#disability law compensation | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

carriesthewind · 11 months

Note

i know very little about law, but im gonna be honest, i feel a bit bad for the loduca guy. is it a good look to sign a coworkers work without looking? absolutely not, they are paid to be anal about this stuff. but it feels like such a human thing to do, if you worked with someone for 25+ years, and never had a significant reason to doubt their work, to just kind of visually skim over the thing, and then sign and stample, bc you trust the guy.

and yeah maybe you saw he was having some issues with this case, the opposite side/judge asking for some documents they cant find and therefore think are fabricated, but again, you trust your coworker, trust that they did the job and this is a mistake not on his part, and you probably have your own workload to worry about, your own cases, so you think little of it. idk, while a bit lazy (bad look) it feels like something that would happen at an office, you know?

that being said ive got a feeling those people are not going to be practicing law quite soon. more so i dont recall if the law firm was one of theirs, but i assume even if it's not, it will have a very hard time recovering from this

A bit of a long and rambling answer here on just my own thoughts on the matter, so I'm putting it below the cut!

I do feel some sympathy for him...for the first opposition brief. My sympathy vanishes once he submitted the fake "opinions" to the court.

Because I absolutely get trusting your colleague, especially if you have worked with him for so long. And as lawyers, it is a really serious thing to sign a submission to the court that you haven't at least read - but it is also very a very human thing to do. People, including lawyers, cut corners and make errors all the time.

But part of his problem isn't just that he was skimming and signing something - when you sign a submission as an attorney, you are making a very real (and legally binding - that's the point of Rule 11) promise to the court. LoDuca is still listed as Mata's counsel of record (and his only counsel of record in this case). He told the court that he was representing this dude, and he never really was.

I saw someone - I think on twitter? - say he was covering up for Schwartz practicing law without a license. Which is technically true! But it's also - come on, there is (usually) a practical, if not ethical, difference between letting some random pretend to be lawyer by signing and submitting their documents without supervision, and signing and submitting documents for a colleague in a jurisdiction they aren't admitted to without going through the steps of having him formally act as local counsel, when you know the end result would be the same if you walked through the formal steps. I want to be clear - the second thing is not okay at all, and is very much against the rules. But, I am also 100% confident he's not the only person doing it, and I can the the way that someone would feel like it was a justifiable bending, not breaking of the rules.

But even then, the problem is that as attorneys, we are (supposed to be) held to a high ethical standard. I said this in an earlier post, but when an attorney makes representations to the court, the court takes those very seriously, because we are assumed to be following those ethical standards. If I make a legal or factual representation in a courtroom, there can be immediate and real consequences for people's lives.

It's a self-licensing and a self-policing profession, and we what we do has very serious consequences both on a societal and individual level. Even in a simple case like this originally was, a personal injury negligence case brought by an individual - the complaint says the plaintiff suffered serious, disabling injuries and has been prevented from working, and he is seeking compensation for his medical care and his inability to work. If that's true, this case is about (should have been about) who paid for that needed medical care, the necessities of life.

And I think this case is an example of why those rules can matter - sure, most of the time, someone doing what LoDuca was won't get caught, and maybe it won't matter practically. But part of the reasons we have those rules is to try to prevent - well maybe not this bullshit precisely - bullshit like this from happening. "Other people break the rules too and don't get caught" isn't an excuse.

But again, it still is a very human kind of error, so I still have sympathy. The real problem, for me, is the submission of the fake opinions.

Because once he got the order from the court ordering him to provide copies of the opinions or the case would be dismissed, he must have known something was wrong. That is not a normal order to receive. That order means the court (which has access to all the legal research tools he doesn't) thinks something is very seriously wrong. If he did not read that order and immediately go "Oh fuck" and a) read the defendant's reply and b) realize the cases seem to have been fake, he is not competent to practice law. And I mean that in a very serious way - he has no business practicing in the field with such serious consequences for people's lives if he didn't immediately recognize the problem.

So once he got that order, he has no excuse. At that point, he either consciously perpetrated a lie upon the court; or he is too incompetent to practice.

#ask #2 Stupid 2 Sanction

149 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 4 months

Text

WASHINGTON — Twitter violated contracts by failing to pay millions of dollars in bonuses that the social media company, now called X Corp, had promised its employees, a federal judge ruled on Friday.

Mark Schobinger, who was Twitter’s senior director of compensation before leaving Elon Musk’s company in May, sued Twitter in June, claiming breach of contract.

Schobinger’s suit alleged that before and after billionaire Musk bought Twitter last year, it promised employees 50% of their 2022 target bonuses but never made those payments.

In denying Twitter’s motion to dismiss the case, U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria ruled that Schobinger plausibly stated a breach of contract claim under California law and he was covered by a bonus plan.

“Once Schobinger did what Twitter asked, Twitter’s offer to pay him a bonus in return became a binding contract under California law. And by allegedly refusing to pay Schobinger his promised bonus, Twitter violated that contract,” the judge wrote.

