Misogynist Triumph

Despite nearly 50 years of precedent, the Supreme Court allowed a Texas law to stand that essentially overturns the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.

The new law, Senate Bill 8, effectively bans abortions at six weeks, when many women don't yet realize they're pregnant. It also deputizes private citizens who can receive bounties of up to $10,000 for suing anyone accused of "aiding and abetting" patients who seek an abortion in Texas.

Amanda Marcotte summarizes the stakes.

[T]his support for the Texas law is an open invitation to every state legislature run by woman-hating Bible thumpers to pass versions of their own. Accompanying the law will be more dehumanizing rhetoric, treating women as livestock who can't be trusted to make decisions, or even acknowledged as capable of making decisions. Because debasing women has always been what the anti-choice movement is about. Now Americans will start to see the real life damage such hatred can wreak in women's lives.

Hopefully, David Frum is correct when he warns the GOP may face a major backlash from voters.

Texas Republicans have just bet their political future in a rapidly diversifying and urbanizing state on a gambit: cultural reaction plus voter suppression. The eyes of Texas will be upon them indeed. The eyes of the nation will be upon them too.

Update (September 8):  Amanda Marcotte warns us not to let Republicans off the hook for seemingly saying dumb things.

The Texas abortion ban isn't something that idiot anti-choicers stumbled into by accident. It was carefully crafted by highly educated, intelligent people who spent years researching ways to overturn Roe v. Wade while pretending that's not what they did. They are manipulative and diabolical, and have had incredible success, despite holding views that are wildly unpopular. It may feel good to write such people off as "ignorant," but that is the last thing they are. They're smart as hell, and that is why they're so dangerous.

Update (September 21):  The legal challenges have begun. 

Colossal Failure

As U.S. troops continue to withdraw from Afghanistan, the Taliban are on the verge of reclaiming control of the country. This comes about in a matter of days after nearly 20 years of U.S. involvement. Hundreds of thousands of lives have been lost and $2 trillion wasted that could have been spent much more productively. Lindsey German:

The whole war on terror has proved a terrible failure and this should be admitted. We should also consider how the lives of Afghanis would have been improved if only a fraction of the money committed to this war ... had gone into improving their lives through investment in infrastructure, housing, education, agriculture. That was an opportunity that could have been taken but was ignored in favor of military solutions. And those have brought us to where we are today.

Update (August 17):  Derek Davidson (via Luke O'Neil) notes that the Washington Post exposed 18 years of government lies about the progress of the war--but there's little attention paid to that.

Whatever form the war apologia takes you can be sure that it will be heavily cloaked in claims of deep concern for the Afghan people.

But you shouldn’t for a second suppose that the people who cheerled endless war and occupation in Afghanistan ever did so out of concern for the Afghan people. If the United States were really concerned for the Afghan people it wouldn’t have spent well over a decade ignoring the evidence that its nation building efforts were failing.

And Thom Hartmann offers these reminders for just how much American presidents cared about the Afghan people.

After 9/11 the Taliban offered to arrest Bin Laden, but Bush turned them down because he wanted to be a "wartime president" to have a "successful presidency." ... With that decision not to arrest and try Bin Laden for his crime but instead to go to war, George W. Bush set the US and Afghanistan on a direct path to today.

More recently, [Dear Leader] and [Mike] Pompeo gave the Taliban everything they wanted — power, legitimacy and the release of 5,000 of their worst war criminals — over the strong objections of the Afghan government in 2019 so [the Orange Turd] could falsely claim, heading into the 2020 election, that he'd "negotiated peace" in Afghanistan when in fact he'd set up this week's debacle.

Update (August 18):  Heather Digby Parton places the greatest blame for the failure on George W. Bush.

[P]erhaps the most cynical of all the rationales they offered in those early days before they pivoted to Iraq and pretty much put Afghanistan on cruise control was the unctuous, insincere, marketing campaign they launched to convince the American people that they were fighting the war on behalf of Afghan women. On November 17, 2001, just a few weeks after the attacks, they sent out First Lady Laura Bush to make a speech about the repressive Taliban regime's treatment of women, all of which was true but was clearly designed to make the war into something nobler than the crude act of vengeance it really was. ... There was zero interest in the issue on the right until the Bush administration decided to make it a central rationale for the war in Afghanistan.

