#Who Prevails in 2021 | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

brf-rumortrackinganon · 7 days

Text

Personally, I don't think Harry has gone for the spouse visa/green card route yet. Simply because his entitlement, and Meghan's entitlement, about his royal status would not allow them to show Harry as being dependent on Meghan in any way

They would both, much rather prefer to lord it over people, family, governments (both UK and US) that he is royal, the kings son (late queens grandson) and hence very very imp in his own right.

Also, the paperwork and forethought required to submit a greencard application means that both harry and meghan would need to do a lot of work - fill out applications, gather documents, aquire and submit bank data, proof of dates, proof of financials, taxation etc - all of which they are both incapable of doing. Not to mention that their narcissistic discordered tendencies would make them think this is below them.

(I know we can't actually diagnose them, but this is Tumblr, not CNN, and as a psychologist I know that filling out paperwork is the absolutebane of an NPD persons existence. These little quirks of the NPD are not talked about much but they are nearly universally observed.)

Another issue would be hiring an immigration lawyer for the spouse visa. The expenses and the process of actively listening to what the lawyers says is required procedure would put HnM on the backfoot and hate the process.

I have assumed that Harry is either on -

1). A1 Visa - diplomatic/head of state/official representative of a country

2). O1 Visa - specialized skilled worker/Einstein visa given to artists, actors, models, investors in specialized fields, highly skilled academicians, persons contracted by a sponcer for a special skill etc

Now, there is some evidence to support both these. So I'll list those reasons and my conclusions from those below.

Option 1.- A1 visa

Harry moved to US in March 2020, just before pandemic. Most people focus on this, but forget that when the couple moved they both were still, officially, Full Time working royals for the BRF and embarking on the 1 year trial period to see how things pan out for them. This trial period lasted till March 2021, upon the conclusion of which the BRF promptly officially announced there demotions. So, they were working royals when they moved to US, albeit on a leave of absence.

So, what does that mean? That his (and her) diplomatic status was still intact. They did their last royal engagement for the UK in mar 2020, but they hadn't retired. Hadn't resigned. His royal patronages, commonwealth role etc were only taken back in 2021. Both parties had agreed to a separation period till then.

Another factor is that they had already asked Canada to provide him (them) with full time security, ie., treat him like a full fledged royal. But Canada said only till March 2020, and not after that. Trudeau actually released a statement about this.

So this tells me that they (may have). actually asked for full time royal treatment ie., security and diplomatic status for the trial period lasting upto March 2021 and were told no.

(I think that's what Harry means when he says the BRF took away his security, I thiy he means that the BRF pricipals personally prevailed upon Trudeau and made him refuse security)

So Harry's only option was to take his fancy diplomatic status passport, hope on a private jet and fly to LA without telling anyone.

People think this was because the lockdowns were imminent. But I think it was also timed in a way that they were out of Canada before the promised security period expired.

After this, during pandemic, Harry consistently did nonsensical "commonwealth" related zoom calls. Till the president/head/chairperson of the CW youth org (I forgot who exactly but one of main people of the org) publicly distanced themselves in late 2020.

Another thing that was odd was that Trump official said he will not be giving the couple security. Which means that his govt was asked, maybe repeatedly asked and Harry made his case, till the time Trump had to release a statement saying he won't. Makes me think, Harry made his case using his A1 status. Because otherwise, if he was there as a private citizen, this request was absurd and the govt would dismissed this without a second thought. But if they had permitted someone to enter based on their A1 status as representative of a head of state, they had weigh the pros and cons of this request and it could have caused a potential diplomatic incidence. So the president himself had to be face of this decision.

(this is irrespective of anyones thoughts about who the president was, or what kind of person the president may or may not have been. This was an executive decision)

So,

All this leads me to speculate that Harry initially, and until end of 2021 at least, made use of his status as a representative of the head of status, which he already officially had, and was on paper, to enter the US.

The duration of permit of this initial stay could have been 2 or 3 years. So, 2022. Or 2023, when curiosly, Heritage Foundation suddenly took interest in the status of his visa.

Option 2 - O-Visa

This is a bit funny and farfetched, but I think Harry could also have entered on his British passport, which allows a stay upto 6 months (tourist visa). And then applied for O- Visa status a couple of months later.

By June 2020 Harry had forged some sort of investment+partnership with Betterup. This likely involved an initial investment into the company. For enterpreneurs and/investors into a US based company, a minimum investment of 250k or 500k is required to be shown. If he did this, then Betterup could have easily sponcered his application and he could used his very imp, very skilled, very unique position as CHIMPO as a means to get a visa.

A lawyer and the company could have helped him. Plus his high profile status due to his work as a philanthropists, patron of various international organisations etc would definitely be an asset as it is proof and documentation of his years of work.

We may laugh and debate about the "quality" of his work all his life but when it comes to govt paperwork, this is still documented proof. And it's verifiable. So, noone is going to get into the nitty gritty of it, and getting a stamp is easy for him.

Another avenue could have been that he was immediately listed as a high in demand, much sought after international speaker or much renown. He did a couple of onscure, forgettable speaker gigs. But that's all he would need for proof.

He was also listed as the executive producer for oprahs documentary, he was earning his producer certification and the Apple documentary was under production.based on that, he could have applied for an O-visa and it would have been approved.

The duration of stay for O-visa status is 3 years at a time, after which you have to apply again for the visa. It is not eligible for renewal. All paperwork and applications have to be submitted again and will be scrutinized as new.

Let's assume he applied 2/3 months after initial entry, so that's June. His application would have been approved by July end Aug latest. (this is based on my personal experience with the same visa, in this the same time period).

With COVID restrictions, he gets approved but doesn't have to immediately go back to his home country to get it stamped at immigration. I got mine stamped end of 2021 from my country. Till then I stayed in US and worked. So he could have stamped his in April 2021 when he went back for his grandfather's funeral.

If he got his O-visa in 2020, then it would expire in 2023. This is the time heritage foundation started creating a fuss about his visa.

Now, with all of that, an important question we need to ask is- why did the heritage foundation start their crusade in 2023?

This could be because Harry's first visa stay (likely) expired in 2023 and he reapplied for a visa. And was (most likely) approved for the same type of visa again. This process would have gone quite smoothly with Harry's pull. But this second time it is quite clear that he got special treatment. And the heritage foundation wants to expose this special treatment.

Orr more likely, someone in the know tipped them off, and wants this exposed for whatever reason. I DO NOT think the BRf want this exposed, I don't think they care.

I do think someone in the US govt or maybe even a journalist wants to make a big deal out of this. And rightly so.

Anyway, that's my dissertation on Harry's visa. I don't think it matters to anyone outside of Tumblr, but I do feel his entitlement is mind-boggling and he should be held accountable for the person that he is. And if this visa issue is what does it, then so be it.

It is based on my personal experience with these 2 types of visas. And my theoretical and observed knowledge about how entitlement is one of the driving forces for most classical NODs. But the reality for him may be different. And you Rumour, being a fed, would probably know more and know better.

*********

I agree with you. I’ve been reading up about the visa issues (and also spoke to a few other fed friends).

I think Harry is here on an O-1 visa, for extraordinary/outstanding talent. Meghan doesn’t seem invested enough into the marriage to be willing to do the paperwork so if he’s here on a spousal visa, a lawyer would’ve done the paperwork. Additionally, I can see the financial requirements being a major concern for the BRF; the BRF goes to a great length to protect their financial information from other countries and the general public. They’re not going to let the US (no matter how special the relationship) take a peek at their books. So I suspect they squashed the idea of a spousal visa unless it was done *exclusively* on Meghan’s own savings/net worth. Which she balked at doing because it implies she’s financially responsible for Harry and that’s not what she signed up. She signed up to spend Charles’s money. Not her own. So that’s off the table.

Next is the diplomatic visa. Harry doesn’t actually have a diplomatic passport. He has a regular passport. He may have had a second passport for work that he traveled on UK business for, but he never had diplomatic status in the BRF; only The Queen and Charles did.

And that’s something government officials are really strict about, that people travel on official business use official papers. Officials traveling on personal business use personal papers. Or, that’s how it works here in the US. Not sure about the UK.

Now for Harry to have come to the US on a diplomatic passport for a diplomatic visa, he would have had to present his credentials for being here, and those credentials would have explained clearly and succinctly what he was in the US for and what official business he had with us. They would’ve looked into it.

So I don’t think he’s here on a A/diplomatic visa. Or perhaps not anymore, when it was made clear following the one-year Megxit review that he no longer represents the UK or works on behalf of The Queen/BRF.