X no longer has a media relations office. The company did not immediately respond to a request for comment to its X account outside business hours.

Twitter’s lawyers argued that the company made only an oral promise that was not a contract, and that Texas law should govern the case, according to Courthouse News, which first reported the ruling. The judge ruled that California law governed the case and that “Twitter’s contrary arguments all fail.”

X has been hit with numerous lawsuits by former employees and executives since Musk bought the company and culled more than half of its workforce.

The lawsuits make a range of claims, including that X discriminated against older employees, women and workers with disabilities, and failed to give advance notice of mass layoffs. The company denies wrongdoing.

24 notes · View notes

mrdirtybear · 16 days

Text

Gustav Marchet (1846 - 1916) was an Austrian lawyer and politician. The son of a pharmacist, he studied law and administration in 1869 and became an Assistant Professor in 1870. He later became a lecturer in Economics and Forest Law, the first of a long series of posts. From 1901–07 he served in the German Parliament as a member of the German Progressive Party for the electoral district of Bathe. In 1908 he was a member of the Cabinet as Minister for Culture and Education. As a member of the Agriculture Council, he presented draft laws and did pioneering work with regard to agricultural damage compensation. He also contributed to the advance of old age pension law and disability law. From 1913 he collected more honorary award from different universities than he could count, or probably value.

#gustave marche

11 notes · View notes

reasonsforhope · 1 year

Text

"How much safer has construction really gotten? Let’s take a look.

Construction used to be incredibly dangerous

By the end of the 19th century, what’s sometimes called the second industrial revolution had made US industry incredibly productive. But it had also made working conditions more dangerous...

One source estimates 25,000 total US workplace fatalities in 1908 (Aldrich 1997). Another 1913 estimate gave 23,000 deaths against 38 million workers. Per capita, this is about 61 deaths per 100,000 workers, roughly 17 times the rate of workplace fatalities we have today...

In a world of dangerous work, construction was one of the most dangerous industries of all. By the 1930s and early 1940s the occupational death rate for all US workers had fallen to around 36-37 per 100,000 workers. At the same time [in the 1930s and early 1940s], the death rate in construction was around 150-200 deaths per 100,000 workers, roughly five times as high... By comparison, the death rate of US troops in Afghanistan in 2010 was about 500 per 100,000 troops. By the mid-20th century, the only industry sector more dangerous than construction was mining, which had a death rate roughly 50% higher than construction.

We see something similar if we look at injuries. In 1958 the rate of disabling injuries in construction was 3 times as high as the manufacturing rate, and almost 5 times as high as the overall worker rate.

Increasing safety

Over the course of the 20th century, construction steadily got safer.

Between 1940 and 2023, the occupational death rate in construction declined from 150-200 per 100,000 workers to 13-15 per 100,000 workers, or more than 90%. Source: US Statistical Abstract, FRED

For ironworkers, the death rate went from around 250-300 per 100,000 workers in the late 1940s to 27 per 100,000 today.

Tracking trends in construction injuries is harder, due to data consistency issues. A death is a death, but what sort of injury counts as “severe,” or “disabling,” or is even worth reporting is likely to change over time. [3] But we seem to see a similar trend there. Looking at BLS Occupational Injuries and Illnesses data, between the 1970s and 2020s the injury rate per 100 workers declined from 15 to 2.5.

Source of safety improvements

Improvements in US construction safety were due to a multitude of factors, and part of a much broader trend of improving workplace safety that took place over the 20th century.

The most significant early step was the passage of workers compensation laws, which compensated workers in the event of an injury, increasing the costs to employers if workers were injured (Aldrich 1997). Prior to workers comp laws, a worker or his family would have to sue his employer for damages and prove negligence in the event of an injury or death. Wisconsin passed the first state workers comp law in 1911, and by 1921 most states had workers compensation programs.

The subsequent rising costs of worker injuries and deaths caused employers to focus more on workplace safety. According to Mark Aldrich, historian and former OSHA economist, “Companies began to guard machines and power sources while machinery makers developed safer designs. Managers began to look for hidden dangers at work, and to require that workers wear hard hats and safety glasses.” Associations and trade journals for safety engineering, such as the American Society of Safety Professionals, began to appear...

In 1934, the Department of Labor established a Division of Labor Standards, which would later become the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), to “promote worker safety and health.” The 1935 National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which legalized collective bargaining, allowed trade unions to advocate for worker safety.

Following WWII, the scale of government intervention in addressing social problems, including worker safety, dramatically increased.

In addition to OSHA and environmental protection laws, this era also saw the creation of the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).

OSHA in particular dramatically changed the landscape of workplace safety, and is sometimes viewed as “the culmination of 60 or more years of effort towards a safe and hazard-free workplace.”"

