in Palestine. In doing so, we will renew our community and strengthen our commitment to the exchange of ideas and scholarship, which we understand to be the foundation of the University."

Penn Faculty for Justice in Palestine is a collective of faculty and teaching staff that has formed as part of a growing campus movement of over 80 Palestinian solidarity chapters nationally. Their email is pennfjp@proton.me. 

Without Free Speech, Today Is Just a Monday

A message from FIRE for Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday:

Today, the vast majority of Americans agree with Martin Luther King Jr. that we should be judged not by the color of our skin but by the content of our character. So it’s easy to forget just how radical King’s ideas were in his time.

Unpopular ideas are often hated, as are the people who voice them. In 1966, Americans were nearly twice as likely to have a negative opinion of King. But many ideas deemed radical in the past become common sense in the future.

Free speech is the engine of that change. As King said in his famous "Mountaintop" speech:



King’s activism was a catalyst for significant shifts in American society — none of which would have happened without his First Amendment right to speak or the American people’s right to listen. That’s why, no matter what we might think of someone’s ideas today, we must defend the right to express them.

Today, FIRE continues to defend the rights of college professors to teach King’s words. But creating a culture of free speech takes more than legal advocacy. It takes tolerance for other views, intellectual humility, and principles over partisanship. 
 

If you don't support free speech for all, you don't support free speech at all.

Sadly, one response to King’s speech was violence, and it was an act of violence that claimed his life. This is a stark reminder of how transgressive his message was to many and the dangers of not respecting the right of others to express themselves. But those who sought to silence King only amplified his ideas, proving that they couldn’t combat his message of unity and equal rights with a better one.

In honor of King’s legacy, we salute free speech: the tool of radicals everywhere, and the right that makes change possible.

FIRE

Remembering David Bowie

 

 

 

“I saw David many times [..] and it was always great.”

Today would be rock star David Bowie’s 77th birthday, and Philadelphia will be holding a week-long celebration. What follows is one fan’s remembrance of him.

 

“Journalist Michael Kaplan interviewed former teenage groupie Lori Mattix, also known as Lori Maddox or Lori Lightning, for Thrillist about her relationship with David Bowie and other rock stars. She told him:

 

“'What I remember most about the E Club was Bowie. I met him when he was doing the Spiders from Mars tour. I had not yet turned 15 and he wanted to take me to his hotel room. I was still a virgin and terrified. He had hair the color of carrots, no eyebrows, and the whitest skin imaginable. I grabbed on to [DJ and club co-owner] Rodney Bingenheimer and said I was with him. So we all just hung out and talked. I had probably kissed boys by that point, but I wasn’t ready for David Bowie. Next time Bowie was in town, though, maybe five months later, I got a call at home from his bodyguard, a huge black guy named Stuey. He told me that David wanted to take me to dinner.

 

“'Obviously, I had no homework that night. Fuck homework. I wasn't spending a lot of time at school anyway. I said that I would like to go but that I wanted to bring my friend Sable. She was dying to fuck Bowie. I figured that she would sleep with him while I got to hang out and have fun. At the time, Sable and her sister Coral were both dating Iggy Pop, spending time at the home of Tony DeFries [then-manager of David Bowie and Iggy] up in Laurel Canyon. People there were so high all the time − Quaaludes, heroin, whatever. In the limo ride to the Rainbow, Sable said, If you touch David, I will kill you. I didn't think she was kidding.

 

"'We sat at this corner table in a private room. Stuey rolled enormous blunts. John Lennon and Yoko Ono stopped by to say hello. We were drinking cocktails and looking at menus when some crazy guy dove over the table and said to David, You flaming fucking faggot. Kill Bowie! Next thing you know, Stuey's got the guy pinned down and we're being escorted out a side door and back into the limo. Danny's Song was playing on the radio and Sable started singing to David: We ain't got honey, but I'm so in love with your money... He laughed so hard. He thought it was hilarious. We got to the Beverly Hilton and all went up to Bowie's enormous suite. I found myself more and more fascinated by him. He was beautiful and clever and poised. I was incredibly turned on. Bowie excused himself and left us in this big living room with white shag carpeting and floor-to-ceiling windows. Stuey brought out Champagne and hash.

