Everyday Erinyes #247

 Posted by at 10:20 am  Politics
Jan 022021
 

Experts in autocracies have pointed out that it is, unfortunately, easy to slip into normalizing the tyrant, hence it is important to hang on to outrage. These incidents which seem to call for the efforts of the Greek Furies (Erinyes) to come and deal with them will, I hope, help with that. As a reminder, though no one really knows how many there were supposed to be, the three names we have are Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone. These roughly translate as “unceasing,” “grudging,” and “vengeful destruction.”

This is an “Oregon Leads the Way” feel-good story. With information, and leads to more information, for any state which wants to do what Oregon has done.
================================================================

Oregon just decriminalized all drugs – here’s why voters passed this groundbreaking reform

According to Oregon law, possessing a small amount of drugs for personal consumption is now a civil – rather than criminal – offense.
Peter Dazeley via Getty

Scott Akins, Oregon State University and Clayton Mosher, Washington State University

Oregon became the first state in the United States to decriminalize the possession of all drugs on Nov. 3, 2020.

Measure 110, a ballot initiative funded by the Drug Policy Alliance, a nonprofit advocacy group backed in part by Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, passed with more than 58% of the vote. Possessing heroin, cocaine, methamphetamine and other drugs for personal use is no longer a criminal offense in Oregon.

Those drugs are still against the law, as is selling them. But possession is now a civil – not criminal – violation that may result in a fine or court-ordered therapy, not jail. Marijuana, which Oregon legalized in 2014, remains fully legal.

Oregon’s move is radical for the United States, but several European countries have decriminalized drugs to some extent. There are three main arguments for this major drug policy reform.

#1. Drug prohibition has failed

In 1971, President Richard Nixon declared drugs to be “public enemy number one” and launched a “war on drugs” that continues today.

The ostensible rationale for harshly punishing drug users is to deter drug use. But decades of research – including our own on marijuana and drugs generally – has found the deterrent effect of strict criminal punishment to be small, if it exists at all. This is especially true among young people, who are the majority of drug users.

This is partly due to the nature of addiction, and also because there are simply limits to how much punishment can deter crime. As a result, the U.S. has both the world’s highest incarceration rate and among the highest rates of illegal drug use. Roughly 1 in 5 incarcerated people in the United States is in for a drug offense.

Criminologists find that other consequences of problematic drug use – such as harm to health, reduced quality of life and strained personal relationships – are more effective deterrents than criminal sanctions.

Because criminalizing drugs does not really prevent drug use, decriminalizing does not really increase it. Portugal, which decriminalized the personal possession of all drugs in 2001 in response to high illicit drug use, has much lower rates of drug use than the European average. Use of cocaine among young adults age 15 to 34, for example, is 0.3% in Portugal, compared to 2.1% across the EU. Amphetamine and MDMA consumption is likewise lower in Portugal.

Woman with a dog waits at a white van while a man drinks from a tiny cup
A mobile drug-services van in Lisbon gives out methadone, a medication for people with opioid use disorder, in 2017.
Horacio Villalobos – Corbis/Corbis via Getty Images

2. Decriminalization puts money to better use

Arresting, prosecuting and imprisoning people for drug-related crimes is expensive.

The Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron estimates that all government drug prohibition-related expenditures were US$47.8 billion nationally in 2016. Oregon spent about $375 million on drug prohibition in that year.

Oregon will now divert some the money previously used on drug enforcement to pay for about a dozen new drug prevention and treatment centers statewide, which has been found to be a significantly more cost-effective strategy. Some tax revenue from recreational marijuana sales, which exceeded $100 million in 2019, will also go to addiction and recovery services.

Oregon spent about $470 million on substance abuse treatment between 2017 and 2019.

Not everyone who uses drugs needs treatment. Decriminalization makes help accessible to those who do need it – and keeps both those users and recreational users out of jail.

3. The drug war targets people of color

Another aim of decriminalization is to mitigate the significant racial and ethnic disparities associated with drug enforcement.

Black and whit image of police arresting a Black man in a New York subway station; no faces are seen
New York’s ‘stop and frisk’ policing most often resulted in marijuana possession charges and targeted young Black men. It was declared unconstitutional in 2013.
Third Eye Corporation/Getty

Illegal drug use is roughly comparable across race in the U.S. But people of color are significantly more likely to be searched, arrested and imprisoned for a drug-related offense. Drug crimes can incur long prison sentences.

Discretion in drug enforcement and sentencing means prohibition is among the leading causes of incarceration of people of color in the United States – an injustice many Americans on both sides of the aisle increasingly recognize.

Freed up from policing drug use, departments may redirect their resources toward crime prevention and solving violent crimes like homicide and robbery, which are time-consuming to investigate. That could help restore some trust between law enforcement and Oregon’s communities of color.

Risks of decriminalization

One common concern among Oregonians who voted against decriminalization was that lessening criminal penalties would endanger children.

“I think it sends a really bad message to them, and influences their perception of the risks,” James O’Rourke, a defense attorney who helped organize the opposition to measure 110, told Oregon Public Broadcasting in October.

But U.S. states that legalized marijuana haven’t seen adolescent use rise significantly. In fact, marijuana consumption among teens – though not among college-aged Americans – actually declined in some states with legal marijuana. This may be because legal, regulated marijuana is more difficult for minors to get than black-market drugs.

Woman browses various types of marijuana in glass jars on shelves, in well-lit, upscale setting
Customers must be 21 or older to purchase marijuana from dispensaries like Oregon’s Finest, in Portland.
Josh Edelson/AFP via Getty Images

Research also shows that for some people, particularly the young, banning a behavior makes it more alluring. So defining drugs as a health concern rather than a crime could actually make them less appealing to young Oregonians.

Another worry about decriminalization is that it will attract people looking to use drugs.

So-called “drug tourism” hasn’t really been a problem for Portugal, but it happened in Switzerland after officials in the 1980s and 1990s began officially “ignoring” heroin in Zurich’s Platzspitz Park. People came from across the country to inject heroin in public, leaving discarded needles on the ground.

The local government shut down Platzspitz Park. But rather than chase off or arrest those who frequented it, it began offering methadone and prescription heroin to help people with opioid use disorder. Public injection, HIV rates and overdoses – which had all become a problem in Zurich – plummeted.

Certain parts of Oregon already have higher rates of public drug consumption, namely Portland and Eugene. Because public drug use is still illegal in Oregon, however, we don’t expect a Platzspitz Park-style open drug scene to emerge.
These places should benefit from the expansion of methadone programs and other medication-assisted treatment, which is endorsed by the American Medical Association.

If neighboring Washington state decriminalizes drugs, which it is considering, the chances of drug tourism would drop further.

[The Conversation’s science, health and technology editors pick their favorite stories. Weekly on Wednesdays.]

Upside – and downside

There are risks with any major policy change. The question is whether the new policy results in a net benefit.

In Portugal, full decriminalization has proven more humane and effective than criminalization. Because drug users don’t worry about facing criminal charges, those who need help are more likely to seek it – and get it.

Portugal’s overdose death rate is five times lower than the EU average – which is itself far lower than the United States’. HIV infection rates among injection drug users also dropped massively since 2001.

These policies show that problem drug use is a public health challenge to be managed, not a war that can be won.The Conversation

Scott Akins, Professor, Sociology Department, Oregon State University and Clayton Mosher, Professor, Sociology Department, Washington State University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

================================================================
Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone, treating misuses, abuse, and addiction of and to drugs as a public health problem rather than a political problem just makes so much sense. And it’s not as if we don’t have models for how this approach can work, and even for transitioning to this approach from approaches which don’t work. Look at alcohol. (BTW heartiest congratulations to Sir Anthony Hopkins on 45 years sober.)

And thank you, Oregon, for leading the way.

The Furies and I will be back.