-via Construction Physics (Substack newsletter by Brian Potter), 3/9/23

#construction #osha #workplace #workplace safety #workers rights #labor rights #occupational health #nlra #collective bargaining #united states #us history #labor unions #industrial revolution #this is why unions and regulations are so fucking important by the way #if you have not studied late 1800s and early 1900s labor history in the US #you really can't grasp how incredibly dangerous things used to be #and how much proof we have that corporations suck #government regulations

89 notes · View notes

dontmeantobepoliticalbut · 9 months

Text

On Thursday, the Social Security Administration announced its largest cost of living adjustment for beneficiaries in four decades, an inflation-driven raise of 8.7% that will take effect in January 2023. That increase matches the average annual COLA from 1975 through 1982, an era of recessions and high inflation. Annual Social Security raises declined after that year. From 1996 through 2021, they averaged 2.3%, and were zero in some years. The 2021 raise was substantially higher: 5.9%.

The new increase in benefits will be pricey. On the other hand, the cost to taxpayers of the entire Social Security program pales in comparison with the cost of federal subsidies for rich Americans enrolled in private or supplemental retirement plans, such as individual retirement accounts (IRAs). According to Federal Reserve data from 2019, only 31% of households from the poorest half of the wealth spectrum contributed to such a plan, while 91% of households in the top wealth decile did.

This suggests that low-wealth retirees rely heavily or exclusively on Social Security, but all US workers get to collect benefits starting at age 62. As of last month, nearly 66 million Americans, rich and poor alike, were getting monthly checks. Most are retirees, but there are also spouses, disabled workers, survivors of deceased workers, and dependent children. The largest and best-compensated group, the retired workers, averaged $1,674 a month, or about $20,000 per year.

The SSA now pays out about $1.2 trillion a year in benefits all told, but those outlays are largely funded by payroll taxes paid by workers who will later reap the benefits. In 2021, the price tag of the entire program—benefits plus administrative costs—totaled $1.14 trillion, of which $1.09 trillion was covered by payroll taxes, income taxes on benefits, and interest. In other words, the federal Social Security subsidy was only about $50 billion.

Compare that with subsidies for private plans and IRAs, which cost the government nearly eight times as much—about $380 billion a year, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. And unlike Social Security subsidies, these subsidies skew heavily toward the highest earners.

There’s a reason I noted the year 1996 above. Before then, as I point out in this earlier exposé about America’s retirement system, private retirement accounts were strictly regulated and not heavily subsidized. Starting that year, federal lawmakers—led by then Reps. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Ben Cardin (D-Md.), began introducing bipartisan retirement “reform” packages that pumped more and more federal dollars into bolstering private retirement savings, mainly to the benefit of high-income workers and Wall Street.

University of Virginia law professor Michael Doran, who dug deep into the subject for a January 2022 paper titled, “The Great American Retirement Fraud,” suggested that lawmakers, rather than helping rich Americans shuffle even more of their money into tax-deferred or tax-exempt retirement funds, could instead pass laws to benefit Americans who actually need help in retirement. That might include simply beefing up Social Security, he wrote.

Instead, yet another bill that benefits wealthy savers sailed through Congress. And Republican Rick Scott released a set of aspirations for his own party—an 11-point “Plan for America,” of which one provision would let all federal laws “sunset” every five years—including laws governing Social Security and Medicare.

#us politics #news #mother jones #social security administration #social security cuts #social security #social security works #individual retirement accounts #federal reserve #cost of living adjustment #Joint Committee on Taxation #Rep. Rob Portman #rep. Ben Cardin #Michael Doran #The Great American Retirement Fraud #sen. rick scott #Plan for America #2022

47 notes · View notes

subism · 2 months

Text

Tumblr, AI, and The Impossible Year

I'm very disappointed by the news that Tumblr's content is going to be used to train AI. with a default Opt-In and questionable means of opting out. As an artist, this is something I cannot abide. From January 1, 2012 to January 1, 2014 I shot and posted a Polaroid photograph a day to this site, and when the pandemic hit in 2020 I resumed in April of that year and carried through (although less strictly) until May of 2021.

This was all posted to theimpossibleyear.tumblr.com / theimpossibleyear.com. It was a personal blog, and a deeply personal project. I showed what I was doing every day for multiple years.

There are literally hundreds of people featured throughout this project. Friends, family, colleagues, some of whom I had fallings out with, and some whom have since passed away.

These folks did not consent to have their likenesses used to train facial recognition algorithms or AI image generators. According to US copyright law, I am the owner to the photographs, and I can sublicense them however I want. I'm not keen on Tumblr doing the same. And while social media sites like Tumblr always had the rights to do things like this in their privacy policies, tools like Dall-E and Midjourney didn't exist at the time, and I never conceived of such a thing. My personal views on AI aside, I don't think allowing the likenesses of these folks to be bought and sold in such a way without their consent is ethical. Hypothetically I could reach out to every single one of them (or at least those still living) and ask for their consent, but aside from the tedium and awkwardness of having to repeatedly have that conversation, including with some folks I no longer associate with, I simply don't want to.

Additionally, I don't believe most folks really understand machine learning algorithms, large language models, and AI image generators, and I think honestly, it would be extremely hard to get informed consent for such a matter, and I sincerely believe most people would say 'No' if they understood it.