Which leaves the O visa, for talent. But I don’t think it’s Better Up. I think it’s Invictus Games. Not only would it explain why they still stick with Harry despite all the expenses and criticism they cost the Foundation. And that’s what Harry is known for, outside of the BRF - his military support and support for veterans. It would also explain why Harry continues to try so hard to collaborate with the US military and warfighter community. Because he needs the military to support his visa.

Maybe it’s transferred to Better Up now since he seems to do more work for them.

As to why the government is trying so hard to keep his visa papers buried? I think they know we know Harry isn’t qualified to be here on a diplomatic or an O visa, so the BRF greased the wheels a bit in some way, shape, or form to help him get through the system.

But also if he’s here on a O-1 visa connected to Invictus Games, it could imply government or DOD support; if not DOD directly, then close partners or contractors…aka military lobbyists.

So that’s where I am right now.

And fingers crossed this gets posted in full. 🤞

#submission

47 notes · View notes

mostlysignssomeportents · 1 year

Text

2023's public domain is a banger

40 years ago, giant entertainment companies embarked on a slow-moving act of arson. The fuel for this arson was copyright term extension (making copyrights last longer), including retrospective copyright term extensions that took works out of the public domain and put them back into copyright for decades. Vast swathes of culture became off-limits, pseudo-property with absentee landlords, with much of it crumbling into dust.

After 55-75 years, only 2% of works have any commercial value. After 75 years, it declines further. No wonder that so much of our cultural heritage is now orphan works, with no known proprietor. Extending copyright on all works – not just those whose proprietors sought out extensions – incinerated whole libraries full of works, permanently.

But on January 1, 2019, the bonfire was extinguished. That was the day that items created in 1923 entered the US public domain: DeMille's Ten Commandments, Chaplain's Pilgrim, Burroughs' Tarzan and the Golden Lion, Woolf's Jacob's Room, Coward's London Calling and 1,000+ more works:

https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday/2019/

Many of those newly liberated works were forgotten, partly due to their great age, but also because no one knew who they belonged to (Congress abolished the requirement to register copyrights in 1976), so no one could revive or reissue them while they were still in the popular imagination, depriving them of new leases on life.

2019 was the starting gun on a new public domain, giving the public new treasures to share and enjoy, and giving the long-dead creators of the Roaring Twenties a new chance at posterity. Each new year since has seen a richer, more full public domain. 2021 was a great year, featuring some DuBois, Dos Pasos, Huxley, Duke Ellington, Fats Waller, Bessie Smith and Sydney Bechet:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/12/16/fraught-superpowers/#public-domain-day

In just 12 days, the public domain will welcome another year's worth of works back into our shared commons. As ever, Jennifer Jenkins of Duke's Center for the Public Domain have painstaking researched highlights from the coming year's entrants:

https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday/2023/

On the literary front, we have Virginia Woolf's To The Lighthouse, AA Milne's Now We Are Six, Hemingway's Men Without Women, Faulkner's Mosquitoes, Christie's The Big Four, Wharton's Twilight Sleep, Hesse's Steppenwolf (in German), Kafka's Amerika (in German), and Proust's Le Temps retrouvé (in French).

We also get all of Sherlock Holmes, finally wrestling control back from the copyright trolls who control the Arthur Conan Doyle estate. This is a firm of rent-seeking bullies who have abused the court process to extract menaces money from living creators, including rent on works that were unambiguously in the public domain.

The estate's sleaziest trick is claiming that while many Sherlock Holmes stories were in the public domain, certain elements of Holmes's personality were developed in later stories that were still in copyright, and therefore any Sherlock story that contained those elements was a copyright violation. Infamously, the Doyle Estate went after the creators of the Enola Holmes series, claiming a copyright over Sherlock stories in which Holmes was "capable of friendship," "expressed emotion," or "respected women." This is a nonsensical theory, based on the idea that these character traits are copyrightable. They are not:

https://web.law.duke.edu/cspd/publicdomainday/2023/#fn6text

The Doyle Estate's shakedown racket took a serious body-blow in 2013, when Les Klinger – a lawyer, author and prominent Sherlockian – prevailed in court, with the judge ruling that new works based on public domain Sherlock stories were not infringing, even if some Sherlock stories remained in copyright. The estate appealed and lost again, and Klinger was awarded costs. They tried to take the case to the Supreme Court and got laughed out of the building.

But as the Enola Holmes example shows, you can't keep a copyright troll down: the Doyle estate kept making up imaginary copyright laws in a desperate, grasping bid to wring more money out of living, working creators. That's gonna be a lot harder after Jan 1, when The Case-Book of Sherlock Holmes enters the public domain, meaning that every Sherlock story will be out of copyright.

One fun note about Klinger's landmark win over the Doyle estate: he took an amazing victory lap, commissioning an anthology of new unauthorized Holmes stories in 2016 called "Echoes of Sherlock Holmes":

https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Echoes-of-Sherlock-Holmes/Laurie-R-King/Sherlock-Holmes/9781681775463

I wrote a short story for it, "Sherlock Holmes and the Case of the Extraordinary Rendition," which was based on previously unpublished Snowden leaks.

https://esl-bits.net/ESL.English.Listening.Short.Stories/Rendition/01/default.html

I got access to the full Snowden trove thanks to Laura Poitras, who jointly commissioned the story from me for inclusion in the companion book for "Astro noise : a survival guide for living under total surveillance," her show at the Whitney:

https://www.si.edu/object/siris_sil_1060502

I also reported out the leaks the story was based on in a companion piece:

https://memex.craphound.com/2016/02/02/exclusive-snowden-intelligence-docs-reveal-uk-spooks-malware-checklist/

Jan 1, 2023 will also be a fine day for film in the public domain, with Metropolis, The Jazz Singer, and Laurel and Hardy's Battle of the Century entering the commons. Also notable: Wings, winner of the first-ever best picture Academy Award; The Lodger, Hitchcock's first thriller; and FW "Nosferatu" Mirnau's Sunrise.

However most of the movies that enter the public domain next week will never be seen again. They are "lost pictures," and every known copy of them expired before their copyrights did. 1927 saw the first synchronized dialog film (The Jazz Singer). As talkies took over the big screen, studios all but gave up on preserving silent films, which were printed on delicate stock that needed careful tending. Today, 75% of all silent films are lost to history.

But some films from this era do survive, and they are now in the public domain. This is true irrespective of whether they were restored at a later date. Restoration does not create a new copyright. "The Supreme Court has made clear that 'the sine qua non of copyright is originality.'"

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/499/340

There's some great music entering the public domain next year! "The Best Things In Life Are Free"; "I Scream, You Scream, We All Scream for Ice-Cream"; "Puttin' On the Ritz"; "'S Wonderful"; "Ol' Man River"; "My Blue Heaven" and "Mississippi Mud."

It's a banger of a year for jazz and blues, too. We get Bessie Smith's "Back Water Blues," "Preaching the Blues," and "Foolish Man Blues." We get Louis Armstrong's "Potato Head Blues" and "Gully Low Blues." We get Jelly Roll Morton's "Billy Goat Stomp," "Hyena Stomp," and "Jungle Blues." And we get Duke Ellington's "Black and Tan Fantasy" and "East St. Louis Toodle-O."

Note that these are just the compositions. No new sound recordings come into the public domain in 2023, but on January 1, 2024, all of 1923's recordings will enter the public domain, with more recordings coming in every year thereafter.

We're only a few years into the newly reopened public domain, but it's already bearing fruit. The Great Gatsby entered the public domain in 2021, triggering a rush of beautiful new editions and fresh scholarship:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/14/books/the-great-gatsby-public-domain.html

These new editions were varied and wonderful. Beehive Books produced a stunning edition, illustrated by the Balbusso Twins, with a new introduction by Wellesley's Prof William Cain:

https://beehivebooks.com/shop/gatsby

And Planet Money released a fabulous, free audiobook edition:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/01/18/peak-indifference/#gatsby

Last year saw the liberation of Winnie the Pooh, unleashing a wild and wonderful array of remixes, including a horror film ("Blood and Honey") and also innumerable, lovely illustrations and poems, created by living, working creators for contemporary audiences.