Share

Everyday Erinyes #246

 Posted by at 10:02 am  Politics
Dec 262020
 

Experts in autocracies have pointed out that it is, unfortunately, easy to slip into normalizing the tyrant, hence it is important to hang on to outrage. These incidents which seem to call for the efforts of the Greek Furies (Erinyes) to come and deal with them will, I hope, help with that. As a reminder, though no one really knows how many there were supposed to be, the three names we have are Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone. These roughly translate as “unceasing,” “grudging,” and “vengeful destruction.”

I would like to be thinking about more pleasant things on the day after Christmas, but events don’t really give me a choice. This is far too important to ignore or even delay.
================================================================

Why it matters that the coronavirus is changing – and what this means for vaccine effectiveness

The French government will not accept any passengers arriving from the U.K. amid fears over the new mutant coronavirus strain.
Steve Parsons/PA Images via Getty Images

David Kennedy, Penn State

A new variant of SARS-CoV-2 is spreading rapidly in the United Kingdom, with over 1,400 cases since September. SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, generally accumulates mutations slowly over time, but this new variant had accumulated many mutations quickly.

If this new version of the virus is here to stay, as it appears to be, what does that mean? Will this new version of the virus replace the old one? Will it be easier to catch? And, most important, will the current vaccines still be effective?

This interests me because I am an evolutionary microbiologist who studies the link between the transmission and evolution of infectious diseases. In particular, I spend a lot of time considering the effects of vaccines on pathogen evolution and the effects of pathogen evolution on the impact of vaccines.

What is the new SARS-CoV-2 mutant that has emerged?

As the spike proteins on the surface the SARS-CoV-2 virus mutate the shape changes, which may affect the ability of the coronavirus to infect cells.
Tharun15/iStock via Getty Images Plus

The new version of SARS-CoV-2 – named the B.1.1.7 lineage – is spreading in the U.K. and possibly beyond. The differences between the old and new virus include 23 mutations in the virus’s genetic code that have altered four viral proteins.

Eight of these 23 mutations affect the spike protein. This matters because the spike protein enables the virus to enter human cells, and it is a key target of our immune response, both in fighting off the virus during infection and in protecting us from disease following vaccination with the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.

If the changes to the spike protein help the virus enter human cells more easily, then the virus could be transmitted from person to person more readily.

These mutations may also alter how well the host’s immune system combats the virus, potentially reducing the efficacy of the current vaccines.

What is different about this new version of SARS-CoV-2?

Samples of the new virus isolated from patients suggest that this variant has been increasing in relative frequency over the past three months.

The increase in frequency is concerning, as it suggests – but does not prove – that the B.1.1.7 isolates of SARS-CoV-2 are more transmissible than the original virus. Some have estimated that the new virus may be up to 70% more transmissible than the old virus. While these estimates are consistent with the data, it is entirely too early to make a definitive conclusion.

If this increase in transmissibility is confirmed, it might be due to of the mutations in the spike protein allows it to bind more tightly to the ACE2 receptor, which provides a gateway for the virus to enter human cells.

But it might also be due to any of the other changes to the virus.

Is it more dangerous? If so, why?

If the new version, B.1.1.7, is indeed more transmissible than the old virus, it will be more dangerous in the sense that it will make more people sick.

However, I am not aware of good evidence that there is any difference in severity of disease caused by the new version of this virus compared with the older one. That said, with so few known cases, it may still be too early to say.

Will the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines still be effective against this new strain?

Both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines work by training our immune systems to recognize a specific version of the viral spike protein. The version of the spike protein used by the vaccines was designed to match that of the old virus, not that of the B.1.1.7 virus. This means that the vaccines might become less effective than expected should this new virus spread widely.

Vaccine-virus mismatch is an ongoing challenge for scientists charged with developing the seasonal flu vaccine. But even with a virus-vaccine mismatch, the flu vaccine reduces the likelihood, and the severity, of disease.

The question is therefore not whether the vaccines will be effective, but rather how effective they will be. The severity of the mismatch matters, but the only way to determine its impact in this case is through scientific study, and to my knowledge, no data on that has yet been collected. In other words, it’s too early to say whether and how this new variant will influence the overall effectiveness of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.

Should people still get the new mRNA vaccine?

The appearance of this new B.1.1.7 makes it even more important that people get vaccinated as soon as possible.

If this new version is more transmissible, or if the vaccine is less effective because of a virus-vaccine mismatch, more people will need to be vaccinated to achieve herd immunity and get this disease under control.

Moreover, we now have proof that the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 can change drastically in a short time, and so it is critical that we get the virus under control to prevent it from evolving further and completely undermining vaccination efforts.The Conversation

David Kennedy, Assistant Professor of Biology, Penn State

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

================================================================
Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone, for myself, I was already inclined to wait (even though I am somewhat high risk) for the vaccination until more is known. This news only strengthens that inclination. On the other hand, if the virus mutates as quickly as all this suggests, one might conceivably wait forever.

Everyone here is aware I have allergy concerns with this (or any) vaccine – I certainly make no secret of it, and have addressed it on other sites as well.  During the week I actually got a response from someone (whose credentials I don’t know, but you’ll see that doesn’t matter)  who provided links to the exact documents at the FDA which have that information.  (I guess if a wheel squeaks for long enough, it will eventually get greased.  Eventually.)  In any case, here they are:  Pfizer and Moderna.  The actual component are on page two of each PDF, about the middle of the page.  Furies and readers alike, feel free to share it widely.

The Furies and I will be back.

Share

Everyday Erinyes #245

 Posted by at 10:00 am  Politics
Dec 192020
 

Experts in autocracies have pointed out that it is, unfortunately, easy to slip into normalizing the tyrant, hence it is important to hang on to outrage. These incidents which seem to call for the efforts of the Greek Furies (Erinyes) to come and deal with them will, I hope, help with that. As a reminder, though no one really knows how many there were supposed to be, the three names we have are Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone. These roughly translate as “unceasing,” “grudging,” and “vengeful destruction.”

All last year, and going into the year before. I did my best to keep us all updated on the 2020 Census – to participate, to encourage others to participate, to object to the Trump* regime’s obvious efforts to make the Census fail by forcing it to ask stupid questions and making it quittoo soon. It ended up stopping too early, but not as much to early as the regime wanted, andit ended up with 99% of all households countes. And, it has just released its projection that as of April 1, 2021, the total population of the US will be 332 million people.

Now – next year – comes redistricting. Each state does that for itself (I suppose that statement doesn’t exactly include states which end up woth only one district.) Each state has its own rules. Iowa, for instance, has rules about the shapes of the districts which tend to curb the worst of gerrymandering abuses. Ohio, Pennsylvania, not so much. Here’s an article on how redistricting can be fairly done.
================================================================

New electoral districts are coming – an old approach can show if they’re fair

Drawing congressional district boundaries can be complicated.
AP Photo/Gerry Broome

Jon X. Eguia, Michigan State University

When the results of the 2020 U.S. Census are released, states will use the figures to draw new electoral district maps for the U.S. House of Representatives and for state legislatures. This process has been controversial since the very early days of the nation – and continues to be so today.

Electoral district maps designate which people vote for which seat, based on where they live. Throughout history, these maps have often been drawn to give one party or another a political advantage, diluting the power of some people’s votes.

In the modern era, advanced math and computer algorithms are regularly used to analyze potential district boundaries, making it easier to spot these unfairnesses, called gerrymandering. But there is a simpler way – and it’s based on a system used early in the country’s history.

Before there were districts

In the very beginning of the U.S., there weren’t formal electoral districts. Instead, representation was based on counties and towns. For instance, under Pennsylvania’s 1776 state Constitution, each county, and the city of Philadelphia, was assigned a number of state assembly seats “in proportion to the number of taxable inhabitants.”