I believe artists should be compensated for their work, and I believe when that work is used for profit that the subjects of such work either need to have consented to that first. And, through that lens, the entitled beliefs of the people behind corporations like Open-AI and Midjourney, that they should be able to train off this work for free absolutely disgusts me. And I am disheartened to see Tumblr go the same route.

I do believe there are positive sides to AI, I do believe it is somewhat inevitable, but I do not believe the ends justify these means.

While I believe strongly in the public domain and creative commons, and I think US copyright law is deeply broken, I also know how hard it is to make a living as an artist. I will not I cannot sit by and just allow my own work, my own memories, my friends, family, and loved ones to be used as a tool to enrich billionaires at the expense of small creators.

I used to think that when I died I wanted all of my creative works to be willed into the public domain for the good of everyone. Now I'm not so sure. As such, I will be removing my content from Tumblr in the coming weeks. As I write this I'm importing the content of theimpossibleyear.tumblr.com to a self hosted server and theimpossibleyear.com is redirecting there. Once I am sure it's been successfully migrated I'll remove all of the content from Tumblr for good.

I know relocated content can still be scraped by AI bots against my will. But I'm considering ways of disabling crawlers, making it password protected and/or parsing all of the images through Nightshade or some other tool. At the very least I’ll have made my terms clear. I'm still figuring out what to do with this blog. It will eventually go away, but I have yet to decide what will happen with the content. Either way, this sucks. I am so tired.

#ai #midjourney #tumblr #polaroid #open-ai #ai art #theft #matt mullenweg #automattic #subism #the impossible year

7 notes · View notes

iamafanofcartoons · 1 year

Text

Defending RWBY’s Writing: Why Yang does not owe Ironwood for her prosthetic arm.

So apparently R/RWBYCritics decided to take a line from Avengers: Civil War and claim that Yang Xiao Long betrayed Ironwood by not being grateful for the prosthetic arm she received in V4. As people want to simplify things and call Yang a traitor/terrorist, I am once again going to make a post/discussion defending Yang’s character.

For those wishing to see my Yang Xiao Long Defense Post? https://www.tumblr.com/iamafanofcartoons/693045544855207936/yang-xiao-long-defense-post

For those wishing to see the mindset of R/RWBYCritics? Just look at the end of this post for the screenshots I took of the rampant sexism towards Yang and Robyn, and the sheer worship of Ironwood.

I WILL HOWEVER point out some criticisms that I feel are valid. Of course those criticisms are ones that are going to be looking at both Yang and Ironwood’s perspectives, rather than be a statement trashing female characters like every RWBY Criticism video that licks Ironwood and Adam’s boots.

10 Reasons Defending Yang’s Actions and Debating Ironwood’s.

1. Just as much as Cap deserved to use the shield after Civil War. Just because James (Or should I say Pietro) gave her the arm doesn't mean she is bound to serve him. They had a serious disagreement about how to protect Atlas and Mantle and any goodwill she felt towards James about the arm wasn't enough to bridge the gap. To look at it another way, if James had given her the arm in Vol 8 as a peace offering would she have taken it and changed to his side?

2. If you were given a wheelchair by a dictator and then joined a resistance movement. Should you then have to crawl on the ground?

3. Yang was asking Robyn Hill to trust Ironwood. She was asking Robyn to stop taking back the supplies that Ironwood bled from Mantle. And Robyn listened. Ironwood refused to trust people he cannot control or have leverage over. Yang took a risk in trusting a person who had always stood up for the people.

4. Dear people claiming that Robyn could have been one of Salem’s moles. HOW? Lionhart was trying to save his own skin. So was Raven. So was Roman. Robyn only served the people. So dear Ironwood apologists who call anyone opposing Ironwood a terrorist? Just stop....the fails in your logic are why I cannot in good faith treat Ironwood apologists with respect.

5. Ironwood didn't made it himself. He requested Penny's father who was much happy to be of help to her daughter's friends. Pietro? Who along with Penny defended Mantle and lived in Mantle, trying to care for the 99% while Ironwood sat in a cushy chair in the clouds and called Pietro and Penny’s home “a few city blocks?” Second, Yang lost her arm because of Ironwood in the first place cuz his "military protection" wasn't good enough to prevent the attack. Third, Jimmy compensated people because of his guilty conscious and her arm was of them.

6. Yang’s wearing an arm from a man who: Declared Martial Law Shot Dissenters Shot down escape vessels Threatened to bomb his own civilians Executed a Prisoner (Though she doesn't know this) It's like keeping an arm from a totalitarian. Yang lied to Ironwood. Is that reason to do any of the things he did? No? Then she's not at fault. The best case scenario is she gets a new arm down the line. Until then, She should keep it for its utility.