As Jenkins notes, many of the works that enter the public domain next week display and promote "racial slurs and demeaning stereotypes." The fact that these works are now in the public domain means that creators can "grapple with and reimagine them, including in a corrective way." They can do this without having to go to the Supreme Court, unlike the Alice Randall, whose "Wind Done Gone" retold "Gone With the Wind" from the enslaved characters' perspective:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wind_Done_Gone

After all this, you'd think that countries around the world would have learned their lesson on copyright term extension, but you'd be wrong. In Canada, Justin Trudeau caved to Donald Trump and retroactively expanded copyright terms by 20 years, as part of USMCA, the successor to NAFTA. Trudeau ignored teachers, professors, librarians and the Minister of Justice, who said that copyright extension should require "a modest registration requirement" – so 20 years of copyright will be tacked onto all works, including those with no owners:

https://www.michaelgeist.ca/2022/04/the-canadian-government-makes-its-choice-implementation-of-copyright-term-extension-without-mitigating-against-the-harms/

Other countries followed Canada's disastrous lead: New Zealand "agreed to extend its copyright term as a concession in trade agreements, even though this would cost around $55m [NZ dollars] annually without any compelling evidence that it would provide a public benefit":

https://www.newsroom.co.nz/nz-agrees-to-mickey-mouse-copyright-law

Wrapping up her annual post, Jenkins writes of a "melancholy" that "comes from the unnecessary losses that our current system causes—the vast majority of works that no longer retain commercial value and are not otherwise available, yet we lock them all up to provide exclusivity to a tiny minority.

"Those works which, remember, constitute part of our collective culture, are simply off limits for use without fear of legal liability. Since most of them are 'orphan works' (where the copyright owner cannot be found) we could not get permission from a rights holder even if we wanted to. And many of those works do not survive that long cultural winter."

[Image ID: A montage of works that enter the public domain on Jan 1, 2023.]

632 notes · View notes

i4bellingham · 1 year

Text

(happy) birthday : jude bellingham x reader (angst)

synopsis: jude’s birthday party wasn’t the same. it will never be the same.

warning: a misleading concept, proceed and read with utmost caution. mentions (implications) of an accident, passing

note: rainy season brings the angst in me so here we are. this is a revised fic that i did for enhypen’s jungwon in my previous wattpad account that i wrote last 2021 (i think??) just in case someone recognizes the plot lol

The craft paper that held the bouquet of flowers was nearly crumpled, snug against Jude’s palm and he placed it beside him on the ground before he can further cause any damage to the floras.

He leaned on the trunk with a sheepish smile when you jokingly frowned at him as he stared ahead.

A timid sigh left his lips before he cradled a box on his lap. It was a gift from one of his teammates in England’s national football team. You've met him a couple of times, Jude thinks. Mason Mount was his name.

You've missed a plenty of party where he normally asks you to be his plus one. Unfortunately, he couldn't exactly do that now.

You're far away. So far away from home.

But Jude would still come over and visit, every thrice a year he would. And you're grateful. Very grateful.

“How was the party?” You asked him, leaning on his shoulders.

Jude feels a breeze of air brush past his neck, and he smiles, a pained one but he smiled regardless.

“The party was an absolute blast. Could never really expect anything less from the guys you know?” He replied. “It was fun. I had fun.”

You hummed, nodding your head to his words as he began fiddling with the ring on his finger.

“They had my brother smash a cake on my face the moment I stepped foot inside the house.” Jude shook his head, an amused laugh leaving his lips as he recalled being bombed by the vanilla frosting of his cake after he locked his door. “They also had these atrocious balloons with my meme faces printed on it. It was such a horrifying sight if I'm being quite honest.”

Jude looked to his side as you remained leaning on him, a soft smile gracing his lips as he recalls yet another monstrosity in his supposed birthday party.

“I don’t know who thought it was a good idea to do a bamboozled theme cupcakes but that was not it. Quite disgusting if I'm bein’ honest with you but no one really did stepped up to own up to that but it was fine.” He pursed his lips with a chuckle. “Jadon was the unlucky one for always picking out the bamboozled flavors though, nearly threw up in the carpet when he got the rotten egg instead of the vanilla flavored cupcakes.”

You laughed alongside him, imagining the reaction Sancho probably had knowing he can be a tad bit dramatic especially when the situation calls for it. But a rotten egg flavored cupcake? You nearly heaved dry air imagining what it might have tasted like.

Silence then prevailed as Jude got lost in his own thoughts and you silently observed your best friend as he stared right ahead of him. A somber expression took over the youthful and joyful glow in his eyes, the smile he had long vanished into a tight-lipped expression to mask the pain and sadness he was feeling.

“I miss you.” He muttered, fingers tugging on the small plants on the ground as he muttered the three words over and over again.

There is a deep-rooted ache in your chest, a sensation that felt like a thousand knives being plunged to your heart as you eye the fragile state your best friend was in.

You lost it when the first tear left his eyes, cascading down his cheeks as he fisted his palms over the ground.

“I just wish you were still here with me you know?” His voice broke, and Jude tried so hard to stop his tears from flowing, but to accompany the pain in his heart, they too never once stopped. “I miss you so much, and every single fucking day I wish that I was there to get you home so you don't have to ride that fucking bus, and maybe this wouldn't have to happen. Every breathing moment, I just wish that you never left me...”

You left his side, crouching down in front of him. And in your faint silhouette, you reached a hand out, gently tracing his cheeks as he cried, calling out for your name, apologizing, and wishing for you to comeback.

Jude feels awful. He was supposed to come here, spend some time with you during his birthday. The 3rd one that you already missed. He wasn't supposed to come here and cry his eyes out. But even this being the 3rd time, the pain in his chest never hurt less. The pain that lingered in his heart and mind, the same one that's been there since your passing was a hard one to tame. So heavy and remorseless as it ate him up whole, so unbothered to bite him where he's hurt the most.

And while everyone else seemed to have coped just fine, for Jude, it wasn't the same. Everyday hurt just the same, every single waking moment brought a new batch of tears to his eyes. It wasn't going easy for him, not even 3 years later.

“I just want you back here with me... that's all I want but I know I can't have that. And that is what hurts me the most, every single fucking day. It's easier to fake that I'm fine than tell the others that I'm not okay at all... I don't even think that I will be okay...”

The faint silhouette of your fingers traced his jaw, thumbs running over the skin of his cheeks where his tears were freely running down as he spoke.

They left a light feeling in your fingers, but cold against Jude’s skin.

It just wasn't the same anymore.

“I'm sorry.” You laid your forehead against his, muttering the only two words that you could speak of at that very moment. “I'm sorry. I am so sorry...”

A cold breeze of air passed by Jude, the gentle touch of cold air nipping at his skin, closer to his face as he closed his eyes to savor the feeling. It was a mere reminder that you were there in that moment with him, although not physically existing and wrapped in the warmth of his arms, Jude knew you were there, looking out for him just as you always do.

It was bittersweet, but he cherished that moment with you before your gravestone, watching the sun set in the distance just like the old times when you were still alive and with him.

And as Jude left, there is a neatly placed bouquet of red tulips by your grave. A bouquet of flowers that spoke of the words and feelings he never once had the chance to tell you.

not proofread.

#☆ i4bellingham writes.#☆ jude bellingham #jude bellingham x reader #jude bellingham x you #jude bellingham imagines #jude bellingham fanfiction #jude bellingham fanfic #jude bellingham angst #jude bellingham one-shot #jude bellingham

284 notes · View notes

theculturedmarxist · 10 days

Text

Conor here: The following post goes into the ins and outs of the case ahead of the April 23 beginning of the case, the outcome of which seems to be a foregone conclusion and will be a major blow to labor.>New York Times labor reporter Noam Scheiber noted back in January when the Supremes agreed to hear the case that the very fact that they did so meant they would likely rule so that it’s harder to unionize. The reasoning behind that belief isn’t just the conservative majority on the court but also that the courtdeclined to hear a similar case in 2014 (back before the current conservative majority).

By Michael Z. Green, professor of law and the director of the Workplace Law Program at Texas A&M University. Originally published at The Conversation.

What factors must a court consider when the National Labor Relations Board requests an order requiring an employer to rehire terminated workers before the completion of unfair labor practice proceedings?

That’s the central question that the Supreme Court will consider on April 23, 2024, during oral arguments in the Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney case. The global coffee shop chain is challenging the NLRB, the federal agency responsible for enforcing U.S. workers’ rights to organize, saying that the agency used the more labor-friendly of two available standards when it asked a federal court to order the company to reinstate workers at a Memphis, Tennessee, store who lost their jobs in 2022 amid a nationwide unionizing campaign.

The Conversation U.S. asked Texas A&M law professor Michael Z. Green to explain what’s behind this case and how the court’s eventual decision, expected by the end of June, could affect the right to organize unions in the United States.

What Is This Case About?

Seven baristas who were attempting to organize a union at a Starbucks shop in Memphis, Tennessee, were fired in February 2022. Starbucks justified their dismissal by asserting that the employees, sometimes called the “Memphis 7,” had broken company rules by reopening their store after closing time and inviting people who weren’t employees, including a television crew, to go inside.

