FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Why Is It That Anti-Semitism Has Recently Become Associated With The Left?

Historically, anti-Semitism has been primarily associated with extreme white supremist groups in both Canada and the U.S., some of which are known neo-Nazi organizations.   For example, such groups in both countries include the Aryan Brotherhood, Ku Klux Klan, the White Patriarch Party, the American Front, the Heritage Front, the National Socialist Movement, etc., etc.  The list includes political parties, terrorist cells/networks, radical paramilitary groups, criminal gangs, social clubs, organized crime syndicates, websites, internet forums, football hooligan firms, religious sects, and other organizations alike.  In North America, there are dozens of such organizations.  Some have even claimed that such groups have infiltrated the MAGA movement in the U.S., an accusation that former President Trump has never adequately dealt with and more overtly confronted and condemned.

Today, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has raised the spectre of anti-Semitism once again in both countries.  Only this time, the rise of anti-Semitism is being blamed on the left by conservative groups in both countries, particularly in connection to the student and faculty protests in support of the Palestinians.  Conservatives have conveniently associated these protests with their past general accusations that certain faculties in universities and colleges are spreading liberal or so-called “WOKE” ideologies.  Their arguments push the belief that the protests are anti-Israel and therefore consequently promote anti-Semitism on campus.  The conflict, being such a highly emotive and divisive issue, will no doubt give rise to some slogans and elements that could be construed as anti-Semitism.  On campuses, the protests have understandably made some Jewish students uncomfortable, and in some cases even making them feel somewhat unsafe.  However, most protests have proven to be peaceful in nature and even involve some Jewish bodies opposed to the Israeli government’s actions in Gaza.  They are opposed to the policies of the Netanyahu coalition, the most right-wing and religiously conservative administration in Israel’s history.  The opposition of the Jewish community in North American mirrors many of the current protests in Israel itself motivated by a variety of issues — such as the return of the remaining hostages, ending the war, and frustration with military draft rules that allow exemptions for ultra-Orthodox Jews.  Certainly, one cannot claim that the protests in Israel are anti-Semitic in origin.

Unfortunately, in both countries the student protests have often been met with force, particularly where the police have been brought in to remove encampments on certain campuses.  Ironically, some of the arrested students were of Asian American, Native American and Latino ancestry who simply identified with the plight of Palestinians.  I have argued before that the nature of activism on campuses is nothing particularly new, as evidenced by past student protests against the war in Viet Nam, apartheid in South Africa and universities’ investments in the oil and gas industry.  Most of these protests were peaceful and even supported by some college administrations at the time.

Today, it’s not unusual to have conservative media sources blaming much of the unrest on elements deemed to be leftist, although there is little proof that anti-Semitism is the basis for the protests.  In particular, they downplay the obvious desire of protesters to resolve the humanitarian disaster unfolding in Gaza as a result of the Israeli- Hamas military conflict.  Needless-to-say, the extreme right-wing groups are jumping on an opportunity to promote anti-Semitism where it supports their political aspirations.  The reactions of campus administrations and conservative political leaders lend proof in their views as to the influence of Jewish leaders in North America, especially when it comes to support for Israel.  People conveniently tend to forget the historical foundation for anti-Semitism laid by extreme right-wing, mostly white groups in both countries.  They also forget that such groups promote Islamophobia at the same time, which has led to increasing violence and hate speech against Moslems.  Hopefully, one can better tackle the emerging conspiracy theories surfacing around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and leveller heads will surface among our leaders, including those on our campuses and in mainstream media.