7. Yang is a disabled person, there's no thing such as not deserving to live her life with full body autonomy. Ironwood did indeed make a selfless gesture by gifting her the prosthetic, but it precisely being a selfless gesture means Yang is in no way in debt with him. That’s not to say Ironwood doesn’t have good intentions. But just because you make a selfless gesture doesn’t mean people owe you anything.

8. A disabled character's prosthetics shouldn't be factored into this. Whatever you think about Yang's handling of the whole situation her having a prosthetic to help with her disability isn't a matter of "deserving" it. It's not like Yang asked for the arm, either. Ironwood gave it to her as a gift. Gifts are typically given with the assumption of not getting anything in return.

9. Taking away her prosthetic over a disagreement seems pretty ableist. She doesn't really owe him anything. It was a gift. Gifts are (or should be) given freely without the expectation of anything in return. That's what makes it a gift and not an exchange. "You don't agree with me? Well that means you don't get to use two arms"

10. Yang was a 17-year-old girl who lost her arm defending a friend during a terrorist attack she was given the choice (by Ironwood) to shamelessly flee from. I think if anyone deserves an arm it’s her, plus it’s only fair to give disabled people a chance at normalcy if the technology allows, and they so choose to accept it.

Acknowledgement of criticisms

We don't really see anything to indicate that RWBY as a whole felt a sense of loyalty to Ironwood beyond just a kind of work partnership.

This could be in keeping with the idea of huntsmen not being loyal to any one kingdom, but there is a bit of difference in being loyal to a government, nation, or even town and being loyal to a person.

One you tend to put the good of that place or group above other concerns and with the other, the person may come before other considerations.

What can be overlooked is that there are cases where you oppose someone out of loyalty because you fear the path they are going down or even because you are trying to keep them from doing something they'll regret.

It would've been nice if the two of them had talked about it or Ironwood even asking how she was holding up after everything that happened, especially as he probably knows some stuff about trying to mentally process physical trauma. It may have even made the idea of going behind his back harder for Yang, maybe leading to Blake pushing more for telling Robyn about Amity rather than arrest her.

But those are valid criticisms, and I do not see much of that in discussions. What I DID see? Was more along these lines from R/RWBYCritics.

Reasons why I felt the need to put up this post after looking at R/RWBYCritics.

R/RWBYCritics, Their love of Ironwood, and their hate of Yang.

If you wish to see what R/RWBYCritics thinks of Yang?

Just so you folks wouldn’t have to wade into the toxic sewer that is R/RWBYCritics...or Twitter. Did you know that at least 2 of the people in these mentions are Yang-hating fanfic writers who write fanfics involving Yang being beaten up? And as you may have noticed, their hate for Robyn is also there.

This weekend I will go into defending Robyn Hill.

#rwby yang #yang xiao long #ironwood #james ironwood #general ironwood #rwby #rwby discussion #rwby character analysis #defending RWBY's writing #rwby is a good show #Robyn Hill #rwby robyn #happy huntresses #iamafanofcartoons

119 notes · View notes

lawyersinaustralia · 2 years

Text

About 9 million Aussies have #TPD insurance cover, but most have no idea what medical conditions

allow them to claim their TPD benefits. There are some injuries and psychological disorders that are more

frequently claimed in Australia. Read this article to understand what they are and if you might claim your TPD insurance payout.

#tpd #tpdclaims #disability #total and permanent disability #payout #legal #law #lawyers #solicitors #personal injury lawyers #compensation lawyers

0 notes

djuvlipen · 3 months

Text

The Understudied History of Roma and Sinti During the Holocaust

Justyna Matkowska Romnja Magazine by Romnja Feminist Library, December 2023 The Understudied History of Roma and Sinti During the Holocaust

The Holocaust is one of the most horrific chapters in human history, characterized by the systematic persecution and extermination of millions of people, including Jews, Roma and Sinti, Afro-Germans, Poles, homosexuals, people with disabilities, Jehovah's Witnesses, and others. During World War II, the Holocaust tragically claimed the lives of over half a million Romani people, who endured brutal persecution by the Nazis and its allies. Despite the documented accounts and testimonies available in Holocaust archives, the story of the Roma and Sinti remains primarily marginalized within the broader Holocaust narrative and research.

Persecution and Extermination The National Socialist Party launched a ruthless campaign against Roma and Sinti, fueled by racial ideology. The Nazis intensified this persecution by passing the Nuremberg Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honor in 1935, which deprived Jews, Roma and Sinti of German citizenship, fundamental rights, and the right to intermarry with Germans. In addition, Roma and Sinti became the subject of research at the Berlin Institute for Research on Racial Hygiene and Population Biology, which aimed to conduct pseudoscientific research aimed at categorizing "Gypsies" and examining perceived links between ethnicity and crime. These communities bore the brunt of this persecution, with over 94% of them falling victim to forced sterilization under the Nazi-imposed 1933 Law for the Prevention of Offspring with Hereditary Diseases.