In June of that year, the shop became one of more than 400 Starbucks locations since 2021 that have voted in favor of joining Workers United, an affiliate of the Service Employees International Union.

While a complaint over the mass dismissal was pending with the NLRB, Kathleen McKinney, the NLRB director for the region that includes Memphis, sought an injunction in a federal district court to force Starbucks to give the Memphis 7 their jobs back while the case proceeded. The company must “cease its unlawful conduct immediately so that all Starbucks workers can fully and freely exercise their labor rights,” she said.

By August 2022, a judge had ordered Starbucks to do that, and in September the baristas were back on staff.

Although the seven baristas got their jobs back and the union vote prevailed, the company has appealed the case all the way to the Supreme Court because it believes the court should not have ordered the company to reinstate the workers while NLRB proceedings were still pending.

But the NLRB argues, and the lower courts agreed, that the terminations chilled further union activities at the store even after the election.

Nevertheless, Starbucks argues that firing the seven workers had no effect because employees at that coffeehouse still voted in favor of unionization.

What’s Being Challenged?

The justices will have to decide which approach federal courts should use when they consider requests for injunctions like this one.

Currently, five appeals courts, including the one where this case arose, base their decision on a two-part test.

First, the courts determine whether there is “reasonable cause” to believe an unfair labor practice has occurred. Second, they determine whether granting an injunction would be “just and proper.”

Four other appeals courts use a four-part test.

First, the courts ask whether the unfair labor practice case is likely to succeed on the merits in establishing that labor violations occurred. Second, they look to see if the workers the NLRB is attempting to protect will face irreparable harm without an injunction. Third, after showing likelihood of success and irreparable harm, they ask whether those factors outweigh any hardships the employer is likely to face due to compliance with the court’s order. Fourth, they ask whether issuing the injunction serves the public interest.

Two other appeals courts use a hybrid test that appears to have components of both of the tests. They ask whether issuing an injunction would be “just and proper” by considering the elements of the four-part test.

In its Supreme Court brief, Starbucks argues that having to give workers their jobs back in these circumstances can cause “irreparable injury” and that it’s an “extraordinary remedy.”

The NLRB, in its Supreme Court brief, says that the injunction was proper in this case because Starbucks terminated 80% of the union organizing committee at the Memphis store and the evidence showed the chilling effect this action had on the “lone remaining union activist.” According to the NLRB, this chilling effect “harmed the union campaign in ways that a subsequent Board ruling could not repair.”

A labor reporter discussing Starbucks’ unfair labor practice cases, including the one involving the Memphis 7, determined that NLRB administrative law judges had found labor violations in 48 out of 49 cases.

What’s the Potential Impact of the Court’s Eventual Ruling on This Case?

While the case may sound like it’s only about seven people employed at a single coffee shop, the scope is wider than that.

Although the NLRB issues hundreds of unfair labor practice complaints against employers every year, it usually doesn’t turn to the courts to force the rehiring of employees. It only sought these types of injunctions 17 times in 2023, for example.

And seven of those efforts involved Starbucks. Despite the small number of overall injunctions, the large number of unfair labor practice complaints – and the eventual 48 out of 49 findings of violations – might support the rare use of injunctions in this case.

If the Supreme Court rules in favor of Starbucks, the overall impact seems unclear.

For one thing, the court will have picked one test over another without any proof that one is more likely to result in an injunction or not. In addition, the underlying unfair labor practice case has been resolved, since the workers have gotten their jobs back and their workplace has joined a union.

What’s more, Starbucks has agreed to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement with the union – which has continued to make inroads at the company’s coffee shops.

Because the NLRB rarely seeks injunctions, the fact that this issue has obtained enough importance for consideration by the Supreme Court seems odd considering its valuable time and the limited number of cases it can consider each year. But let’s see what the court’s majority decides.

#nlrb #union busting #starbucks #supreme court #biden administration #labor rights #naked capitalism

19 notes · View notes

ruiniel · 8 months

Note

i think i'm too late so obvs feel free to ignore but i saw alucard smut fic and yelled so... i'm thinking outside (wherever lmao), and "I thought u were dead but you're not!" vibes? >_> (or...anything fluff/angsty alskdfj.)

While we are silent

Fandom: Castlevania series (2017-2021)

Pairing: Alucard x F!Reader

Follow up to A Place To Hide

Rating: Explicit 🔞(in Part II)

Count: 1.3k

Also on ao3

You watch the crowd on this chill November night, each nursing the flicker of a candle as they follow a path toward the village cemetery. Most are bundled in thick layers of clothing, as this time of year has seen the advent of less forgiving weather, far too soon.

Removing your glove, you raise a clawed hand into the air; only to feel... if only you could feel the cold as you did before, if only it could harm you.

Another, larger hand cups yours as it curls, bringing it down between the two of you. “What happens now?” asks Adrian.

He stands at your side, close enough that you sense his body heat, radiating off him like the memory of sun rays on skin. You crave more of it, always more, all the time, ever since… “The priest will hold the rite for those no longer among the living… and the people, their families, will tidy up the graves of their dead,” you continue in a hollow voice, remembering. You’d missed them, the chatter, humanity. “They bedeck the graves with flowers…” you say, blinking as fading candlelight reflects eerily in your eyes, “with chrysanthemums, or crowns made of evergreen leaves.”

“That sounds… beautiful, in its own way,” Adrian comments, bringing an arm around you.

You tuck yourself into him, ensuring your hood shields your face—especially your eyes. As startling as his own appearance might be, unlike him, you would swiftly give yourself away, and despite recent alliances and the fragile peace his father had forged by the strength of both vampire and human arms you’d been warned and knew it well: the base mortal fear of the unknown always prevails.

In short, you’d like to avoid any unfortunate events, if you can, and he understands this better than anyone.

“Why the candles, though?”

“It’s said they help light the way, guiding the souls of the departed to the other side.”

“The other side…”

You glance up at him, at the expression of contemplation on his face; every feature is visible to you, despite the shroud of darkness.

The pinpricks of light are far and smaller now, a procession of wisps wandering away.

“What?” Adrian asks with a drowsy smile, not looking your way.

“Thank you for joining me here.”

Adrian turns to you, sensing your mood. It never left you; ever since that damned night, when you were desperate and struggling, slashing with your dagger at a face pale in the moonlight. Whenever you close your eyes, you see it—but Adrian doesn’t know. You’d declined to tell him, no matter the gentle probing once or twice, no matter the shiver in his fingers, the clawing anger turned to talons each time. The anger you should feel, but find you do not; anger at the one who took your life, who robbed you of choice.

“What else do you wish to do? Come, this is your night.” He wears inconspicuous, plain clothing for your excursion in the nearby town, but the fine cut would still draw many a trained eye were it not for night’s shadow.

You stare after the retreating people again, then to your feet, and glance at the gauze of light flooding the dirt road from the nearby tavern. Once, you would have gone in without a second thought, to be happily ignored, and when you were yet human, Adrian by your side was a deterrent to any trouble.

But now… you clench your fist. “Why don’t we return to the castle?” Your hand glides down his chest. You reach, fingers twirling a lock of his pale hair. “I’ve had enough of study for this week…” you smile, trying to change the mood; heart unbeating, yet still, you possess the capacity to feel, and that is a blessing or an anathema depending on circumstance. “I could pose for you if you like.” A grin slips across your face, a ploy against yourself. He’s the one thread keeping you together, and you’re trying. You both are.

The war is over, but still, at times, you catch him staring into nothingness, unobserved; a shadow he does not sense if you’re careful enough until you make yourself known. He looks haunted in those moments, as though a tapestry depicting things foreign to you has been drawn before his eyes. Moments together help him, too, though every so often he still falls prey to his perceived share of guilt for your state. But etching, painting… nothing for nothing’s sake, done together, is what still seems to move him.

You will take from my warmth. Words once spoken gleam brightly in your mind as his arm slides around your waist. “... that is a fine suggestion, I’m forced to admit …” he says with a soft sigh. “... any particular ideas?”

Your forced smile feels genuine now, your body pressing closer into his, the perceived warmth of longing sparking within. “Didn’t you mention, yesterday, that you’d like…”

His eyes widen for a breath, expression swiftly melting into one of tender mischief. His touch glides through your hair, graceful along the nape of your neck. “I doubt I’ll manage more than a sketch if that is to be the case.”

You shake your head as thrill blooms—the full spectrum of human emotions and needs is still there, an unravaged cloister. It feels like a refuge, the last remaining piece of your old self, and you’re grateful for that much.

