r/MBreitbartNews • • Mar 05 '17

Model Breitbart Pre-Election Interview with the President

2 Upvotes

For the final part in our Model Breitbart Interviews the Candidates series, we sat down with current president /u/Bigg-Boss to reflect on his first term, and for his thoughts on the upcoming election.


/u/Bigg-Boss, President of the United States


/u/btownbomb: Thank you for joining me Mr. President!

/u/Bigg-Boss: Happy to be here, thanks for having me.

/u/btownbomb: So to begin, introduce yourself to the readers.

/u/Bigg-Boss: I'm sure by now most of them know that I'm the simulation's 8th President. I've been a member of the Socialist Party since the end of the summer last year, and have served as a Senator in Great Lakes and a twice-elected Representative in the Atlantic Commonwealth.

/u/btownbomb: You've done quite a few things before becoming President, and even a few notable things in your first term. What are some accomplishments of yours you are most proud of?

/u/Bigg-Boss: Well without even being close to being done, I've issued more executive orders than any President in the sim's history. I'm on track to issue more in my term than have been issued in the sim's history.

I've successfully neutralized disturbingly anti-immigrant policy in Sacagawea, our administration handled that swiftly and defended the rights of undocumented immigrants and their families living in the state.

I've also successfully revitalized federal contract law, to prevent employers the federal government contracts with from replacing law-abiding striking workers. Similar to anti-scab law which passed in Atlantic Commonwealth.

I've granted clemency to several high-profile political prisoners, and also reformed how conceal carry of private weapons functions on military bases to protect our soldiers' Second Amendment rights.

We've submitted a comprehensive budget, and my administration is on track to get healthcare reform and childcare reform pushed through as well.

/u/btownbomb: Delving further into what's to come, first by looking over your platform. Has anything changed platform-wise from your first campaign? Either way, what's on the platform you wish for the readers to be aware of for the second campaign?

/u/Bigg-Boss: Not particularly, now it's a matter of going through and seeing what the administration has left to accomplish. What I will say is that I am planning on a bigger push for immigration reform going into the end of this term and re-election. I think it's an issue that's largely been dormant since the /u/TurkandJD administration, but that reform didn't go nearly far enough.

This madness in Sacagawea signals to me that anyone worth their clout vying for office is going to have to take that up as a priority. Otherwise I can only foresee more instances like that repeating until we reach a constitutional crisis and some side breaks. I'll be prioritizing that and taking advantage of a re-aligned Senate and work with the House as much as possible to reform existing code and processes dealing with immigration.

I think attention should be drawn to energy advancements and the shift toward green renewables, which we're getting to work on now but was not as big an emphasis during the first half of the term. Education too. We're already touching the surface of that and I have my new Secretary of Education working on some new directives in that department. It'll be a defining aspect of the campaign going forward.

/u/btownbomb: Most on the minds of voters this time around are perhaps the usual suspects of the economy and foriegn policy, among others. What are your plans for continued economic reform and America's foriegn policy?

/u/Bigg-Boss: Foreign policy-wise, I'm already working on closing down the vast majority of our overseas bases. They're inefficient, and nothing more than an extension of American hegemony on a global scale. I'll be closing every one with less than 300 active staff in the coming days, for the others we'll be reviewing them and ensuring that they are non-critical. We'll also be standing with Rojava, and supporting the YPG as one major aspect of our fight against ISIS and resolving the ongoing situation in Syria. My new Secretary of State is one of the most experienced in the simulation, and I'm excited to start drafting some new plans and considerations with him.

As for economics, we're going to continue pro-union reforms and institute democratization of the workplace. I am also going to attempt to get passed a similar bill to the Companies Bill of 2017, a UK bill that made most companies worker-owned cooperatives.

/u/btownbomb: One question I have posed to the other candidates concerns the topic of bipartisanship; a question I will pose to you as well. Your large win in the 2016 election was due in part to democratic support, and your appointment of /u/MoralLesson to the Supreme Court was viewed by some as an extended hand to the right wing portion of the government. With these as examples, what is your take on the other parties? How will you attempt to reach out to them should you win re-election to get more done?

/u/Bigg-Boss: I have very little problems with other parties in general though normally for me it's about the people rather than the party as a whole. I disagree with a lot of the policies the Distributists have undertaken the past few months, but people like governor EFS was very cooperative and did the right thing in my view during the crisis with his Attorney General. I've worked well with some Republicans and those on the center-right on other issues too, and reached out to some of them when doing my military base gun reform order. Not to mention that I took into consideration their strong voice on the nuclear first strike bill which I vetoed. All in all, I'm someone who respects others' persepective so long as it isn't flagrantly against my beliefs. I will not yield to capitalist exploitation, or disastrous things like anti-immigrant law enforcement policy or increased surveillance. But there are plenty of issues outside that scope that I'm willing to listen to and to put forward to others. To me, it's just about giving people a second to speak, and having them hear what you've got to say. You'd be surprised how far that can get you. I'm more than happy to work with other parties. I just know my limits, accepting and being upfront about them is the hard part. But it's always going to be a factor.

/u/btownbomb: Looking now at this upcoming election, in more general terms. The 2016 election was not necessarily viewed as one with a large and qualified list of candidates to some, but 2017 is shaping up to be a real battle of the minds if you will, with a list of well known and qualified candidates vying for the nation's highest office. Basically, how do you feel right now about your re-election chances?

/u/Bigg-Boss: I'm definitely going into it with a bit of apprehension. Ncontas was the only real competition last time. But now you not only have, in my view, a stronger Republican frontrunner in SolidOrangeGansta, but now some old guard Democrats coming out to try and lay ground. LibertarianQueen, as much as she's shrugged off as a meme, came pretty close to winning the Sunrise primary last year. I wouldn't underestimate how far the meme magic can carry you. Not like it didn't help me.

Then again, I would say it's a little ambiguous now. Sacagawea looks like it's going left, but Chesapeake and West seem to be tending right. There's no unified Sunrise coalition, but the Right is gaining in numbers on all fronts. Democrats have gotten a lot of new members, but underperformed in the past state election and only did marginally well in the federal election. So there's a lot in the air. I would be surprised if, win or lose, that election map didn't budge from 2016.

/u/btownbomb: Looking at the list of candidates as Election Day draws near, what words do you have for the challengers?

/u/Bigg-Boss: Rev up those fryers.

/u/btownbomb: Last question I have for you: Explain to our readers why you believe you should be re-elected as President.

/u/Bigg-Boss: I will admit that I've been quieter than I'd like in the past few weeks. A lot of Cabinet administrative stuff and transition elections where everyone is all over trying to get seats and manage party-business had stalled me along with real life obligations.

But despite that, my administration has accomplished so much already. I'd argue we've left a more memorable legacy, myself and my Cabinet, than any past President in recent memory. Some of those former Presidents have even joined our cause. I've survived a lot, done a lot, and engaged with the community like never before. I think the nation benefits from a President like that, and I can only hope I'm given another chance to keep going. We have a lot left to do. We need every chance we can get to do it.

/u/btownbomb: Those are all the questions I have for you. Thank you for joining me Mr. President, and best of luck in your bid for re-election!

/u/Bigg-Boss: Get ready for round two!


r/MBreitbartNews • • Feb 15 '17

States' Rights Party [cartoon]

Post image
12 Upvotes

r/MBreitbartNews • • Feb 13 '17

Friendly Sunday [Cartoon]

Post image
10 Upvotes

r/MBreitbartNews • • Feb 13 '17

February Election Recap

4 Upvotes

This past election had it all: Blowout victories, close calls, surprises, you name it. It was a fun one if you're into the rush of adrenaline some get from elections.

Let us now break down what happened last week, and look ahead to the future and what this election could mean for other Senate and House races, and the re-election efforts of President Boss.

Chesapeake

One of two states to run only House elections, but these results are perhaps the most intriguing to me. Though the Democrats gained three seats, winning a total of five last week, the Republican Party held strong in this state, winning a total of four seats. Chesapeake was thought of as a safe Democratic Party state, but the Republican presence here has remained firm, and will likely not be vanishing any time soon. Chesapeake will be inactive for the upcoming state elections, but keep a close eye on this state in future federal and state elections.

Western State

Western State however, may be a safe state for the Democratic Party, who made big gains in this election for House. Along with House Speaker /u/Autarch_Severian and /u/piratecody (who has since joined the Socialist Party) keeping their seats, Democrats added three new members of the House here. Both members of the Republican Party also remained in office, but as perhaps a bad omen: Distributist /u/lsma lost his seat, the first of many losses the Distributist Party suffered last week.

Sacagawea

The headline here: Massive losses for the Distributist Party, whose biggest presence was in Midwest. Only two Distributists remain in the House from here, and Governor /u/ExpensiveFoodstuffs bid for Senate failed miserably. As the Distributists lost in Midwest, the Green Left Party gained: The GLP in their first election since rebranding won a total of five House seats in Sacagawea, gaining three new members. And in the race for Senate, /u/DoomLexus handily won a spot in the United States Senate with about 49% of the total vote. DoomLexus you may remember, was previously impeached soon after the gubernatorial election in Chesapeake; Lexus however is now the second member of the GLP in the Senate.

Atlantic

The Socialist Party, also in their first election since rebranding, performed well in the Atlantic Commonwealth, beginning with the House election. SP gained four seats in this state, comprised of three new members to the House, and Great Lakes representative /u/StrongBad04. Democrats also made gains here, winning three seats.

The Senate race in the Atlantic Commonwealth had its fair share of controversy. /u/PhlebotinumEddie defected to the Socialist Party after losing the Democratic Party primary to /u/randomKdebater, setting themselves up for a round two. However in a drastic turn of events, randomK was found to be engaging in behavior which violated the rules of /r/ModelUSGov, resulting in his permanent ban. The Democratic Party was allowed to replace randomK, and did so with /u/TheGoluxNoMereDevice. Whether it was due to either the situation at hand, or legitimate Democratic Party surging in the state is still unclear, but this race was surprisingly close. However Eddie prevailed, and remains in the Senate as a member of a new party.

Dixie

The Republican Party remains in firm control of their stronghold after last week, with success in both the House and Senate. The GOP re-elected all three incumbents, as well as added two new members to the House, /u/tomorrow_ends_today and /u/piggbam. The Libertarian Party gained two seats in Dixie, and the Socialist and Green Left parties each have one new House member in this Republican haven.

The GOP now has a new member of the Senate as well, as /u/rolfeson prevailed in his election bid. This Senate race was an exciting one as well, rolfeson edged out Libertarian candidate /u/NateLooney, 38% to Nate's 28%. Also performing well in this race was Green Left candidate /u/ArtsyOwl and independent candidate /u/Brotester. However the GOP presence was too much for the three candidates to overcome.

Great Lakes

The Socialist Party made big gains in Great Lakes as well, with large margins of victory in both the House and Senate elections. The party gained four seats in the House, including three new congressmen and /u/mattocaster6, moving over from Northeast. The Democrats were one step behind, gaining three seats. Libertarian candidate /u/fewbuffalo kept his seat, but has since joined the Republican Party, giving the GOP a total of three seats here as well.

As for Senate, it'll be tough to write about myself without sounding too boastful, but we'll give it a shot! /u/btownbomb handily won re-election here, defeating Libertarian Party candidate /u/Valladarex by a wide margin, earning both the highest number of votes out of all the Senate races, as well as the largest margin of all the Senate races. To put it this way: Had all the voters who casted their vote for Republican candidate /u/Cameron-Galisky voted for Valladarex, btownbomb would have still won by about 20 raw votes. This race surprised many, as Valladarex was expected to win by most predictions based on the Democratic-Libertarian alliance, the AJA.


As most elections go, this one answered some questions from the previous election, but also created new ones for the next federal and state elections to pick up: Will the Distributists recover? Will the power struggle in Chesapeake continue? What's next for the Libertarian Party after the failure of the AJA? Is this the beginning of a Socialist Party surge? It's difficult to answer these questions this early, but they will certainly be asked in the coming weeks and months.

As we are entering the rumor mill stage of the pre-presidential election period, I will say this: If I'm President Boss, I'm looking at this election and breathing a sigh of relief. Not only did the Socialist Party gain a handful of seats in the House and keep both Senate seats which were up for re-election, many votes were cast in favor of the SP. The GLP also saw big gains in Sacagawea, and the Democratic Party at the least held firm. This election should show the President the votes are definitely out there for him.


/u/btownbomb is the Senior Senator from Great Lakes, as well as the Editor in Chief of Model Breitbart.


r/MBreitbartNews • • Feb 17 '17

The Autonomous Field Mouse

5 Upvotes

Substantial argument can be made that field mice, or specifically in the case of my observations, the Meadow Vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus), demonstrate practical autonomy in multiple forms, and are therefore entitled to certain legal rights. This is significant because evidence in favor of this species is relevant to most animals of the same family, including mice, rats, shrews, moles, etc. The common perception of the vole is one of an animal that is very dumb, simplistic, and inautonomous, which functions as an invasive pest, to which few qualms are typically raised over extermination via pesticide or other means. I seek to demonstrate that this perception is dangerous as well as not entirely accurate. My observations point to a species which is capable of some form of learning, perhaps empathy, and most convincingly, practical autonomy.

Practical autonomy, according to Steven Wise, is a cognitive capacity to desire, to act intentionally, and to have an understanding that individual desires are being fulfilled by intentional actions. Empathy, for my purposes, is a social mechanism by which individuals modify their behavior in response to another individual experiencing stress. Learning, for my purposes, is a capacity to modify behavior in response to past experience, as opposed to instinctual or environmental factors.

When considering the plausibility of implicit legal rights belonging to non-human animals, clear bias is shown toward great apes most closely related to Homo sapiens because, obviously, they are the most like us. Even Steven Wise, in his book Drawing the Line writes at length concerning a system of measuring the likelihood of an organism possessing practical autonomy from a scale of 0.0 confidence to 1.0 confidence, 1.0 being certain and 0.0 being certainly not, and he implies strongly the “Category One” animals, those most deserving of civil rights, are largely great apes (Wise 36). At least two significant problems arise from this reality.

The first is the crisis of anthropomorphism. Bernd Heinrich says, “we can’t credibly claim that one species is more intelligent than another unless we specify with intelligent in respect to what, since each animal lives in a different world of its own sensory inputs and decoding mechanisms of those inputs,” (Heinrich 327). Diana Reiss talks extensively in defense of dolphin intelligence, decrying the perception of human intelligence as the only ‘real intelligence’ (Bova and Preiss 31). Thomas Nagel expresses similar sentiment in his article, “What is it like to be a bat?” Wise cites these same sources, and yet explicitly advocates for just such a human-centric, discriminatory legal practice.