Furthermore, on December 12th, 1938, Heinrich Himmler issued a decree titled 'Combating the Gypsy Plague,' mandating the registration of all Roma and Sinti individuals and the issuance of new identity cards. Subsequently, in 1940, the Nazis initiated deportations of Roma and Sinti from Germany and Austria to ghettos and camps established in Poland under German occupation. In January 1943, the Nazis established the Zigeunerlager, a family camp designed for Romani individuals within Auschwitz II-Birkenau.

The forced sterilization of Roma and Sinti women during the Holocaust is a tragic chapter in history that has left lasting consequences that continue to reverberate in contemporary society. The consequence of this tragedy of violations of human and women's rights is the continued mistreatment of Roma and Sinti women in European healthcare systems. Roma and Sinti women's deep-seated distrust of healthcare institutions can be traced back to forced sterilizations and the deep trauma and suffering that Roma and Sinti women have experienced for decades. Moreover, the violation of the reproductive rights of Roma and Sinti women had far-reaching consequences for their communities. Forced sterilizations disrupted family planning and left long-lasting social and psychological scars and trauma. It is important to note that these violations did not end with the fall of the Nazi regime, as sterilization continued throughout the post-war period and continued to affect Roma and Sinti women. To date, Romani women continue to advocate for recognition and compensation for forced sterilization, as is the case in the Czech Republic and Slovakia.

Lemkin’s Contribution Raphael Lemkin played a crucial role in ensuring that the Holocaust of the Roma and Sinti would be recognized during post-war legal trials. Even though prosecutors at the Nuremberg trials listed "Gypsies" as victims of genocide, international organizations established by the Allies did not classify Roma and Sinti as a separate legal category. This marked a significant omission in recognizing the Roma and Sinti. While the prosecutors frequently used broad terms such as "racial persecution" and "crimes against humanity" during the trial, Romani people were primarily listed among victim groups, mirroring their treatment in the genocide definition.

Challenges to Recognition Despite being victims of the Holocaust, the Roma and Sinti communities have faced challenges in gaining recognition, particularly within Holocaust education. While many European education systems include comprehensive Holocaust history in their curriculum at different academic levels, they often fail to address the experiences of Roma and Sinti adequately.

The struggle for official recognition of the Roma and Sinti Genocide, perpetrated by the Nazis and their allies, commenced in the 1960s, with key leadership provided by German Sinti and Roma activists. Commemorative events like rallies and hunger protests were crucial in drawing attention to the genocide. Despite these efforts, some German files related to the Nazi genocide against the Roma and Sinti remain lost. The Federal Republic of Germany officially recognized these crimes as racially motivated in 1982. However, the struggle for recognition of the Roma and Sinti continues to persist to this day. Roma and Sinti receive only marginal mention in mainstream Holocaust exhibitions, museums, and other sites of memory, textbooks, and research.

Archival Challenges The dominance of Jewish Holocaust institutions, such as the University of Southern California's Shoah Foundation, in preserving Roma and Sinti Holocaust testimonies raises concerns about narrative control and potential biases. Ari Joskowicz's study of testimonies from Roma and Sinti survivors highlights concerns about the accessibility and ownership of historical archives related to the Roma and Sinti victims of the Holocaust. Joskowicz emphasizes the prominent role of Jewish Holocaust institutions, positioning them as the primary repository for Roma and Sinti Holocaust testimonies. The author's analysis of the coexistence of Jewish Holocaust institutions containing collections devoted to Romani history raises queries regarding who has authority over Roma and Sinti Holocaust archives and the stories they present, emphasizing the importance of narrative control and the possibility of biased or incomplete representations when one community's history is housed within another's archival holdings.

Scholars searching archives for information about Roma and Sinti often come across interviews with Jewish survivors that mention "Gypsies", necessitating searches using different terms such as "Roma" or "Roma" rather than "Roma" and/or "Sinti". Some interviews can be insensitive, asking uncomfortable questions about Roma and Sinti. A notable example is the question about Roma "tribes", which reveals the interviewer's limited knowledge of Romani culture. This question has arisen in several interviews and has been observed to make Romani individuals uncomfortable, as it often leads to confusion about the interviewer's intended meaning. This confusion is understandable because Romani people are not organized into tribes like some indigenous groups but rather into distinct ethnolinguistic sub-groups. Additionally, it's worth noting that some interviewers, when speaking with Holocaust survivors, have used the term "Gypsy," which may be considered inappropriate or offensive by certain members of the Roma and Sinti communities.

Another significant issue concern involves the testimonies of Roma and Sinti survivors. Those accounts were collected many decades after the war, presenting challenges for survivors in recalling every detail of their wartime experiences and what they witnessed. Additionally, the passage of time has tragically resulted in the loss of many Holocaust survivors, underscoring the crucial importance of documenting these testimonies to preserve the memory of their suffering and resilience. Furthermore, it's noteworthy that a high percentage of Roma and Sinti survivors have never received any Holocaust compensation.