 

"'We were getting stoned when, all of a sudden, the bedroom door opens and there is Bowie in this fucking beautiful red and orange and yellow kimono. He focused his famously two-colored eyes on me and said, Lori, darling, can you come with me? Sable looked like she wanted to murder me. He walked me through his bedroom and into the bathroom, where he dropped his kimono. He got into the tub, already filled with water, and asked me to wash him. Of course I did. Then he escorted me into the bedroom, gently took off my clothes, and de-virginized me.

 

"'Two hours later, I went to check on Sable. She was all fucked up in the living room, walking around, fogging up windows and writing, I want to fuck David. I told him what she was doing and that I felt so bad. Bowie said, Well, darling, bring her in. That night I lost my virginity and had my first threesome. The next morning, there was banging on the door and it was fucking [Bowie's wife] Angie. I was terrified of her. David said not to worry about it. They were already at the point where they had separate rooms. She probably knew he'd be in there with girls... or boys. He was totally bisexual. I saw David many times after that, for the next 10 years, and it was always great.’

 

“Kaplan: 'Still, you were a 15-year-old kid and he was an adult man with a lot of experience, and power, and drugs. You don’t see any problem with that now?'

 

“'I was an innocent girl, but the way it happened was so beautiful. I remember him looking like God and having me over a table. Who wouldn't want to lose their virginity to David Bowie?'

 

“Kaplan: 'But did it ever feel like there was something unusual about it?’

 

“’No. You need to understand that my life has never been normal. I have always been special. I always felt like the universe was taking care of me. [...]'

 

“Kaplan: 'Still, a lot of people would have a hard time with an underage girl having sex with rock stars.'

 

“'But you need to understand that I didn't think of myself as underage. I was a model. I was in love. That time of my life was so much fun. It was a period in which everything seemed possible. There was no AIDS and the potential consequences seemed to be light. Nobody was afraid of winding up on YouTube or TMZ. Now people are terrified. You can't even walk out your door without being photographed. It has become a different world. [...]

“'For me, now, I'm in the fashion business and look back very fondly on those years. I was really special. I knew it the night after I lost my virginity to David Bowie, when I went to see his concert at Long Beach Arena. It was still the Spiders from Mars tour, and, literally, the night that he became a star. But he had the spotlight shined on Lee Childers [Bowie's publicist], Sable, and I, sitting in the audience. That's when he thanked me for being there. Who cares what people said about me? I feel like I was very present. I saw the greatest music ever. I got to hang out with some of the most amazing, most beautiful, most charismatic men in the world. I went to concerts in limos with police escorts. Am I going to regret this? No.'”

 

Source: Source: Michael Kaplan: “I Lost My Virginity to David Bowie: Confessions of a '70s Groupie.” Thrillist, 11 March 2015

 

Excerpted in Positive Memories by T. Rivas, available for free download from uryourstory.

Standing Together Gets Started on New Academic Year

The Israeli peace and justice group Standing Together is jumping into action on its campus organizing now that the academic year has belatedly started. They sent out this message about it:

Happy New Year! The start of 2024 marks the opening of the academic year in universities and colleges in Israel - finally!
 

The academic year was supposed to begin in October but was delayed until this week due to the high number of students who were drafted into the reserves. For many people in Israel, university is the first place that Jews and Palestinians meet each other. This means that the campus is a great opportunity to build new partnerships with one another, and it can also be a hotbed for racism and discrimination against Palestinian students. Since the war broke out, there have been several cases of racism, discrimination, and violence on campus against Palestinian students. Despite the academic year being postponed, Standing Together’s student chapters have been working hard to organize and mobilize students across fourteen academic institutions towards solidarity and partnership on campus in the wake of increased hostility. 

SUPPORT OUR STUDENT CHAPTERS

JOIN FRIENDS OF STANDING TOGETHER

Our mission over the past few years is to grow progressive politics on campus, mobilizing students around a range of social justice issues. So far we have seen a lot of growth, and this coming year we plan to expand our reach even further. In addition to campaigns for improving student dorm conditions, access to public transportation, and participation in student unions, next week the Tel Aviv University student chapter will be the first to organize a sit-in demonstration against racism and discrimination on campus. Student chapters across the country have also been hanging signs around campus promoting Arab-Jewish solidarity.    These are incredibly difficult times for everyone, and our ability to foster solidarity in shared spaces is crucial in order to advance peace, equality, and social justice in Israel.

SUPPORT STANDING TOGETHER