In 1789, the U.S. Constitution declared that seats in the U.S. House of Representatives would be allocated to the states in proportion to their populations. But it gave no guidance about how to fill those seats. Some states chose to draw an electoral district map, with each district getting one representative. Most of the others chose to grant the entire delegation to the party with the most votes statewide.

Through the first half of the 1800s, the rest of the states gradually shifted to drawing single-member electoral districts. The ideal was for each of these members – whether of Congress or a state legislature – to represent an equal number of people.

New census data, available every 10 years, was useful for doing this, but many states didn’t redraw their districts to adjust for population changes. As a result, newly developed regions with rapid population growth found themselves with less representation than more established population centers with slower growth.

It wasn’t until 1964 that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that all states had to redraw their district boundaries for congressional and state elections, to guarantee that each member of a state delegation in a given assembly represented an equal number of people according to the latest census.

At that point, the controversy shifted from the number of people who lived in a district to its shape.

A depiction of a state electoral district as a monster
An 1812 political cartoon depicted a Massachusetts senatorial district as a monster.
Elkanah Tisdale/Boston Centinel via Wikimedia Commons

Drawing the boundaries

An unfair map can favor one party over another by spreading out supporters across many districts and concentrating opponents in just a few. For instance, the 2018 North Carolina congressional elections saw Republican candidates win 50% of the votes statewide. But the Republicans had drawn the districts, so the party won 10 of the 13 seats. In the three districts Democrats won, they scored landslide victories. In the other 10 districts, Republicans won, but with smaller margins.

Maps aren’t necessarily unfair just because they deliver such lopsided results. Sometimes supporters of one party are already concentrated, as in cities. It’s possible for a fair map to deliver large Democratic wins in Philadelphia, Atlanta, Detroit or Milwaukee while the party gets only half the statewide votes in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan or Wisconsin.

Comparison with alternatives

What I consider a better way to analyze a redistricting map for fairness is to compare it with other potential maps.

Making this comparison doesn’t require knowing how individual people voted. Rather, it involves looking at the smallest units of vote tabulation: precincts, which are sometimes also called wards. Each of these has somewhere between a few hundred and a couple thousand voters; larger districts are made by putting together groups of precincts.

Computers can really help, creating large numbers of alternate maps by assembling precincts in different combinations. Then the vote totals from those precincts are added up, to determine who would have won the newly drawn districts. Those alternate results can shed light on whether the real map was fair.

For instance, in the 2012 congressional elections in Pennsylvania, Republican candidates got fewer votes than Democrats, but Republicans won 13 of the state’s seats, while Democrats won only five. Researchers created 500 alternative maps, and showed that Republicans would win eight, nine or 10 seats in most of those maps, and never more than 11 seats. After seeing that evidence, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court found that the map violated the state Constitution’s standards for free and equal elections. Justices tossed out the map and ordered a new one drawn in time for the 2018 election.

Easily evaluating fairness

A simpler way to evaluate newly drawn districts is to imagine going back to assigning seats the way Pennsylvania did in 1776: The party winning the vote in each county or large town got seats in proportion to the location’s population.

Comparing the county-by-county results with the results based on a particular district map will show whether there is a major difference between the imaginary and the real results. If so, that signals an unfair partisan advantage.

For instance, North Carolina has 100 counties. In the 2018 U.S. House election, Republican candidates got more votes than Democratic candidates in 72 of them, which together are home to 51% of the state’s population. Under the 1776 Pennsylvania system, the Republican Party deserved 51% of the seats – or 6.6 out of 13. Allowing for rounding, it’s reasonable for Republicans to win six or seven seats – or perhaps even eight – but more than that is an unfair and artificial partisan advantage.

Under the map in use in 2018, North Carolina Republicans won 10 seats. The state Supreme Court later threw out that map, which was replaced by one in which Republicans won eight seats in 2020.

To be very clear, I’m not proposing actually returning to the old Pennsylvania method of assigning seats. Rather, I’m proposing that its potential outcomes be used to evaluate maps of electoral districts drawn with equal populations. If the results are similar, then the map is likely relatively fair.

This measure of partisan advantage is much simpler to compute than making large numbers of alternative maps. I did the calculations for 41 states, using the results of the 2012, 2014, 2016 and 2018 congressional elections. I compared those election outcomes with the results that would have happened if seats were assigned by counties and major towns or cities.

[Deep knowledge, daily. Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter.]

I found that on average across these four elections, and on aggregate across all these 41 states, the 2012-2018 maps gave an advantage of 17 seats in the House of Representatives to the Republican Party. The five states with the most unfair advantages relative to their total delegation size are North Carolina, Utah, Michigan and Ohio – favoring Republicans – and Maryland, favoring Democrats.

Auspiciously, court rulings and citizen ballot initiatives in the past five years have led to redistricting reform in four of these states. Continued civic engagement can help to induce mapmakers in these and other states to draw redistricting maps that guarantee fairer representation for the 2022-2030 cycle.The Conversation

Jon X. Eguia, Professor of Economics, Michigan State University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

================================================================
Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone, this shows why it is so important for us to concern ourselves with gubernatorial elections, and most particularly in the last election before the redistricting is done. These are usually years ending in 8 or 0, though I believe a few states use odd years. But it’s not hard to figure for any given state. y state, Colorado, in 2018, overwhelmingly approved a ballot measure establishing an independent commission with no veto possible by the governor to draw our districts. It will be interesting to see what happens. But only 7 states have independent commissions. Ballotpedia makes it very easy to find how your state does this. Thirty-four states leave it to the state legislatures (which means the Governor has veto power). Seven have only one district anyway. The remaining two have commissions made up of politicians (which certainly doesn’t sound good.)

The Furies and I will be back.

Share

Everyday Erinyes #244

 Posted by at 10:01 am  Politics
Dec 122020
 

Experts in autocracies have pointed out that it is, unfortunately, easy to slip into normalizing the tyrant, hence it is important to hang on to outrage. These incidents which seem to call for the efforts of the Greek Furies (Erinyes) to come and deal with them will, I hope, help with that. As a reminder, though no one really knows how many there were supposed to be, the three names we have are Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone. These roughly translate as “unceasing,” “grudging,” and “vengeful destruction.”

How often would you expect the wife and daughter of a deputy managing editor of a publication committed to bringing truth out of hiding to personally witness an episode of police misconduct? I would make a wild guess that, statistically, it must run close to the odds of giving birth to twins. Yet here we are.
================================================================

My Family Saw a Police Car Hit a Kid on Halloween. Then I Learned How NYPD Impunity Works.

ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.

Last Halloween, my wife and then-6-year-old daughter were making their way home after trick-or-treating in Brooklyn. Suddenly, an unmarked NYPD car with sirens wailing began speeding against traffic up a one-way street, our neighborhood’s main thoroughfare. The officer seemed to be going after a few teenage boys.

Then, in an instant, the car hit one of the kids.

It was the first of many jarring things my family saw the NYPD do that night. Afterward, I tried to find out more about what exactly had happened and whether officers would be disciplined. There was footage and plenty of witnesses, and I happen to be an investigative journalist. I thought there was at least a chance I could get answers. Instead, the episode crystallized all of the ways in which the NYPD is shielded from accountability.

This happened in my neighborhood, Carroll Gardens, which is overwhelmingly white. Residents named it that in the 1960s to distinguish it from nearby Red Hook, where the population was largely Black. The area has changed enormously over the decades. But even now, it’s segregated almost block by block.

Halloween is the one day that it can seem like an integrated neighborhood. With lots of stoops and storefronts, there’s always plenty of candy to be had. Kids from the whole area come for the haul.

The police said a group of teenage boys that night had punched and kicked another teenager at a nearby playground and stolen his cellphone. The teen flagged down an officer and was driven around the neighborhood looking for the boys. He pointed out a group, and police descended from different directions. One car sped against traffic until it hit a kid; the boy slid over the hood, hit the ground, and then popped up and ran away along with the others.

