Jacobin Magazine: No Third Way for the Planet

As Democrats endeavored to “end welfare as we know it,” adopting the racist language of “superpredators” from the Right, greens worked with companies like Walmart and McDonalds on sustainability strategies — even as those same companies were facing down challenges from environmental justice advocates. By design, each warmed to the corporate world, embracing, as Ezra Klein would put it, “liberal ends through market means.” [...]

Technocratic demands like cap-and-trade, in other words, make it easy for the fossil fuel industry and the Right to paint climate change as a concern of elites, who can afford to drive hybrid cars, install solar panels on their homes, and bear the cost when corporations send regulatory fines downstream. Any politically viable climate policy will have to give working people a material stake in supporting it — not a fear that that they’ll be forced to shoulder its costs. [...]

It’s true that coal plants are closing, largely as a result of market forces. But driving that decline has been an explosion in natural gas, the proliferation of which is hardly a sum positive for the planet. Despite impressive growth, renewables like solar and wind still only meet a tiny percentage of Americans’ demand for electricity. Meanwhile, whatever piecemeal climate policy was created over the last four years is in the process of being systematically stripped away by the Trump administration. [...]

Carbon pricing, per se, is an eminently reasonable and common-sense policy: Polluters should pay for what they pollute. Fortunately, its less dogmatic proponents — Sanders among them — see pricing as a piece of the climate puzzle rather than the whole thing. If there are conservatives willing to get behind it, so be it. But framing the carbon tax as a silver bullet for the planet’s ills runs a deadly serious risk of obscuring how big the changes physics demands really are: Namely, sweeping transformations in nearly every sector of the economy, led by the state rather than the market, and a swift liquidation of the fossil fuel industry.

read the article 

Scientific American: The Rising Trend of Pets at Work

It's growing increasingly common to see pets at work, especially at smaller companies settings in New York City. LinkedIn has 178 results for "dog friendly" jobs in NY, which presumably means they either have a designated "office dog" or multiple employees may bring their dogs in. And dogs do seem to be the winner in this category over, say, a pet hamster. Big names like Google, Mashable, and Amazon have pet-friendly policies that welcome non-assistive companions into the office on a daily basis. Google, for instance, makes plain its preference for dogs and even allegedly has caregivers on staff for those lucky pooches. Amazon’s canines are featured on a dedicated page where visitors are informed that they get dog biscuits at reception desks and have access to doggie-sized water fountains. Smaller companies are following suit by allowing dogs into the workplace (albeit with fewer of those fancy additional perks) seeing the allowance as a non-financial perk that helps generate a perception of work/life friendliness and an acknowledgement of the life commitments of the incoming workforce. The benefits are touted widely: pets help reduce stress and may increase communication and socialization and there is no shortage of research to this effect. But in our rush to welcome pets into the workplace, we may be overlooking the full experience for everyone involved—including our furry friends.

Approximately 60% of Americans own a pet. It's not surprising therefore that there is a cultural shift toward permitting access for pets in spaces that have traditionally been more narrowly defined. There has been a lot of research on the impact that pets have on children, the elderly, the sick, and prisoners. For example, pets may help as an icebreaker for children in therapy; or help the emotional development of children by putting them in a situation where they learn how to care for others. Pets have been shown to help elderly Americans remain social and mobile, and may reduce depression in this population.  [...]

According to one study that surveyed 31 companies in Kentucky, pets in the workplace allow owners to express a bit of their personality. There are three types of organizational symbols that employees may use to personalize these collective spaces: authority symbols, reward symbols, and empathic symbols. These symbols influence how a person perceives the organization. Authority symbols are things like flags and banners, and they signify legitimacy. Reward symbols are things like plaques and they signify accomplishment. Empathic symbols—like plants and artwork—are suggestive overall of warmth and comfort. Pets fall into this last category. There may be fewer opportunities for symbology overall as employers strip down walls in favor of open work stations, so pets help fill this gap. Empathic symbols may encourage more social interaction by providing a neutral field where employees can connect with each other. Psychologically, they convey the perception that someone is approachable and friendly. 

read the article 

VICE: Photos of LGBTQ Life in Japan

Japan is famous for its political and social conservatism. Family – in the traditional sense – comes first, and even the country's ruling party, the Liberal Democratic Party, aren't all that liberal; they staunchly oppose same-sex marriage. This kind of prejudice means being LGBTQ in Japan can come with its share of difficulties – not always out-and-out homophobia like you get elsewhere in the world, but the feeling for gay and trans people of being othered, what the Japanese call "the nail that sticks out". [...]