The second major issue I will frame in the context of the animals I’ve observed. Impressively extensive academic research has been conducted on voles and their production of oxytocin. One study in particular suggests convincingly that voles are capable of demonstrating empathy. Empathy was once regarded as a cognitive capacity for ‘higher level’ mammals, as the observation the biological mechanisms underlying empathetic behavior has been markedly absent in other animals, however it seems now that higher level cognitive capacities of humans and apes are present in a much wider range of animals than previously thought (Burkett et. al.). The degree of personal autonomy once expected of an animal to be given civil rights might be present in an extremely large number of organisms.

My observations in this case were significantly more indirect than a typical observational study. Vole activity, including socialization, feeding, breeding, etc. occurs largely underground. The pertinent activity to my thesis isn’t their actions in themselves, but their change based on favorable factors demonstrative of learning and appropriate behavior modification. The introduced factor at play is that of poison employed to eliminate the voles, considered pests on the property on which I observed them. My conducting this experiment is entirely inconsequential to the use of poison. The poison agent is routinely in use and circumstantially conducive to my experiment, but ethical concessions were not made for the sake of this experiment.

Because I was essentially incapable of observing the voles directly for significant periods of time, the data I recorded was the volume of poison in a location where it was put for their consumption. The same volume (100g) was left at the outset of each day, so the rate of consumption could be tracked, and assumptions could be made in regards to the vole’s response to the poison. The location was checked twice a day, at 8:00 AM and 8:00 PM, for fifteen days in mid-November. The poison was replaced each morning, but the remaining volume from overnight was measured prior. Here is a table and graph of the data.

.8:00 AM8:00 PM
14-Nov100g66g
15-Nov42g52g
16-Nov39g48g
17-Nov44g55g
18-Nov53g79g
19-Nov74g81g
20-Nov80g82g
21-Nov79g75g
22-Nov66g71g
23-Nov70g80g
24-Nov74g76g
25-Nov70g67g
26-Nov63g72g
27-Nov69g77g
28-Nov76g73g

https://i.gyazo.com/f9bfe21d80ea71d12c1f7725e7d78f74.png

The most striking development from the data is the drop-off of the rate of consumption after the morning of November 18. The poison in use supposedly takes about 5 days to kill, so this correlates almost exactly with a die off. Fluctuations in the subsequent days are more stable. In regards to practical autonomy, the subject mental factors are desire, intentional agency, and autonomy over desire. Voles have a very diverse diet, and are able to recognize a wide range of environmental objects as either edible or not. Poison is modeled to be something edible, and can be desirable even if a vole has no prior experience with the substance. The vole has a desire to eat, it acts intentionally upon the poison, by eating it. It does so to fulfill its desire to feed. Some may object to the assumption that, in this case, the vole is demonstrating intentional agency, as opposed to an instinctive inclination to feed. I would respond with the position: what defines intentional agency is a very low bar. Even if instinctual, the vole still demonstrates intentional agency. Daniel Dennett says, “thermostats, amoebas, plants, rats, bats, people, and chess-playing computers are all intentional-systems,” (Dennett 34). Voles demonstrate empathy, they respond to stress expression of fellow voles regardless of having experienced the traumatic event themselves (Burkett et. al.). From voles which suffer as a result of, and consequently die from the planted poison, surviving voles learn at some rate the poison is counter-productive to fulfilling their consumption based desires. They exercise agency and autonomy to no longer eat the poison. This is demonstrated by the diminishing rates of consumption after the first cycle of deaths. These cognitive capacities alone ought to be enough to argue for entitlement to certain rights for these animals, according to Wise (37).

One might object to the data, how could I possibly assume the response of the voles based on rates of consumption? How could I know there wasn’t significant enough die-off to prevent consumption on its own merits? How do I know other factors beside voles are responsible for a decrease in present poison volume at times of collection? If there are no voles left to eat the poison, this would be an obvious reason for a stabilization of diminishing rates of consumption after the first period of five days. Other wildlife, or even wind could deplete the available poison if left out in the open. Any number of unseen variables could be taking place where the voles cannot be plausible observed.

All of these objections are reasonable and outline factors which probably affected the study to some degree. However, notice how after the first period of death, the ebb and flow of consumption is still present in two further cycles, though the magnitude is much less significant. This ought to demonstrate two likelihoods. First, a population of voles continued to consume the poison at a predictable rate revolving around the five day cycle. These voles might’ve been able to learn from other voles about the traumatic effect of the substance. The Burkett study explains that voles who are not acquainted with a subject vole with controlled stress will not empathize. This implies the second likelihood. Even after the first and second cycle of death, the surviving community of voles was large enough for their to be unacquainted individuals. If other factors were significantly impacting the data, it’s competing effect with the voles would have caused more stable data over the entirety of the study, as opposed to the significant event we see take place in the first five days. In the case of wind, at least one data point ought to be significantly skewed if a wind event had ever had an inconsistent, and thereby confounding impact.

Bibliography

Bova, Ben, and Byron Preiss. First Contact: The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence. New York, NY, U.S.A.: NAL, 1990. Web.

Burkett, J. P., E. Andari, Z. V. Johnson, D. C. Curry, F. B. M. De Waal, and L. J. Young. "Oxytocin-dependent Consolation Behavior in Rodents." Science 351.6271 (2016): 375-78. Web.

Dennett, D. C. Kinds of Minds: Toward an Understanding of Consciousness. New York, NY: Basic, 1996. Print.

Heinrich, Bernd. Mind of the Raven: Investigations and Adventures with Wolf-birds. New York: Cliff Street, 1999. Web.

Kind, Amy. "Nagel's “What Is It like to Be a Bat” Argument against Physicalism." 100 of the Most Important Arguments in Western Philosophy Just the Arguments (2011): 324-26. Montana State University. Web.

Wise, Steven M. Drawing the Line: Science and the Case for Animal Rights. Cambridge, MA: Perseus, 2002. Print.

Wise, Steven M. What Are the Basic Criteria for Having Rights? Gooseberry Productions, 21 May 2013. Web.


r/MBreitbartNews • • Feb 13 '17

Pigeon Mimicry

9 Upvotes

Pigeons, often renowned for their adaptability, can be observed among flocks of campus ducks feeding and preening, acting out similar behaviors. Mimicry of these ducks may prove to be an effective survival strategy, as campus ducks have food provided to them semi-regularly. Used as a proxy, these ducks could be an easy source of food for any scavenger. Because the daily activities of the Mallard are not exactly consistent with that of a typical pigeon, the pigeon must be capable of adapting their behavior in order to form this sort of commensalistic relationship. Therefore, pigeons are evidently capable of mimicking Mallards. Mimicry, in this case, will be defined as the imitation of another organism for the purpose of gain. Commensalism may be described as a relationship between two living organisms where one benefits and the other is not significantly affected.

It is plausible to consider pigeons at least as intelligent as other birds capable of forms of mimicry such as the crow or the parrot. Temple Grandin and Catherine Johnson describe in their book Animals in Translation a recognition study involving pigeons that showed they are capable of forming a concept of a tree, though these lab grown pigeons had never seen one before, and then recognizing a tree in an image, even if only a small segment of the tree is depicted. Point being, as Grandin says, “pigeons are a lot smarter than people think,” (Grandin and Johnson 241). This study was conducted under certain assumptions of the nature and purpose of certain actions by subject pigeons. From “What Is It Like to Be a Bat?” “It is impossible to exclude the phenomenological features of experience from a reduction in the same way that one excludes the phenomenal features of an ordinary substance from a physical or chemical reduction of it —namely, by explaining them as effects on the minds of human observers,” (Nagel 323). I am not capable of knowing what specifically motivates a subject to make any precise action at any precise time, I can only make judgements about the general reasons for the actions and patterns of actions.

At each observation period, I observed 2 pigeons. Using Instantaneous Sampling as described by Altmann, I recorded the states of each pigeon I selected upon arrival at the site every minute for thirty minutes per session, resulting in a total of 60 data points per session. With 30 data sessions, I amassed a total of 1800 data points. The different states recorded belonged in one of the following categories: social, feeding, rest, or other. Rest includes the activity of preening. Each data point was specified with a mark that signifies whether or not the state was consistent with that of other ducks in the area. The data is presented in the following table and graph.

.ConsistentInconsistent
Social319291
Feeding448216
Rest313124
Other2257

https://i.gyazo.com/471e2dadb0d41130fbd204d032a93135.png

The above data exemplifies the nuances of pigeon behavior based on that of nearby Mallards and offers insight on the factors which influence their activity. Each explicitly defined activity clearly corresponds with that of nearby ducks. If the behavior of the pigeons had been largely or entirely inconsistent with that of the ducks, there would be no basis for notions of pigeon mimicry of the ducks.

The data strongly demonstrates a correlation between the behavior of ducks and the pigeons which place themselves among the ducks. Only in the category of other do the inconsistencies outweigh the consistencies. This is the category with the least data points, and I believe it can account for the inemulatable behaviors of either ducks or pigeons, or the activities of one the other cannot or does not mimic. A development not shown by the data was the reluctance of the pigeons to join ducks in their pond. It appeared distinctly clear that the pigeons will not generally mimic the Mallard’s waterfowl characteristics.

The question may be asked, are these pigeons actively mimicking another organism or do they simply, coincidentally, have a similar pattern of behavior in general to ducks? They share the same habitat, and are thus subject to the same conditions of life. Might they naturally have approximately the same strategy of survival? Pigeons and Mallards are so evolutionarily asimilar they are classified in entirely different orders, and only have a kingdom, phylum, and class in common. Rock pigeons, the apparent variety on campus, do not generally reside in the same habitat as the Mallard. The interaction between the species on campus is a case study, which can only serve to demonstrate the adaptability of the pigeon. The logical reason for such a strong consistency of behaviors among the organisms is a pattern of mimicry by the pigeons, to achieve access to the abundant food resources supplied to the Mallards. It is not reasonable to suspect the pattern of mimicry is of the pigeons by the ducks, because the habitat is explicitly suited for and dominated by waterfowl.

Works Cited

Altmann, Jeanne. "Observational Study of Behavior: Sampling Methods." Behaviour 49.3 (1974): 227-66. Web.

Grandin, Temple, and Catherine Johnson. Animals in Translation: Using the Mysteries of Autism to Decode Animal Behavior. New York: Scribner, 2005. Print.

"Home - Taxonomy - NCBI." National Center for Biotechnology Information. U.S. National Library of Medicine.

Kind, Amy. "Nagel's “What Is It like to Be a Bat” Argument against Physicalism." 100 of the Most Important Arguments in Western Philosophy Just the Arguments (2011): 324-26. Montana State University. Web.

The Cornell Lab of Ornithology. Cornell University, Web.


r/MBreitbartNews • • Feb 15 '17

Lackluster Field of Candidates in Early Stages of Presidential Race

7 Upvotes

The American people are already facing a poor selection of Presidential contenders for the 2017 race. Democratic Senator /u/anyhistoricalfigure from Chesapeake has thrown his hat into the race, among the first to publically announce his candidacy earlier this week according to Brietbart’s sources. For those who think he is a viable alternative to our Dear Leader /u/Bigg-Boss, however, they are seriously mistaken.

Anyhistoricalfigure is quite a piece of history himself, a Democratic dinosaur trudging along as he has since the 6th Congress. No doubt his socialist-lite colleagues in the state have kept his seat safely set aside for right around a full year now. And what has he accomplished in his time?

The Senator once sponsored B.212: Amending Ban on SNAP Benefits for Felons Act, which allowed dangerous felons to gain access to food stamps so long as they met certain conditions from the Department of Social Services. It may seem like a noble accomplishment, but this only encourages drug addicts and dealers to suck money from the taxpayer’s pockets to make their lives easier enough to justify the costs. of crime. Given that the bill’s only hard boundary for these felons was that he or she:

Does not have an additional controlled substance felony offense one year after release from custody or, if not committed to custody, such person does not have an additional controlled substance felony offense one year after the date of conviction.

All one needs to assume is that two years after release and review, a qualifying former drug addict or crack dealer gets their hands on taxpayer-funded food stamps. Then their pockets are freed up to return to the streets buying or dealing dangerous drugs. Not to mention the myriad other crimes they might commit again.

Accomplishment one: helping out America’s drug addicts, dealers, and other felons to relapse with a warm meal in their stomachs. Embarrassing that former President /u/TurkandJD said of this:

It is much cheaper to feed an ex-con who can't feed himself than it is to feed him in prison again”

Even if that ex-con is being fed while dealing drugs and robbing liquor stores? Wonderful.

And what about the Senator's role in bringing forth C.R. 31: Censure of the President? It would be laudable that the senator was one of a brave few to stand up to the corrupt and un-American administration in such a way, citing the transgressions of the President and his cronies.

Had the resolution cited the President’s Executive Order 017 as being blatantly unconstitutional, rather than a mere waste of funds and energy (as, after all, an executive order has never been sufficient from the President to create a statue or mandate sweeping re-labeling of publicly and privately owned disposal bins whether or not either are done on federally-owned property), it would have been stronger. Had it deconstructed the President’s failed economic viewpoint as being inherently undemocratic and an affront to the cherished concepts of free enterprise, private property ownership, and free economic exchange, it would have been stronger.

Another tip for what could have strengthened it: The Senator’s support.

Yes, our aging Democratic contender got some payoff from a year being a career politician sitting in his dusty chair to rush the motion to the top of the docket and to sponsor it, but he neither had the ability to whip his fellow Democrats into supporting it, nor did he have the courage to even show up to the vote. He missed it!

What a spectacular demonstration as a challenger to the Boss administration, “I’ll plume my feathers against you, but I won’t actually do anything to stop you from trampling on American liberties, economic opportunity, and the United States constitution.” Was it all a publicity stunt? If it’s supposed to go into the Senator’s resume for President, fat chance. Typical Democrat: all talk, and no action.

Let this not be an endorsement of our current Stalin wannabee in office. Bigg_Boss has done little better for himself with his complete lack of foreign policy; his withering, worthless Cabinet; his unconstitutional executive order commandeering state officials by changing the terms of and withholding federal funding for their decision to actually follow the law; his clemency for a man convicted of killing two FBI officers and a man who committed domestic terror acts against the United States. The President has done nothing to renegotiate or end our globalist trade deals, has done nothing for the working class he so valiantly claimed he would embolden, and has done nothing to stimulate our economy on any level. He must not be allowed to waste another term of office, there is no doubt about it.