You disentangle yourself from him; together you take the path unnoticed towards the end of the human establishment, skittering and winding ahead through the forest. The nightly dark affects neither of you, no one is in sight at this hour. It’s you, and him, and the wind in the crowns of withering trees.

The stars have disappeared. The sonorous voice of the woods is mellow, with his help you’d learned to filter out all the much too loud sounds your mind had begun to perceive, and again you can be at ease, finding some enjoyment in the twigs snapping beneath your shoes as you walk.

Somewhere along the way Adrian begins a soft banter, teasing you with hidden meanings and suggestions concerning your proposal.

“... you’re impossible,” you shake your head, and if nothing else, this, at least, feels right at last.

“But you like me that way,” Adrian speaks in that mellow tone of his, and you’re about to say something just to feel the heat rising through him, always a delight.

You stop in your tracks, fingers tightening around his.

“... what’s wrong?” But then he feels it also; you see it in his eyes.

It must be the predator instinct he’d said would awaken and the pitched awareness it entails, as you sense the peculiar and disturbing wave of alertness, a sharpening of senses so sudden it aches. Another.

Adrian turns, eyes narrowing. “We’re not alone.”

“I know.” You each listen closely, but there is no breath no beat no warmth.

Before you know what you’re doing, your palms are set against his chest, pushing him roughly away. Something darts between you, striking the trunk of a tree.

You stare at the arrow even as the prickling up your spine becomes ice needles, the glimmer unmistakable: silver-tipped, the same used in the war.

Adrian is swifter than you still, but he’d not taken a weapon. And the glimmering pairs of eyes staring at you from the shadows come nearer, behind you—before you. Adrian’s voice fades from your hearing.

“... Vampires; hostile.”

“Finally,” one speaks, and your teeth gnash at the voice even as Adrian’s warmth meets you where you stand, back to back. The utterance is pain.

“... the prince—”

Dread awakens unmatched but for the bite that made you, burning like hot coal pressed to skin; your insides are roiling thunder but you stand as stiff as a corpse, limbs cramped as though the mere inflection has turned you to stone.

“—with my fledgling.”

MASTERLIST: CASTLEVANIA SERIES x READER

More of my work is on AO3 [many stories not on tumblr]

BLOG MASTERPOST (all you need to know)

Likes/comments/reblogs always and forever appreciated

#ruiniel:fanfiction #alucard castlevania x reader #adrian tepes x reader #castlevania x reader #alucard x reader #alucard castlevania x you #sorry it took so.long chthonic #alucard x you #x reader #vampire reader #castlevania x you #castlevania imagine #castlevania smut #alucard smut #adrian tepes x you

67 notes · View notes

mightyflamethrower · 10 days

Text

Trans Vampire Sexually Assaults Cognitively Disabled Teen

There is nothing our society values more highly than inclusion, so let’s not forget to include in the Transsexual Violence Hall of Horrors a serial sex offender in Wisconsin named Adam Hetke:

Hetke, who identifies as a female vampire named Sabrina, has a lengthy criminal history involving multiple sex offenses against women and outstanding charges related to a homicide.

Regarding the homicide, he allegedly strangled someone with a power cord and blamed it on a demon. He has now been convicted of assaulting an intellectually disabled teenage girl.

Hetke, 35, was charged in July of 2021 with first-degree sexual assault by threatening the use of a dangerous weapon and second-degree sexual assault of a mentally ill victim. The assault occurred in Waukesha, and involved a 16-year-old cognitively disabled girl Hetke had met at a local gas station.

Hetke was already a lifer on the sex offender registry before he decided he is a woman. He reportedly also identifies as an “incarnation of Satan” — which is more believable than the Sabrina the vampire persona.

However, according to the prevailing ideology, whatever Hetke declares himself to be is his true self. No doubt they will make special accommodations for him in prison to protect him from daylight and crosses.

Proving once again tranz people are just mentally ill. If it's normal why does it take three surgeons, artificial hormones, and a busload of shrinks??

18 notes · View notes

an-shu · 5 months

Text

Socials

Welcome.

Many of you may know me as Spoopercorp if you're a senior citizen in the Supercorp fandom.

Others may be familiar with Local_Asshole on AO3 or Local-Asshole on FF, the latter of which I will no longer post fanmade works on. These are virtual spaces where I shared my Supercorp fanfiction like Desolate Scars, Eclipse, Limbo, and Voices when I was a teenager—naturally, when I read my previous work during a time I was angsty and hormonal I CRINGE because I feel emotionally mature now comparatively.

I've reignited the passion I once had for writing in the midst of a damning 9 to 5 corporate America job after graduation. Unfortunately, this hyperfixation rediscovery was made after Supergirl ended in 2021, where its online fandom activity is currently calm. Despite that, I hope the remaining fans who still froth at the mouth for Lena Luthor and Kara Danvers, and who still love and support Katie McGrath and Melissa Benoist, stumble upon this post and wait to see a Supercorp fanfic I'm almost 100,000 words in and eager to share.

Please also follow me on Twitter at Spoopercorp of course, the profile is a work in progress.

Also, I feel like I should explain my sudden absence in the Supercorp fandom; simply put, I wanted to focus on my studies, but also some users were loudly toxic and I couldn't quite stand it anymore. Even after blocking, it felt like their negativity and mean behaviors bled out within the fandom and to other fandoms and ships. BUT HYPERFIXATION PREVAILS YET AGAIN.

#melissa benoist #kara danvers #supercorp #kara x lena #kara zor el #kara zor-el #katie mcgrath #lena luthor #supergirl #lena x kara #kara danvers x lena luthor #lena luthor x kara danvers #spoopercorp #karlena #superluthor

20 notes · View notes

ryanlowrie · 21 days

Text

@secretagentsunshine has been a supporter of the Paper Stage recreational art project since 2021. Favour projects are flattering but Patreon Pledgers have priority participation and have paid the postage on their pages if they want them. Not wanting to reveal your home address is completely understandable but if you’re not sharing I’m not caring. I have dozens of people who want to be drawn in my idiosyncratic style. Paper Stage prevails

#outsider art #ryan lowrie #my art #canadian #ryanlowrie #pencil crayon #drawing #art #illustration

13 notes · View notes

blondietalks · 7 months

Text

Is blogging still relevant in the age of TikToks and Instagram?

Hi, it’s blondietalks here! On this week of my Digital Communities thread, I will be exploring the topic of blogging and its relevance in the current Internet atmosphere.

In my opinion, blogging is still relevant in some ways. However, it is incomparable to the relevance of TikTok and Instagram as the public spheres on these platforms are getting more engagement by the day.

The Pilot episode of the Internet: Blogging

Blogging was the foundation of the rise of the Internet. Blog websites – formerly known as weblogs, created the first public sphere for people all over the world to come together online. Before blogging, traditional websites that were set up by big companies did not allow a two-way communication system for the readers to interact with (Duermyer 2022). Blogs have become a public sphere by allowing equal participation for the users and the sharing of public opinion.

Knowing this it is no surprise that a large chunk of users still use the Internet to blog as their way to embody their online presence. Being a part of the blogging community – for example, being a member of a subgroup on Reddit – gives people a sense of community and support from the peers whom they interact with. In all its glory, people still blog because there are others who still demand for it and engage with it, in turn making it somewhat relevant.

The Relevance of Blogging

When people search on Google “why does my Epson printer won’t go online”, they most likely wouldn’t want to watch a whole video explaining why. This is where blog posts come in handy when people are searching for content that they can glance through quickly. Blog posts are still mainly the first result that appears when you search for a topic on Google. The Google algorithm that prevails blog websites on their platform is what keeps these blogs around.

Some people turn to blogging because it gives them a sense of anonymity. For people outside of my circle, you wouldn’t know who I am writing this blog post on Tumblr. People feel more comfortable writing their thoughts online instead of recording a video of themselves talking on media-based platforms. Based on an article on BBC (2021), online anonymity helps people to openly speak up about their concerns while protecting their privacy. Using platforms that focus on pieces of writing instead of media that might expose their identity allows the participation of anonymous users.

Blogging vs. TikTok and Instagram

So how does blogging fit in the current rise of TikTok and Instagram?

Blogs are getting less engagement these days because people are more attracted to fast-paced content. As the attention span of social media users get shorter and shorter, content that are digestible and easy to follow will get the engagement that they strive for.

An example of how Instagram can be used to capture the attention of social media users is the phenomenon of spreading political and environmental education with the use of infographics. Instead of reading through lengthy blogs about a chosen topic, resourceful accounts such as the Instagram account below make information more digestible and attainable for people.