Who is it that generally opposes LGBTQ rights in Japan?

Michel: Well, traditionally there's been same-sex love in religious orders and samurai orders, so this has been in Japanese culture a long time. Today, it's a general conservatism that goes against it. It's not like Western cultures of strong Judeo-Christian morality; it's more social. It's the breaking conformity that's the biggest issue.

What are the most urgent things the activists you met are fighting for?

Haruku: Maika Muroi, a member of the steering committee for Tokyo Rainbow Pride, thinks the community's first priority is to set up information networks through the school system and to legalise same-sex marriage. Akta, the non-profit organisation, is doing an education campaign in schools about HIV/AIDS through dramatic and musical performances.

read the article and see the photos 

Vox: 6 things to watch as Macron takes office in France

Macron, who formed a new political party called En Marche in 2016, has promised to strengthen France’s ties to Europe, simplify the tax system, overhaul the labor market, and scale back needless regulations. But without a clear governing coalition, he will face a number of obstacles. If he’s unable to lift France out of its economic malaise, all those festering anxieties will come bubbling up five years from now when the next presidential election is held. [...]

We don't know what will happen or what the mode of failure will be if Macron fails. Who knows, it could empower the far left. Mélenchon [the far-left candidate who quit the Socialist Party in 2008] did better than expected in the first round, so people might turn in that direction. If you were to ask me today, I would say that's the most probable direction in which things would turn if Macron became as unpopular as Hollande.

It's still a deeply divided country, and Macron's vote is by no means an endorsement of Macron's program. Estimates are that as many as 40 or 45 percent of the people who voted for him voted to block Le Pen and not for Macron positively. And he's probably going to alienate quite a number of those people because he said that his first move will be to reform the labor code, which even the mild reforms attempted under Hollande elicited quite a strong reaction and there were demonstrations in the streets, lots of union protests. So the divisiveness is going to come to the fore immediately, and we'll see how he responds to that.

read the article 

Political Critique: Mothers Breastfeeding in Defense of Mother Nature

Young mothers gathered at Edward Rydz-Śmigły Park in Warsaw to demonstrate their opposition to mass deforestation using silent protest. Holding young babies in their arms, they sat on recently cut tree stumps in silence, while breastfeeding their children. They were accompanied by husbands, loved ones and partners, who closely watched the scene. [...]

Adopted hurriedly without any kind of public consultation, the law – authored by Szyszko –was passed by the Sejm on December 16th, 2016, put into effect on January 1st, 2017. According to the legal document, tree felling on private property is possible without governmental permission – provided that does not constitute economic activity. Anyone can cut down even a decades-old tree without informing the relevant authorities.

Environmental organizations were opposed to the Ministry’s ideas on tree felling even before the law put into effect. Previously, penalties for illegal felling could reach over 15,000 złote per tree. Today, they cannot exceed 500 złote per tree and 200 złote per bush.

read the article and see the photos 

Al Jazeera: No end in sight for India's bloody Maoist conflict

The Leftist rebels, or Naxalites as they are popularly known, have been active in the Bastar division of the Chhattisgarh state, which encapsulates the Sukma district, for more than three decades. They have been taking up issues of land and forest rights for the indigenous people or Adivasis, keeping out mining companies, and establishing an almost parallel state. In the last decade, however, the war between them and the Indian government has intensified, ever since the government sponsored Salwa Judum, a vigilante movement aimed at depopulating the region and forcing villagers into camps. 