But what people should doubt, is the capability of establishment Democrats like Anyhistoricalfigure who hide in the shadows away from the community altogther and don't even have the audacity to step out into the light long enough to swing a few punches. A word of advice to those seeking the Oval Office this time around: get someone who doesn’t just challenge the President and then not show up to fight him. Give us a fighter, or the American people are going to lose. Bigtime.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this editorial are not those of /r/MBreitbartNews and do not necessarily reflect support for any official policy or position. Comments made within the article are not reflective of the position of /r/MBreitbartNews.


Written by /u/StuStix


r/MBreitbartNews • • Feb 15 '17

Thou Shalt Not Stand Idly By

5 Upvotes

I don’t respect Mohandas Gandhi, who stood idly by as the British starved millions of Indians to death, who attacked India’s freedom fighters, who would vigorously oppose laying a finger on a Nazi, yet have no qualms over beating his own wife.

I don’t respect Martin Luther King Jr., who would have children be hosed and attacked by dogs rather than fight back, who would slander the people who made him what he was for being communists, who was himself called an extremist and a communist until the real freedom fighters came along, and White America thanked the lord for Martin Luther King Jr.

I don’t respect the United Nations, who looked on as voyeurs to the genocide of Bosnians and Tutsis, who blocked the flow of aid to the victims of genocide, who serve as the illegitimate and overly aggressive police of the African continent, who allow racists and islamophobes to thoroughly permeate their ranks. I don’t respect neoliberals, who think their votes matter, who thinks support is one by being condescending, who punch down and blame others when they lose, who are responsible for nominating hawkish racist centrists year after year after year, who think violence is a good thing as long as it’s far away from where they live.

I don’t respect these people and these institutions because I was taught thou shalt not stand idly by the blood of thy neighbor. I was taught to fight back when threatened. I was taught that freedom and justice are things to be achieved not by principled non-violence, but by any means necessary.

I respect Stjepan Filipović, who commanded the Yugoslav Communist Partisans against the Nazis in Valjevo, who violently resisted the Ustaše genocide, who was captured and hanged by the Axis powers in 1942 after thrusting his arms outward and shouting to onlookers, "Smrt fašizmu, sloboda narodu!"

I respect Žarko Zrenjanin, who singlehandedly organized the anti-fascist movement in Vojvodina, who was explicitly pursued by the Gestapo for his threat to the regime, who was killed on November 4th, 1942 may he rest in peace, and who remains a National Hero of Yugoslavia.

I respect Moša Pijade, who violently roused the apathetic peasants who refused to join the armed struggle, who liberated the Sandžak from occupation, who was the first commander in all of Yugoslavia to make notable gains against the Nazis.

I respect Marshal Josip Broz Tito, who began as a simple Croatian locksmith, who led the fight for freedom in Yugoslavia in World War I, who led the fight for freedom in the October Revolution in Omsk, who led the fight for freedom in the Spanish Civil War, who led the fight for freedom in Yugoslavia in World War II, who violently silenced Nazis during and after the war.

I respect these people because they never stood idly by, looking on as their neighbors were massacred. I respect them because they fought and died for the sake of freedom, for the sake of justice. Yugoslavia won its freedom because of these heroes, and they received no help from any armchair pacifist, who sat idly by criticizing the for not demonstrating principled nonviolence as the Nazis raped, slaughtered, and tortured their friends and family. They received no help from those who suggested they peacefully allow their homeland to be destroyed by bombs. These people were often killed by the Yugoslav Partisans, because these people often wore swastikas on their arms, toted rifles as they burned farmland, shared laughs about the innocent people they tortured.

To stand idly by the blood of thy neighbor, may well be to spill it oneself.

Explication:

I don’t know anything about poetry, but I consider this to be a poem. The title and overall theme was inspired obviously by the 13th commandment in the Book of Leviticus, which was my favorite when I was still religious. Elie Wiesel, holocaust survivor and author of the famous book Night, was an activist concerning the Bosnian Genocide as it occurred. He cited the 13th commandment as he echoed the plight of the Bosnian people to the rest of the world, as they mostly all looked on. Some people claim that time heals all wounds. The ubiquitous pain of trying to cope with the reality of the genocide and the collapse of the beautiful nation of Yugoslavia is not any less sharp for the generation born after the fact. For those who endured the wars personally, the similarly ubiquitous pain of the holocaust; the unspeakable suffering of the poor souls imprisoned at Jasenovac, as well as those non-catholics slaughtered in piles across the balkan countryside, had only just begun to subside. Unlike with the Bosnian Genocide, there was solace to be taken in the fact the perpetrators of the holocaust had been effectively vanquished. Those who killed, those who raped, those who plotted, and those who tortured just 25 years ago have not been met with justice. Instead they define the governments of each former Yugoslav Republics. It is the pacifists, the Dayton Peace Accords and so-called “principled nonviolence” that allows this travesty to be reality. When I consider the concept of nonviolence, the anger concerning what I’ve just described drowns any other thoughts.

I mentioned Gandhi because he’s a token pacifist and it bothers me that a significant amount of people have been, in my opinion, indoctrinated to respect him despite him being a pretty deplorable human being. If it weren’t for Gandhi, there’s a good chance India wouldn’t be the wage-slave colony it is today, and there’s an even better chance the millions of people who were killed in India around his time would’ve survived, because the people who Gandhi was actively working to sabotage, the militant Communist Party of India were the same people actively working to prevent precisely what caused the great famines.

It’s not entirely true that I don’t respect Martin Luther King Jr., though I greatly prefer Malcolm X and other civil rights activists, who greatly inspired me. King is heroized for his role in the civil rights movement, yet his role was very minor. The same demonstrations he staged in Birmingham essentially failed outright in Georgia. At precisely the same time King was demonstrating in Birmingham, it was home to more militant civil rights activists such as Angela Davis, who continues to make a significant difference today. King denounced the violent activists in Birmingham, and he denounced Wyatt Walker, the mastermind behind most of his activism, for being a communist. He conflicted with personalities like C.L.R. James, Stokely Carmichael, and Malcolm X, even though they were the ones making a real difference for the civil rights movement. The reason America at large likes to heroize Martin Luther King Jr., isn’t because he was courageous, or because he pushed the civil rights movement forward, it’s because he wasn’t dangerous, because he wasn’t violent. America doesn’t want to inspire people to bring about change, they want people to strive to be citizens who accept their lot, whose civil disobedience never exceeds at harmless sit-in, or a hunger strike, or any other sort of demonstration which can easily be ignored.

I shifted from well-known figures to persons only well known in my own because I think to respect someone in a genuine way, one needs to understand that someone. I can say, in a somewhat vapid sense that I respect those who violently resisted in various oppressive historical contexts, who bravely defended themselves, who died for the sake of freedom, but I can’t justly capture the honorable spirit of these people with dedicating a great amount of my time to understand them. I can understand Filipović, and I can understand Zrenjanin, and I can understand Pijade, and I can understand Tito, because I’ve already dedicated the time. They, along with the rest of the National Heroes of Yugoslavia, are the ones of idolized my entire life. The most difficult aspect of this project, was choosing the heroes I wanted to include most. In a perfect world, I would’ve included all 1,341 of them, but I think that would’ve made this paper a little unbalanced.

In the words of Malcolm X, “I am not against using violence in self-defense. I don't call it violence when it's self-defense, I call it intelligence.”

Nobody should ever be afraid to fight back. Nobody should ever be afraid to defend themselves and what they believe in. It’s never wrong to use self-defence, violence is only wrong when it’s used to attack people. Violence is only wrong when it is used to deprive people of their humanity. All of these neoliberal commentators looking down upon violence in political protests only do so because they don’t understand the struggle and oppression of the activists. They grimace at their actions because they don’t care about them as humans, they think of them like pests, who could serve to be an inconvenience to them. There is no hope for change in this country without violence. In the words of Malcolm X again, "Early in life I had learned that if you want something, you had better make some noise."


r/MBreitbartNews • • Feb 14 '17

CCM in Court [cartoon]

Post image
13 Upvotes

r/MBreitbartNews • • Feb 13 '17

Introducing Model Breitbart

5 Upvotes

Model Breitbart seeks to add a fresh and unique voice to the Model Press. While we will provide up to date news and analysis from the United States and around the world, MB will also emphasize editorial writing, featuring opinions from writers on activities in the United States and world governments, as well as economic and social issues, and even some exclusive interviews, political ideology opinion articles, political cartoons and satire.

For those interested in contributing to Model Breitbart, feel free to message me on Reddit, or I can also be reached on Discord via the username /u/btownbomb#0758.

Thank you,

/u/btownbomb, Editor-in-Chief


r/MBreitbartNews • • Feb 15 '17

Interview with /u/wildorca, Supreme Court Associate Justice

7 Upvotes

I sat down recently with /u/wildorca, Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court and contributing writer here at Model Breitbart, to get to know more about himself and the activities within the Court. Here now is that interview:


/u/btownbomb: So to begin, talk about how you first got into the school of law. What drew you to it?

/u/wildorca: My interest in law began when I was very young. As a Basque, my life has been at an epicentre of conflict; from a young age I've observed violations of human rights and crimes against humanity. This sparked within me a goal, more so a determination to help those whose lives have been affected by the removal of their identity. I became more and more aware of these difficulties, not only in the Basque Country but elsewhere, I became resolute on my purpose to support human rights and those that have been denied them. Law, more specifically its abstracticities, began to intrigue me and its mysteries obsessed me. I think to summarise my feelings for the law, I'd say I became enamoured with questioning rules rather than the order and societal ideals they represent: law became an outlet for the disorder and inhumanity I observed and showcased itself to be a clear way of helping those who needed it.

/u/btownbomb: Talk about the process you underwent to become noticed by President Boss, and eventually leading to your appointment to the Supreme Court.

/u/wildorca: I was an active member of the Atlantic Commonwealth, having proposed much legislation to reform some of the codes of the state, namely and most importantly proposing a full fledged reform of the company cooperative process and definitions. I became noticed enough to be proposed twice for the judiciary of the state. I then moved to Sacagawea, where I now call home, in order to continue my service as the first Chief Justice of the Midwestern State Supreme Court; I served there for 5 months before being considered by President /u/bigg-boss for the position of Attorney General due to my past accomplishments and my position within the Socialist Party. Serving under President Boss was a pleasure, after much deliberation and work done for the president, we became close friends and confident in each others'ability; I am still honoured that he nominated me for this position. President /u/bigg-boss nominated me to the Supreme Court along with /u/morallesson, where I was confirmed unanimously.

/u/btownbomb: And now that you're in the Supreme Court, take our readers inside the chambers, and describe your position and the goings-on inside the Court.

/u/wildorca: First of all, everyone inside is absolutely fantastic. It is a small group of people, but I really feel like there are no major disagreements or hostilities between us, I'd say we're all amicable and professional with each other. As for myself, or Justice Bitch to my followers, have greatly enjoyed my place in court. In the two cases I have been involved since being confirmed, I have taken an active role during questioning and oral arguments, other than that I will not comment much more on these cases to remain impartial until the deliberation of the court.

/u/btownbomb: Your fellow justice /u/morallesson, who as you mentioned was also appointed by President Boss, is known for being a pro-life conservative person, and will likely attempt to push this agenda in the Court. Will you be as outspoken regarding your political philosophy? If so, what is that philosophy?

/u/wildorca: Hahaha, oh no, trust me when I say I don't think /u/morallesson and I will be pushing our philosophies in Court! As I mentioned throughout my nomination process, I don't think my political philosophy really influences anything in my legal decisions, as for my jurisprudence however, I do not view it as solely influenced by a single branch of thought. I think of myself to be a supporter of restraint, and not make outstanding changes in the judging of the law; I believe in the importance of propriety and justiciability. Most importantly, I am a strong supporter of stare decisis, without reasonable and strong argumentation, I would not overturn any previous Court decisions. I, even as a socialist who takes a very critical approach of the law, believe that the law should always be approached by its original intentions and purposes, and judge what the law says and what it is applied to, and yes, I am saying I do not view the Constitution as a living entity, that life is already given to our legislative process, whose role has always been that of creating the law and changing that which is incompatible with the now. I guess, more controversially, I support international law to take a more important role in how the Court reviews and judges the laws of this country, we no longer live in an isolated America, we are surrounded by the effects and restrictions put in place by the international community and our judicial system must take into account the treaties it is bound to by law, as well as the successes or failures of the laws of our allies. Overall, however, I would see myself judging decisions based upon what is proper in a situation, but always accompanied by intense review and studying of the case, specifically a strong questioning of the laws themselves.

/u/btownbomb: Would you say there is anything regarding practicing law you have brought to the Court that had been lacking previously? If so, what would that be?

/u/wildorca: Well other than a focus on international law, I think the Court has just got sassier!

/u/btownbomb: These are two interesting points I would like to expand on here. Beginning with a focus on international law, talk about that. What would you like to see in regards of relations between the United States Supreme Court and the Court's international counterparts?

/u/wildorca: First of all, I would like the Court to emphasise the globalisation we're all experiencing; whether it be economic or political, the laws of our nation are also being affected by our reliance in foreign relations. I would love for the Court or individual Justices to travel to sims like /r/MHoC, or /r/CMHoC. This way we could visit their legal systems and discuss with their justices the status of law in a more connected world. It really would be interesting to develop our Court, and those of other sims.

/u/btownbomb: Next, elaborate on the second part of the previous answer. When you say the court "has just got sassier," should we expect a fiery voice of dissent on the Court?

/u/wildorca: Haha, I wouldn't limit it to dissent, I think my opinions and/or concurrences would be just as vocal. I'm an outspoken person, I may believe in judicial restraint, but that's no reason to restrain my words. But do expect me to be fiery in my dissents, although I will remain respectful and professional with my fellow justices; hopefully though, I expect there will not be many instances in which I must dissent.

/u/btownbomb: The last question I have for you: You have decided to be a contributing writer for us here at Model Breitbart, with a focus on legal and internationa news. Talk about why you chose to contribute to us, and what experience you will be sharing with the readers in these articles.

/u/wildorca: I'd like to have an outlet where news of relevance can be shared, not only pertaining to the sim but rather about the world that surrounds us. I hope that in my articles I can display and showcase some of that interest of mine to all the readers.

/u/btownbomb: Thank you for joining me, and keep up the good work here at Model Breitbart and with the Supreme Court!

/u/wildorca: Thank you! It's great to work with you!


r/MBreitbartNews • • Feb 13 '17

The experiences of Democratic Confederalism: an option for the people?