@/impact on Instagram posting an infographic about the history of slavery. Link: https://www.instagram.com/p/CwS5HGGu1wH/?hl=en&img_index=1

People also prefer TikTok and Instagram over blog websites because of the intelligent algorithms that these applications offer. These platforms can learn a user’s interest just by their engagement and activity on the application. According to Huang (2022), generation Z are using TikTok as their search engine because of its powerful algorithm that makes searching for information more convenient. TikTok is constantly learning the user’s behaviour and presenting them with content that is in their favour.

Video-based platforms give people an enriched experience with visual stimulation compared to blog websites. Based on Huang (2022), a TikTok user stated that a restaurant review on the application feels more genuine based on watching the reviewer’s facial expressions. People use TikTok to obtain product and establishment reviews because they can observe it first-hand through video recording.

The conclusion

So, in conclusion, just because blogging is not trending through the charts anymore, that doesn't mean that it’s completely irrelevant. I believe that blogging is still relevant as ever because people will go back and forth between platforms and in ways of expressing themselves on the Internet. Some days they feel like hopping onto TikTok trends – and another day they might write up their opinion on Tumblr under a hashtag that no one else is reading through.

That's all for this week, catch up with you guys soon :)

List of references Duermyer, R 2022, ‘What is blogging?’, The Balance, 29 November, viewed 1 October 2023, <https://www.thebalancemoney.com/blogging-what-is-it-1794405>. Huang, K 2022, ‘For Gen Z, TikTok is the new search engine’, The New York Times, 16 September, viewed 1 October 2023, <https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/16/technology/gen-z-tiktok-search-engine.html>. BBC 2021, ‘Social media: should people be allowed to be anonymous online?’, BBC, 26 February, viewed 1 October 2023, <https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/56114122 >.

#MDA20009 #Week4

22 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 7 months

Text

All the attention in Washington is on the looming government shutdown, and understandably so.

Barring a last-minute spending agreement on Capitol Hill ― which is to say, barring a last-minute outburst of sanity by the extremist House Republicans preventing an agreement ― the federal government will officially run out of spending authority at 11:59 p.m. Saturday night.

Agency workers will be furloughed, except for members of the military, air traffic controllers and other essential employees who will have to work without pay. And while the federal government will keep issuing checks for automatic entitlements like Social Security, within a few days it will have to cut off funds for the Women, Infants and Children system that provides food benefits to 7 million low-income Americans. A prolonged shutdown would affect still more federal services, and likely deal a blow to the economy as well. But whether or not a shutdown happens, and however long it lasts, a whole other kind of fiscal shock is about to hit the country. And while its effects will materialize more slowly than the shutdown’s, they could be more long-lasting.

I’m talking about the end of billions in emergency funding for child care that the federal government has been providing since 2021, as part of its COVID-19 relief efforts. The money was a lifeline for providers who were getting hammered, first by a decline in customers because of illness and public health closures and since then by the need to pay the higher wages it takes to compete for workers in a tighter labor market.

That money also runs out at midnight Saturday, creating what has come to be known in Washington as the “child care funding cliff.” The term is slightly misleading: Because of the way the disbursements move from the U.S. Treasury to states and then to individual providers, the effect will be gradual. But it will be real and it will likely be significant, because providers still need money. They and the families that rely on them were struggling even before the pandemic, because of the inescapable, seemingly paradoxical economics of child care: Reliable, quality programs require salaries high enough to attract and keep talented workers, but the tuition and fees to support those salaries are more than many families can afford on their own. And the gap is probably even bigger now than it was a few years ago.

In that sense, the emergency funding was more like a Band-Aid on a wound that had been bleeding for a while and is still bleeding now. With no more Band-Aid — i.e., no more emergency funding — providers will react by reducing hours or staff, or charging more to families that are already struggling to pay, or shutting down altogether.

Predicting the precise impact is difficult, because the child care market is in such flux. A widely cited estimate by The Century Foundation says the end result could be as many as 3.2 million fewer child care slots. Critics say that’s wildly inflated.

But whichever view is closer to reality, it’s hard to imagine so much money coming out of the sector without providers and families feeling it. The economy could take a hit too, if affected parents cut back their own working hours or drop out of the labor force, though it’s likely many would simply return to more stressful double shifts as workers and caregivers — in other words, a replay of what happened to so many at the peak of the pandemic.

Precisely because it will take a while for the federal money to stop working its way through to providers, Congress still has some time to approve new funding, as Democratic leaders and their allies have been proposing with increasing urgency. But they won’t prevail unless even more elected officials — and the public at large — come to see child care as the kind of national priority the U.S. has never made it.

31 notes · View notes

strideofpride · 10 months

Note

On that note, can you imagine how INSANE the media circus would be if it did come out publicly that Chuck and Blair illegally backdated their marriage certificate and the case against them was actually re-opened? Especially in 2023, at a time when anti-billionaire “eat the rich” sentiment has become very mainstream, and true crime is one of the most popular and profitable genres of entertainment?

Like, the events of season six happen so fast that we don’t really get to appreciate just how wild they are from the outside looking in. Imagine if Michael Bloomberg or pre-presidency Donald Trump died in a car crash, and their then-teenage progeny took over their real estate empires. Everyone just gets used to the idea of a little boy real estate mogul, I guess, and a few years pass, and then - surprise! They were faking their death all along!! Yes there was a funeral, yes they were legally declared dead, but who cares! They’re back baby, and ready to go back to being the same shitbags they were before!

Except, a mere handful of months later, they’re dead again - this time having gone careening off the side of one of their company’s most famous buildings (imagine if Donald Trump died falling off of Trump Tower lmaoooo). Did they fake it again? Was it foul play? By the time rumors start to swirl of the alleged involvement of their recently deposed nepotism baby, the cops close the case and rule it an accident. Their heir, still barely an adult, retakes the reigns of leadership - newly married, a detail no one realizes is suspicious because they likely have no idea that the spouse was at the scene of the crime.

Years pass. YouTubers and online conspiracy theorists periodically bring up the case, but the public at large once again more or less accepts the public narrative. Another piece of shit real-estate mogul gets elected president, and the attitude of the general public towards the uber wealthy turns increasingly hostile. Then there’s 2020, and 2021, and 2022, and- And then. “Billionaire boy and family linked to father’s mysterious death after discovery of faked marriage license”.

Even though we, the audience, knows Chuck didn’t actually kill his father, do you think in a world where this was an actual case involving actual public figures anyone would believe that? The coverup is so ridiculously suspicious that the general public almost definitely assumes they really did do the crime.

And consider the players in this case - a terrible billionaire who died a deliciously ironic death, his somehow worse son who in a post-#MeToo world is already a PR nightmare waiting to happen, and the ex-princess of Monaco (?!) who just so happens to already be tabloid fodder. If they get especially unlucky, Dan (a pretty famous novelist, at least according to the reboot), Serena (a 2000s era “it girl” and semi-celebrity), and Nate (an ex-NYC mayoral candidate, media mogul, and in universe Kennedy equivalent) might just find themselves implicated too - or at least forced to testify - given they were at the very much in public wedding where any rando could have snapped a picture.

There is just soooo much fucked up entertainment value in a case like this I can’t imagine it being anything less than a public fucking spectacle, and not the kind Chuck or Blair could just shake off. I genuinely do not know how they could absolve themselves in the court of public opinion if it actually went to trial, even if they managed to prevail legally.

Oh my god. Okay well, first of all, I really want the fake Serial podcast that unpacks all of this lol. Someone should make that lmao.

"little boy real estate mogul" took me out lololololol

also like...faking your death is a crime right??? how was Bart just able to re-enter society so easily??? did they ever say???

i'd also like to point out that it's actually much vaguer whether or not Chuck killed his father. They cut away during their fight and then next thing you see is Bart hanging onto the edge. Chuck himself says that he isn't sure whether or not he pushed him or Bart fell over. but also Chuck and Blair both just stood there and did nothing to help Bart before he fell, which is involuntary manslaughter I believe

But seriously though, you're so right anon that all of this was made for true crime. In 2030, someone makes a "Jinx" style doc about Chuck I bet

#anti chair #gossip girl #anti chuck bass #anti blair waldorf #anti bart bass #gg meta #anonymous #strideofprideanswers

33 notes · View notes

galerymod · 1 month

Text

The crisis of the world - 1933 and 2023

Thomas Weber

Memorise content

What does 1933 teach us? If we understand National Socialism as a form of illiberal democracy, we can see that today's variants could easily slide into something worse. Then as now, exaggerated perceptions of crisis play an important role.