In April 2010, 76 men from the CRPF were ambushed and killed by the Maoists in the same stretch of the Sukma district. More recently, in March this year, Maoist rebels killed 12 paramilitary men after ambushing their convoy. There have also been several unmarked deaths among the Maoist cadres over the years. But above all, there have been continuous, relentless assaults on the lives and human rights of indigenous villagers across the region.

In March 2011, security forces burned down at least 300 homes in three villages in Bastar, a brutal attack during which three men were killed and three women were raped. And this was not the first time that these indigenous villages were burned to the ground: In 2007, men from the state-sponsored Salwa Judum vigilante movement, which included members of the security forces, had burned down the same villages.

read the article 

The Conversation: Islam and feminism are not mutually exclusive, and faith can be an important liberator

Islam is not unique in having theological interpretations that centre on men. Christian, Jewish and Buddhist women (and men) have grappled with the overt and covert sexism within their own sacred texts and traditions in numerous ways. This is because where there are people there is often sexism, and sexism within societies is frequently echoed by, and transplanted on to, social institutions: the law, politics and, of course, religion. [...]

Most of the Christian women in this study rejected the label of feminist, but espoused feminist values. In contrast, most of the Muslim women were willing to endorse the label of feminist, and actually identified Islam as a feminist religion.

More tellingly still:

The majority of Muslim women identified as feminist. This finding is in stark contrast to the common perception of Muslim women in American society. [...]

The vast majority of interviewees believed religion was the most effective tool to challenge and change sexism within Muslim communities. Nahida spoke about feminism being one of the key reasons for divine revelation in Islam, and the need to reclaim religious texts previously used for women’s oppression:

read the article 

Politico: Czech finance minister ready to take one for the team

But Babiš, who spoke in English and French, said he would allow Zeman to fire him on one condition: that Prime Minister Bohuslav Sobotka accepts that his replacement will be someone from Babiš’s centrist ANO party.

Sobotka, the head of the Social Democrat party, and a majority of Czech parliamentary deputies have demanded that the president sack Babiš because of allegations of financial improprieties, including that he benefited illegally from a 2012 purchase of tax-exempt bonds issued by his conglomerate Agrofert, the source of his wealth. Babiš denies these allegations. [...]

Babiš has also faced allegations of conflict of interest involving his wide business interests and the use of EU funds for his firms during his time as finance minister. In January, the Czech parliament passed a law banning government ministers from owning media firms and more than a quarter of any company bidding for state contracts or receiving EU subsidies. A few weeks later, Babiš placed all his business holdings into a trust. [...]

In three audio recordings posted on the Internet, Babiš can be heard insulting other ministers and apparently discussing the planting of news stories that would be damaging to Interior Minister Milan Chovanec and Minister of Health Miloslav Ludvík, both members of Sobotka’s Social Democratic party. In the latest recording, a journalist from Mlada fronta Dnes is heard offering to publish information from an ongoing police investigation and discussing with Babiš the timing of the proposed leak.

read the article 

Deutsche Welle: Knesset moves to make Israel Jewish

With a 48-41 vote in the 120-seat Knesset Wednesday, lawmakers gave initial approval to a bill to redefine Israel as "the national home of the Jewish people." Authors called the bill, which would enshrine Hebrew as Israel's official language, "especially crucial in times like these, when there are those who seek to undermine the Jewish people's right to a national home in their land." [...]

Activists have raised concerns that the bill would lead to further discrimination. Many in Israel view Netanyahu's government, which supports the bill, as the most right-wing in the country's history, and Arab Israelis, generally the descendants of Palestinians who remained within newly drawn borders when the state arose in 1948, allege widespread discrimination. Not counting the more than 4.4 million people who live in the Palestinian territories, Arabs make up 17.5 percent of Israel's population, and road signs and government services are often bilingual. [...]

Nevertheless, Jamal Zahalka, of the left-wing Balad party, was removed from the Knesset on Wednesday afternoon after tearing up a copy of the bill and calling Dichter a "fascist" and a "racist." And Zehava Gal-On, the leader of the pacifist Meretz party, said the legislation was "a declaration of war against the Arab citizens of the country and contrary to Israel as a society governed in a democratic manner."

read the article