politics

cross-posted from: https://hexbear.net/post/3899632

Bhadradri Kothagudem District, November 14, 2024: The Congress government, which is completing one year in power, has been running a bulldozer government in the state, Communist Party of India (Maoist) Telangana State Committee spokesperson, Comrade Jagan, has alleged.

In a statement issued to the media on Thursday, Comrade Jagan claimed that Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy was working for the benefit of corporate companies and earning commissions on a large scale from the companies’ investments. During it’s one year rule, the Congress government has forsaken its election promises and suppressed the fundamental rights of the people. Efforts were being made to hand over Telangana’s resources to corporate companies, Comrade Jagan alleged.

On the pretext of building a world class Hyderabad, the government has taken up the Musi river front project and formed the HYDRAA, to which extensive powers were given to run a bulldozer government, Comrade Jagan stated.

Leaving out massive illegal structures built by rich and affluent, the government was targeting the poor and middle class families who built houses with hard earned money and with permissions. In doing so, residents were not given notices or prior information, Comrade Jagan declared, also objecting to the government’s decision to permit the Indian Navy’s very low-frequency (VLF) radar station in 2900 acres in Damagundam reserve forest in Vikarabad district. It would lead to destruction of Ananthagiri hills and affect the livelihood of thousands of families, Comrade Jagan said.

Commenting on the pharma village proposed in Lagacharla of Kodangal, Comrade Jagan said that the government was plotting to loot natural resources and agricultural lands of farmers. The farmers who were losing their lands resorted to militant agitations but the government distorted their legal fight and foisted illegal cases against them, Comrade Jagan alleged.

As soon as it assumed office, the Congress government in Telangana state joined hands with the Centre and resorted to massive attacks on the Maoist party. Hundreds of security personnel were deployed at Dameratogu of Gundala mandal in Bhadradri Kothagudem district and Maoist leader Nallamari Ashok and six Maoists in Karakagudem mandal were killed in the district, Comrade Jagan proclaimed.

ah, well

https://www.npr.org/2024/11/08/nx-s1-5183210/nonpartisan-primary-ranked-choice-voting-results

https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/results/2024/11/05/ranked-choice-voting-ballot-measures/

Alaska: had ranked-choice voting in place for certain statewide elections, but it looks like they've voted to get rid of it and go back to using the first-past-the-post system

Arizona: had a ballot question that would have created non-partisan open primaries, but voted it down

Colorado: had a ballot question that would have created top-four non-partisan open primaries AND ranked-choice voting in general elections, but voted it down

Idaho: same thing as Colorado, voted it down

Missouri: had a ballot question that would do two things: prohibit ranked-choice voting, and require voters to be US citizens. It passed.

Montana: had a ballot question that would have created top-four non-partisan open primaries, as well as a separate ballot question that would have "required a majority vote to win election". Both were voted down.

Nevada: same thing as Colorado and Idaho, voted it down

Oregon: had a ballot question that would have created ranked-choice voting, but voted it down

South Dakota: had a ballot question that would have created a "top-two" primary election system, voted it down.

The only places where ranked-choice voting was adopted this year were at the city level, in Washington DC and a few mid-sized cities in the Midwest.

This is depressing. Ranked-choice voting is something that I've supported for, like, almost my entire adult life (EDIT: although I've also learned about score voting recently and now I think that would be better), but it doesn't look like other Americans want it very much. Why did this happen? Am I out of touch?

Allow me to translate this mealy-mouthed shitlibbery:

1. GDP growth hell yeah, redistribution of wealth hell no.
2. Arrest homeless people, crack down on shoplifting and turnstile jumping.
3. Climate change is inevitable, line must go up.
4. Stop discriminating against the real oppressed minority, white people.
5. There are two genders. No more trans women in sports.
6. Capitalists are the real heroes, forget about those intellectuals and stuff.
7. Political correctness bad.
8. Break up teachers' unions.
9. America first.

literally the only difference between this shit and MAGA chuddery is that this is dressed up in obfuscating language.

"How easy life is for those who give grand names to their trivial pursuits and passions, presenting them to humanity as monumental deeds for its benefit and prosperity." - Goethe, The Sorrows of Young Werther

Doctor of Philosophy Igor Chubais has proposed a fascinating idea: to establish a new academic subject called "Russian Studies" in the Russian education system. This subject, according to an article in Mir Novostei, would cover Russia's history, culture, geography, and more. The concept seems excellent—people need to know their country's history. But the question is, can we create a truthful and unbiased textbook for Russian Studies?