Leave a comment »

U.S. Protectionist Trade Policies Will Drag Canada Into Similar Trade Patterns

By signing the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) in 2018, the ability of Canada to negotiate a trade deal with China or another “non-market economy” was greatly restricted.  Current or future protectionist policies concerning trade with China or other countries will have a direct effect on Canada’s trade patterns.  Under the USMCA, the U.S. will remain Canada’s biggest trade partner (75.4% of total Canadian exports in 2023), especially in the automotive and energy sectors.  One other result has been that the U.S. bought more goods from Mexico than China in 2023 for the first time in 20 years, evidence of how much global trade patterns have shifted. The U.S. under President Trump and now under President Biden has become the most bilateral-trade-focused government in its history.  Like the U.S., Canada is also looking to conclude deals with the EU, Japan, South Korea, the U.K. and India and other democracies eager to share in the benefits of bilateral trade agreements.  For example, as a result in December 2023, Korean exports to the U.S. surpassed Korean exports to China for the first time in 20 years, driven by shipments of vehicles, electric batteries and other parts.

However, in an apparent effort to protect strategic American industries, President Biden’s recent announcement regarding a sharp increase in tariffs on an array of Chinese imports — including electric vehicles, solar cells, semiconductors and advanced batteries — will have an impact on Canada as well.  Initially, the President had pledged to repeal at least some of Trump’s tariffs imposed on China.  However, the upcoming election in 2024 changed all that.  Mr. Biden’s moves, to be phased in over the next three years, now represent the latest trade-war escalation suggesting that the Democrats refuse to cede any ground to their rivals via a tough-on-China appeal to swing voters in the industrial Midwest and beyond.  Politics appears to be overriding economic considerations once again.

Multinationals operating in both the U.S. and Canada are affected by the array of tariffs imposed on Chinese imports, especially when it comes to the need for parts, pharmaceutical ingredients, or rare earth elements essential for many high-tech devices.  However, not everyone in the business community is happy with the most recent tariff increases on these imports.  The National Retail Federation in the U.S., which represents many companies that source or sell Chinese products, called on Mr. Biden to reverse course and lift tariffs.  As consumers continue to battle inflation, the Federation argues that the last thing the administration should be doing is placing additional taxes on imported products that will be paid by U.S. importers and eventually American consumers.  Although the USMCA eliminated tariffs on all Canadian-purchased goods manufactured in the U.S., if a product includes components that were made outside of the U.S. — like China, for example — then the Canadian customer very likely has to pay tariffs on those components.  The same argument can therefore be made with respect to the impact on Canadian consumers and on the inflation rates in both countries.

Mr. Trump has apparently promised to go even further if he wins in November — restricting investment between the two countries and banning some Chinese products from the U.S. entirely.  Back in 2018, with President Trump’s plan to impose tariffs on up to $60 billion (U.S.) of Chinese imports, experts noted that a full-fledged trade war between the world’s two economic superpowers would damage Canada’s economy.  At the time, the Retail Council of Canada declared that such U.S. tariffs that would raise the prices of Chinese consumer goods, such as electronics, sold in the U.S. and while prompting more Canadians to shop at home.  However, such a situation today would very likely lead to a further inflationary increase at a time of already high inflation.

Economists have long argued that trade protectionism leads to a misappropriation of global goods and inefficiencies by interfering with the normal benefits offered by free trade.  Cheaper Chinese imports to the U.S. and Canada led to many more affordable consumer goods which otherwise would not have been available in both countries, while also raising average standards of living in China.  In addition, bilateral trade agreements can be broken at any time by either party to an agreement, unaffected by normal global market considerations and swings in trade patterns.

Leave a comment »

Student Protests in U.S. and Canada More Than Just About Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

As most people know who follow current news and social media, college student protests in both countries have escalated in recent weeks.  Students have now set up encampments on campus grounds and have even occupied university buildings.  In numerous cases, especially in the U.S. to date, the university administrations have called in the police to physically force the protesting students from their encampments on campuses.  Universities are doing so under the guise of protecting the safety of their student population, especially in the case of Jewish students who appear concerned for their safety on campus.  In some cases, faculty members have joined the protesters in objecting to the use of physical force, especially where the protests have been peaceful.