In times when several major crises are brewing into what is perceived as an existential poly-crisis, fears of the political consequences of this perception spread. The most spectacular case of the collapse of a democracy - the collapse of the Weimar Republic in January 1933 - is therefore repeatedly scrutinised in the hope of discovering lessons for the present.

A prime example of this in recent years is what has been happening in the United States: since the New York Times columnist Roger Cohen greeted his readers with "Welcome to Weimar America" in December 2015, "Weimerica" has developed into a veritable genre of opinion pieces and books. After the attack on the Capitol in Washington in January 2021, the son of an Austrian SA man also used his fame as a Hollywood actor and former governor of the US state of California to record a video message to the world: In it, Arnold Schwarzenegger spoke about his father and drew direct comparisons between the Reichspogromnacht, the Nazi anti-Jewish pogrom of 9 November 1938, and the situation in the US in early 2021. to resolve the footnote[3]

It is therefore not surprising that Adolf Hitler is more dominant in public discourse today than he was a generation ago. Between 1995 and 2018, the frequency with which Hitler was mentioned in English-language books rose by an astonishing 55 per cent. In Spanish-language books, the frequency even increased by more than 210 per cent in the same period. To break up the footnote[4] This increase is a result of both a growing perception of crisis and another phenomenon: an awareness of how much the world we live in today can be traced back directly and indirectly to the horrors of the "Third Reich" and the Second World War.

But the world that emerged in 1933 is not invoked everywhere in order to understand and interpret today's situation. Strangely enough, one country in the heart of Europe has taken a different direction: Germany itself. Here, the frequency with which Hitler was mentioned in books fell by more than two thirds between 1995 and 2018. The same trend applies to other terms that refer to the darkest chapter of Germany's past, such as "National Socialism" and "Auschwitz". To resolve the footnote[5] However, a declining interest in National Socialism should not lead to the false assumption that today's Germany is less strongly characterised by the legacy of the "Third Reich" and the horror that the Germans spread throughout Europe. The legacy of National Socialism defines who the Germans are, and has done so since the day Hitler was appointed Reich Chancellor in January 1933.

New "special path"

In Germany, there was probably not so much explicit publicity about National Socialism because it was believed that the country had learnt from the past and built an exemplary political system with a corresponding society that had internalised the lessons of National Socialism. The prevailing narrative of the early Berlin Republic was that Germany had taken a "special path" towards dictatorship and genocide in the 19th and early 20th centuries. With reunification in 1990, however, the country had finally left this path and had fully arrived in the West. To resolve the footnote[6] According to this interpretation, the Berlin Republic was a new player in international politics, working side by side with its partners in Europe and the world to secure peace and stability at home and abroad.

However, the varying frequency with which Hitler, Auschwitz and National Socialism are referred to in books in Germany and abroad shows that Germany did not abandon its special path in 1990, but rather embarked on a new one. Germany's actual special path is that of its second (post-war) republic, which was founded in 1990 and, if one follows the argumentation of journalist and historian Nils Minkmar, collapsed in the wake of Putin's war of aggression against Ukraine. Germany's second republic, writes Minkmar, "took a holiday from history, was finally able to enjoy the moment like Faust and, also like Faust, made a pact - with Putin and with bad consequences". To resolve the footnote[7] However, Germany's holiday from history came to an abrupt end with the Russian invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022. In the words of Federal Chancellor Olaf Scholz: "24 February 2022 marks a turning point in the history of our continent." To resolve the footnote[8] Scholz is right when he speaks of a turning point, but it does not primarily concern "our continent", but first and foremost his own country. The Russian invasion of Ukraine made many Germans suddenly aware of the realities of international politics that had been present to Germany's neighbours for some time.

The Faustian pact was not born of malice - Germany's second republic had been founded and governed with the best of intentions. Rather, a certain short-sightedness had prevailed that prevented many Germans from seeing what many of their international partners had long recognised after Russia's previous invasions or the shooting down of MH17 - the Malaysia Airlines plane that was shot down by a Russian missile in Ukrainian airspace on its way from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur in July 2014. And this short-sightedness is closely linked to the normative conclusions that the protagonists of the Second German Republic had drawn from the country's experience with National Socialism, which differed quite drastically from those drawn by other countries.

As a result, many Germans relied on soft power and had little interest in hard power - without realising that the former is just hot air if it is not accompanied by the latter. At the same time, many failed to recognise that Putin's aggressive approach since the day he took office was in line with earlier phases of Russian history. This is also reflected in a sharp decline in references in German-language publications to terms associated with the dark side of Russia's past, such as "Gulag", "Stalin", "Prague Spring" or "popular uprising". Dissolving the footnote[9] In English-language books, the number of mentions of the terms "Stalin" and "Prague Spring" remained relatively constant between 1995 and 2018, while mentions of the "Gulag" actually increased significantly. Resolution of the footnote[10]

The illusions that were harboured in Germany ultimately stood in the way of both even more successful European integration and the creation of an even more durable security and peace architecture. Minkmar therefore believes that a third republic must emerge from the ruins of the second: one that takes a less short-sighted view of the world around it and leaves behind the "naivety" of thinking about the world. To resolve the footnote[11] It is therefore necessary to work out lessons from the "Third Reich" for the third republic.

Historical misunderstandings

However, the myopic view of the past is not limited to Germany. In fact, many of the lessons learnt worldwide from 1933 for crisis management in the 2020s are based on historical misunderstandings. For example, although there are countless books about the "Third Reich" and its horrors, in many cases, and without realising it, they reproduce clichés dating back to Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels, or they portray Hitler and the National Socialists only as madmen driven by hatred, racism and anti-Semitism. However, such approaches will never understand why so many supporters of National Socialism saw themselves as idealists. And they will not be able to explain why, according to Hitler, reason, not emotion, should determine the actions of National Socialism. On the resolution of the footnote[12]

A reductionist approach to the question of what characterised Hitler and other National Socialists is dangerous. It tempts us to look for false warning signs in today's world and to search for Hitler revenants and National Socialists in the wrong places. We are therefore recommended to read Thomas Mann's essay "Brother Hitler" from 1938, in which he portrays the dictator as a product of the same traditions in which he himself had grown up. In doing so, he opens our eyes to the realisation that it is not the angry crybabies, but above all people "like us" who are open to dismantling democracy in times of crisis. In fact, as soon as we take the ideas of the National Socialists seriously, it becomes disturbingly clear that many people supported these policies in the period from the 1920s to the 1940s for almost the same reasons that we so vehemently reject National Socialism today - not least the conviction that political legitimacy should come from the people and that equality is an ideal worth fighting for.

It is therefore important to dispel various misconceptions about the death of democracy in 1933 that are still taught in German schools today, including the idea that the seeds of Weimar's self-destruction were sown as early as 1919, that the "unstable Weimar constitution (.... ) ultimately led to the self-dissolution of the first German democracy", that "coalitions capable of governing [became] impossible because there were too many splinter parties", On the dissolution of the footnote[13] that the rise of Hitler resulted from the strength of the German conservatives, that the world economic crisis played the decisive role in the death of German democracy, that Germans supported the National Socialists, because they longed for the return of the authoritarian state of the past and rejected democracy in any form, or that the actions of the National Socialists did little to bring Hitler to power - which is evident, for example, in the tendency to speak only of a "transfer of power" in relation to the events of 1933 and not of a process that was both a "transfer of power" and a "seizure of power". On the resolution of the footnote[14]

The beliefs of the National Socialists and the appeal of their ideas cannot be understood if we do not take seriously the central apparent contradictions at the core of National Socialism, namely that the National Socialists destroyed democracy and socialism in the name of overcoming an all-encompassing, existential mega-crisis and creating a supposedly better and truer democracy and socialism. The National Socialists preached that all power must come from the people, not out of insincere and opportunistic Machiavellianism, but because they believed it. The promise of a National Socialist illiberal "people's community democracy" as a collectivist and marginalising concept of self-determination was widely accepted and promised to overcome what was supposedly the greatest crisis in centuries. This made 1933 possible and ultimately brought the world to the gates of hell.

So if we understand National Socialism as a manifestation of illiberal democracy, we see that today's variants of illiberal democracy could very easily slide into something much worse in times of crisis than we are currently experiencing in many places around the world. If we refrain from a reductionist account of National Socialism, we will recognise that the parallels between the present and the past lie primarily in the dangers posed by illiberal democracy and the general perception of crisis.