My wife took a photo of the car right after:

The police then turned their attention to a different group of boys. My wife and others said they were younger and didn’t seem to have any connection to the ones who had been running. Except that in both groups, the boys were Black.

The police lined five of the younger boys against the wall of our neighborhood movie theater and questioned them, shining bright lights that made them wince and turn their heads. The smallest of the boys was crying, saying, “I didn’t do anything.”

My daughter took in the scene. “What did the boys do wrong?” she asked. The family members of a couple of the boys were there. They had all been trick-or-treating in the neighborhood.

The police eventually let the two boys with relatives go and arrested the three others: a 15-year-old, a 14-year-old and a 12-year-old.

My wife came home with my daughter and urged me to go back. I arrived about half an hour after everything started, a bit after 9 p.m., just as the handcuffed boys were put into a police car.

I watched the mom of one of the freed boys try to tell the ones being arrested to shout out their parents’ numbers, so somebody could tell them what was happening. An officer stood in front of the car window to block the boys from sharing their numbers. Another officer walked up close to the mom and started yelling at her to shut up. A senior officer backed him away.

I also watched another little girl take it all in. She was about the same age as my daughter. Except my daughter is white, as am I. The little girl is Black, and she had just watched her brother be put against the wall and her own mother being yelled at by a cop.

The boys were driven to our local precinct, the 76th. I eventually made my way there, too. The families of all the boys were there. The police are required to notify families when a minor is arrested. But the families told me that hadn’t happened. They’d learned about the boys’ arrests from friends. (The police later said the families showed up so quickly they didn’t have time to make notifications.)

The parents stood outside the precinct for the next four hours, waiting to be allowed to see their kids. One of the fathers, silent most of the time, said he was worried about how late the kids were being held because they still had school in the morning. A mother had to leave her 2-year-old with a neighbor. She paced around outside the station. “I blame myself,” she kept saying. “I never let him out on Halloween. A bunch of Black boys together. I shouldn’t have let him out. But he begged me.”

The police didn’t allow the parents into the station or let them see their kids. At one point, an officer came out, apologized and explained that the station was simply waiting for paperwork to go through. The boys were finally let out around 12:45 a.m.

They weren’t given any paperwork or records about what had happened or told the arresting officers’ names.

The next day, our daughter and her 8-year-old brother were full of questions: “Why did they arrest the boys if they didn’t do anything wrong?” “Is the boy that got hit OK?” I had questions, too. So I called the NYPD. What was the department’s understanding of what happened, I asked, and was it going to investigate any of the cops’ actions?

I felt a sense of kinship with the NYPD’s spokesman, Al Baker. He’s a former journalist. We followed each other on Twitter. Surely, he’d tell me the real deal.

Baker soon called me back. He had looked into it. The boys were being charged with something called “obstructing government administration,” which basically amounts to resisting arrest.

The police hadn’t done anything wrong, Baker said. I don’t know what your wife saw, he explained, but a police car did not hit a kid.

So I went back to my wife and asked her, “Are you sure?” She was sure. It happened right in front of her. Still, memories are fallible. So I went into nearby storefronts and asked if anyone had seen anything the night of Halloween.

“Yeah, I saw a cop car hit a kid,” a waiter told me. He said he had a clear view of it: A handful of kids were running. One of them jumped out into the street and got hit by the police car, “probably going faster than he should have been.” He saw the boy roll over the hood and fall to the ground: “It sounded like when people hit concrete. It made a horrible sound.”

I spoke to four witnesses, including my wife. All of them said they saw the same thing. When I called Baker back, he told me that my wife and the three others were mistaken. The car hadn’t hit the kid. The kid had hit the car.

As his statement put it: “One unknown male fled the scene and ran across the hood of a stationary police car.”

The NYPD has units devoted to investigating its own cops. The city’s district attorneys can also charge officers, of course. But there is supposed to be another check on abuse by police.

New York City has an agency dedicated to investigating civilians’ allegations against the police, the straightforwardly named Civilian Complaint Review Board. After reporterscovered what happened on Halloween, the CCRB responded to a Twitter thread I had written, saying it was investigating. Once again, I assumed we’d get answers.

But the NYPD has long fought against truly independent civilian oversight. Seventy years ago, community groups banded together and pushed the city to address “police misconduct in their relations with Puerto Ricans and Negros.” The NYPD responded by creating the CCRB. But it didn’t have any actual civilians on it. The board originally consisted of three deputy police commissioners.

The first outsiders were appointed more than a decade later, by Mayor John Lindsay’s administration. The police unions fought it. “I’m sick and tired of giving in to minority groups with their whims and their gripes and shouting,” said the head of one.

Things have changed a lot over the years. The civilian board now has about 200 staffers, and its investigators dig deep into cases. My wife said a CCRB investigator who called her was incredibly thorough.

They have lots to do. In 2018, the latest year for which there’s complete data, the board logged 2,919 complaints against NYPD officers for punching, shoving, kicking or pushing people. Each complaint can contain multiple allegations and involve multiple officers. About 9% of the members of the force have had six or more complaints of some type made against them.

The names of all of those officers have long been kept secret, which is finally set to change after New York repealed the notorious “50-a” law that had barred disclosure of police discipline records.

A recent CCRB report focused on police abuse against Black and Latino boys: “Young teens or pre-teens of color were handcuffed, arrested, or held at gunpoint while participating in age-appropriate activities such as running, playing with friends, high-fiving, sitting on a stoop, or carrying a backpack.”

In one case, a few boys were walking home and throwing sticks when police swarmed them, drew guns and ordered the boys up against a wall. The kids were “compliant and cooperative,” the report says, but the commanding officer at the scene decided to arrest two of the boys, ages 8 and 14, for disorderly conduct for throwing the sticks. The report notes: “The children were transported to the stationhouse, handcuffed and in tears.”

The report flagged a few other troubling patterns. One was the NYPD not notifying parents of arrests. Another was children being held for running from plainclothes officers.

I asked the NYPD about the report and everything else in this story. They didn’t respond.

The CCRB assiduously logs all complaints it gets against the police, about 7,000 per year. But actually investigating them, let alone meting out discipline, is a different matter. The NYPD still has control of nearly every step of the process.

Take body cams, which are now standard equipment for NYPD officers. There’s almost certainly footage of exactly what happened on Halloween. But civilian investigators don’t have direct access to the footage. They email requests to the NYPD, which decides which footage is relevant. The department takes its time.

The CCRB’s monthly report shows investigators have made nearly 1,000 requests for body cam footage that the NYPD hasn’t yet fulfilled. More than 40% of the requests have been pending for at least three months.

The CCRB and NYPD recently hashed out an agreement to marginally improve the process: CCRB investigators can now go to a room and watch footage. The agreement stipulates that CCRB staff can only take notes. They cannot record anything or use footage they see of abuse that happens to be different from the specific incident they’re investigating. They must sign a nondisclosure agreement. The deal runs nine pages.

It’s different elsewhere. Civilian oversight investigators in Washington, D.C., San Francisco and New Orleans all have direct access to the body cam footage. Unlike New York, police there can’t redact footage. “That type of behavior should have gone out about 50 years ago,” the head of Washington’s civilian oversight board told WNYC.

Here’s another glimpse into the leverage NYPD officers have: Since the pandemic started, officers haven’t allowed CCRB to interview them remotely, meaning investigations have effectively stalled. The police unions had objected to doing it over video.

“We won’t do Zoom,” one union spokesman told The City. The CCRB is re-starting in-person interviews soon. It noted 1,109 investigations are awaiting police officer interviews.

Most CCRB investigations aren’t completed, and not just because of police intransigence. The roughly 100 investigators can only handle so many cases at once. Each one is its own challenge; witnesses often don’t respond or are hesitant to say what they saw.