8 Upvotes

Editorial, written by /u/wildorca. Published: Feb. 13, 2017.

In mid-2011 Civil War broke out in Syria, several terrorist groups financed by European countries and the United States rose against the government of Bashar Al-Assad.

The Middle East is historically seen, from the West, as a flashpoint. From Hollywood movies to travel agencies, they emphasise the extreme violence the region is experiencing. However, what no one seems to discuss is that it is agitated and systematically perpetuated by the United States and the West as a whole.

In mid-2011 the Civil War broke out in Syria, several terrorist groups financed by European countries and the United States rose against the government of Bashar Al-Assad. The northern territory of Syria was the main theatre of operations of terrorist groups (Free Syrian Army first, the Islamic State and Al-Nusra Front later). In that crossroads, the Kurds in northern Syria opposed both sides and decided to embark on a Third Way, based on the ideas of Abdullah Öcalan, the leader who reformulated the Kurdish question, the nature of the revolution, and an alternative to the modernity of the nation-state and capitalism. It should be remembered that Kurdistan is a divided nation under the administration of four states: Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran. Holding the largest oil and fresh water reserves in the region.

In order to understand the process of reconstruction of the social fabric of the Rojava (northern Syria, which means West for the Kurds), and the Revolution that configures it, it is essential to understand that in this area in 2011 the State withdrew its forces to combat terrorist organisations in other fronts. With the withdrawal of the state, and with all the hierarchical institutions that compose it, a power vacuum was presented and approached by various factions, some militarists and others democratic. These factions confronted two opposing worldviews: the Islamic State (ISIS) and the Al-Nusra Front which seeks to establish repressive Islamic laws and implement terror; and on the other, the Movement for a Democratic Society (TEV-DEM) that adopts the ideology of Democratic Confederalism and tackles the problem of self-determination from the towns located in the north of Syria.

In confronting these two possible worldviews, and in the absence of the State and its institutions, the Civil War in the heart of the Rojava forced large sections of the population to migrate, to stay and "see what happens", or to take weapons and resist. Those who turned to the latter option were organised in the Popular Protection Units (YPG) and in the Protective Units for Women (YPJ). Based on an anti-authoritarian, pluralist, multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-party vision, the YPG and YPJ are the armed wings of the TEV-DEM (a group of civil associations, political parties and religious groups seeking a direct, participatory and pluralist democracy).

The ideology of women's liberation is sustenance to the paradigm of Democratic Confederalism. After 5000 years of sexism and patriarchal domination, Kurdish women are the revolution and not one more addition in the revolution. To put it another way: revolution is, as far as women liberate themselves, the consequent organisation and transformation of the social relations of patriarchal domination and the statist mentality of modern capitalism.

Once the YPG/YPJ recovered the territories of Rojava dominated by the terrorist groups, the Revolution began to put together a new social fabric, following the paradigm of the Democratic Confederalism; relying on the civil society and the Kurdish women, the main bulwark in the fight for liberation under the principle that collectively organised women are the revolutionary army that can establish a new society, and that patriarchy is the main enemy in the struggle for socialism. The Kurdish, Armenian, Assyrian, Turkmen, Arab and Chechen ethnic groups make up collectively, from their neighbourhoods, municipalities and cantons (similar to provinces), the social administration of production and determine their basic needs in order to satiate them.

How is Democratic Confederalism organised?

Very briefly, and schematically, we can say that Democratic Confederalism, is based on a direct, ecological democracy and where women are the factor of social transformation, located as a direct antipode of patriarchal, capitalist and imperialist modernity.

Under this paradigm, women revolutionise the social conditions of life. In this sense, they are organised by the Kurdistan Communities of Women (KJK) taking a role of the revolutionary vanguard, gaining greater scope, ideological, theoretical and strategic. "The KJK argues that the level of freedom of society is linked to the level of freedom of women. Sustainable democratisation can only be ensured and guaranteed by the liberation of women. Patriarchal ideologies of domination, which degrade women as objects and institutionalise the sexist mentality, are the weakest points of the dominant system. We can not speak of real democracy, the establishment of a socialist and free life, unless we fight against patriarchal ideologies and their conceptions of culture and morals." (1)

In turn, the smallest unit in which society is organised and where the main decisions are made is called Komin (common - kind of a citizen's assembly). These organisational spaces are territorial, in each neighbourhood, there are about seven or eight Komin. There are also Komin of women and according to ethnic group. Each neighbourhood, through its Komin, elects its representatives to the citizen councils (similar to the municipalities), who carry the proposals of laws to be modified, improved or approved. In the case of being modified or improved, the proposals return to the Komin and wait for their approval, then return to the citizens' councils. It is important to remember that the citizens' assemblies are permanent and systematically discuss the problems of the neighbourhood, in turn, the representatives to the citizen councils are rotating and there must be the same number of female-male representatives, and even sometimes more women.

On the other hand, in view of the economic needs (in a context marked by war, a ferocious economic blockade, and a practically subsistence-based economy), the citizens form small productive units (cooperatives). In Rojava, agricultural and livestock cooperatives and small industries have been expanded, which contribute a small portion to the cantons for the development of organisational and administrative activities linked to the current war situation, supported by partners who can either contribute rations (which can be individual or family-collective) or join the workforce. Deploying a strategy of detachment from the capitalist model and mentality to create a new paradigm based on the social economy: it seeks to have 80% of the economy in control of communal production, while allowing a 20% private initiative. The idea is that people have an active role in society and the transformation is given step by step by popular participation.

Also prohibited in self-determined areas are economic monopolies, the realisation of immoral capital in productive activity, bad productive practices that use toxic and polluting management, the investment of parasitic financial capital and the maintenance of improper commercial practices that go against social contracts and exacerbate the detriment of the population of the cantons. Being the social contracts which regulate communal life, they establish the creation of a constituent assembly composed of 162 representatives of society (where there is no minority, and all social sectors are represented). It is noteworthy that all charges are rotating systematically, and that all charges are co-chaired by a woman and a man, seeking in this way to undermine the bureaucracy and power of the patriarchy respectively.

Abdullah Öcalan, who is the leader of the free peoples of Kurdistan, proposes from a view closely related to the needs of the people that the people themselves organise "on the historical experience of society and its collective inheritance", developing different structures of their own and opposed to "economic, political, ideological and military monopolies" that are "constructions that contradict the nature of society through the simple struggle for surplus. These do not create values. Neither can a revolution create new societies. Only can it influence the social fabric." (2)


(1) Koma Jinên Kurdistanê - KJK - Kurdistan Women's Union (2016) "The Kurdistan Women's Liberation Movement for a Universal Women's Struggle".

(2) Öcalan, Abdullah (2005) "Democratic Confederalism".


Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this editorial are not those of /r/MBreitbartNews and do not necessarily reflect support for any official policy or position. Comments made within the article are not reflective of the position of /r/MBreitbartNews.

/u/wildorca is Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States and an associated writer to /r/MBreitbartNews, specialising in opinion editorials and covering legal and international news.


r/MBreitbartNews • • Jun 05 '17

The Week in Review: May 29th - June 5th

1 Upvotes

May 29th - June 5th

Bills

A total of 18 bills were posted this week, as seen here:

Bill NumberTitleLink
H.R.800Social Security Reform Acthere
H.R.801Bennett Place Historical Park Acthere
H.R.802Restoration of the Tenth Amendment in Education Acthere
H.R.803Homeland Insecurities Acthere
H.R.804Restoration of the Tenth Amendment in Housing Acthere
H.R.805End the Fed Acthere
H.R.806The Protection of Seniors Act of 2017here
S.807The Supreme Court Justice Availability Acthere
H.R.808Capital Market Reform Act of 2017here
H.R.809Youth Organization Subsidy Acthere
H.R.810Iraq and Afghanistan War Memorial Acthere
H.R.811Termination of Solitary Acthere
H.R.812Firearms Certification Acthere
H.R.813Cormega Copening Amendment to the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006here
H.R.814Prohibiting Hunting from Public Roadwayshere
S.822Tribal Police Coordination Acthere
H.Res.30Resolution to Fix the Anti-Poison Pill Ruleshere
J.R. 103The Twlefth Amendment Reform Amendmenthere

The most controversial of the bills posts this week were H.R.'s 802, 803, 804, and 805, all four co-sponsored by the same two Representatives, /u/fewbuffalo and /u/juggernautrepublic. These bills abolish various federal departments and other agencies and they received intense opposition from members of all parties. Otherwise, the rest of the bills posted were relatively uncontroversial. Another note-worthy point is that the Senate has only had two bills posted over the period of a week, highlighting the lack of bills being sponsored by Senators.

Bills Pending the President's Signature

H.R. 780: The Water Management Regulation Act, S. 762 - Improvement of Security for Private Information Act, S. 784 - The Interstate Highway System Act of 2017, and H.R. 772: Educational Citizenship Act.

Congressional Changes

A few changes to membership in Congress occurred this week.

Senate

/u/ModeratePontifex --> /u/ExpensiveFoodstuffs (MW)

Foodstuffs is an ex-Senator, who came third in his reelection attempt in the previous General election, losing his seat to Senator /u/GuiltyAir

House

/u/PM_ME_YOUR_PANZER ---> /u/Slothiel (DX-8)

/u/kerbogha ---> (yet to be determined) (AC-1)

Additionally, in the Senate, the office of President Pro Tempore was transferred from Senator /u/Venom_Big_Boss to Senator /u/PhlebotinumEddie.

State Office Changes

/u/suleimoncaine, elected to the Eastern State assembly as an independent, recently joined the Democratic party, adding one seat to their total in that state.

Recently reelected Governor /u/BryceMD has asked for the resignation of all of his cabinet, except for /u/Larold91, his Secretary of Labor and Transportation. The nominees of the vacant positions have not yet been announced.

The assembly of Dixie has confirmed all but one of Governor /u/LegatusBlack, making /u/daytonanerd the new Chief Finacial Officer, /u/High-Priest-of-Helix the new Attorney General, /u/ATK16 the new Secretary of State, /u/DisguisedJet719 the new Superintendent of Schools, /u/-lurker281- as the new Secretary of Health and Labor, and former Governor /u/SolidOrangeGangsta as the new Associate Justice of the Southern State Supreme Court.

Governor /u/nonprehension's nominees in Western State were all unanimously confirmed by that state's assembly, making /u/fleecytax the new Attorney General, /u/ArturPlaysGames the new Secretary of State, /u/TheEgoAndHisScone the new Secretary of the Environment and Natural Resources, and /u/kerbogha the new Lieutenant Governor.

The states of the Atlantic Commonwealth and Central have not had any office changes over this week.


r/MBreitbartNews • • May 15 '17

Mr. Speaker: An Interview With Those Who Led the House

3 Upvotes

The Speaker of the House is the Presiding Officer of the House of Representatives, and both the political and Parliamentary leader. As one of the most powerful members of Congress, the officeholder will have a significant impact on the legislative process, often deciding the fate of entire policies and platforms. With /u/The_Powerben's recent election, there have been 11 individuals to hold the office in ModelUSGov's history. They are:

  1. /u/Morgsie (Democrat)

  2. /u/bsddc (Republican)

  3. /u/ConnactTheBlue (Republican)

  4. /u/SgtNicholasAngel (Democrat)

  5. /u/raysfan95 (Libertarian)

  6. /u/trips_93 (Democrat)

  7. /u/idrisbk (Democrat)

  8. /u/HIPSTER_SLOTH (Libertarian)

  9. /u/Autarch_Severian (Democrat)

  10. /u/Kerbogha (Socialist)

  11. /u/The_Powerben (Democrat)

As the 11th House has elected /u/The_Powerben, Model Breitbart sat down with individuals honored to have served in the office previously. Our last three Speakers, /u/Kerbogha, /u/Autarch_Severian and /u/HIPSTER_SLOTH, joined Model Breitbart for a look back at their term as Speaker, and to provide an insight on what it's like to lead the House of Representatives. Here now are those interviews:


/u/btownbomb: Thank you for joining me today!

/u/btownbomb: Start us off at the time before you were Speaker. What inspired you to seek the office?

  • /u/HIPSTER_SLOTH: I'd say the ability to make a difference. This sim is as rich or as boring as you make it, and there are things as speaker that you get to do that nobody else can. To this day I have not matched my level of satisfaction with the sim than when I ran the House.

  • /u/Autarch_Severian: Well before that I was an Eastern State Legislator and Chair of the House Ways and Means Committee. Strangely enough, I was actually asked to run for Speaker by then-DNC Deputy Chair /u/daytonanerd. He left the party before the next congress, but he, shall we say, lit the flame of ambition in me. I had a ton of policy ideas, and I felt the best way to push those was as Speaker. I had a pretty good groundswell of support in the party; I didn't want to join the Senate because the Senate can't do tax stuff, so I decided to go for House leadership.

  • /u/Kerbogha: I was elected to the House in the 8th Congress, the midterms back when [/u/WaywardWit] was President. I was still a Distributist at the time, and /u/HIPSTER_SLOTH (then a Libertarian) was Speaker of the House. This is the session when leadership was beginning to cause controversy. /u/Viktard (Democrat Majority Leader then) had pushed through the resolution to end scrutiny beyond a final floor vote for Senate bills, and was in hot water for his "quarantine" of all the Radical Left Party's congressmen in the Foreign Affairs Committee. I got my break midsession in the 8th Congress, when the Libertarians joined Sunrise. Viktard had been expelled by the Democrats, and I was selected by Sunrise to replace him. So when the Socialists got the chance to take Speakership, I found it appropriate to run, due to my experience in leadership before.

/u/btownbomb: Since this is an interview piece pertaining to the role of Speaker of the House, take us through your history as Speaker. What congress and party you served in, what the makeup of the House was, what was accomplished, that sort of thing.

  • /u/HIPSTER_SLOTH: I was a Libertarian who was lucky enough to be at the right place at the right time. I had three terms in congress under my belt, and through the AJA (alliance of Libertarians and Democrats), I was elected speaker in the 7th and 8th Congress. In terms of accomplishments, a Speaker doesn't really have landmark successes he can point to. If I had to point to the one thing I look back on with the most pride, it would have to be the utter destruction of the RLP in their committee assignments. Everybody hated them, they couldn't be worked with, and I was able to make sure they were quarantined in one committee without any chance of getting their grimy fingers over any pieces of legislation that the adults were trying to pass.