However, the fact of the matter is that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has also galvanized the unrest witnessed among student bodies over the last two to three decades.  As one observer notes, in many students’ eyes, the war in Gaza is linked to other issues, such as policing, mistreatment of Indigenous people, racism and the impact of climate change.  More than likely, protesters have been joined by others who oppose the role of their governments in terms of their global policies and lack of action on tackling climate change viewed by many as the first priority in terms of today’s issues.  There is a lot of pent-up anger among young people over a number of social issues that they are facing on a daily basis.  In addition, many college programs and policies supporting diversity, equality and inclusion have been watered down, particularly in the U.S. as a result of recent Supreme Court decisions.

In addition, there is the apparent lack of transparency among university administrations concerning the allocation of resources and investments in various domestic and foreign industries and businesses.  Students pay a lot of money to attend these universities and are asking for greater transparency and accountability in such transactions at home and abroad, not only with respect to Israel but also other global matters.  One has to ask whether such student demands are indeed reasonable under the circumstances?

Most would agree that violence on campus, including hate mongering, is not the answer.  Hopefully, cooler heads will prevail over the course of the coming weeks.  However, with pro-Israel students ratcheting up their counter protests on a number of campuses, the climate could grow even more strained in the coming days.  The current disproportionate involvement of an increasingly militarized police force is a major concern, and can only exacerbate the situation on many campuses.

Young people have a right to peacefully protest, which is part of the freedom of expression normally supported in universities and colleges across Canada and the U.S.  Unfortunately, college faculties in many states have come under attack by governments over what is being referred to inappropriately as the “woke” effect.  Critical thinking has come under attack by conservative elements in both countries.  Some faculties are being told not only what they can teach but also how they go about teaching certain subjects.  We must all agree that this is a major affront on the fundamental rights and obligations of universities to offer open and considered dialogue on today’s important issues.  These attacks have once again frustrated many students in light of the increasingly apparent lack of respect for these institutions of “higher learning”.

Universities have often served as one of society’s important settings for activism, given the very nature of examining and questioning many of our daily issues; whether political, economic, environmental or technological.  Activism can often lead to open peaceful protests in a democratic society and must be supported, especially on our campuses.

Leave a comment »

Worsening Air Pollution Leads To Worsening Health

The findings in a new report from the American Lung Association (ALA) show the worst toxic particle pollution in the 25 years since the Association released its first annual “State of the Air” report.  More than 131 million Americans live in areas that indicated unhealthy levels of air pollution.  Higher pollution rates have been found to lead to higher rates of chronic health problems such as asthma, diabetes and heart disease.  In the long term, researchers have even found that pollution very likely is linked to brain damage that puts people at higher risk of Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease and other related dementias. 

The ALA report used only data from 2020 to 2022.  It did not include the impact of the historic wildfires across Canada in 2023 that choked many eastern U.S. and Canadian cities, often turning skies orange.  Air quality across American and Canadian cities is once again expected to deteriorate due to an early start to the wildfire season already underway this spring, notably in Alberta and British Columbia.

The costs of health impacts due to pollution, especially on the health care system, are enormous.  A University of B.C. study in 2007 claimed that pollution is killing 25,000 Canadians a year and costing the health care system more than $9 billion (Can) annually.  A recent analysis by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) suggested that further lowering the level of allowable particulate matter in the air would save lives and health costs.  By 2032, the EPA estimates that it would amount to $46 billion (U.S.) in cost savings and help the U.S. avoid 4,500 premature deaths, 800,000 cases of asthma and 290,000 lost workdays.

Paul Billings, ALA’s senior vice president of public policy, told USA TODAY that, despite a lot of progress on air pollution cleanup, we’re seeing the impacts of climate change, particularly wildfires.  The impact is overwhelming a lot of cleanup, particularly with respect to these daily spikes of particle pollution.  There is little doubt that much more needs to be done in both the U.S. and Canada to reduce air pollution and improve air quality.  Both countries have managed to do this with respect to ozone levels which have declined in some places due to governments acting on implementing regulated restrictions and encouraging new greener technologies.