Mayor Bill de Blasio has increased the office’s budget in recent years to hire more investigators. But after the pandemic hit, de Blasio laid out a 6% cut for next year. (Asked for comment, the mayor’s office said the cuts are only for one year.) A city report recently noted that the CCRB’s staffing is already below the level mandated by a referendum passed last year to expand the agency.

If a complaint does end up being investigated, the police still get to decide what happens. The police commissioner can take the case back from the CCRB at any point. If the commissioner doesn’t interfere, and if the board — which still has some members chosen by the commissioner — finds that abuse occurred, then the CCRB can recommend discipline.

The CCRB has been able to get to that point and confirm plenty of cases. In 2018, again the most recent year for which there’s full data, the board calculated that the NYPD had 753 active officers who’ve had two or more substantiated complaints against them.

But even if the CCRB substantiates a case, the commissioner still has complete authority over what to do next. He can decide to simply ignore the recommended punishment. The commissioner can also let the case go before an internal NYPD judge (whose boss is the commissioner). If the judge decides punishment is merited, the commissioner can overturn or downgrade that, too.

The NYPD has rejected the CCRB’s proposed punishment on the most serious cases about two-thirds of the time.

So that’s how the system works. And this is what comes out of it: In 2018, the CCRB looked into about 3,000 allegations of misuse of force. It was able to substantiate 73 of those allegations. The biggest punishment? Nine officers who lost vacation days, according to CCRB records. (An additional five officers got a lower level of discipline left to the discretion of their commanding officer.) The most an officer lost was 30 vacation days, for a prohibited chokehold. Another officer wrongly pepper-sprayed someone. He lost one vacation day.

Last winter, I sat down with one of the boys my family saw arrested, Devrin. We were with his mom and the founder of the celebrated charter school he attends in Red Hook called Summit Academy.

Ellen DeGeneres gave college scholarships to the senior class a few years ago after the school founder, Natasha Campbell, wrote to her about the kids’ accomplishments. The vast majority of the students are Black or Latino.

Campbell told me her guess is that at least 40% have been stopped by police at some point. Students are stopped so often that the backs of their student IDs have instructions about what to do when that happens.

Devrin, who was in ninth grade and turned 14 the day before Halloween, sat with me and his mom in Campbell’s office. He’s about 5 feet tall and sat slightly hunched over. It was clear that sitting with a stranger and being asked questions about that night wasn’t his first choice. But his mom and Campbell had encouraged him to, so there he was.

Devrin answered a few questions I asked to try to break the ice. He loves basketball, is on the JV team and had practice in about an hour. Campbell pointed out that he’s never been suspended or disciplined at school.

“I don’t even get in trouble at home,” Devrin chimed in. And then he talked about his experience on Halloween.

Devrin said he was finishing up trick-or-treating when “I just saw a bunch of cops jumping out of their cars.” It was a confusing scene, particularly so because some of the police were in plainclothes, including one who started to go after Devrin. Devrin said he didn’t know the man was an officer.

“I was taught when I see danger to run,” Devrin said. He was starting to run home when he heard the plainclothes officer say he was following a suspect with a Tom & Jerry shirt. That’s what Devrin was wearing. “I turned,” Devrin recalled, “and he pointed a gun at me. He said, ‘Stop before I shoot.’ He was like this with both his hands” — Devrin mimicked holding a gun — “like he was about to pull the trigger.”

I spoke to another witness from that night who recalled the same scene but said the officer was pointing a Taser. Devrin and the witness, a law student named Zoe Bernstein, agreed on what happened next: The officer pushed Devrin to the ground and handcuffed him. “They tackled him,” Bernstein told me. “He just looked so young.”

Devrin was lined up against the wall. He’s the one who was crying, saying, “I didn’t do anything.”

After he was taken to the station, Devrin was handcuffed to a table along with the other boys, asked a few questions and mostly left alone. Then, they said, “You can leave now.”

“I didn’t really sleep that night,” Devrin told me.

He said he just wants to forget about what happened. His mother, Deveeka, wants to let him do that, “but I can’t sit in this thing and let it go. I want answers.” (I’m using only their first names at her request.) She was the mother at the station that night upset with herself that she had let him go.

She said she makes Devrin call her whenever he goes out, even to the corner store. “I’ll ask, ‘Dev, you OK?’ And he’ll say, ‘Yeah, you OK?’” She would seem to have a particular advantage in getting answers. At the end of our interview, she mentioned her job: She’s a school safety officer for a public school in Brooklyn. She works for the NYPD.

Deveeka said she was considering suing but said she’d had a hard time finding a lawyer because the police, her own agency, said they have no records to give her. And despite the NYPD announcing the boys had been charged with obstruction, they didn’t actually follow through with it. “All I have is a story,” she said.

Last week, facing enormous pressure after protests, de Blasio announced reforms. The city is going to post NYPD discipline records online, and police have to move quickly to investigate and release camera footage when there’s alleged abuse involving serious injuries or death. The police commissioner also said he’s disbanding a plainclothes unit that’s been involved in many shootings.

None of the changes limit the commissioner’s absolute discretion over discipline.

The CCRB said this month that it has received more than 750 complaints about NYPD abuse in less than two weeks involving the recent protests. There were 129 separate incidents reported. And the mayor’s office recently said there’s likely little bodycam footage of the incidents since the NYPD adheres carefully to an old civil rights agreement limiting the filming of protests.

I recently called the CCRB to ask the status of its investigation into the Halloween case.

It said the investigation is still open, along with 2,848 others.

================================================================
Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone, to me this is a shocking and outraging story. To far too many kids in this country whose skin is a different color from mine, this is just Thursday. Adults suffer also. This is a story not new to us and i won’t even begin to try to list organizations which are raising money and training people to help learn to deal with it – but I will give a small plug to the newest one – just this week – because I love Colin Kaepernick. He and Ben and Jerry have a new non-dairy frozen dessert out (that’s “fake ice cream” to Republicans) called “Change the Whirled.” ALL of Colin’s profits from it are going to Know Your Rights Camp. (I can’t have it, as it contains both graham crackers and chocolate cookies – but it sounds absolutely delicious.) Info on the flavor and the beneficiary are here.

But there is so much more to be done. This incident, and others like it, is why people are so mad they are saying “defund the police” when that isn’t even what they mean, exactly. I hope to see some progress in my lifetime … but I know I won’t live to see it solved. Too many Karens and Kierans out there.

The Furies and I will be back.

Share

Everyday Erinyes #243

 Posted by at 10:00 am  Politics
Dec 052020
 

Experts in autocracies have pointed out that it is, unfortunately, easy to slip into normalizing the tyrant, hence it is important to hang on to outrage. These incidents which seem to call for the efforts of the Greek Furies (Erinyes) to come and deal with them will, I hope, help with that. As a reminder, though no one really knows how many there were supposed to be, the three names we have are Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone. These roughly translate as “unceasing,” “grudging,” and “vengeful destruction.”

Last week we discussed conspiracy theories. Then, I came across this story. It’s about s different kind of conspiracy – one I believe we can all get behind. It was sent to Wonkette anonymously, so they published it with no author’s name, so I can’t attribute it to the writer But I can’t imagine he or she would not want it to be shared. And so, here it is.
================================================================

A Little Bit of Christmas

An unsolicited submission from one among you that made me cry, and who wishes to remain anonymous.

My older daughter must have been seven or eight when she asked me to tell her the truth about Santa.

Truth is a dangerous thing as we all know. As Terry Pratchett says about the not-really-Santa of the Discworld:

YOU HAVE TO START OUT LEARNING TO BELIEVE THE LITTLE LIES.

“So we can believe the big ones?”