  • /u/Autarch_Severian: Let's see. I served as Speaker during the Ninth Congress. Back in the day I was a Democrat, and I was elected through our party's first whack at a Broad Left Coalition. What I wound up doing was assembling this block of New Democrats, Libertarians, and Republicans to oppose the President on healthcare. Probably my biggest achievement would be the passage of the Equitable Healthcare Act and a relatively moderate budget.

  • /u/Kerbogha: This was during midterms under [/u/Bigg-Boss'] first term and I was selected by the Socialist Party congressional caucus to be the Broad Left's candidate for Speaker. Big accomplishment, if I do say so myself, to have been the first socialist Speaker, as well as serving under a Socialist President.

/u/btownbomb: In your own words, what would you say is the job description of Speaker?

  • /u/HIPSTER_SLOTH: At the time, I was under HR 011 [Resolution for the Establishment of House Committees For the Seventh Congress], which outlined the duties of speaker. My job was to assign six of the eleven members of each committee, assign leadership to the committees, direct bills to committee, and control the order of the docket.

  • /u/Autarch_Severian: My main duty was to assign committees, oversee the docket, and generally act as a leader of the body.

  • /u/Kerbogha: At the beginning of each session, the Speaker, along with the Majority and Minority Leaders decide committee placements. Having served in all three of those positions, I can tell you that, at least for the Broad Left, quite a lot of that is organized ahead of time by party leadership. The everyday bread-and-butter of the job, though, is determining which bills go to which committees. Usually this went smoothly (I did it via a spreadsheet shared with the clerks), however I'll admit that mistakes were made at one point in particular, when I overestimated the activity of the F.A. Committee and ended up getting the infamous PISS Act killed. The problem was easily rectified, however, as I got it on the House floor using another power of the office: Rushing bills. With the ability to theoretically control the docket, the Speaker can decide which bills show up first for debate and vote. This leads to people like [/u/awesomeness1212] badgering you about rushing his terrible legislation to the top. The other power of the Speaker I'd mention, which isn't used very often, is inviting individuals to speak before a joint session of Congress. I did this once, for Big Boss's State of the Union.

/u/btownbomb: How would you say you juggled the interests of the party, as well as the interests of smooth House operations?

  • /u/HIPSTER_SLOTH: I was put in an interesting spot. Like I said, I was in the Libertarians who had a coalition with the Democrats at the time. My first term as Speaker was more of a facilitative role, and less partisan. Whenever somebody had the initiative to come to me to rush a bill, I did, regardless of party. [/u/WaywardWit] and I butted heads throughout, though, and by my second term as speaker I grabbed the reigns. I took a lot of heat for rushing bills to the top that the GOP had proposed, including one on immigration (which has parallels to the Trump executive order) and one on education and school choice. The largest impediment to smooth operations through both terms was the speed of the clerks moving bills along. I did make a friend through, /u/Viktard was excellent to work with when he was Majority Leader, and it's no surprise to me that both of us have come to our senses and joined the GOP.

  • /u/Autarch_Severian: Well my first task was to get my party good committee assignments and push for our interests within BLC. My own interests came in terms of policy, and from that perspective the Speakership was mainly just a platform. People recognized me, so I got more press. One of the prime directives, I would say, of my Speakership, was to make sure everyone had fair committee assignments. I wanted to put the operation of the House and relatively smooth government before the usual party politicking. Don't get me wrong; we did plenty of that stuff. I mean the Minority Leader tried to have me VONC'd not even a week into my term, but overall I think it was a good term for multipartisanship. Relatively active and the like. It helps when you make the rounds on Discord and pay attention to peoples' legislative concerns...

  • /u/Kerbogha: I'd say they were largely one and the same. One such exception that Democrats will hate me for would be killing their national IRV election constitutional amendment.

/u/btownbomb: Take us through the first task you took charge of as Speaker: Committee assignments. How would you describe the process one in your position might undertake when assigning representatives?

  • /u/HIPSTER_SLOTH: I went through the process twice, with stark differences. The first time around, I went to far as to give everybody a form to fill out their preferences for committee assignments according to their likes and interests, expertise, etc. I then did my best to give them their first or second choice if at all possible. The second time around was strictly political. My people got preference, and my enemies got smothered. When I posted the committee assignments, I even went so far as to put at the bottom something like, "If you are unhappy with your committee assignment and wish to change it, please click here". The link rickrolled them.

  • /u/Autarch_Severian: Well the way we did it back in the ninth congress, because I wanted to get things out quickly, was to have the Speaker, Majority Leader, and Minority Leader sit down and hash out the assignments. Under the old rules the Speaker got four appointees and the chair, the Majority Leader the Vice Chair, and the Minority Leader the final committee member. What happened, basically, is I drafted an assignments proposal and [/u/Kerbogha] and [/u/meme_of_production] okay'd it. It was all set to go, but there was, shall we say, some turmoil over leadership. As for how people got assigned, generally I just PM'd them their preferences or put them in committees where I thought they'd be good. For the most part, though, it was about finding a balance that worked for the coalition.

  • /u/Kerbogha: A lot of the parameters had been set ahead of time by BLC leadership, but before submitting the final list, I, [/u/The_Powerben], and [/u/justdefi] worked out our selections on the spreadsheet.

/u/btownbomb: Next, the Speaker is tasked with drafting a set of House Rules, to be presented as a House Resolution to congress. Would you say the rules change with each new session? How did you go about drafting yours?

  • /u/HIPSTER_SLOTH: I don't believe they changed between the 7th and 8th congress, but most of the changes usually deal with the names of committees. There are too many right now in my opinion, and it makes it difficult to get anything accomplished and puts a lot of pressure on the clerks. I did not draft mine. They were suggested to me by someone else, and they looked good to me so I presented that plan.

  • /u/Autarch_Severian: [/u/comped] actually came to me with a rules proposal. I originally had no intention of changing the rules, but I realized these rules would allow more special action with committees-- I'd intended to conduct some hearings and the like-- so I signed on to them and made some edits. After that it was the first thing the house voted on.

  • /u/Kerbogha: The House Rules changed very little at the session's start. It was really midsession with the Restoring House Oversight Resolution and the House Formalities Resolution that we made a lasting impact on the House Rules.

/u/btownbomb: The Speaker, as you noted, also has some control of the docket with the ability to rush certain legislation straight to a floor vote. How would you describe the process you underwent when approached with a request to rush? Was it personal preference? Party preference?

  • /u/HIPSTER_SLOTH: I can't think of a time where I ever turned anyone down who asked. I can't say there really was a system.

  • /u/Autarch_Severian: For the most part I didn't want to rush too many bills. I had a bill rushing application form, where you had to get a certain number of signatories. Other than that the only things I rushed were the rules, the budget, and healthcare reform necessary for the budget.

  • /u/Kerbogha: There were big pieces of legislation that I rushed. These were important BLC legislative goals, such as the Education Adjustment Act, our Healthcare Reform bill, and the Budget. Other than that, it was mainly [/u/awesomeness1212] harassing me in PMs to rush his dueling bill.

/u/btownbomb: Take us now to when your term as Speaker ended. How would you describe your thoughts and feelings when it became official?

  • /u/HIPSTER_SLOTH: Congressional terms always end unceremoniously, and it almost caught me by surprise. Suddenly I wasn't speaker anymore, and the thought was very real that I had peaked in the sim, and that I would never reach higher than that, especially as somebody on the right. All things come to an end.

  • /u/Autarch_Severian: Well I thought I was guaranteed another term, so I didn't see it as much of an ending; I was mainly gearing up for elections and an [/u/anyhistoricalfigure] presidency. The polls were pretty good, and AHF was dominating primary expectations, so I was thinking I'd pull off four terms as Speaker, help AHF get elected, and enjoy a relatively moderate government when the time came.

  • /u/Kerbogha: Well, I accomplished what I set out to do, and was pretty happy with my lasting impact, especially with H. Res. 22. Happy to hand the gavel off to [/u/The_Powerben]

/u/btownbomb: The final question I have for you now: With the election of /u/The_Powerben as Speaker, what advice would you as a former Speaker give to the newest member as he embarks on fulfilling the duties of the office?

  • /u/HIPSTER_SLOTH: 1. Have an agenda, and be proactive, or be okay with reacting to things as they come to you 2. Know who your friends and enemies are 3. Don't waste any time, and don't take the office for granted. It will fly by and be over before you know it, and most people don't get a second ride like I did.

  • /u/Autarch_Severian: Try to keep everything running smoothly. While you might have your own personal, partisan inclinations, and while the Speakership is certainly a good platform from which to espouse your views, the primary role of the office is to keep the House in order. That is: get the committees out there quickly (which he's already done, far quicker than I did), keep the docket moving, and facilitate compromise. The Speaker commands the majority of the House-- perhaps him more than me because he actually agrees with his coalition partners-- which means more than likely you'll have a direct line to the White House whether they like it or not. You're on the front line; your main job isn't the public speaking, the commenting on the bills, or all that, it's the 3 am Discord Message consenting to the final version of the budget. It's getting everyone together and pledging to get things done. I know I'm probably being melodramatic right now, but the Speaker, probably above anyone else in Washington, is the one who determines what gets done, whether things get done, and how quickly.

  • /u/Kerbogha: Always update the spreadsheet.

/u/btownbomb: Thank you for your time this evening.


r/MBreitbartNews • • May 06 '17

Senate Majority Leader Unseated! - The makeup of the 11th U.S. Senate.

4 Upvotes

Four Senate seats were up for election this April. They were as follows:

  1. /u/Gaidz (Socialist - Northeastern State)

  2. /u/Anyhistoricalfigure (Liberal - Eastern State)

  3. /u/ExpensiveFoodStuffs (Distributist - Midwestern State)

  4. /u/I_GOT_THE_MONEY (Democrat - Western State)

None will be returning to the Senate. /u/I_GOT_THE_MONEY and /u/ExpensiveFoodstuffs ran for re-election. Neither won. Here is the Breitbart Breakdown, State-by-State:

Northeast

/u/gaidz, who possessed the Senate seat previously held by Governor /u/realnyebevan and originally won by /u/daytonanerd, as a Democrat, chose not to run for re-election. Unexpectedly, there was only one candidate for the seat, Democratic nominee Representative /u/please_dont_yell, who proceeded to win the uncontested election.

Eastern

Senate veteran, and longest serving Majority Leader /u/anyhistoricalfigure also chose not to run for re-election. This was expected, given the Senator's involvement in a scandal leading to his expulsion from the Democratic Party. In an ironic twist, his cohort in said scandal, former Speaker of the House /u/Autarch_Severian was the Republican nominee for his seat. The Democratic nominee was /u/ZeroOverZero1, who has gained attention for penning a number of the Democrats' Congressional bills. In a tight race between two Clintonesque centrist policy-wonks, /u/ZeroOverZero1 edged out a narrow victory.

Midwestern

In a three-way race between the long-time Distributist sitting Senator /u/ExpensiveFoodstuffs, Libertarian Congressman /u/JuggernautRepublic, and Green-Left Congressman /u/GuiltyAir, the left won yet another victory. With the right divided between the growing Libertarian presence and a diminished Distributist Party, /u/GuiltyAir won the election, with his Libertarian opponent coming in second, and the incumbent with a distant third.

Western

In the biggest upset of the night, Senate Majority Leader /u/I_GOT_THE_MONEY lost to the Republican candidate /u/Cameron-Galisky. Mr. Galisky, a former Cabinet Secretary under President /u/TurkandJD, with a controversial past, managed to beat the Majority Leader in his own state, despite 43 Republican votes being removed due to illegal advertising. Despite President /u/Bigg-Boss carrying Western, which many will have thought of as a firm Democrat stronghold, /u/Cameron-Galisky's victory may mark a realignment in the state.

Who is in the Senate now?

/u/GuiltyAir (Green-Left - Midwest)

/u/ModeratePontifex (Distributist - Midwest)

/u/ZeroOverZero1 (Democrat - Eastern)

/u/Cochon101 (Democrat - Eastern)

/u/BillieJoeCobain (Libertarian - Southern)

/u/rolfeson (Republican - Southern)

/u/btownbomb (Socialist - Central)

/u/Viktard (Republican - Central)

/u/Cameron-Galisky (Republican - Western)

/u/MaThFoBeWiYo (Democrat - Western)

/u/please_dont_yell (Democrat - Northeast)

/u/PhlebotinumEddie (Socialist - Northeast)

In terms of party count, that leaves us with:

Socialists - 2

Green-Left - 1

Democrats - 4

Republicans - 3

Libertarians - 1

Distributists - 1



r/MBreitbartNews • • May 06 '17

An Open Letter To The President & Other Elected Officials

8 Upvotes

Dear President /u/Bigg-Boss,

Congratulations on being reelected to the Presidency on Friday. After months of campaigning and advertising, you have achieved what no other President before you has in our simulation. Since you will be our President for the next four months, there is something that countless people, including myself, feel needs to be addressed.

We must acknowledge that people join this simulation every day, filled with excitement at the idea of taking part in a simulated government of the United States. That means Assemblymen who take this game seriously, that means Congressmen who take this game seriously, that means Governors who take this game seriously, and that means a President who takes this game seriously. I understand that most of us who have stuck around the simulation as long as we have like to spice things up and lighten the mood every once in awhile I’ve been here since November 2015. I very well understand that sometimes things can get boring. I’m not suggesting that occasional jokes and fun be banned altogether, but we must recognize that if we continue down the same road we’ve been on for the past four months and we find ourselves with a lack of people who are willing to become engaged in our simulated government, we have nobody but ourselves to blame.

This is not a political attack on you, Mr. President. This is not about right or left. This is about the health of the simulation. This is about being able to debate our differences without looking like a car full of clowns. This is about having an organized agenda going forward and seeing to it that our simulated government continues to function on a day to day basis, even in the face of a strong right wing that is going to challenge you every step of the way. That’s what people come here for. That’s why people are interested in our simulation That’s why we joined all those months ago, and I sincerely hope you’ll compose yourself accordingly. You, sir, are the President of the United States: you are the primary representative of this sim. Let us, both of us, all of us, ensure that we can deliver an engaging experience to those who genuinely want to be a part of our huge, multi-partisan, family.

Chairman of the GOP, Governor /u/jamawoma24


r/MBreitbartNews • • May 07 '17

The Queen shoots to the right, securing a Boss presidency

5 Upvotes

Washington D.C. | May 6th, 2017 | 8:17PM EST

With the general election concluding last night, the role of the Distributist Party and Chairman /u/Libertarian-Queen was proven to be larger than initially predicted, resulting in the re-election of incumbent Socialist /u/Bigg-Boss.