It seems unlikely that in the next 30-40 years, an impartial history textbook could exist, free from ideological influence. Some historians still cling to Marxism-Leninism, while others view the Soviet era in only the darkest terms. For example, One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, introduced into the curriculum at the request of Solzhenitsyn's widow, was impactful when first read in the 1960s. Yet other works, like Bas-Relief on the Cliff, which described the tragedy of a sculptor forced to carve Stalin’s image, also capture the harsh realities of that era. Knowing the darker sides of history is essential, but should they alone define a generation’s perspective?

**A Balanced Perspective on Soviet History ** It’s essential to remember the positive achievements of the Soviet era, alongside its dark aspects. Figures like locomotive driver Krivonosov, pilot Chkalov, and others made valuable contributions. Despite severe hardships, the Soviet people built a strong industrial base, enabling the country to withstand the struggles of World War II. Such resilience deserves to be part of the historical narrative. To suggest that the Soviet period should be erased, as Chubais proposes, is simply unrealistic. History should be complete, encompassing all shades of the past.

National Pride and Patriotism in Historical Education

It’s misleading to imply that pre-revolutionary Russia was a paradise. Authors like Gogol, Chekhov, and Leskov reveal the struggles of ordinary people in the 19th century, which were far from idyllic. A hungry, oppressed population doesn’t rebel without cause. The Soviet government eventually collapsed in 1991, unable to meet people’s needs. Therefore, instead of erasing the Soviet period, we should study it deeply, acknowledging both the achievements and mistakes, to give young people a well-rounded view.

Patriotism Beyond Political Systems

Chubais argues that one can’t be a patriot of both North and South Korea, using this to claim that patriotism for both Russia and the USSR is contradictory. But a nation is loved not for its political system, but for its people and land. True patriotism should inspire pride in our heritage and appreciation for the sacrifices of past generations. To instill pride in young people, we must teach them about their forefathers’ achievements without reducing our history to mere political disputes.

In short, a national idea based on a well-rounded, honest portrayal of history—both the hardships and the triumphs—is key to fostering genuine patriotism.

As the finger-pointing begins, and the autopsy of the Kamala Harris campaign continues, financial details are being released on how the Harris campaign managed to blow more than $1 billion in war-chest funds — and not only lose, but get wiped off the electoral map by Donald Trump, who ended his campaign with roughly $488 million. That’s not a Dr. Evil typo: Kamala Harris not only blew a billion dollars, but actually ended up $20 million in debt.

As it turns out, the Harris campaign wasn’t run much differently. As reported in the Washington Examiner, the Harris campaign spent upwards of six figures to build a custom set for her appearance on the Call Me Daddy podcast, which only netted about 800,000 downloads.

There were seven swing-state concerts that involved high-priced performers — Katy Perry, Lady Gaga, Jon Bon Jovi, Ricky Martin and more — who seemingly ended up costing the Harris campaign more than $20 million on event production alone, and reportedly even more on paying the celebrities to appear. Even Oprah Winfrey charged the campaign $1 million to show up. The campaign went so far into debt that the campaign was reportedly forced to scrap Canadian Nineties indie-pop singer Alanis Morissette to save money. The pop concert campaign strategy is said to have been the brainchild of former Obama advisors on the campaign.

Of course it was lmao. I saw approximately one million ads of the Democratic politicians begging for donations, and I'm not even on their email and phone lists. Thinking about all the regular working people who donated their hard-earned money for it to be lit on fire by a PodJohn

https://thespectator.com/newsletter/kamala-harris-ran-the-fyre-festival-of-campaigns-bad-press-11-11-2024/

Edit: I had almost forgotten about the Kamala Fashion Week party

Keith Creel is president and CEO of Calgary-based railway company Canadian Pacific Kansas City Ltd.

Railways. Airlines. Ports. Seaways. All have experienced significant labour disruption in the past 18 months. Canada has experienced 62 work stoppages in the transportation sector alone in 2023 and 2024, involving close to 20,000 workers.

This month, Canada’s two largest ports (Vancouver and Montreal) have been completely or partially shut down due to labour disruptions. In September, a strike by grain handlers at the Port of Vancouver disrupted exports during peak shipping season. In August, the country’s two largest railways, including Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC), came to a halt due to labour work stoppages. Before that, a strike shut down one of the nation’s largest airlines and threatened to shut down another. That was after the St. Lawrence Seaway was forced to close a year ago, which happened months after the previous B.C. port shutdown that went on for two weeks in July, 2023.

These are self-inflicted harm to our supply chains. A work stoppage of any duration or even the threat of a work stoppage causes serious disruption to Canada’s supply chains and harms the country’s reputation as a stable, dependable trading partner.