YES. JUSTICE. MERCY. DUTY. THAT SORT OF THING

And lying was a thing I did not want to do. So I told her that I would provide the absolute truth about Santa on our annual trip to meet her Grandparents in New York.

Every year we would go to the outrageous Rockefeller Center Christmas Special that is all money and glitter and then live camels on stage for the real Jesus feeling at the end. I admit it was fun. We then went to one family play as well.

Yes, we are very lucky.

If you have gone to one of those plays then you know that at the end the ushers offer some of the letters sent to the New York Times but not chosen by the New York Times to support. I know that it is not intentionally cruel. But there are so many.

There are so many letters. We took one back, and opened it. There was a barely teenager who wanted cool tennis shoes. There was a small girl, I believe 4t, who wanted a pretty Christmas dress. A and I shopped together, the two of us. We spent serious time in Footlocker before deciding on a truly fabulous shoe with the name of the most gorgeous basketball player in my lifetime on the side. The sales worker assured us that this was *the shoe* for the stylish just-now-a teenager. It was all about the brand. Then the dress. We thought about velvet blue with white teddy-bear fur trim. But a Christmas dress was what was wanted, so we went with red brocade with lace. We guessed the matching shoe size, and matching tights. I can not remember if we bought the muff or the hat. Muffs are so fun. They are highly underrated accessories for sheer fun.

We took the gifts back to the theater as instructed. The person opening the door was so charming, and so taken by the outfit she took us to see the manager as exemplars for the gifting program.

Then we went home.

Christmas morning I whispered to her as she opened her own gifts, “And now YOU are Santa. You have met the real Santa. It is a vast conspiracy of kindness.” We talked about how she knew she would have gifts under the tree, but many people do not. Discussing the joy of that anonymous mother — giving her children what they wanted — led to the discussion of the moms whose letters of hope went unanswered.

We had to stop going to plays. They were confusing to first my father then my mom as dementia took them. We stopped going to New York two years later, so the younger sibling never was able to share that experience.

Instead, when the younger came home from second grade saying there was a boy who said Santa was not real, my older child nodded decisively, “There is a Santa. I have met Santa. Next year, I will introduce you.” Then one weekend the next year, I dropped them off together at the Mall with an Angel Tree. (Not the Angel Tree for children with one parent in prison, but one sponsored by the local shelter.

That Christmas morning, we all became coconspirators.

As a small family of adults, we have been matching each gift to each other with a donation of equivalent size. It is more likely to be Heifer.com than Toys for Tots, and includes environmental charities as much as local Boys & Girls Clubs. This year it is the Senate race in Georgia.

We are still part of the conspiracy. And in 2020 that conspiracy is desperately needed.

The kindness is the point.

================================================================
AMT, I don’t know about anyone else, but to me, this story has “Yes, Virginia” beat six ways from Sunday. Of course, sharing it kind of has the effect of giving you the week off. And that’s fine. You deserve one. And you’ll likely need to rest up for what all is coming. Enjoy it.

The Furies and I will be back.

Share

Everyday Erinyes #242

 Posted by at 10:00 am  Politics
Nov 282020
 

Experts in autocracies have pointed out that it is, unfortunately, easy to slip into normalizing the tyrant, hence it is important to hang on to outrage. These incidents which seem to call for the efforts of the Greek Furies (Erinyes) to come and deal with them will, I hope, help with that. As a reminder, though no one really knows how many there were supposed to be, the three names we have are Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone. These roughly translate as “unceasing,” “grudging,” and “vengeful destruction.”

I saw a wicked good article on QAnon last week, written by a game designer. If you have time you should really look at it. But here’s a quote which gives you the key takeaway:

“When I saw QAnon, I knew exactly what it was and what it was doing. I had seen it before. I had almost built it before. It was gaming’s evil twin. A game that plays people.”  Cue ominous music:

While we probably can train ourselves to be on the alert for telltale signs of phony conspiracies, not everyone has the time or the disposition. That’s why I was so relieved to see the article which follows:
================================================================

An AI tool can distinguish between a conspiracy theory and a true conspiracy – it comes down to how easily the story falls apart

In the age of social media, conspiracy theories are collective creations.
AP Photo/Ted S. Warren

Timothy R. Tangherlini, University of California, Berkeley

The audio on the otherwise shaky body camera footage is unusually clear. As police officers search a handcuffed man who moments before had fired a shot inside a pizza parlor, an officer asks him why he was there. The man says to investigate a pedophile ring. Incredulous, the officer asks again. Another officer chimes in, “Pizzagate. He’s talking about Pizzagate.”

In that brief, chilling interaction in 2016, it becomes clear that conspiracy theories, long relegated to the fringes of society, had moved into the real world in a very dangerous way.

Conspiracy theories, which have the potential to cause significant harm, have found a welcome home on social media, where forums free from moderation allow like-minded individuals to converse. There they can develop their theories and propose actions to counteract the threats they “uncover.”

But how can you tell if an emerging narrative on social media is an unfounded conspiracy theory? It turns out that it’s possible to distinguish between conspiracy theories and true conspiracies by using machine learning tools to graph the elements and connections of a narrative. These tools could form the basis of an early warning system to alert authorities to online narratives that pose a threat in the real world.

The culture analytics group at the University of California, which I and Vwani Roychowdhury lead, has developed an automated approach to determining when conversations on social media reflect the telltale signs of conspiracy theorizing. We have applied these methods successfully to the study of Pizzagate, the COVID-19 pandemic and anti-vaccination movements. We’re currently using these methods to study QAnon.

Collaboratively constructed, fast to form

Actual conspiracies are deliberately hidden, real-life actions of people working together for their own malign purposes. In contrast, conspiracy theories are collaboratively constructed and develop in the open.

Conspiracy theories are deliberately complex and reflect an all-encompassing worldview. Instead of trying to explain one thing, a conspiracy theory tries to explain everything, discovering connections across domains of human interaction that are otherwise hidden – mostly because they do not exist.

People are susceptible to conspiracy theories by nature, and periods of uncertainty and heightened anxiety increase that susceptibility.

While the popular image of the conspiracy theorist is of a lone wolf piecing together puzzling connections with photographs and red string, that image no longer applies in the age of social media. Conspiracy theorizing has moved online and is now the end-product of a collective storytelling. The participants work out the parameters of a narrative framework: the people, places and things of a story and their relationships.

The online nature of conspiracy theorizing provides an opportunity for researchers to trace the development of these theories from their origins as a series of often disjointed rumors and story pieces to a comprehensive narrative. For our work, Pizzagate presented the perfect subject.

Pizzagate began to develop in late October 2016 during the runup to the presidential election. Within a month, it was fully formed, with a complete cast of characters drawn from a series of otherwise unlinked domains: Democratic politics, the private lives of the Podesta brothers, casual family dining and satanic pedophilic trafficking. The connecting narrative thread among these otherwise disparate domains was the fanciful interpretation of the leaked emails of the Democratic National Committee dumped by WikiLeaks in the final week of October 2016.

AI narrative analysis

We developed a model – a set of machine learning tools – that can identify narratives based on sets of people, places and things and their relationships. Machine learning algorithms process large amounts of data to determine the categories of things in the data and then identify which categories particular things belong to.

We analyzed 17,498 posts from April 2016 through February 2018 on the Reddit and 4chan forums where Pizzagate was discussed. The model treats each post as a fragment of a hidden story and sets about to uncover the narrative. The software identifies the people, places and things in the posts and determines which are major elements, which are minor elements and how they’re all connected.

The model determines the main layers of the narrative – in the case of Pizzagate, Democratic politics, the Podesta brothers, casual dining, satanism and WikiLeaks – and how the layers come together to form the narrative as a whole.

To ensure that our methods produced accurate output, we compared the narrative framework graph produced by our model with illustrations published in The New York Times. Our graph aligned with those illustrations, and also offered finer levels of detail about the people, places and things and their relationships.