So when you go out for your daily run or bicycling in urban locations, don’t forget that you may be breathing in air that very likely will not be overly healthy for you physically.  If you must, do so in the early morning hours when pollution levels are at their lowest.  Take the appropriate precautions, especially during the wildfire season by wearing an appropriate mask and limiting your outdoor activities when applicable.  Fortunately, most municipalities have good air quality monitoring on a continuing basis which can be accessed daily via the Internet.  I know that I’ll be using these information sources once again this coming summer.  Good luck and good health!

Leave a comment »

Gag Orders by Judges Against Trump Just Par for the Course

The latest gag order on April 4th against Donald Trump was issued by State Justice Juan Merchan, who will preside over his trial in New York state court in Manhattan.  The trial is over criminal charges of covering up a $130,000 payment before the 2016 election to porn star Stormy Daniels to buy her silence about an alleged sexual encounter.  The trial is now set to begin on April 15th.  The judge expanded an existing gag order that had barred Trump from publicly commenting about witnesses and court staff to make clear that it also applies to family members.  He did so after Trump disparaged Merchan’s daughter who worked as president of Authentic Campaigns, a firm Vice President Kamala Harris used for digital fundraising and advertising during her presidential campaign.  Judge Merchan asserted that “It is no longer just a mere possibility or a reasonable likelihood that there exists a threat to the integrity of the judicial proceedings. The threat is very real.”

At this time, the looming hush-money trial, one of four criminal cases Trump is confronting ahead of the U.S. election, is the most important one.  It could be the only one to reach trial before the election.  Trump has pleaded not guilty to all and has called them politically motivated.  Furthermore, given the charges against him, Trump will have to be present during this trial.

Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that it would be a great honor to go to jail for violating the gag order imposed by the judge.  What is more ridiculous, he has compared himself to a modern day Nelson Mandela, the South African leader and anti-apartheid activist who spent 27 years in prison for his opposition to apartheid.  Unbelievable!  Mandela passed away in 2013, partly as a result of his poor health condition attributed to his time in prison.  Globally, Mandela was given over 250 awards, accolades, prizes, honorary degrees and citizenships in recognition of his political achievements, including the Nobel Peace Prize.  Trump’s mere comparison to Nelson Mandela is an insult to his very memory and legacy!

While in office and now as part of his campaigning, Donald Trump has disparaged the traditional Republican support for law and order matters.  Attacking the judicial system and those responsible for carrying out their judicial responsibilities is an affront to all Americans.  This is nothing more than a political stunt which unfortunately few Republicans appear to discredit.  In particular, attacks of any kind upon jurists undermine our respect for our courts and our legal processes.

I’m certain the Trump’s lawyers are not happy with his public outbursts against judges as it may affect the general mood of the courts in their deliberations.  Not a good idea!  If there are any improper actions by judges or court officials, including prosecutors, then the system provides for the applicable investigation and appropriate responses.  Trump is also separately calling on Justice Merchan to recuse himself from the case, similar to his first recusal motion more than 10 months ago.  The court previously considered and rejected that motion and is likely to do so once again.

In the past week, in another unorthodox move, Trump’s lawyers indicated that they plan to file a type of lawsuit against the Justice Merchan.  Such an unusual move is essentially an appeal in the form of a suit, and is unlikely to succeed, particularly so close to trial date.  Legal experts note that actions against judges are unusual.  However, this is not Trump’s first attempt to use that tactic to try to delay a trial.  Last year, he sued the New York judge presiding over his civil fraud trial — an effort the appeals court ultimately rejected.

It is obvious that the former president, who unfortunately is again the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, is aiming to push all four of his criminal cases past Election Day next November.  In light of his continuing desperate and unethical conduct, Trump is not doing himself or the Republican Party any favours. 