Conclusion In summary, the Roma Holocaust remains an under-researched and overlooked chapter in history, particularly when it comes to the experiences of various groups of the Roma and Sinti communities, including women, LGBT people, people with disabilities, and others. This omission raises the importance of intersectionality, highlighting the interconnections between Nazi and racial discrimination against Roma and Sinti. To fully understand the consequences of the Holocaust, it is necessary to acknowledge and address the intersecting forms of marginalization of the Roma community.

Comprehensive research is needed to fill research gaps on the persecution and post-war experiences of Roma and Sinti survivors. It is also essential to promote the contribution of Roma scholars to creating knowledge about the Holocaust. Furthermore, it is necessary to include education on the persecution of Roma and Sinti in school curricula to increase awareness and understanding of this often-overlooked history.

Although there are over 200 memorials across Europe that commemorate the Roma and Sinti who were murdered during the Holocaust, many mass graves of Roma and Sinti remain unmarked or undiscovered. It is crucial that governments work with local Roma and Sinti communities and Holocaust researchers to take collective action to respectfully commemorate these victims.

#Justyna Matkowska #The Understudied History of Roma and Sinti during the Holocaust #Romnja Feminist Library

9 notes · View notes

militantinremission · 10 months

Text

Is ending Affirmative Action in College Admissions a bad thing?

I wanted to monitor any fallout resulting from the SCOTUS Decision on Affirmative Action before speaking on it. Watching Mainstream Media frame the narrative has been interesting. An assortment of News Anchors, across the Major News Networks have featured a variety of individuals to give 'their' perspective; but NONE of them appear to be Indigenous Black Americans. The Black Immigrants speaking on 'Our Behalf' do not share Our Experience of Racism in AmeriKKKa, so they offer a weak argument that can be easily picked apart.

None of the Black Immigrants interviewed mentioned White Supremacy by name. They speak of a 'Black' Experience in AmeriKKKa of discrimination & bias, but not the Systemic Racism that Indigenous Black Americans face. They also seem beholden to the forces of White Supremacy. The fact that Mainstream Media spotlights This Group to discuss Affirmative Action in College Admissions, is indicative of WHO has been chosen by these College Admission Boards over the decades.

Affirmative Action is being presented by Mainstream Media as a 'hand out' for Minority Groups, but this is completely false. Affirmative Action was designed specifically for American Descendants Of Chattel Slavery, as a compensation for being shut out of The New Deal & The G.I. Bill. Using Benign Neglect tactics, Liberal- Progressives [intentionally] transformed Affirmative Action into 'Diversity Initiatives for Minorities'; which benefited White Women, White LGBTQ..., & Disabled Whitefolk more than the Blackfolk that it was designed to help.

If 'The History of Race Relations in America' wasn't weaponized & repackaged as Critical Race Theory, The Public would have a clear understanding of what Affirmative Action is & why it is necessary. The Argument Against Affirmative Action in College Admissions largely comes from Asian Students that were denied Admissions to Harvard & The University Of North Carolina. The Students argued that they were discriminated against because of their Race, & the preponderance of this bias leads to Asians gaining Admission at a lower percentage than Any Other Group.

On ABC's 'This Week', Sherrilyn Ifill, of Howard University Law School explained how both UNC & Harvard held separate trials on the issue of Asian Admissions. In both Cases, Asians were NOT found to be underrepresented. 'The Real Dana', w/ Judge Joe Brown pointed out that Asian Attendance at Harvard is 27.7%, while 'Afrikan- Americans' are 9.9%, & Hispanics are 12%. The only group w/ a higher Admission Rate than Asians, are 'Harvard Legacies' [Whitefolk] at 38%... Judge Joe Brown gives background on the SCOTUS Decision, by explaining that it was inevitable.

He says that Affirmative Action was created w/ the intent of bringing Future Leaders of every Community into each other's orbit. Getting these individuals familiar w/ each other on the Collegiate Level, would benefit Society moving forward. Unfortunately, a group of Black (boule) students at U.C. Berkeley (19 Dental students, 19 Medical students- back in 1971) wanted Racial Quotas established for Berkeley Medical School. According to Judge Joe Brown, the measure was passed, despite going against California State Law (& 219 Black Law Students). This action changed Affirmative Action into a Racial Quota Program that was destined to end. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor famously quipped that Affirmative Action would end after 25Yrs, but the Original Construct barely lasted 10Yrs.

Throughout the 1970s & 1980s, Affirmative Action was stripped from the hands of Indigenous Black Americans that it was created to help, & given to an ever expanding number of Minority Groups. Today, Minorities have collected so many resources from Us, that They feel comfortable enough to speak for Black America. They [arrogantly] equate Our Experience w/ their Own. Nikki Haley, Vivek Ramaswamy, & Dinesh D'Souza are at the top; but there is a long list of Black Immigrants that also feel that They can speak for Us. Hint- If you can't say [Publicly] that White Supremacy is the underlying cause of Black Oppression in America, then you CANNOT speak for Us.

