To complement the article we already posted on the British National Party: Today hundreds of protesters gathered outside the BBC Television Center where the leader of the BNP will appear as a panelist on the program "Question Time". Many condemn the invitation to the racist party leader, but the BBC said that as a publicly-funded broadcaster, it must cover all political parties that have a national presence [6% of British votes in the European elections resulting in two seats, and no seats in the British parliament, is not too much of a national presence, if you ask me.] This has sparked a debate between free-speech advocates and those that believe the BNP shouldn't be given a public, national platform (on primetime) to express their racist beliefs (and some says it gives legitimacy to their views and could spark racist violence). While others say the BNP appearance will expose how bigoted the party is (for example, only white people can join the BNP, they're anti-immigration, they have denied the holocaust). (Full Story)
I don't think free speech covers hate speech intended to intimidate. I also don't think free speech has anything to do with the right to be on television. I respect people's right to self-publish but I don't expect them to have the right to have their hate broadcasted on television.
A Pew Research Center poll found that only 57% believe there is strong evidence that the Earth is warming. This is in contrast to 2006 and 2007 when 77% believed there was strong evidence of global warming (and in 2008 it was 71%). That 57% is made up of 36% that believe it's because of human activity, 16% that believe it's because of natural patterns, and 3% that don't know. So only 36% believe there is strong evidence of global warming and that it's caused by human activity. In addition, in 2007 45% thought global warming was a very serious problem. That number is now 35%. (Full Story) (Full Story)
Interesting article on the British National Party (BNP). This far-right fringe party, which many say is racist, is getting more and more votes. The BNP got nearly a million votes in the European elections and got two seats in the European parliament. There are white working class voters who are feeling ignored by the Labour Party, and are starting to cast their votes for BNP mostly for its anti-immigration stance. The reporter found that many of the people he interviewed, that said they were going to vote for the BNP, knew very little about the party. They didn't know much about its history or its party leaders. They only knew the party was anti-immigration, and that was enough for them. "They did not particularly like the party. Theirs was a protest vote, a cry to be heard...Many of the people I met knew that the BNP was regarded as a racist party but it did not deter them from voting for the party. They did not care because they felt ignored and sidelined." (Full Story)
In these tough economic times, the shortage of jobs and housing will probably only increase the number of white working class people who feel like their needs are not being met and they will look to blame someone (often immigrants). This will only help the BNP. The reporter argued that there is a "need for the mainstream parties to re-connect with white working families."
It is sad that many working class people don't realize that the things hurting them are the same problems pushing people to immigrate in the first place. And that immigrants in their country often deal with the same problems that white working class people are -- cuts in wages, lack of affordable housing, feelings of being ignored and isolated. If these two groups combined their struggles, they would be in much better shape. Unfortunately, groups like the BNP take that resentment and then play these groups against each other.
Hispanic farmers are suing the U.S. Department of Agriculture for discrimination. They say the USDA discriminated against Hispanics by delaying or denying them loans that could have saved their farms. They say these loans were readily extended to white farmers in similar situations. In addition, they say the USDA neglected to investigate their complaints.
This lawsuit by Hispanic farmers from Texas to California was filed nine years ago and they're still waiting. While they wait, some of the farmers have lost their livelihood and homes. These farmers are having to turn to other jobs. Many of these farm owners are now working as farm workers on other people's farms. The article mentions a former farmer that applied for disaster relief assistance after water pipes broke and ruined her land. She now works at Wal-Mart.
What is frustrating for these Hispanic farmer plaintiffs is that they have been denied by the government a class action lawsuit, which would result in a group settlement. Instead, farmers have to present their cases one by one and claims will be decided on an individual case basis. Stephen Hill, the lead council who is representing these Hispanic plaintiffs pro bono, said that forcing the farmers to fight their case on an individual basis instead of as a group is "really a cynical ploy on the part of the government, and it denies these farmers justice." He added that the farmers alone don't have the means to to take on the agency's bottomless resources. He has appealed the farmers' case to the Supreme Court, hoping to get certification as a class action.
Also frustrating for the Hispanic farmers is that a similar lawsuit filed by black farmers led to a billion dollar settlement (heard by a different judge). It was certified as class action and and was settled in 1999. In addition to the billion dollar settlement, Congress last year gave black farmers a second chance to claim the money. Obama also set aside another $1.25 billion as part of the 2010 budget to settle their additional claims. These Hispanic farmer aren't against the black farmers' settlement, they just want the same standards to be applied to their case. (Full Story)
Several musicians have endorsed a Freedom of Information Act request which would declassify documents related to using music in interrogation practices at Guantanamo and other detention camps. They want to know all the songs that have been used as a method of torture (blasting the same song over and over for several hours at excruciating decibels), in an attempt to coerce or punish detainees.
Musicians that are supporting this cause include Pearl Jam, R.E.M., the Roots, Rosanne Cash, Trent Reznor, Tom Morello, David Byrne, Billy Bragg, Steve Earle, Jackson Browne, Bonnie Raitt, and T-Bone Burnett. These musicians are against the idea of their music, or any music in general, being used for the purposes of torture. They said once the song information is released, they may explore legal options.
Based on interviews with former detainees, it is believed that at least this music was used: the theme from Sesame Street, Don McLean's "American Pie", Bruce Springsteen's "Born to Run", Queen's "We Are the Champions", Nine Inch Nails's "March of the Pigs", Eminem's "The Real Slim Shady", Rage Against the Machine, the Bee Gees, Christina Aguilera, Metallica, and "The Star Spangled Banner". I'll skip the obvious, inappropriate joke about how some of this music could break me, even at regular decibels.
A White House spokesman said that music is no longer used as an instrument of torture, and that Obama changed that policy on his second day in office. He signed an executive order that interrogations must be consistent with the Geneva Conventions. (Full Story)
The Treasury Department is expected in the next few day to order cuts in pay for top executives at bailed-out firms. The cuts apply to the 25 highest paid executives at the seven companies that received the most bail-out funding (excluding those companies that have already repaid the bailout money). It's expected that, on average, the top executives' base salary will be cut 90% and their total compensation will be cut in half. (Full Story)
It just shows how ludicrously high these executive salaries are if they can easily shoulder a 90% salary cut. How many people could feasibly do that? It's got to be hard going from $7 million to a paltry $700,000. Hopefully they can still put food on the table. And of course, it doesn't hurt that they have all these perks on top of a salary (like stock options, retirement savings, performance-based incentives, and other special benefits). Even if all those things were cut in half, that still would be a lot of money. And they've made so much money throughout the years, they could probably go quite a while without pay. Most Americans have no idea what that is like.
(But in Spanish, of course; my imaginations aren't ethnocentric!)
ReplyDeletegeeze. you really should work on that... ;)
as always, thanks for keeping me informed.