Leave a comment »

Trump’s Appeal to American Christians is Hypocritical to Say the Least

Issues over the separation of state and church have never been so evident as today if one is to follow Donald Trump’s most recent campaign scheme.  It is blatantly obvious that Trump is attempting to win the support of American’s estimated 90 million evangelists.  In Christianity, evangelism or witnessing is the act of preaching the gospel with the intention of sharing the message and teachings of Jesus Christ.  Now one has Trump selling “God Bless America Bibles” for $59.99 as he himself faces mounting legal bills.   But what of the other millions of Americans who worship according to the teachings of the Koran or Torah?

Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) reportedly said former President Trump selling the branded Bibles is “risky business” given the sins of his life, adding to criticism against the former president over the deal.  Warnock, a reverend who on Sunday gave an Easter sermon at Ebenezer Baptist Church, Martin Luther King Jr.’s church in Atlanta, said selling the Bibles goes against the tenets of the religion.  He also noted that the Bible sales were ironic given Trump’s history of lying.  Moreover, the sale of the Bibles has been widely criticized on line and mocked since their announcement, including by numerous well known Christian leaders. 

What is of greater concern is the fact that this campaign strategy is increasingly blurring the separation of church and state, a major premise in the governance in most modern democracies.  Unfortunately, there are a number of Christian-based writers who are attacking what they refer to as the impact of so-called “secularization” and “paganization” on American society, especially on family values.  They point to the resulting demise of the traditional family whereby an estimated one-fifth of American households now conform to the “nuclear family” model of mother, father and children.  In 1960, that number was reported as 45 percent, and some 40 percent of all children lack a biological father in the home.  They perceive this as a result of the decline in the number of Christian homes, and in turn Christian-based values.  However, based on recent social science studies, researchers today would definitely argue that this assertion represents an over simplification and generalization.

What is most interesting is that even among the various different Christian churches, there are numerous disparities over how they deal with today’s societal changes.  The more conservative churches have been leading the charge against issues surrounding abortion, same-sex marriage, homosexuality and transgender identity.  However, other churches have been taking a more moderate view of how to approach such issues, given that the majority of their followers accept greater tolerance and understanding in terms of such issues.  As a result, similar to what we see in American political circles, there is just as much division among American clerics.  This phenomenon has also affected rulings within the judicial system, which should fundamentally to be impartial and secular in its deliberations.

One has to question the belief that adherence to any one particular religion would help to resolve the challenges facing today’s issues in modern Western society.  For example, the battle between science and religion is on-going, as evidenced during the pandemic.  In addition, one has to conclude that right-wing organizers will unfortunately continue to incorporate Christian arguments and positions whenever they appear to benefit their causes. 

For the most part, people, including agnostics, are tolerant of religious beliefs, as long as they are not forced upon them.  America is a society that has always promoted and attempted to protect the rights of individuals, including freedom of religion and expression.  What Donald Trump is doing is an affront to those very rights in his hypocritical move to obtain the political support of a fraction of American society.  He is the last person that I would imagine trying to purvey Christian values!

Leave a comment »

Electorate in Both U.S. and Canada Appears to be Very Disgruntled. I Wonder Why?

George H. W. Bush Senior, going into his bid for a second term, was frequently told that it’s all about the economy stupid!  The U.S. economy went into a recession in 1990; the unemployment rate rose from 5.9% in 1989 to a high of 7.8% in mid-1991; and the debt percentage of total gross domestic product (GDP) rose from 39.4% in 1989 to almost 46.8% in 1992.  By the presidential election in1992, many conservative Republicans’ support of Bush had waned for a variety of reasons, including raising taxes and cutting defense spending.  Americans were less concerned with his foreign policy successes (e.g. Persian Gulf War victory over Iraq) than with the nation’s deteriorating economic situation.  Thus, despite having once been a relatively popular president, he lost to Bill Clinton.

Today, the primary issue among voters continues to be the economy, and especially the high rate of inflation and high interest rates affecting people’s mortgages and the cost of loans in general.  Yes, there is low unemployment and more people are employed today than anytime since the pandemic.  However, unfortunately for Joe Biden, the average American is struggling on a daily basis to make ends meet, especially since average wages have not kept up with increasing inflation over the last few years.  Many people and businesses are still recovering from the pandemic, which has created a real sense of insecurity and a general malaise within the population.