Furthermore, if we understand National Socialism as a political religion, we can understand why Germans followed its siren song en masse. Hitler's political religion demanded a double commitment from converts: firstly, to National Socialist orthodoxy - adherence to 'correct' beliefs and the practice of rituals - and secondly, to National Socialist orthopraxy - the 'ethical' behaviour prescribed by orthodoxy. In this way, acts of violence and war against internal and external "enemies of the people" were given a moral and even heroic significance - because they supposedly served a "higher" purpose, the good of one's own "national community". The belief systems of National Socialism are therefore inextricably linked to the violence and horrors of the "Third Reich". In other words, while it may well be true that liberal democracy brings with it a "peace dividend", illiberal democracy - at least in its totalitarian, messianic incarnations - can easily generate a "genocide and war dividend" if people believe they can overcome an existential crisis in this way.

Just as the National Socialist mindset should be taken seriously as a key driver of violent and extreme behaviour, the National Socialists themselves should also be understood as political actors with a clear plan for the future. Although it often looked as if they were merely reacting to others, it was precisely this reactive character of National Socialist behaviour that was a tactic - and a very successful one at that - that explains not only the developments in 1933, but also the dynamics of twelve years of Nazi rule. The path from the seizure of power to the settlement policy in the East, to total war and to a war policy of extermination and genocide was by no means long and tortuous - in the self-perception of its actors, it was the path to overcoming an existential polycrisis.

What does 1933 teach us?

The way in which the National Socialists succeeded in seizing and consolidating power and ultimately pursuing radical policies has more in common with the cunning of Frank Underwood, the fictional US president from the Netflix series "House of Cards", than with many of the portrayals that question whether their rise was coolly calculated. The political style and the illusion game of the National Socialists, the undermining and destruction of norms and institutions as well as the pursuit of a hidden agenda are increasingly becoming characteristics of politics in our time as well. Understanding the year 1933 should therefore help us to better understand today's challenges.

We therefore need a defensive democracy with strong guard rails in order to be able to counter the perception of an existential polycrisis. This includes strong party-political organisations that - unlike in daydreams of the transformation of parties into "movements" - prevent the internal takeover by radicals. Crucially, strong party structures also provide a toolkit to deal with polarised societies by both representing and containing divisions. The behaviour of conservative parties is particularly important here. German conservatism played a central role in the fall of Weimar democracy, but in a counter-intuitive way, not through its strength but through its weakness and the fragmentation of its organisations.

However, guard rails offer little or no protection if they are poorly positioned. Thus, a look beyond Germany reveals that in trying to make our own democracy weatherproof and crisis-resistant, we may have more to learn from cases where democracy survived in 1933 than from the death of democracy in Germany. The Netherlands, for example, had established a resilient political structure, or a defencible democracy avant la lettre, capable of dealing with a wide range of shocks to its system and responding flexibly to crises. As a result, the Dutch did not need to anticipate the specific threats of 1933, as their crisis prevention and response capacities were large enough to avoid the establishment of a domestic dictatorship. The comparison also shows that some supposed guard rails of today's democracy in Germany - such as the five per cent hurdle in elections - are largely useless and only appear to offer security.

The problem of looking at specific cases of the collapse of democracy, including the German case in 1933, harbours a danger: that the most important variables are insufficiently recognised and too narrow conclusions are drawn. The exact historical context of the collapse of a political order will always vary, as will the perception of an existential polycrisis and its political consequences. It therefore makes sense to identify states and societies from the past that were resilient to the widest possible range of shocks. Or as historian Niall Ferguson puts it: "All we can learn from history is how to build social and political structures that are at least resilient and at best antifragile (...), and how to resist the siren voices that propose totalitarian rule or world government as necessary for the protection of our unfortunate species and our vulnerable world." To resolve the footnote[15]

Nevertheless, the fall of the Weimar Republic in 1933 is a warning of where uncontained perceptions of crisis can lead. After all, it was Hitler's polycrisis consciousness and the associated individual and collective existential fear that formed the core of the emergence of Hitler's political and genocidal anti-Semitism. Added to this was the identification of the Jews with this crisis and the implementation of this identification in a programme of total solutions in order to "protect" themselves permanently. To resolve the footnote[16]

Perhaps the most important warning that the past century holds for us is that the biggest and most terrible crises in the world only arise when we try to contain real or perceived crises headlessly and without moderation. To resolve the footnote[17]

This article is a revised extract from Thomas Weber (ed.), Als die Demokratie starb. Die Machtergreifung der Nationalsozialisten - Geschichte und Gegenwart, Freiburg/Br. 2022.

Footnotes

On the mention of the footnote [1]

Roger Cohen, Trump's Weimar America, 14 Dec 2015, External link:http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/15/opinion/weimar-america.html.

For the mention of the footnote [2]

Niall Ferguson, "Weimar America"? The Trump Show Is No Cabaret, 6 Sept. 2020, External link:http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/weimar-america-the-trump-show-is-no-cabaret/2020/09/06/adbb62ca-f041-11ea-8025-5d3489768ac8_story.html.

On the mention of the footnote [3]

Cf. Thomas Weber, Trump Is Not a Fascist. But That Didn't Make Him Any Less Dangerous to Our Democracy, 24.1.2021, external link:https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/24/opinions/trump-fascism-misguided-comparison-weber/index.html.

On the mention of the footnote [4]

Cf. Google N-gram analyses for "Hitler" and "Auschwitz" in English and Spanish, created on 10 August 2022: External link:https://t1p.de/ngramspanish and External link:https://t1p.de/ngramenglish.

For the mention of the footnote [5]

Cf. Google N-gram analyses for "Hitler", "Auschwitz" and "National Socialism" in German, created on 10 January 2022: External link:https://t1p.de/ngramgerman.

On the mention of the footnote [6]

Cf. Heidi Tworek/Thomas Weber, Das Märchen vom Schicksalstag, 8 November 2014, External link:http://www.faz.net/13253194.html.

On the mention of the footnote [7]

Nils Minkmar, Long live the Third Republic, 10 May 2022, External link:http://www.sueddeutsche.de/projekte/artikel/kultur/e195647.

Mention of the footnote [8]

Government statement by Federal Chancellor Olaf Scholz, 27 February 2022, External link:http://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-de/suche/regierungserklaerung-von-bundeskanzler-olaf-scholz-am-27-februar-2022-2008356.

Mention of the footnote [9]

Cf. Google N-gram analyses for "Stalin", "Gulag", "Prager Frühling" and "Volksaufstand" in German, created on 10 August 2022: External link:https://t1p.de/ngramstalingerman and External link:https://t1p.de/ngramgulagpfvgerman.

For the mention of the footnote [10]

Cf. Google N-gram analyses for "Stalin", "Gulag" and "Prague Spring" in English, created on 10 August 2022: External link:https://t1p.de/ngramstalinenglish and External link:https://t1p.de/ngramgulagpsenglish.

On the mention of the footnote [11]

See Minkmar (note 7).

On the mention of the footnote [12]

In his first known written anti-Semitic statement - the so-called Gemlich letter of 1919 - Hitler rejected "anti-Semitism on purely emotional grounds" and advocated an "anti-Semitism of reason". Cf. Hitler to Adolf Gemlich, 16 September 1919, reproduced in: German Historical Institute Washington DC, German History in Documents and Images, n.d., external link:https://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/pdf/deu/NAZI_HITLER_ANTISEMITISM1_DEU.pdf.

On the mention of the footnote [13]

Cf. Fabio Schwabe, Gründe für das Scheitern der Weimarer Republik, 12 March 2021, external link:http://www.geschichte-abitur.de/weimarer-republik/gruende-fuer-das-scheitern.

On the mention of the footnote [14]

Cf. Hans-Jürgen Lendzian (ed.), Zeiten und Menschen. Geschichte, Qualifikationsphase Oberstufe Nordrhein-Westfalen, Braunschweig 2019, pp. 237-264; Ulrich Baumgärtner et al. (eds.), Horizonte. Geschichte Qualifikationsphase, Sekundarstufe II Nordrhein-Westfalen, Braunschweig 2015, pp. 242-270.

On the mention of the footnote [15]

Niall Ferguson, Doom. The Politics of Catastrophe, London 2022, p. 17, own translation.

On the mention of the footnote [16]

Cf. Thomas Weber, Germany in Crisis. Hitler's Antisemitism as a Function of Existential Anxiety and a Quest for Sustainable Security, in: Antisemitism Studies (n.d.).

On the mention of the footnote [17]

Cf. Beatrice de Graaf, Crisis!, Amsterdam 2022.

#Creative Commons Licence #CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 DE #Thomas Weber #bpb.de #Germany 1933 #weimar #weimar America #stop violence #stop trump #save our democracy #vote democrat #vote blue #please vote #Weimerica #Roger Cohen #read more

10 notes · View notes