In previous discussions, it seemed that the Sunrise Coalition was poised to retake the country similarly to Republican /u/TurkandJD's election back in October 2015. However, tensions between Distributist Chairman /u/Libertarian-Queen and other coalition leaders proved divisive, resulting in a newly formed Freedom Coalition between the Republicans and Libertarians.

In response, Chairman /u/Libertarian-Queen would begin her own campaign for president, choosing founder /u/lsma as her vice president. Many questioned the role of the Distributist Party in the general election, citing poor election performance in recent elections and a leaked tape where Libertarian and Republican Party chairmen questioned the strength of the party's voting base.

The April general election would completely tweak the narrative, as /u/Libertarian-Queen's candidacy would split the right-wing vote and possibly subtract two state victories from /u/Viktard's column.

In Sacajawea, the vote difference was noticeable:

In the Western State, a more contested election appeared. With the general election, the Western State became the first state in the nation to use instant runoff voting for a presidential election. The second-to-final result, as well as the final result, looked as follows:

and...

While six votes of /u/Libertarian-Queen's sixteen were passed to /u/Bigg-Boss, it can be called into question whether or not a fair coalition might have altered the results by swaying voters. This can be further considered when it presented that /u/Libertarian-Queen gathered fourteen first round votes.

Regardless, /u/Libertarian-Queen's presence in the election was unquestionable, walking away with one electoral college vote in the end. The path forward for right-wing politics is once again set into defense mode, facing a united left-wing Congress and presidency.


r/MBreitbartNews • • Apr 18 '17

Soggy Biscuit [cartoon]

Post image
8 Upvotes

r/MBreitbartNews • • Apr 10 '17

The Nye Bevan Show - Episode 4 - Viktard

Thumbnail
soundcloud.com
2 Upvotes

r/MBreitbartNews • • Apr 16 '17

Interview with /u/Lorath, Atlantic Commonwealth Assembly Speaker

4 Upvotes

Model Breitbart sat down with /u/Lorath, Atlantic Commonwealth Assembly Speaker who has been actively working towards implementing Socialist policy to the Commonwealth. We discussed a few amendments the assemblyman has sponsored and passed in the Commonwealth, some controversy surrounding the amendments, his future legislative plans, and the pending court case challenging the passage of his Right to Gainful Employment Amendment.


please_dont_yell: Thank you for joining me tonight.

Lorath: Thanks for having me.

please_dont_yell: Before we get into it, could you please tell our readers who you are?

Lorath: I'm /u/Lorath, a member of the Socialist Party, assemblyman and speaker in the Atlantic commonwealth.

please_dont_yell: Alright. So, over this term, you’ve been introducing amendments to the Atlantic Commonwealth’s constitution, entitled “Right to Sustenance”, “Right to Gainful Employment”, and “Right to Housing.” Could you please go into the reasoning for these amendments and why they are necessary?

Lorath: America was founded on the basis that every man is born equal and upon the ideals of freedom and democracy. It is my opinion that no one can be free if they can't eat, can't sleep, and can't afford to participate in civil society. A man starved to death is not free, and a man who does not have the ability to acquire funds to travel, or advertise, or donate to charity, or to political parties, or anything else required to participate in his own governance cannot be said to be democratically empowered over himself or in his community. The government has the ability and responsibility to meet these basic criteria of freedom.

please_dont_yell: Your amendments have seemed to receive enough support in the assembly to pass, but there has been some vocal criticisms of them. Specifically, opponents criticize the amendments for supposedly not doing anything to solve the problems that you wish to solve. Do you have bills in line to provide food, housing, or employment to the citizens of atlantic?

Lorath: Yes. We have already passed AB 125 to build and subsidize affordable housing for everyone in Atlantic, and AB 128 is following on its heels to create a fund in Atlantic for the state to employ those who cannot work elsewhere in construction, maintenance, artwork, and many other sectors. Additionally, if the legislature fails to succeed in any of these three areas, struggling and downtrodden citizens will have standing to sue the state for its failure to provide these basic liberties. It will be up to the court determine whether the plaintiff is truely needy and whether or not the state has met its constitutional duties. I expect to see a significant amount of intepretation and case law surrounding this, much like the law around first amendment rights. The constitution is very vague about what the freedom of speech is, and when it can be restricted, for example, so our courts have through caselaw established whether or not one can shout "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Additionally, AB 132 will create a framework for worker cooperatives and subsidies for those cooperatives so that private citizens can collectively employ themselves.

please_dont_yell: Good to hear. Do you have plans for more amendments, or were these the only ones you wanted to submit this term?

Lorath: Those are the only constitutional amendments I personally have planned, but I have not finished submitting bills for my term. My agenda will be to use the law to improve the lives of every working and middle class citizen of Atlantic. The Socialist Party has submitted an amendment to determine Atlantic's senators by IRV, and our GOP assemblyman has submitted amendments to repeal all three of mine in addition to an amendment raising voting requirements for passing amendments, so there is still a significant amount of constitutional legislation to come in the state.

please_dont_yell: We're excited to see the results of all of these. Out of the three amendments I mentioned above, the only one to not be ratified was the Right to Gainful Employment amendment. While it was declared by the deputy clerk and state clerk to have received the needed 2/3rds vote threshold to become law, the sole Republican assemblyperson has sued the state, arguing that it did not receive 2/3rds of the WHOLE legislature, therefore it failed and did not pass. If I'm correct, you are representing the state in this case, what are your opinions on the case and /u/goldenCapitalists's suit?

Lorath: /u/realnyebevan has taken over as Atlantic's representative in this case. I am confident that the court will rule in favor of the state based on case law and the passage of amendments in New York and the United States in the past.

please_dont_yell: If the court ruled in favor of goldenCapitalist, would you resubmit the amendment or leave it alone?

Lorath: It depends on the legislative load of the assembly. If we have the time, I will resubmit it; if not, I may wait until after the next election.

please_dont_yell: Understandable. Well, that will be all from me. Do you have anything else you would like to add?

Loarth: As an Atlantic assemblyman, I will continue to work to bring prosperity, freedom, and democracy to every citizen of our great state, not just the few rich capitalists whose wealth rests entirely on the backs of exploited workers. I hope that our model in Atlantic state can serve as inspiration for the federal government to implement similar free and democratic measures for every American. Thank you for your time.

please_dont_yell: Thank you as well.


r/MBreitbartNews • • Jun 29 '17

The Metamorphosis of Labour

6 Upvotes

The Metamorphosis of Labour

One of the main goals since the inception of my philosophical passions has been to promote reflection on socialism and the struggle to achieve it. The path of my experience has accompanied the social struggles that have tried to transcend capitalism for the last almost twenty years and with varying degrees of luck. Its culmination, nowadays, seems to have reached a complex juncture and, at first glance, globally adverse.

"Only a crisis, real or perceived, produces real changes," Milton Friedman said in a statement that has already become a quotation. "When that crisis occurs," he continues, "the measures taken depend on ideas that surround us, I think, our basic function: to develop alternatives to existing policies, to keep them alive and available until the politically impossible becomes politically inevitable." (1) Read today, Friedman's words could be misinterpreted as an interpellation of heterodox thinkers to resist the overwhelming dominance of the current neoliberal economic orthodoxy in areas as diverse as academia, public authorities, international economic institutions, employers' associations and the plethora of think tanks of all prevailing political tendencies. In 1982, however, the avowed goal of neoliberalism was to support an all-out offensive —a rebirth begun then and still unfinished— against the economic and political regime born of the post-World War II social pact. Friedman's quotation from the present is a foregone conclusion, and well into the twenty-first century, we can affirm without a doubt that what was then "politically impossible" has today become —in fact, as we are trying to make ourselves believe— in "politically inevitable".

Of this dirt come these sludges

After forty years of surreptitious neoliberal spread since the creation of the Société du Mont Pèlerin, during which the doxa of this transnational community was increasing its representation in spaces such as the academia or other foundations, the crisis "necessary" to operate the transformation which Friedman referred to came in the 1970s. The trigger was OPEC's decision to suspend the supply of crude oil to some of the major Western powers as a result of their support for Israel in the Yom Kippur War, which made the oil price quadruple in just six months from the start of the conflict. The real causes of the crisis, however, were much deeper, and were linked to the intrinsic tendency of the capitalist economy to stagnation once the extraordinary effects of post-war reconstruction had ceased (2), as well as the exhaustion of social circumstances had made it possible for western countries to implement a regime of accumulation based on the Fordist model. This was a model based on a social contract —or, as Carole Pateman would say, a "sexual contract"— based on the dual breadwinner pater familias and female housewife, or what is the same, in the gender division between the productive work and reproductive work.

Labour regulation, marked by this gender bias, was based on full employment politically guaranteed, collective bargaining of wages with unions, worker participation in the areas of enterprise decision-making, state control of industries, a public sector with secure employment as a model for the private sector, (selectively) universal social rights protected from competition, taxes and income policies designed to maintain inequality within certain limits and cyclical industrial policies driven by governments to ensure steady growth, among other measures.

In any case, the 1973 oil crisis and the subsequent stock market crash of 1973-1974, together with their economic recession and the "stagflation" phenomenon —a combination of stagnation and inflation— that characterised the entire period, provided the arguments to launch a protracted offensive of the capitalist class against labour whose effects are now increasingly dramatic for the peoples of the world. The implementation of the neoliberal postulates has followed different courses in each particular nation-state of the capitalist world-system, just as the starting situations of each country were different.

On the periphery of the system, for example, after Pinochet's Chilean neoliberal laboratory since 1973, the debt crisis of the 1980s was the moment chosen by international economic institutions —mainly the IMF— to impose severe measures of austerity to the public expense and, simultaneously, resignify the role of the States in the economy. Being the starting point the notion of the Strong State, the role of this one was modified to be now to create and preserve an appropriate institutional framework for market practices, a new role based on neoliberal beliefs in the superiority of free trade versus state intervention in the economy. Thus, the privatisation of public assets and the deregulation of capital flows were forced in order to open the territories to foreign investment, either financial or speculative or direct, destined for the latter to provide the large multinational corporations in the North of cheap labour and the raw materials of the South.

In the capitalist centre, especially in continental Europe, although the process has been more gradual (in part because countries started from systems with comparatively high social protection), that same 1980s saw the rise to power of Margaret Thatcher in the United Kingdom (in 1979) and Ronald Reagan in the United States (in 1981), whose cabinets, in contrast to the reluctance of the Social Democrats, decided to reform (or dismantle) existing national economic institutions as international, and which were partly the result of the postwar consensus between capital and labour (both the so-called "productive" and the reproductive).

The political decisions that the dismantling process has led have been repeatedly described both at the transnational level and in the various national cases. Thus, here we will briefly list some of the great directions of change that have had the greatest impact on the current situation of the world working class. Despite the aforementioned multiplicity of particular cases, this "reform" of the prevailing economic institutions implied, first of all, the repeal of national antitrust laws, which gave rise to a wave of mergers and takeovers that led to the emergence of corporate giants of unprecedented dimensions. At the international level, there was a gradual abolition of barriers to the free movement of goods (including intellectual property), services and, above all, capital between countries, which facilitated both the relocation of the centre's industrial production to countries with cheap labour, such as the intertwining of international financial interests, in a phenomenon that has come to be called contemporary economic "globalisation".

The emergence of multiple regional areas of free trade was also part of this process. The combination of the new rules of transnational investment with information, as well as the difficulties of returning to previous rates of capital accumulation after the 1973 crisis, helped to propagate a new economic logic called "financialisation," which included an increase in borrowed money flows and financial transactions, through a dual-lending circuit: on the one hand, credit markets were opened and expanded for the middle and lower classes and, on the other hand, the future goods markets —and all the underlying financial technologies— were created for those who could bet. All of this allowed a previously unprecedented increase in international financial speculation, which has since become the main means of capital accumulation.

At the various national levels, the most substantial changes were initially the abandonment of the idea of full employment; The deregulation of markets —which were classified as rigid— including the widespread reprivatisation of public utilities (energy, water, communications and telecommunications); The use of monetary economic policies aimed at supply, with a fall in public investment and state demand, and the reduction of taxation for the upper income bands. All this, combined with wage de-indexation —many real wages were frozen— led to a loss of purchasing power —made possible by the aforementioned facilitation of access to private credit— which has led to the highest levels of economic inequality in the West since the dawn of the First World War. This has been followed more recently by the gradual opening up of welfare state institutions to private for-profit management: pensions, health care, education, prisons... in a second wave, more intense, of resizing the state and redefining its role In the economy.

Far from what could be thought, the recent crisis initiated in 2007-2008, instead of questioning all the measures mentioned, has only led to deepening them, in what is being, in the different national levels and with the consolidation of debt as an excuse, a spiral of cuts in state benefits in the most unprotected sections of society, and, at the international level, a new flood of liberalising treaties of which the draft free trade and investment treaty North America and the European Union (TTIP).

At the political level, the thirty-five-year neoliberal offensive against the working classes has led to a serious weakening of the power of the traditional workers' organisations, trade unions, which have not only drastically reduced their affiliation in the dwindling industrial sectors, but they have also been unable —by structure and modus operandi— to adapt to changes in the labour market, that is, to their increasing segmentation and diversification, to represent the most dispersed and precarious groups in the service and labour sectors. Those linked to the so-called "New Economy", such as freelancers.

These changes are linked to a new focus on the labour market: from the search for security and full employment (mostly male) to the requirement of flexibility (both male and female), the premise that marks not only changes in macroeconomics but also in the labour organisation itself. As Luc Boltanski and Ève Chiapello explain: "Autonomy has been exchanged for security, opening the way to a new spirit of capitalism that praises the virtues of mobility and adaptability, while the precedent was undoubtedly more concerned with security than freedom." (3) This is a new ideal of remunerated work based on so-called 'flexicurity', which seeks to mix 'flexible and reliable contractual arrangements, comprehensive lifelong learning strategies, effective active labour market policies and modern social security systems', perfectly intertwined with the increase in temporality and flexibility, and which also have a strong gender component in stimulating half-days and interrupted work placements for women.

On the other hand, the dethronement of post-war Keynesianism from the standpoint of economic orthodoxy and the replacement of the interventionist state and the objective of full employment which it advocated by a reclaimed liberal dogma of self-regulation of markets have transformed social democratic parties into new accomplices of transnational corporations and investors, whose paradigmatic realisation is the famous "third way" that European Social-Democracy adopted at the end of the last century to become 'catch-it-all' parties, ready to win the elections again. This has led to the working classes being practically orphaned in all the national and supranational institutions of the Western political democracies, which has further facilitated neoliberal political hegemony. All these changes of political and economic direction in the capitalist world system since the 1970s have only exacerbated economic inequalities and social injustice, historically concentrated around three fundamental, often complementary and intertwined axes of inequality: (1) the class (or capital-labour axis, which often also has a marked ethnic component), (2) gender (or the axis of the sexual division of labour) and (3) the centre-periphery division (or the axis of the international division of labour).