Taking all of this into account, and that people are not happen with another Trump vs. Biden election, there is a general mistrust with governance.  The same can be said for in Canada where you have a Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, and a party that has been in power for over nine years.  The opposition is continuously harpooning about the high cost of inflation and high interest rates that average Canadians are facing.  There is also a good amount of discord over the government’s intention to raise the national carbon tax this coming April, despite it being only one element of several policies aimed at tackling climate change.  However, right now, climate change has taken a back seat to the economy.  A federal election will very likely be called next year in Canada, and all the government can hope for is that the economy will improve and inflation will come down.

Overall, these are tough times for governing parties.  There appear to be no win-win situations.  Government deficits have been climbing steadily, partly in earlier response to the pandemic, with no end in sight.  Wars overseas in the Ukraine and Middle East are not helping.  Funds are being allocated to support the Ukraine against Russia, Israel’s military and the plight of Palestinian refugees in Gaza.  The situation has placed both the U.S. and Canada in a difficult situation given the evolving humanitarian crisis in both conflicts.  In terms of foreign policy, domestically it is a no-win and highly emotive situation for both governments in terms of supporting one side or the other particularly in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In addition, stability in the energy markets is constantly under threat as a result of the sanctions against Russian oil and natural gas exports and the general unstable situation in the Middle East.  As a result, there has been a measurable direct or indirect impact in the form of rising costs for gas and heating fuel in North America.

There is little doubt that we live uncertain times.  There is also little doubt that voters are concerned with the cost of living and continuing hard economic times.  This bleak outlook does not bode well for President Biden and Prime Minister Trudeau.  The question then becomes whether their political opponents can take advantage of the situation?  I guess time will tell.

Leave a comment »

Why Are So Many People In North America On Antidepressants?

At no time in our history have so many Americans and Canadians been prescribed antidepressants.  Firstly, one should remember that patients who take the drugs often get them from their regular doctor rather than a so-called mental health professional.  Feeling down or unhappy with your life, go see your doctor and get prescribed some form of antidepressant.

According to a 2011 analysis by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Health Statistics, antidepressants were the third-most common drug used by Americans of all ages between 2005 and 2008.  They were the most common drug among people aged 18 to 44.  According to the same survey, U.S. women are 2-1/2 times more likely than men to take antidepressants, and whites are more likely than blacks to take the drugs. Also, fewer than a third of Americans taking one antidepressant drug and fewer than half of those taking more than one have seen a mental health professional in the past year.

Canadians now rank among the highest users of antidepressants in the world.  In 2011, Canadians consumed 86 daily doses of antidepressants for every 1,000 people per day. One of Canada’s top psychiatrists stated that too many Canadians are treating life’s normal spells of misery the way they would handle something they dislike about their bodies: by asking a doctor to make their lives better.  Canadians take twice as many antidepressants as Italians do, and more than Germans or French.  In 2011, Canada reported the third highest level of consumption of antidepressants among 23 member nations surveyed by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

What’s even more alarming showed up in a large 2015 American study containing data about the state of children’s mental health in the U.S.  The study found that depression in many children appears to start as early as age 11.  By the time they hit age 17, the analysis found 13.6 percent of boys and a staggering 36.1 percent of girls have been or are considered depressed.  These numbers are significantly higher than previous estimates.  As recently as the 1980s, adolescents were considered too developmentally immature to be able to experience such a grown-up affliction. Today, most scientists recognize that children as young as 4 or 5 years of age can be depressed.