Update (August 30):  The U.S. military withdrawal from Afghanistan is complete. 

Code Red for Humanity

The first part of the Sixth Assessment Report from the Intergovernment Panel on Climate Change finds that

It is unequivocal that human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land. Widespread and rapid changes in the atmosphere, ocean, cryosphere and biosphere have occurred.

Human activities are responsible for about 1.1 degrees Celsius of warming since the late 19th century and warming will likely exceed 1.5 degrees within 20 years.

But it is not just about temperature. Climate change is bringing multiple different changes in different regions – which will all increase with further warming. These include changes to wetness and dryness, to winds, snow and ice, coastal areas and oceans. For example:

Climate change is intensifying the water cycle. This brings more intense rainfall and associated flooding, as well as more intense drought in many regions.

Climate change is affecting rainfall patterns. In high latitudes, precipitation is likely to increase, while it is projected to decrease over large parts of the subtropics. Changes to monsoon precipitation are expected, which will vary by region.

Coastal areas will see continued sea level rise throughout the 21st century, contributing to more frequent and severe coastal flooding in low-lying areas and coastal erosion. Extreme sea level events that previously occurred once in 100 years could happen every year by the end of this century.

Further warming will amplify permafrost thawing, and the loss of seasonal snow cover, melting of glaciers and ice sheets, and loss of summer Arctic sea ice.

Changes to the ocean, including warming, more frequent marine heatwaves, ocean acidification, and reduced oxygen levels have been clearly linked to human influence. These changes affect both ocean ecosystems and the people that rely on them, and they will continue throughout at least the rest of this century.

For cities, some aspects of climate change may be amplified, including heat (since urban areas are usually warmer than their surroundings), flooding from heavy precipitation events and sea level rise in coastal cities.

Update (August 20):  Brian Tokar summarizes key points from the IPCC report. 

The report affirms much of what we already knew about the state of the global climate, but does so with considerably more clarity and precision than earlier reports. It removes several elements of uncertainty from the climate picture, including some that have wrongly served to reassure powerful interests and the wider public that things may not be as bad as we thought. The IPCC’s latest conclusions reinforce and significantly strengthen all the most urgent warnings that have emerged from the past 30 to 40 years of climate science.

Further Warning

An article published in BioScience updates previous warnings to humanity about the climate emergency.

Out of the 31 variables that we track, we found that 18 are at new all-time record lows or highs.

 

Disillusion

As the world literally burns, the Guardian reports on Russian efforts to subvert American politics.

Vladimir Putin personally authorised a secret spy agency operation to support a “mentally unstable” [Fuckface von Clownstick] in the 2016 US presidential election during a closed session of Russia’s national security council, according to what are assessed to be leaked Kremlin documents.

And five years after that Kremlin meeting, reporting from Philip Rucker and Carol Leonnig shows how close we are to the brink of authoritarianism.

General Mark Milley, was so concerned the outgoing president would try to stage a military coup he warned the heads of the U.S. Military branches, did daily "check-in" calls with the White House Chief of Staff, and likened the Commander in Chief's efforts to retain power to Adolf Hitler.

"They may try, but they’re not going to fucking succeed," Milley told his deputies.

In turn, Manbaby denies comtemplating a coup.

[I]f I was going to do a coup, one of the last people I would want to do it with is General Mark Milley.

So who did he have in mind to help with the coup? 

Update (July 16):  Chaucey DeVega notes that military leaders preparing to defy civilian rule sets a dangerous precedent.

Any "democracy" where such decisions become normalized — and are welcomed by the public — is in practice an autocracy, or eventually a military dictatorship.

America's political institutions did not "hold" in the face of the [Fuckface] regime's many assaults. If anything, [Dear Leader's] attempt to overthrow American democracy was sabotaged by his own incompetence and stopped by a few courageous individuals.

[O]ne thing is certain: if there are no severe consequences for the [Orangeman] regime's ongoing assault on American democracy, or for its other crimes, that will offer both permission and a blueprint for future fascists and other types of demagogues. They will learn from the [von Clownstick] regime's tactical and strategic errors, and will not repeat them.

Heather Digby Parton agrees that

it's very unnerving to see a general in this position, working with others to thwart the will of the civilian leadership. That is NOT how it's supposed to work.