The dispute at the Port of Montreal is the third in four years. Canadian labour instability has become a chronic problem. The pattern of disruption is forcing global shipping companies to look elsewhere and ship through alternative U.S. ports. Canada needs a reliable method to resolve economically damaging labour disputes; one that respects the collective bargaining process, while avoiding disruptions when negotiations fail.

As a country we place a high value on collective bargaining and firmly believe that the best deals are found at the bargaining table. But while CPKC has an excellent track record of reaching negotiated agreements with the vast majority of our unions, we have repeatedly faced bargaining with certain unions where it has become clear that a negotiated agreement is simply unachievable.

While CPKC did lock out Teamsters workers back in August, that had come after the union issued a strike notice. The company had little choice in the matter. This is not our unique problem but one faced by companies across the country.

In such situations, Canada needs a mechanism to maintain industrial peace that does not repeatedly disrupt and damage the supply chains Canadians depend on every day. Other countries do this effectively. It can – and must – be done in Canada.

The federal government must step in to protect the clear national interest by putting an end to the frequent disruptions and mandating the parties to resolve their differences through binding arbitration when deadlocked. While this did happen with CPKC less than 24 hours after the labour disruption, there had been no certainty of that. And that one day is costly. One day of stoppage is three to five days of recovery.

Canada must prepare for the USMCA review by addressing its chronic labour instability now. It should start by rapidly resolving the current port strikes. Then, there needs to be a serious national conversation about improving the legal tools the federal government has available to prevent – or rapidly end – a labour disruption that is threatening Canada’s national interest.

President-elect Donald Trump is naming longtime adviser Stephen Miller, an immigration hard-liner, to be the deputy chief of policy in his new administration.

Confirming the appointment, Vice President-elect JD Vance posted a message of congratulations on Monday to Miller on X and said, “This is another fantastic pick by the president.” The announcement was first reported by CNN.

Miller is one of Trump’s longest-serving aides, dating back to his first campaign for the White House. He was a senior adviser in Trump’s first term and has been a central figure in many of his policy decisions, particularly on immigration, including Trump’s move to separate thousands of immigrant families as a deterrence program in 2018.

Miller has also helped craft many of Trump’s hard-line speeches, and was often the public face of those policies during Trump’s first term in office and during his campaigns.

I really hate this fascist piece of shit.

In terms of the American experience, the Harris campaign seemed to aspire to something like Nixon’s 1972 project for a ‘new majority’. To be sure, today’s Democrats lack Tricky Dick’s swagger and agility. But, like him, they imagined building a coalition that spanned the AFL-CIO, the Business Roundtable and the neoconservative movement (nascent in 1972, senescent in 2024).

The things about him which are supposed to be deal breakers – racism, xenophobia, misogyny – can only be seen as outside the American mainstream by someone with the mental equipment of an earnest child. The slogan Make America Great Again is borrowed from Ronald Reagan, an American hero who mocked the poor for being hungry, compared African diplomats to monkeys and (on the advice of Pat Buchanan) proclaimed the Waffen SS to be ‘victims, just as surely as the victims in the concentration camps’. The idea that Trump could be banished to the margins by getting Reagan appointees to endorse Harris never made sense to anyone not already opposed to Trump.

..

But it is simply not serious to claim that workers who rejected Harris were ignoring objective economic reality. As Biden’s own outgoing Council of Economic Advisers observed last month, ‘workers’ share of national income took a hit during the pandemic inflation’, with the result that the labor share – ‘an important indicator of how the economic pie is divided’ – was lower in 2024 than it had been under Trump. Perhaps the safest thing to say is that the working class, as a class, didn’t do anything. The vote is evidence of dealignment, not realignment: voters below $100,000 split basically down the middle.

This same top decile, according to a study by Thomas Ferguson and Servaas Storm, captured 59% of the overall increase in household wealth created since 2019. In turn, this wealth explosion set the pattern for a highly inegalitarian consumption boom, with the top 10% of US households accounting for 36.6% of the overall increase in consumption between 2020 and 2023. If you add in the next richest decile, the top 20% of households accounted for over half of the increase.

I'm more of quintile type guy but

Wall Street’s euphoric response to the election suggests that ‘the market’ doesn’t think Trump is serious about mass deportations and punitive tariffs. But even if he doesn’t go as far as he promises, any serious steps in the direction of economic nationalism will have differential effects on business which could turn into political fractures. The same may develop with regards to the budget deficit, particularly if inflation returns for whatever reason.