Now, don’t get me wrong.  Diagnosed clinical depression is a very serious mental illness.  Many of us are familiar with persons with such a diagnosis, and who are undergoing treatment which includes antidepressants.  In such cases, antidepressants are essential in treating severe, debilitating and life-threatening depression.  However, the pills including Prozac and its cousins that were held out to be miraculous when they hit the market in the late 1980s, are increasingly being swallowed by millions of Americans and Canadians every day.  However, recent studies suggest that, in cases of mild depression where one is still working and functioning, the drugs often don’t work, or they produce a temporary placebo effect which doesn’t last.

One observer declared that “drugging unhappiness” has far too often become the easy solution, especially one taken by family physicians.  Remember the 1960s and 1970s when someone complaining of some form of anxiety was prescribed Valium.  With its launch in 1963, diazepam, which was patented in 1959 by Hoffmann-La Roche, became one of the most frequently prescribed medications in the world.  In the U.S. it was the best-selling medication between 1968 and 1982, selling more than 2 billion tablets in 1978 alone, prescribed particularly to women.  For some its continuing use became addictive.  In addition, besides dependence, long-term use can result in tolerance and withdrawal symptoms on dose reduction.  Abrupt stopping after long-term use can be potentially dangerous.  For these reasons, the drugs became less prescribed in later years.

Today, our societies must begin to question why people believe that they require medication to deal with their everyday lives and a state of so-called unhappiness.  What’s even more worrisome is the fact that more and more children are being diagnosed with some form of depression at an ever younger age!  Given these facts, one cannot but conclude that something is terribly wrong with our general state of mental health and with our health care systems.

Leave a comment »

Why are Affirmative Action Initiatives Under Attack in the U.S.?

It all started in June 2023 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that race-conscious college admissions programs at Harvard and the University of North Carolina are unconstitutional, causing colleges and universities to shift to race-neutral policies.  This decision upended decades of legal precedent when it came to affirmative action policies among post-secondary institutions.  Since then, several lawsuits have been launched representing the latest front in a conservative campaign to roll back affirmative action programs in government and diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in the corporate world.  Affirmative action programs are ripe targets, legal experts say, in part because nearly every state and locality has one or more that benefit women, minorities and other underrepresented groups.  Conservative activists have filed dozens of complaints against Fortune 500 companies alleging discrimination against White people.  Long-standing federal programs created to benefit minority-owned businesses now find themselves on shaky ground.  In the past, courts typically have upheld government affirmative action programs on the grounds that society has an interest in remedying past and ongoing discrimination.  All that is starting to change, largely because of recent court decisions.

One of the programs under attack is the federal Small Business Administration’s 8(a) program for minority government contractors.  The SBA had to overhaul its application process last year after a court ruled that the SBA could not automatically assume that Black, Hispanic, Asian or Native American business owners qualify as socially disadvantaged – a prior key requirement.  The Minority Business Development Agency was similarly blocked from using racial categories to determine applicant eligibility.

The Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative public interest law firm representing many of the plaintiffs, noted that the vast majority of race-based government programs are operated by states and cities.  Fifteen states have race- and sex-based mandates that apply to most public boards, according to a survey released in 2023 by the Foundation.  In 14 states, the survey found similar requirements for 63 professional licensing boards responsible for social work, dentistry, pharmacy and medical examination.  All told, the Foundation reported that at least 25 states have such requirements in some form.  Generally, it is argued that preference for minority applicants allegedly violates the 14th Amendment right to receive equal treatment under the law.

Historically, African Americans were largely locked out of the skilled workforce.  A 1960 report by the Department of Labor found that Black workers make 60 percent less on average than Whites.  Meanwhile, the modern civil rights movement began challenging segregation in the South, and the landmark Brown v. Board of Education case led to the desegregation of public schools.  Responding to growing demands for racial equality, President John F. Kennedy signed an executive order in 1961 requiring federal contractors to “take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin.”  This was the birth of affirmative action initiatives in the U.S.