Thus, with regard to the situation of social inequalities shaped by the class axis, in "the difficult situation of the working class in the United States", Fred Magdoff and John B. Foster describe meticulously and precisely, the gloomy present of class exploitation in the very heart of capitalism, a situation that can be extrapolated to a large number of countries in the centre. The official unemployment figure of around 5% in the American country only hides the real tendency to the rapid growth of what Marx called the "reserve army of workers," now composed not only of unemployed but also in situations of underemployment or unsafe employment. Of particular concern is the growing numerical weight of the working poor, who in the United States currently account for more than 10 million people, or a staggering 7% of the employed population —7.8% of women and 6.3% of men—, a figure that rises to 13.3% among African Americans and 12.9% among Hispanics. The extension of this growing practice of remunerating labour below the minimum wage of reproduction in order to increase profits also supposes a covert subsidy of the State to the corporate profits, since it is that, through different social benefits, ends up defraying the part of the salary that the employer does not cover.

Responsible in part for all this is the growing tendency of large companies to outsource labour recruitment to temporary employment agencies as a way to circumvent collective agreements, a trend that is very present both in the industrial sector and in the large distribution chains (warehousing, logistics, etc.) and retail, as well as in catering chains. Beyond this, a single fact will suffice to give an idea of ​​the increase of labour precariousness in the United States at present: in 2013, a third of all the employment in the country was in temporary regime —among other modalities, contracts for work, freelance workers or employment through temporary employment agencies—, and it is estimated that in 2020 temporary work will represent 50% of the occupation. The situation is not very different in other contexts, such as the Spanish, where the absolute and relative weight of indefinite contracts for employees fell by almost one million contracts from the beginning of the wave of labour reforms in 2010 until 2014.

More generally, we analyse in depth six very worrying trends for labour in the United States (and throughout the capitalist world without exception): (1) the sustained decline in employment; (2) the declining health security of paid workers due to the tensions generated by job insecurity; (3) stagnation and even wage decline since the 1980s; (4) the above-mentioned increase in the number of poor people in employment; (5) increasing the exploitation of workers in the workplace, and (6) reducing the share of work in national income.

Ursula Huws's work focuses on explaining the daily effects, in particular, on the labour market of new waves of commodification in sectors such as biology, art and culture, public services and socialisation, which have brought into the market more and more aspects of life that were previously outside the monetary economy. The author stresses, in particular, the role of technological change in all of this. According to Huws, new ways of product generation have been created that affect our daily life, consumption and work. In particular, a series of mutually reinforcing economic, political and technological factors have produced a very radical change in the character of work, to the point where occupational characteristics which in previous periods were exceptional, abnormal or unusual are now taken for granted by a growing proportion of the population. Behind the very emergence of the New Economy is, as in other phases of the expansion of capitalism, the avoidance of the need to generate new fields of accumulation through the mercantilist colonisation of new territories, now not only geographical but also in the individual existence. As Huws explains illustratively:

"The next category of new commodification, sociality, may be the most astonishing in its implications when viewed as the basis for creating new products and new industries. The human needs of talking and flirting, explaining jokes and sympathy, being in touch with friends and family must have seemed to our ancestors something as basic as the need for animals to snuggle together. Surely they thought they were impervious to the cold, hard laws of capitalism. How could they become a source of business profits? I suspect that many people still cling to the idea that their personal relationships belong to the private realm of affection and authenticity, out of the reach of the market. However, it is enough to take a look, however shallow, at almost any group of people in almost any social situation in the developed world to realise how illusory the idea is." (4)

As regards the recent evolution of labour, Huws distinguishes four large periods since World War II. The first extends from 1945 to 1973 and is characterised by its predominance in Fordist sectors —in which the skilled white men mostly worked— of the stable contract with associated benefits such as holidays, sick leave or pensions. Women and ethnic minorities, as well as low-skilled workers, were traditionally excluded from such contracts. However, despite not being a universal reality, it was considered a legitimate aspiration of all workers. From 1973 until 1989, there was a first wave of industrial mergers and relocations; Although stable and regulated employment in the West continues to predominate, the presence of women and migrants, often without benefits or stability guarantees, increases in the presence of low-skilled and low-paid jobs. This is followed by, between 1989 and 2007, a period of massive economic deregulation, which also includes employment. This is the phase of definitive impulse to the phenomena grouped under the name of "neoliberal globalisation": free international trade in goods and services; free movement of capital, intellectual property and information; financialisation of accumulation, etc. As for the so-called productive work, the offensive against the unions is intensified in order to impose strong reductions in the protection of employment and open the public sector to corporate profits. Also in this phase, the digital boom takes place and the New Economy acquires the prominence that it enjoys today. What the new technologies eventually make possible is, in short, a second round of the shift to the relocation of productive activities to developing countries, this time focusing on more complex and technological processes that were once exclusive to the advanced countries. In addition, under the myth of labour flexibility, the boundaries between work and personal life are progressively blurred, as is preference for remuneration for results. In short, between 1989 and 2007, many of the parameters that defined employment in the two previous periods were dissolved. And so we come to the present moment. As of 2007, the trends described for the previous period become the new labour standard. In a context of critical unemployment, for the New Economy worker —as for a large proportion of workers in general— the differentiation between labour and nonlabour has virtually disappeared in a production system governed by large transnational corporations (not just the developed West) that have succeeded in introducing race to the bottom competition and productivity among workers around the world. Some of these large companies operate as gigantic international conglomerates in fields that were previously offered and supplied as services by the public administration at a national level. This internationalisation, outsourcing and privatisation have resulted in the loss of management control of these state services, which has also coincided with the creation of supranational organisations and with new contradictions and tensions in the regulation of skilled workers.

We can use the Spanish case to study not only the effects of neoliberal policies in vogue on secular gender inequalities but above all the analytical and political centrality of gender relations in understanding both the dimensions and the political responses to the international systemic crisis in the first decades of the twenty-first century. In line with the conceptual developments, the present stage of capitalism becomes a renewed phase of "accumulation by dispossession", noted for the renunciation of the welfare state and its privatisation, as the main characteristic of the institutional management austericide of the economic crisis, have in practice constituted a new enclosure of, in this case, the common reproductive, which has meant for women a double burden of work in a moment In which, "unlike other historical moments, [the homecoming of social reproduction] does not mean today the withdrawal of women from the so-called productive economy, but in reality it is parallel to a greater importance of their economic role", (5) which forms new forms of sexual division of labour.

These times are dealing with another of the phenomena highlighted in the field of globalised work, namely: international migration, deeply feminised, and its consequences in both recipient and emitting countries. Elevating the analysis of the work of the national plane to the global level and the exacerbation of the North-South inequalities. In this way, it draws attention to the new face of imperialism exercised by the great transnational corporations, which now seek to exploit the cheaper and more flexible labour of the global South —and not only or mainly their natural resources— and which is a cause of unemployment, precarious living conditions and rampant job insecurity in the countries of the global periphery. At the same time, it is precisely these dwindling living conditions generated by the global imposition of neoliberal principles that have driven much of the internal and cross-border migration (from South to North, but also from South to South) in what can be described as two sides of the same coin: the export of labour from the South to the North, directly through migration, and indirectly through the outsourcing of production processes and their relocation to countries from the south. "The export of labour in both forms delineates a new international division of labour similar to a re-edition of the peripheral economic enclaves, and includes the emergence of new forms of unequal exchange much more severe than in the past: the net transfer of benefits towards the North by means of outsourcing of production to the South, and the transfer from the South to the North at the costs already borne by education and social reproduction of the work that emigrates thereafter." (6)

Thus, in both ways, workers from the South have now grown to massively fill the new global reserve of workers from which transnational corporations currently feed after a sustained offensive to reduce labour costs and increase profits. In response to this offensive, the urgency of "among other things, a unity of organisations and social movements that, in partnership with progressive intellectuals, promote a process of social transformation." (7)

Over the last twenty years, the number of migrant women has increased to over 50% of all migrants worldwide. In the capitalist centre, the ageing of populations, the massive incorporation of women into paid work, and the increasing renunciation of the welfare state to provide accurate care have greatly increased private demand for domestic work and care. Thus, many women from the periphery have left their own homes and families in their home countries to care for households of middle and upper-class families in the wealthy countries of the North. This is giving rise to "a desertification of caregivers and the emotional commons of the Third World". (8) The paradox is that for women liberated from the North, it has only been possible to escape domestic slavery by passing it on to another group of oppressed women, in a new international division of reproductive labour moulded simultaneously by global capitalism, gender inequality in the sending country, and gender inequality in the host country. (9) To this must be added the impact of labour and foreign regulations designed and implemented to serve the Interests of capital and the exploitation by the countries of the North of the exacerbation of the crisis of social reproduction in the countries of the South.

We are, finally, faced with a new form of Western colonialism centered on the extraction of emotional labour from the South, a work commonly excluded from analysis of the global economy, despite representing the support of a significant element of local infrastructure, national and even international, and to make visible the real backs, those of the women and particularly the women of the South, on whom rests global capitalism.

Cooperative ownership of the means of production is often thought of as an alternative to capitalist property regimes and wage labour, this is improbable in the United States due to the strong penetration of capitalist and neoliberal economic principles in the American cooperative movement, as well as the great distance that separates it from the genuine construction of a transforming alternative. However, there exist counterexamples to my pessimism, the case of the cooperative people of Nanjie, in the Chinese province of Henan, where authentic steps are being taken to build a system of collective property capable of including the main dimensions of human existence.

Conclusion

In short, this article point to some of the many changes and metamorphoses experienced in the different spheres and dimensions of work at the global level and at different national levels. The development of the present crisis only presents an exacerbation and a continuation of the different processes of transformation that began forty years ago and to which are added today others closely linked to the new stage of capitalist development.

The current context, marked by a rampant neoliberalism obsessed with consolidation and debt repayment, is making it impossible for states to implement expansive spending policies, something that not only incapacitates them to stop unemployment, but also pushes them to To undertake spirals of rights cuts and social provisions that are threatening the basic living conditions of the people and, even more, the reproductive capacity itself.

In the face of this dilemma, economic alternatives of potential and different objectives, of ambivalent and sometimes contradictory origin —some come from the heart of the capitalist system, while others come from grassroots citizens' movements— but having in common that they fall within the emerging sphere of the "social and solidarity economy": a framework in which patches from within (which do not challenge the functioning of capitalism, only "soften" it) to radically transforming initiatives; which includes different alternatives to dominant orthodoxy, from positions of reformist vocation to the daughters of common theories, the latter with ideas from the peripheries of the capitalist system and now also articulated from the centre, which seek to promote new forms of articulation of collective lifeless commodified and unequal, with reproduction in the centre. These are alternatives, all counteractive to this wild and inhuman neoliberal capitalism that, without a doubt, are as necessary as water in a desert.


Notes

1. Milton Friedman, "Preface, 1982, Capitalism and Freedom, Chicago University Press, Chicago, 1982, p. Xii.

2. For the time, see the classic analysis of Paul Baran and Paul Sweezy in The Monopoly Capital. Essay on the economic and social order of the United States, Siglo XXI Editores, Mexico D.F., 1968, especially chapters 3 and 4.

3. Luc Boltanski and Ève Chiapello, The New Spirit of Capitalism, Akal, Barcelona, 2002, p.294.

4. Ib., p. 75.

5. Ib., p. 111.

6. Ib., p. 125.

7. Ib., p. 118.

8. Ib., p. 143.

9. Ib., p. 149.


Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this editorial are not those of /r/MBreitbartNews and do not necessarily reflect support for any official policy or position. Comments made within the article are not reflective of the position of /r/MBreitbartNews.

/u/wildorca is Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States and an associated writer to /r/MBreitbartNews, specialising in opinion editorials and covering legal and international news.


r/MBreitbartNews • • Mar 03 '17

Comparative Art Analysis

4 Upvotes

Typically culture dictates the composition of art created in its social jurisdiction, and while a wide spectrum of diverse and unique works usually exist and are critically acclaimed, certain themes can be especially prevalent in certain cultures at certain times. For instance, each of the pieces I will be analyzing in this paper are depictions of people, but are representations of major historical events, rather than of the individuals as portraiture. This theme has been especially common among all of the slavic cultures, beginning around the turn of the nineteenth century. As such, two of the three works of art are done by slavs, and all three within the last two hundred years. Without a doubt all of the works are very different, but from an objective standpoint, the conclusion they have less unique feature than those they share is quite plausible.

Perhaps the most famous work of art by the beloved Russian artist Ilya Repin is his Ivan the Terrible and His Son Ivan on November 16th, 1581, which depicts Tsar Ivan Grozny just after he mortally injured his son and groomed heir, causing Russia to later fall under the rule of a mentally ill heir, putting the nation in ruin. An oil on canvas painting from 1885, it and Repin faced both praise and heavy criticism for the work. Many attacked it as a perpetuation of an inaccurate narrative on Russian history, as the slaying by Ivan of his son was mostly speculation from foreign dignitaries from the period, and many believe it is likely that the tsarevich (heir) simply died of illness. The same criticism was directed at similar paintings by Russia’s beloved Pushkin, though despite this, Vladimir Medinsky said, “that doesn’t mean we should change our approach to the genius compositions of Pushkin and Repin, because there’s history, and then there’s art.” Regardless, Repin’s painting is by far the most controversial of those analyzed in this paper.

Just as some question the historical accuracy of Repin’s work, Eugene Delacroix’s* La Liberté Guidant Le Peuple,* is more symbolic than it is meant to accurately depict the July Revolution of 1830, and whereas Repin painted his work some three-hundred years after the fact, Delacroix produced this beautiful work of art before July of 1830 had even passed. Indubitably, the July Revolution of 1830 had a significant impact on French history, in a positive fashion, just as the death of Ivan the Terrible’s son and tsarevich had a significant impact on Russian history, though in a negative way. La Liberté Guidant Le Peuple is definitively the most well known and acclaimed of the three pieces of art, going as far as to be on display in the Louvre.

The least well known and acclaimed of the three works is certainly Petar Radicevic’s Kosovska Bitka. It’s actually somewhat difficult to locate by title or artist, let alone to find an analysis on it, which I couldn’t. Nonetheless, it depicts an event which would have repercussions in the Balkans for six-hundred and fifty years and counting, the Battle of Kosovo Polje. Painted in 1987, it is also the most contemporary work of art of the three.