The SCOTUS Ruling on Affirmative Action in College Admissions has triggered expected reactions. Chief Justice John Roberts ruled on the grounds of the Color Blind intent(?) of The U.S. Constitution, so he needs to clarify. How does he explain Indigenous Blackfolk being relegated to 3/5ths of Humanity, in a (so- called) Color Blind Society? Justices Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, & Coney- Barrett were expected to tow the Conservative Line. Justice Kagan was expected to tow the Liberal Line, but attention remained focused on Justices Thomas, Sotomayor, & Brown- Jackson. All three were beneficiaries of Affirmative Action; at least more clearly than Justice Kagan.

Justices Sotomayor, & Brown- Jackson both dissented w/ this Ruling. Justice Sonia Sotomayor offered what she called 'the most obvious data point available to this Institution today'. The Example of 3 Supreme Court Justices of Color. All graduates of elite universities & law schools that offered race conscious Admissions Programs, who went on to have successful legal careers. Justice Ketanji Brown- Jackson offered the additional commentary of the 'let them eat cake obliviousness' of the Majority, & 'ostrich like hope' that ignoring Race will somehow make racial inequities disappear.

Justice Thomas concurred w/ Chief Justice Roberts' Ruling, emphasizing the Race Neutral Argument. He went further, singling out Justice Brown- Jackson when he said: "As she sees things, we're all inexorably trapped in a fundamentally racist society". He goes on to accuse her of labelling All Black People as victims. Clarence Thomas has been under a microscope, ever since his ominous gay marriage comments following SCOTUS' repeal of Roe vs Wade. Reports of unethical behavior by Justice Thomas & his Wife, has kept him in the spotlight.

The dumpster dive into Clarence Thomas' Life has revealed that he has extremely low regard for Affirmative Action. He blames his trouble finding work, fresh out of Yale Law School w/ being typecasted as an Affirmative Action beneficiary. It's interesting how a former 'Black Panther sympathizer' never considered Race as a factor. It's said that Thomas affixed a 10 Cent Stamp to his Yale Law Degree- claiming that thanks to Affirmative Action, that's all it's worth. Ironically, despite Clarence Thomas' (nearly obsessive) desire to prove himself on his own merits, EVERY JOB that he landed in the Law Profession, was predicated on his Race.

I'm not a fan of Ketanji Brown- Jackson, but I agree w/ her more than I agree w/ Clarence Thomas. His condescending tone towards her reminds me of Anita Hill- another Black Woman w/ a Legal Mind superior to his. Both women make Thomas look like a 'mental midget', & he KNOWS it. All of the attention that Justice Thomas is getting is jeopardizing his usefulness. White Supremacy moves in the shadows; the spotlight on the 'excess' of Justices Thomas & Alito will likely affect the future of SCOTUS. This may explain the effort to show that the Justices found consensus in most of the Cases they preside over.

From an Indigenous Black American perspective, the issue of ending Affirmative Action in College Admissions is moot. It hasn't benefited Us specifically in over 30Yrs. The fact that Asian students are the protagonists of this move is gut busting! The Asian presence on College Campuses is literally 4X their percentage of the American population. I guess they don't understand that this action will reduce their presence on College Campuses. I wasn't aware of the number of Asian students that lie & cheat to get into College; the extra scrutiny expected from the SCOTUS Ruling will certainly affect those individuals.

Some are saying that Black American students should look to HBCUs, but Indigenous Black Americans, as a group, have been unable to afford HBCU tuitions for over 30Yrs. The majority of the students on these Campuses, like the majority of Black students on Ivy League Campuses, are Black Immigrants. They are being prepped to become the Joy Reid, Roland Martin, Barack Obama, & Kamala Harris of the future. Their experience/ perspective once again, is of discrimination & bias, not Systemic Racism & White Supremacy. These are the folks that allow People Of Color/ Brownfolk to pass racist remarks w/o 'putting them in perspective'.

Affirmative Action Programs & the Diversity Initiatives that they were repackaged as, offered Minorities an enormous 'hand up' over the last 45+Yrs. Post Vietnam, Immigrants were offered what Professor Black Truth calls: 'goodies giveaways & guarantees' that Indigenous Black Americans were promised, but never received. Immigrant Enclaves began popping up, as thriving Black Communities began to decay. Is it a coincidence that many of the new store owners in Our Community were inhabitants of these Enclaves; in areas that were former Sundown Towns?

The AmeriKKKan Government is making it abundantly clear that it is Green Light Go! w/ the campaign of Anti Black Racism. Using their 'Model Minority' as a proxy may surprise the newcomers, but those of Us w/ Blood & Bones in the soil have been foretelling how THIS will be White Supremacy's Method of Attack. Ending Affirmative Action in College Admissions will inevitably lead to the End of Affirmative Action altogether. I say good! It has been an albatross around Our Collective Neck. We get the accusations of tokenism & mediocrity, while others reaped the benefits. Let All of the minorities earn their keep- No More Free Milk from Black America! Get your own legislation, & we'll get Ours.

#ADOS #13Percent #DredScott #LineageMatters #AgeOfProphecy

20 notes · View notes