Sturdy truth, fragile fiction

To see if we could distinguish between a conspiracy theory and an actual conspiracy, we examined Bridgegate, a political payback operation launched by staff members of Republican Gov. Chris Christie’s administration against the Democratic mayor of Fort Lee, New Jersey.

As we compared the results of our machine learning system using the two separate collections, two distinguishing features of a conspiracy theory’s narrative framework stood out.

First, while the narrative graph for Bridgegate took from 2013 to 2020 to develop, Pizzagate’s graph was fully formed and stable within a month. Second, Bridgegate’s graph survived having elements removed, implying that New Jersey politics would continue as a single, connected network even if key figures and relationships from the scandal were deleted.

The Pizzagate graph, in contrast, was easily fractured into smaller subgraphs. When we removed the people, places, things and relationships that came directly from the interpretations of the WikiLeaks emails, the graph fell apart into what in reality were the unconnected domains of politics, casual dining, the private lives of the Podestas and the odd world of satanism.

In the illustration below, the green planes are the major layers of the narrative, the dots are the major elements of the narrative, the blue lines are connections among elements within a layer and the red lines are connections among elements across the layers. The purple plane shows all the layers combined, showing how the dots are all connected. Removing the WikiLeaks plane yields a purple plane with dots connected only in small groups.

Two graphs, one above and one below, showing dots with interconnecting lines
The layers of the Pizzagate conspiracy theory combine to form a narrative, top right. Remove one layer, the fanciful interpretations of emails released by WikiLeaks, and the whole story falls apart, bottom right.
Tangherlini, et al., CC BY

Early warning system?

There are clear ethical challenges that our work raises. Our methods, for instance, could be used to generate additional posts to a conspiracy theory discussion that fit the narrative framework at the root of the discussion. Similarly, given any set of domains, someone could use the tool to develop an entirely new conspiracy theory.

[Deep knowledge, daily. Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter.]

However, this weaponization of storytelling is already occurring without automatic methods, as our study of social media forums makes clear. There is a role for the research community to help others understand how that weaponization occurs and to develop tools for people and organizations who protect public safety and democratic institutions.

Developing an early warning system that tracks the emergence and alignment of conspiracy theory narratives could alert researchers – and authorities – to real-world actions people might take based on these narratives. Perhaps with such a system in place, the arresting officer in the Pizzagate case would not have been baffled by the gunman’s response when asked why he’d shown up at a pizza parlor armed with an AR-15 rifle.The Conversation

Timothy R. Tangherlini, Professor of Danish Literature and Culture, University of California, Berkeley

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

================================================================
Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone, the best science and technology in the world underperforms (to say the least) if people don’t believe it, don’t use it, won’t use it. Some conspiracies are real. More are not. I hope you can put a fire under all of us to use the technology and trust the results.

The Furies and I will be back.

Share

Everyday Erinyes #241

 Posted by at 10:00 am  Politics
Nov 212020
 

Experts in autocracies have pointed out that it is, unfortunately, easy to slip into normalizing the tyrant, hence it is important to hang on to outrage. These incidents which seem to call for the efforts of the Greek Furies (Erinyes) to come and deal with them will, I hope, help with that. As a reminder, though no one really knows how many there were supposed to be, the three names we have are Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone. These roughly translate as “unceasing,” “grudging,” and “vengeful destruction.”

With thanksgiving so near in the United States, and CoViD-19 so endemic and increasing, I thought the Furies and I had better take a look at staying safe over the holiday. If, like me, you have been taking maximum care for eight months to avoid exposure, you probably feel pretty prepared. But there are still things to learn. I am featuring the article which gives multiple tips specific to travel and/or a gathering, but there is plenty more. Here are links to three articles which are strongly holiday-oriented – and another link to a section where there are several more.

Why face masks belong at your Thanksgiving gathering – 7 things you need to know about wearing them
How to host a safe holiday meal during coronavirus – an epidemiologist explains her personal plans
Keeping indoor air clean can reduce the chance of spreading coronavirus
The Conversation – CoViD-19 Central
================================================================

As CDC warns against Thanksgiving travel, here are a dozen more things you can do to help stop COVID-19

While it may be deflating, events like the annual Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade are best watched from home this year. Here, the Harold the Fireman balloon lies face down as he readied for the parade on Nov. 27, 2019.
Gary Hershorn via Getty Images

Pamela M. Aaltonen, Purdue University

As Americans prepare for the first Thanksgiving in the time of the coronavirus, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued a stark warning a week before the big day: Don’t travel.

No over the river and through the woods to grandmother’s condo. No flying to a beach gathering with the family you choose.

And if it sounds like the CDC is trying to be like the Grinch who stole Thanksgiving, it is important to remember the grim statistic of more than a quarter of a million people dead from COVID-19. There is no mistaking: The coronavirus is out of control.

Ultimately, lowering the staggering numbers of COVID-19 cases and deaths lies squarely with us. Yes, governments can mandate actions; but we’re the ones responsible for adhering to them. Our failure is clear when you look at the latest numbers: Deaths from the virus are projected to soon approach 2,000 Americans a day, and cases continue to climb in the vast majority of states.

If national numbers don’t spur action, will it help to localize the problem? You can find out what’s happening closer to home here at the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center. Drill down to see the data in your state and county, then take a moment to pause and consider the catastrophic consequences. It’s still within our power to reverse course and lower these numbers. But as a public health scholar and researcher, I can tell you that as infections increase, the more difficult that becomes.

Even the rural states of North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa and Wyoming are experiencing tremendous surges. Exhausted hospitals and health care workers across the U.S. are becoming overwhelmed, if not already there. Overwhelmed systems place care at risk. Those with other health conditions need medical intervention and hospitalization. And those with a lax attitude about COVID-19 put themselves at increased risk for negative health outcomes.

Vaccines are on the horizon, but in the meantime, the pandemic is not winding down.
Vaccines may be on the way, but the pandemic is hardly winding down.
Kena Betancur / AFP via Getty Images

Changing behavior is a must

Modifying our behavior minimizes the chances to spread infection. But this is a big task. Government actions are most effective when based on local data and the option to loosen or tighten restrictions based on solid information. We should not view these actions as an attempt to take away our civil liberties. Instead, we should think of them as liberating, a way to keep us away from the virus.

It is not too late to modify your behavior if you’ve been reluctant to accept the realities of the virus. With promising vaccines on the horizon, our challenge as individuals is to reduce current infection numbers. And to do that, everyone must commit to established public health strategies.

A traditional Thanksgiving this year may not be a good idea.
Skipping the traditional Thanksgiving this year may be a good idea.
Ariel Skelley via Getty Images

A dozen things you can do

  1. Always mask up when indoors and around people who don’t live in your household.
  2. Always mask up when outdoors and unable to maintain physical distancing.
  3. Use either disposable masks or a multi-layer tightly woven cotton mask. Single-layer kerchiefs are insufficient.
  4. When you mask up, make sure it fits your face and covers both nose and mouth. Wash or sanitize your hands after touching or removing the mask.
  5. Remember that masks are not a substitute for physical distancing.
  6. Maintain at least six feet of distance between you and others outside of your household.
  7. Wash your hands frequently with soap and water for 20 seconds, or use a hand sanitizer with at least 60% alcohol.
  8. Avoid motions that transfer organisms from your hands to your face. Your mouth, nose and eyes have mucous membranes that are potentially receptive to these organisms.
  9. Clean frequently touched surfaces.
  10. Do as much as possible outside and keep interactions with others short.
  11. Fortify ventilation systems for more frequent air exchanges.
  12. Curtail in-person holiday celebrations with those not in your household.

Celebrations are particularly challenging because it’s difficult for everyone to self-quarantine for the 14 days prior to the event. Also, events are typically inside rather than out; spacing of six feet may not be an option; ventilation systems in our energy-efficient homes are likely COVID-19-insufficient; and one cannot be masked while eating.