Parton adds a further detail from Rucker and Leonnig that Vice President Pence refused to get into a car with Secret Service on January 6. She quotes Nicolle Wallace:

[S]omeone familiar with this reporting tells me that Pence feared a conspiracy. He feared that the Secret Service would aid [Dear Leader] in his ultimate aims that day.

Update (July 20):  Chauncey DeVega discusses the Guardian report.

Whatever one concludes about the authenticity of these Kremlin papers, one conclusion is obvious: Their observations about [Fuckface von Clownstick], and about the vulnerability of American society to disinformation and subversion, are correct.

Both Robert Mueller's report and the Senate Intelligence Committee's report on the 2016 election (the latter completed under Republican leadership) have conclusively shown that Russia interfered to help [Dear Leader] win as a way of advancing its strategic goals. Moreover, it is a matter of public record that [Manbaby's] inner circle included at least one Russian agent.

Russia's strategy would prove to be brilliant: [Fuckface] left the White House with the U.S. a weakened world power, gripped by a plague that has killed at least 600,000 people, along with a neofascist insurgency that shows no signs of dying out. Right-wing terrorism and other violence is escalating, and the nation has become irreparably polarized by the increasing radicalism of Republicans and the right.

Unreasonable, "Reasonable" and Rising Fascism

It seems astonishing that anyone with a functioning brain could claim that a door-to-door vaccination initiative could give the government an opportunity to "take your guns, take your Bibles". I mean, we wouldn't want public health to be a top concern of government--what if people start expecting action to improve their lives?

Charles Holden notes there's a long tradition of conservatives attacking expertise in pursuit of their agenda. 

[T]he goal was not to win a debate ... ; it was to stop social change they objected to.

[A]ttempts by "the experts" to set the record straight will most likely be seen as more proof that the world is out to get them.

Even the notion of "fiscally conservative, socially liberal" is just more ideological nonsense argues Greta Christina.

You can't separate fiscal issues from social issues. They're deeply intertwined. They affect each other. Economic issues often are social issues. And conservative fiscal policies do enormous social harm.

[I]t lends credibility to the idea that conservatism is reasonable, if only people would do it right.

But the real crazy shit comes from the growing far right. In an interview with David Masciotra, Alexander Laban Hinton discusses the threat of genocide in the United States.

If we look at Jan. 6, it is almost remarkable that there wasn't a lot more violence. If there had been, it would have sparked more violence across the country.

So, moving forward, Biden comes in. We have a strengthening of the buffers, the pandemic is improving and the economy is improving. That takes things down from the rapid simmer, but what is worse is the lingering polarization and the belief that Biden is illegitimate. This overlaps with the GOP now having white grievance as its default issue.

At the time of Charlottesville, it is a small group of extremists. They are savvy on social media, but appear as if they are on the fringe. By the time we get to January of 2021, the white nationalist movement is millions and millions strong.

If [Dear Leader] can return to a dynamic social media platform, or if his former campaign strategist, Jason Miller, can succeed with the social media platform that he has created, that is the ingredient that can escalate the crisis.

Update (July 12):  In an interview with Chauncey DeVega, Annette Gordon-Reed ties the insurection to the ongoing resistance to multiracial democracy in the U.S.

[T]here are people right now here in the United States who do not take [the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments] of the Constitution seriously. They are imagined as "true" Americans, and are given the benefit of the doubt when, for example, they attack the Capitol building.

[Muslim or Black attackers] would have been mowed down. They would not have gotten inside the Capitol building. Historians cannot predict the future, but Jan. 6 is going to be looked at as potentially a turning point in the country's history. If there is no proper reckoning, then the United States is facing serious problems. The whole concept of democracy and the republic are at stake.

Update (July 28):  Amanda Marcotte calls out the GOP as cowards for gaslighting the public over election "integrity". They pretend their criticism of the January 6 investigation isn't about the fact they actually support the attempted coup.

All these Republicans are betting that [Dear Leader] will soon ascend to the dictatorial powers he aspires to, and they want a piece of the pie when that happens.

This is really one of those rare moments in life where there's no nuanced middle ground. Continuing to support [Fuckface] means supporting fascist insurrection, and no rhetorical games played by Republicans can change that.