Many American businesses were confused about how to comply with the subsequent new laws, including President Lyndon B. Johnson’s Civil Rights Act of 1964, which encouraged businesses to diversify their workforces while prohibiting discrimination.  Critics argued that they would result in preferential treatment of Black Americans, claims that have persisted for decades.  Affirmative programs appear to have had a positive effect.  According to one 1973 study, the average income in 1969 of “non-White” young, college-educated men was 98 percent of the average of U.S. workers, up from just 80 percent a decade earlier.  Such programs are seen as attributing to helping to reduce traditional discriminatory patterns in the labor market.  In addition, the wage gains coincide with an explosion in the number of Black people enrolling in colleges, particularly in elite colleges — 417,000 in 1970, up 83 percent from a decade earlier. 

There is little doubt that affirmative action programs, no matter how effective they are, will continue to be under attack by conservative groups, whether in the courts and in local and state governments.

Leave a comment »

The Kingmakers: How Corporate Elites Work to Re-elect President Trump

Now that Donald Trump has garnered the Republican candidacy for the Presidential election next November, you can be sure that a number of the corporate elite will be lining up to support him and help fund his campaign.  After all, Trump believes that he is one of them.  Remember, that both Hitler and Mussolini garnered the support of the corporate elite respectively in Germany and Italy to help overthrow their existing democratic regimes in order to push forward their agenda and solidify their places among the wealthiest in each nation.  Both average Germans and Italians, like many Americans today, were upset with the current economic state.   Once in charge, those same elites worked with each dictator to build up the military-industrial complexes, much like what Putin has been doing and continues to do in Russia today.

Trump’s efforts to garner corporate support is already underway as witnessed by the recent reported meetings whereby he is urgently seeking a cash infusion to aid his presidential campaign.  These took place with the likes of Elon Musk, one of the world’s richest men, and a number of wealthy Republican donors.  Furthermore, now that Nikki Haley has withdrawn from the presidential campaign, it will be interesting to see whether the conservative billionaire Koch brothers will back Trump during his campaign.  The Koch brothers founded and fund the Americans for Prosperity Action (AFP), a libertarian conservative political policy body.  Initially, the AFP, which fuels the most powerful donor network in conservative politics, had declared itself as part of the NeverTrump effort for 2024, aiming to deny former President Donald Trump a third nomination for the White House.  Therefore, it will be interesting to see whether the Koch brothers will continue to take this position.

In addition, Nikki Haley was probably not the corporate elites’ most preferable candidate. Instead, like Musk, they would have preferred Florida Governor Ron Desantis as their candidate given his similar extreme right-wing political positions to those of Trump.  However, Desantis had a weak campaign and did not live up to the expectations of many of the corporate elite and those in the Republican Party.  The tide swung quickly in favour of Nikki Haley as a possible alternative to Trump, although unfortunately somewhat weak at the outset.

The corporate elite know that despite all the current indictments against Trump and his continuing denial of the results of the last presidential election, his hard-core MAGA base will continue to support him regardless.  Noteworthy, “The Daily Show” correspondent Jordan Klepper couldn’t recently hide his frustration with Nikki Haley supporters who fiercely condemned Trump but then, in the same interview, admitted they’ll still probably vote for the former president when he takes on President Joe Biden in November.

There appears to be too much at stake for corporate America not to support Trump.  After all he supports the fossil fuels sector, denying the impact of climate change; he believes in an “American First” policy at the expense of international trade agreements; he wants to build up America’s nuclear arsenal and speed up the military-based space race; he would never introduce new tax measures aimed at high-income earners or any new capital gains taxation; once again reduce the abilities of federal regulatory agencies such as the EPA and IRA; and he would increase further access to federal lands and waters for mineral exploration.

It was just a matter of time before we witnessed the “kingmakers” coming out of the woods, SuperPacs and all.  While a few corporate elites may support Biden, the majority like Elon Musk will most likely support and fund Trump.  It’s quite simple, the so-called “haves” want to keep what they have without paying their fair share.  After all, they are the kingmakers, and neither you nor anyone else can change that.  Just ask the German and Italian descendents of earlier insidious times!

Leave a comment »