[Deep knowledge, daily. Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter.]

So for Thanksgiving, do a virtual gathering instead. Cook the same menu in different houses to promote a sense of sharing. Send e-cards to each other with a personal note and wish for a good holiday. Or do a Zoom call where all can speak and express thankfulness for the ability to still be able to connect this year.

It is not unusual for COVID-19 patients to rage when they discover that those around them dismissed or downplayed the wisdom and experience of scientists and doctors about the realities of the pandemic. But there is no need to give up, even in the face of increasingly frightening statistics. Instead, now is the time we need to commit not just to ourselves, but to one another. What’s standing in the way of curtailing the numbers of COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations and deaths is us.The Conversation

Pamela M. Aaltonen, Professor Emerita; Immediate Past President, APHA, Purdue University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

================================================================
Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone, I wish everyone were able to just stay home, but that is not a realistic expectation. As you fly around the nation and the world, I hope you will be able to protect some of the most vulnerable people from contracting this deadly disease.

The Furies and I will be back.

Share

Everyday Erinyes #240

 Posted by at 10:00 am  Politics
Nov 142020
 

Experts in autocracies have pointed out that it is, unfortunately, easy to slip into normalizing the tyrant, hence it is important to hang on to outrage. These incidents which seem to call for the efforts of the Greek Furies (Erinyes) to come and deal with them will, I hope, help with that. As a reminder, though no one really knows how many there were supposed to be, the three names we have are Alecto, Megaera, and Tisiphone. These roughly translate as “unceasing,” “grudging,” and “vengeful destruction.”

When I saw “feeling disoriented” at the top of this article, I immediately knew it was going to be useful. And I think it is. We are probably all familiar with the concept of getting in touch with our own dark sides, and this, while similar, is a little different – more like getting in touch with our share, whatever that may be, of community distress in order to heal, or help heal, the community. But see what you think.
================================================================

Feeling disoriented by the election, pandemic and everything else? It’s called ‘zozobra,’ and Mexican philosophers have some advice

Is it a lovely autumn day, or is America burning to the ground?
Jessica Rinaldi/The Boston Globe via Getty Images

Francisco Gallegos, Wake Forest University and Carlos Alberto Sánchez, San José State University

Ever had the feeling that you can’t make sense of what’s happening? One moment everything seems normal, then suddenly the frame shifts to reveal a world on fire, struggling with pandemic, recession, climate change and political upheaval.

That’s “zozobra,” the peculiar form of anxiety that comes from being unable to settle into a single point of view, leaving you with questions like: Is it a lovely autumn day, or an alarming moment of converging historical catastrophes?

On the eve of a general election in which the outcome – and aftermath – is unknown, it is a condition that many Americans may be experiencing.

As scholars of this phenomenon, we have noted how zozobra has spread in U.S. society in recent years, and we believe the insight of Mexican philosophers can be helpful to Americans during these tumultuous times.

Ever since the conquest and colonization of the valley of Mexico by Hernán Cortés, Mexicans have had to cope with wave after wave of profound social and spiritual disruption – wars, rebellions, revolution, corruption, dictatorship and now the threat of becoming a narco-state. Mexican philosophers have had more than 500 years of uncertainty to reflect on, and they have important lessons to share.

Zozobra and the wobbling of the world

The word “zozobra” is an ordinary Spanish term for “anxiety” but with connotations that call to mind the wobbling of a ship about to capsize. The term emerged as a key concept among Mexican intellectuals in the early 20th century to describe the sense of having no stable ground and feeling out of place in the world.

This feeling of zozobra is commonly experienced by people who visit or immigrate to a foreign country: the rhythms of life, the way people interact, everything just seems “off” – unfamiliar, disorienting and vaguely alienating.

According to the philosopher Emilio Uranga (1921-1988), the telltale sign of zozobra is wobbling and toggling between perspectives, being unable to relax into a single framework to make sense of things. As Uranga describes it in his 1952 book “Analysis of Mexican Being”:

“Zozobra refers to a mode of being that incessantly oscillates between two possibilities, between two affects, without knowing which one of those to depend on … indiscriminately dismissing one extreme in favor of the other. In this to and fro the soul suffers, it feels torn and wounded.”

What makes zozobra so difficult to address is that its source is intangible. It is a soul-sickness not caused by any personal failing, nor by any of the particular events that we can point to.

Instead, it comes from cracks in the frameworks of meaning that we rely on to make sense of our world – the shared understanding of what is real and who is trustworthy, what risks we face and how to meet them, what basic decency requires of us and what ideals our nation aspires to.

In the past, many people in the U.S. took these frameworks for granted – but no longer.

The gnawing sense of distress and disorientation many Americans are feeling is a sign that at some level, they now recognize just how necessary and fragile these structures are.

The need for community

Another Mexican philosopher, Jorge Portilla (1918-1963), reminds us that these frameworks of meaning that hold our world together cannot be maintained by individuals alone. While each of us may find our own meaning in life, we do so against the backdrop of what Portilla described as a “horizon of understanding” that is maintained by our community. In everything we do, from making small talk to making big life choices, we depend on others to share a basic set of assumptions about the world. It’s a fact that becomes painfully obvious when we suddenly find ourselves among people with very different assumptions.

In our book on the contemporary relevance of Portilla’s philosophy, we point out that in the U.S., people increasingly have the sense that their neighbors and countrymen inhabit a different world. As social circles become smaller and more restricted, zozobra deepens.

In his 1949 essay, “Community, Greatness, and Misery in Mexican Life,” Portilla identifies four signs that indicate when the feedback loop between zozobra and social disintegration has reached critical levels.

First, people in a disintegrating society become prone to self-doubt and reluctance to take action, despite how urgently action may be needed. Second, they become prone to cynicism and even corruption – not because they are immoral but because they genuinely do not experience a common good for which to sacrifice their personal interests. Third, they become prone to nostalgia, fantasizing about returning to a time when things made sense. In the case of America, this applies not only to those given to wearing MAGA caps; everyone can fall into this sense of longing for a previous age.

And finally, people become prone to a sense of profound vulnerability that gives rise to apocalyptic thinking. Portilla puts it this way:

“We live always simultaneously entrenched in a human world and in a natural world, and if the human world denies us its accommodations to any extent, the natural world emerges with a force equal to the level of insecurity that textures our human connections.”

In other words, when a society is disintegrating, fires, floods and tornadoes seem like harbingers of apocalypse.

Coping with the crisis

Naming the present crisis is a first step toward dealing with it. But then what is to be done?

Portilla suggests that national leaders can exacerbate or alleviate zozobra. When there is a coherent horizon of understanding at the national level – that is to say, when there is a shared sense of what is real and what matters – individuals have a stronger feeling of connection to the people around them and a sense that their society is in a better position to deal with the most pressing issues. With this solace, it is easier to return attention to one’s own small circle of influence.

[Deep knowledge, daily. Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter.]

Uranga, for his part, suggests that zozobra actually unifies people in a common human condition. Many prefer to hide their suffering behind a happy facade or channel it into anger and blame. But Uranga insists that honest conversation about shared suffering is an opportunity to come together. Talking about zozobra provides something to commune over, something on which to base a love for one another, or at least sympathy.The Conversation

Francisco Gallegos, Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Wake Forest University and Carlos Alberto Sánchez, Professor of Philosophy, San José State University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

================================================================
AMT, the outcome may be known (with a couple of significate exceptions), but the aftermath seems not only uncertain, but getting more so every day. I’ll bet you are in touch with spirits like Tlaltecuhtli, Quetzalcoatl, and Tlaloc, and would be able to discuss this with them and help us come to terms with our uncerainties and anxieties, and build community through sharing.

The Furies and I will be back.

Share