Update (July 29):  John Stoehr thinks Republicans are pushing people into becoming "partisans for the United States" when they refuse to take the January 6 investigation seriously.

[B]eing an American is so politicized there are now two sides to the controversy. One side is for democracy. One side is against it. One is for the Constitution and the principles it enshrines. One is for the GOP and its fuhrer. One side honors duty and sacrifice. One side belittles them. One side sees selfishness, disloyalty and betrayal as fair game. One side has unvarnished contempt for treason.

Update (August 9):  In an interview with Paul Rosenberg, Michael Bang Petersen argues that the spread of false beliefs and conspiracy theories isn't about ignorance.

[A] lot of beliefs don't really exist for navigating the world. They exist for social reasons, because they allow us to accomplish certain socially important phenomena, such as mobilizing our group or signaling that we're loyal members of the group. This means that because the function of the beliefs is not to represent reality, their veracity or truth value is not really an important feature.

Petersen mentions research finding that ethnic massacres are typically preceded by a period of rumor-sharing. 

[I]f you look at the content of the rumors, that's not so much predicted by what the other group has done to you or to your group. It's really predicted by what you are planning to do to the other group. So the brutality of the content of these rumors is, in a sense, part of the coordination about what we're going to do to them when we get the action going — which also suggests that the function of these rumors is not to represent reality, but to serve social functions.

Those kinds of rumors are similar "to the kind of misinformation that is being circulated on social media". 

This suggests that a lot of what is going on in social media is also not driven by ignorance, but by these social functions.

There may be an evolutionary pressure underlying the value of such misinformation. 

[T]hese false beliefs don't just exist to make you feel good about yourself, but exist in order to enable you to make changes in the world, to mobilize your group and get help from other group members. I think that's an important point to think more about: What it is that certain kinds of beliefs enable people to accomplish, and not just how it makes them feel.

Voter Suppression is Legal

In a partisan 6 to 3 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld voting restrictions in Arizona. Justice Elena Kagan argues that the decision rewrites the intent of Congress for Section 2 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

The language of Section 2 is as broad as broad can be. It applies to any policy that "results in" disparate voting opportunities for minority citizens. It prohibits, without any need to show bad motive, even facially neutral laws that make voting harder for members of one race than of another, given their differing life circumstances. That is the expansive statute Congress wrote, and that our prior decisions have recognized.

Update (July 2):  Heather Digby Parton doesn't see much room for optimism.

This decision, which endorses the idea that states can restrict voting because of (non-existent) voter fraud is solely a Republican Party project. This decision makes it clear that while this court may throw a bone to the left once in a while, when it comes down to securing power for the Republican Party, their allegiance is clear. Mitch McConnell must have strained a muscle patting himself on the back for his efforts to make that happen.

At this point, the entire Republican establishment, which includes the Supreme Court majority, is working together to take advantage of the opening [Dear Leader's] Big Lie has given them. The party strategically targeted the states that Biden won closely and is feverishly passing laws to disenfranchise Democratic voters there. At the same time they are assiduously working to disempower any form of non-partisan oversight of the election apparatus. In fact, they are using every lever of power at their disposal, from legislative control in the states, to the filibuster and the Supreme Court.

She notes the pundits are convinced the Democrats have accepted their fate in the name of "bipartisanship".

That's right. The party that controls the House, the Senate and the White House apparently believes it is impotent to protect American democracy from a bunch of right-wing crazies who worship [Fuckface von Clownstick] so they're planning to give some speeches instead.

If this cynical consensus is right (and I fervently hope it isn't) all I can say is that it's a good thing we have an empathetic mourner-in-chief in Joe Biden to comfort us when our democracy finally dies. Unfortunately, we probably won't be able to hear his consoling words over the giddy laughter of [Manbaby] and the Republicans. They couldn't have dreamed the Democrats would go down so easily.

Update (August 2):  Paul Blumenthal explains why laws like the For the People Act are necessary.

Without the passage of that law, the strategy of out-organizing voter suppression would need to include out-organizing laws that make it harder to vote, harder to organize, and allow partisan Republicans to change the result in the end anyway. And this out-organizing won’t be limited to 2022, but to every future election where these laws remain on the books.