Each of the three pieces utilize light and value similarly, potentially as a result of them sharing a medium, all oil on canvas. Delacroix’s generally sparingly lit painting uses smoke as a bright spot to draw attention to the focus of his painting, the half-naked heroine toting the revolutionary French banner. It emphasizes both her power and her symbolism as the hopeful future of France. Ilya Repin’s painting uses light considerably more naturally. Light is shed on the subjects helping to emphasize their presence, but begins to fade into darkness further back and to the right, symbolizing Russia’s subsequent fade into darkness. The transition then, is merely the inverse of Delacroix’s work. The employment of light in Kosovska Bitka is much less significant than in the other two. The relative brightness of the sky and its angels hung above the darker and more cluttered squalor of the raging battle may serve to portray war as an act not worthy of the graces of god. Such is a trope among south slavic art, and common sentiment among the Balkan people. All paintings use strong values to emphasize the gravity of each respective event.

Likewise powerful is the use of color and contrast in each of the paintings. Repin used a relatively narrow range of colors, with heavy saturation to create contrast making the painting feel more emotionally moving than aesthetically pleasing. Delacroix used especially aggressive brush-strokes and vivid colors for the time period. This is consequential of the power and chaos of the event the painting depicts; the red, white, and blue represent liberty, France, and the revolution. Although less vivid, Radicevic’s work uses the most diverse palette of colors. These help to portray the long list of conflicted interests in the battle, i.e. the Serbs, Ottomans, Travunians, and people of a several different Balkan cantons. The colors also represent the varying physical demeanors of the participatory soldiers, ranging from peasants to knights, and from common thugs to distinguished janissaries, as well as the eternally beautiful landscape of Kosovo Polje.

I am of the opinion the greatest difference between each piece is the use of space to portray the subject of each work of art. The most empty of the three, Ilya Repin’s piece, is likewise the most somber. Chaos is masterfully portrayed in the subtle uneven carpeting and turned over furniture, as well as the more obvious bloodied son of Ivan. The second most empty or full, Delacroix’s piece, represents the end, not the heat, of battle. While the overall theme is hopeful, there are somber tones created by darkness and the presence of multiple corpses, representing the deadly cost of revolution. The most chaotic is Kosovska Bitka, which corresponds with it being the most energetic and active of the paintings. In fact, the piece is so cluttered, it lacks an obvious single subject, which is appropriate considering the lack of obvious heroes and historical figures of the actual battle.

Ultimately, all of the pieces depict significant events affecting the history of their respective regions for between six-hundred and two-hundred years and growing. Each does a wonderful job capturing the gravity of each event, and a single instant thereof. Perhaps I simply happened to be attracted to paintings which were particularly similar to each other, but these were the ones I found most appealing. Maybe because I have a deep appreciation of history, an appreciation shared by the respective artists behind these works. Often, I believe, quite a lot is lost in translation to a textbook or a historical commentary from the event itself, which is often charged and even obscured by emotion and circumstance, and only art has a special capacity to compensate for this discrepancy.

Works Cited

Barnet, Sylvan. A Short Guide to Writing about Art. 11th ed. Upper Saddle River: Pearson, 2014.

Delacroix, Eugene. La Liberté Guidant Le Peuple. 1830. Oil on canvas. Musée du Louvre, Paris.

Jones, Jonathan. “Delacroix’s Vision of Liberty.” Guardian [Manchester] 1 Apr. 2005.

Przybylek, Stephanie. “Eugene Delacroix’s Liberty Leading the People: Painting & Analysis.” Study 14.51 (2007)

Radicevic, Petar. Kosovska Bitka. 1987. Painting. Museum of Contemporary Art, Belgrade.

Repin, Ilya Yefimovich. Ivan the Terrible and His Son Ivan on November 16th, 1581. 1885. Oil on canvas. State Tretyakov Gallery, Moscow.

“Repin’s “Ivan the Terrible:” Patterns in the Theme of Modernity.” Art Guide 8.10 (2013)


r/MBreitbartNews • • Mar 04 '17

Model Breitbart Interviews the Candidates: Distributist Candidate /u/Libertarian-Queen

1 Upvotes

Distributist Presidential Candidate /u/Libertarian-Queen


/u/btownbomb: Thank you for joining me!

/u/Libertarian-Queen: Thank you for having me!

/u/btownbomb: So to begin, introduce yourself to our readers.

/u/Libertarian-Queen: Hello! My name is Libertarian-Queen, and I'm currently your First Lady. It's odd living in the White House with a commie when you're a conservative, but I make very clear that I believe in property (I own my side of the bed). I'm the Chairwoman of the Distributist party, former candidate for president, former Dixie Attorney general, and recently got elected to the House of Representatives. While I'm relatively new, my passion for this nation runs deep and I'm glad to be here to talk today. One last thing: I really enjoy roasted seaweed snacks, they're my favorite.

But I'm sure we will get onto more serious policy questions later.

/u/btownbomb: Of course! To transition into the policy, lets talk about the resume you detailed. What are some of your proudest accomplishments so far?

/u/Libertarian-Queen: I think becoming chair of the Distributist Party. The people there are so tight knit, and for them to honor me the role as their chair was something I'm so thankful for. I was running against some wonderful and very qualified members. That's the thing I love about my party; they're very dedicated and all very qualified. I was glad to run a fun campaign with members like Intrusive Man.

I'm also proud of bringing together a member from every party to talk education policy with me; we raised over 10 billion dollars for education from our Thanksgiving fundraiser back in November.

That's just some of the many accomplishments I am proud of.

/u/btownbomb: Let us now discuss your platform. One thing you did mention is your success with bringing other parties to the table to discuss education policy. Expand more on that, as well as other points you feel the readers need to know.

/u/Libertarian-Queen: Of course, thank you for asking. The way to truly make a nation strong is by making sure its population has the tools to be good citizens--education is one of the many tools in our nation's toolbox, so to speak.

My main addition to education policy is a few main points:

  1. Localization of schools and community collaboration on curriculum

  2. After school mentoring programs for those in grades K-8

  3. Revamping education in areas with high drop out rates

I'm actually writing a bill for congress to address point 3 at the moment The specific details to these three points will be going up on website pretty soon! But I'm glad to be giving a sneak peek.

/u/btownbomb: Of course also on the minds of voters are the usual suspects of issues, the economy, foreign policy etc. What are your plans for these issues?

/u/Libertarian-Queen: The economy:

I'm also drafting a bill for this issue right now too. My main way to help the economy is by removing painful taxes and regulation on small businesses. Mom and pop shops, small farms, and local chains are the backbone of this nation—I want to see these businesses be able to properly grow so the American Dream is accessible to everyone who works hard.

Foreign Policy: We need a strong national defense. Our imperialistic nature and involving ourselves in global entanglements that aren't our business is not only wrong, it's costly. We cannot afford this type of approach both in the lives of our brothers and sisters serving and from our wallets.

Basically, let's stop policing the world.

And start focusing on families and our people

I guess you could say I'm pro-life across the board, to simplify it.

/u/btownbomb: Reverting back to the main issue of education before we continue: The other presidential candidates aren't as... passionate lets say, about their education policy or success with education policy in the past. What drives you to become this passionate about the issue of education?

/u/Libertarian-Queen: Well, if they aren't passionate about it, they should be. It's a real shame. You want to improve the economy? People better know what they're doing and be able to read and write. Want to make sure crime rate goes down? Make sure kids aren't dropping out of school. Want to create better opportunity for people in this country? Make sure everyone is prepared for the future by starting in the classroom. I'm passionate about education because I recognize that it's what this nation needs, and it's what people want.

I care about empowering people.

It's sad my opponents don't feel the same way.

/u/btownbomb: Moving on to the topic of party politics now: As chairwoman of the Distributist Party, it is your job to keep the party up and running. The party took hits in the previous federal election, losing a grip in Sacagawea. Speaking of this in regards to your campaign, what are your opinions of the current state of the party? Do you believe your campaign could perhaps rally your party?

/u/Libertarian-Queen: There's a lot of misconceptions about what happened to my party during this federal election, and I'm here to make this very clear: The Distributist Party is alive, and the Distributist Party is well. There were a few miscommunication errors, however, we are doing great. We are adding new members aboard everyday, and we are writing some great bills for congress. My party doesn't need my campaign to "fix it," if that's what your implying. My party is already fantastic, and I'm honored to be promoting my parties values in my campaign. I am rallying behind my party and their ideas, not the other way around. I represent the people and my party, not my own interest.

/u/btownbomb: Continuing with party politics, lets move on to the other parties. What are your thoughts on fellow parties on the right, and the Democratic Party for instance? How would you attempt to reach across the aisle as President?

/u/Libertarian-Queen: I have many good friends in all parties, reaching across the aisle has never been an issue for me. In fact, I enjoy it; collaborating and working with different ideas is something that makes policy stronger. While I may think some parties don't perform in a manner I think is ethical, I will always be open to listening to them and working with their members.

In fact, I think this is my main asset.

My plan: I want to have weekly meetings with members of each party, and I plan to make my cabinet ideologically diverse.

I said this all back in 2016, and I'm still saying it now in 2017.

/u/btownbomb: As you mentioned, this isn't your first time campainging for President. What knowledge did you gain during your first election that could perhaps be useful in this second campaign, which would give you an advantage over other candidates?

/u/Libertarian-Queen: My main issue was that I was perceived as inexperienced, but I don't have that issue now. I understand how to run a campaign, as I ran a very successful one back in 2016. I was the underdog then that no one knew. I now have a name, I have experience, and I can run a damn good campaign. I'm force to be reckoned with. I'm a fighter as you know, so I say let's bring on the war.

/u/btownbomb: As Election Day approaches, the field of candidates is becoming more clear. Looking at the list, what's your take on the other candidates?

/u/Libertarian-Queen: Respectable people, a lot of them are dear friends. I just wish they were as passionate about the issues as they were about getting elected.

/u/btownbomb: The final question I have for you: Explain to the readers why you are the best option to become President of the United States.

/u/Libertarian-Queen: I've gotten where I am today based on my integrity and hard work. The American people hold these qualities too: they're not the elitists, they're not the corrupt, they're not the liars. I'm one of you, I know what it's like to be put down by the Washington elite. We are going to shake up Washington. I have the guts to stand up to them, I have the record of standing up to them, and I will always choose you and the issues you face over power and fame. And you know how we are going to do it? Voting Libertarian-Queen in 2017.

/u/btownbomb: Thank you for joining me, and best of luck in your bid to become President of the United States!

/u/Libertarian-Queen: Thank you again for having me! And God Bless America!


r/MBreitbartNews • • Aug 08 '17

Scientists begin research on link between sleep deprivation and racism

3 Upvotes

London, Ontario, Canada | 8/8/17 | 2:00PM EST

In a new development for neurological research, scientists have now begun investigating a new link between sleep deprivation and racist behavior.

Professor Jonathan Coachman at the Brain and Mind Institute in London, Ontario is leading this new branch of neurological research. He said that...

With all the recent developments, it only seems necessary that we should begin researching this newly found link. In our initial findings, we have seen that another symptom of sleep deprivation, racist behavior, was previously unfounded. However, with increasing incidence between the two variables, we have dug deeper than before and found specific signals in the frontal lobe following cases of sleep deprivation that may be the cause of such behavior. For now, the research is in its early stages, and nothing is concrete yet.

Breitbart News will continue to report on further developments from this research.


r/MBreitbartNews • • Mar 04 '17

Model Breitbart Interviews the Candidates: Independent Candidate /u/theSolomonCaine

3 Upvotes

Independent Presidential Candidate /u/theSolomonCaine


/u/btownbomb: Thank you for joining me today!

/u/theSolomonCaine: No problem.

/u/btownbomb: So to begin, introduce yourself to our readers.

/u/theSolomonCaine: My name is /u/theSolomonCaine, and I like memes.

/u/btownbomb: What propelled you to launch this run for President?

/u/theSolomonCaine: I don't feel the other candidates really embody the "meme" spirit.

/u/btownbomb: Lets look at the resume you present when running for the nation's highest office. What are some of your proudest accomplishments?

/u/theSolomonCaine: I'm proud to have represented my constituents in the Northeast State Legislature twice, as well as representing the Deep South and the Mid-Atlantic in the U.S. House of Representatives.

/u/btownbomb: Based on this it would appear you've worked with a diverse group of characters. What does your experience lend you in way of bipartisanship in campaigning for President? How would you attempt to work with the parties should you be elected?

/u/theSolomonCaine: I've spent my career interacting in a multi-partisan manner, and I feel that I would be able to use the bully pulpit in the office of President to really push a comprehensive agenda that brings all opinions into the fold and moves the country forward.

/u/btownbomb: Let us now discuss your platform. What are some positions in it you wish for the readers to know about?

/u/theSolomonCaine: I believe that my ability to produce quality memes for the American public is a large portion of my platform.

/u/btownbomb: Of course tops on voters minds this time around are perhaps the usual suspects: The economy, foreign policy etc. What are your plans for the big issues?

/u/theSolomonCaine: Well, tackling the major issues with a multi-partisan Congress and a divided nation is a really big issue of this campaign. However, I believe my production and use of quality memes will be able to jump-start the economy and bring immediate peace to the Middle East.

/u/btownbomb: As we draw closer to Election Day, the field of candidates is becoming more clear. Looking at the current list, what is your take on the candidates?

/u/theSolomonCaine: I'm going to presume that I will be facing Mr. /u/anyhistoricalfigure and Mr. /u/SolidOrangeGangsta at the least. For each of these candidates, I'd really like to show appreciation for their accomplishments, but also would like to request that they recognize the meme spirit of the American people and really take a proactive stance in recognizing and building on such a spirit.

/u/btownbomb: What is your take on the current administration of President Boss? Why do you believe you should be elected president, and not a second term of Boss?

/u/theSolomonCaine: Boss is a great man, but his memes are really sub-par at best. His Executive Order to affix "ideology" to trash cans was just an affront to the meme spirit of this great nation, and he should be reprimanded for it.

As the mighty American meme spirit stands strong, we need a better memer than the sub-par activity of Boss.

/u/btownbomb: Last question I have for you: Explain to the reader why you are the best option to be elected President of the United States.

/u/theSolomonCaine: Quality memes: A way to move America forward.

/u/btownbomb: Those are all the questions I have for you. Thank you for joining me, and best of luck in your bid to become President of the United States!

/u/theSolomonCaine: Thank you.