Both-sidesing: Democrats trying to impress Republicans on how harsh they can be on immigrants?

This person who identifies as an "abundance liberal" suggests that Democrats should propose taxing immigrants more for the purpose of (somehow?) impressing Republicans (who care about real numbers? who argue in good faith?).

I'm kind of shocked that anyone is still proposing technocratic solutions to the "debate" over immigration. Even if this were a good idea (and it is not), Republican elites and media will never tell their base about it. You can't policy your way out of a propaganda problem!

[image or embed]

— Michael Hobbes (@michaelhobbes.bsky.social) September 6, 2025 at 1:47 PM

There is no indication that republican leaders or voters even know what current immigration policy looks like. Their views are driven by Breitbart blowups about caravans, Haitians eating cats and MS-13. Change the policy all you want, they'll never give you an ounce of credit for it.

— Michael Hobbes (@michaelhobbes.bsky.social) September 6, 2025 at 1:53 PM

There is no compromise policy Democrats can offer Republicans to make them act normal on this issue. We simply have to state the basic reality — immigrants contribute to our country in myriad ways — and fight for it. I don't know how so many journalists convinced themselves this isn't an option.

— Michael Hobbes (@michaelhobbes.bsky.social) September 6, 2025 at 1:59 PM

Exactly. Exactly. We know there is no compromise to be had on immigration *BECAUSE DEMOCRATS HAVE TRIED TO BROKER ONE FOR 30 YEARS*. Three f’ing decades! As long as Jerusalem Demsas, who offered another “let’s hear the right out” proposal this week, has been alive!

[image or embed]

— Greg Greene (he/him/his) (@greene.haus) September 6, 2025 at 6:56 PM

If the punishment is going to happen, if you cannot stop it (And Democrats have never been able to stop it), then you need to extract cost for it; or else you're just allowing your enemies to shift costs onto you for nothing. You are building political externalities that make it more difficult for u

— jessdee.bsky.social (@jessdee.bsky.social) September 6, 2025 at 7:04 PM

No democracy, but hope

Chris Kluwe tells Marisa Kabas (interview published today) that the US is currently under "weak authoritarian rule," which means "we still have the potential to get back our democracy. We just have to show up and fight for it," and that's why he's running for office even though currently there is no democracy.

KABAS: Do you think we still have a democracy?

KLUWE: Currently? No. I believe we are currently in authoritarianism, and I think that's been made very clear, both due to the fact that the Republicans, as well as the Supreme Court, refuse to reign Trump in. He's deploying the National Guard to multiple states. He's deploying the military into US cities. And he has publicly proclaimed that he wants to be a dictator. And call me silly, but when Donald Trump says he wants to do something, I listen, because whenever he says he wants to do something, he always tries to do that thing.

KABAS: I think running for office, though, shows some faith that a system still exists, right? That you can affect change from the inside in some way. So if we aren't living in a democracy, what do you hope to achieve by running and working within the system as it currently is?

KLUWE: So right now, we're currently under authoritarian rule, but it's still weak authoritarian rule. The courts are still pushing back on the lower levels, both federally and state, and there are a lot of states that are pushing back. Obviously, Newsom has been doing the redistricting stuff. Governor Pritzker has been talking about ‘you can't come into Chicago.’ I think I saw something in Philadelphia where if ICE or DHS breaks the law, they're going to prosecute and charge them. And so we still have the potential to get back our democracy. We just have to show up and fight for it.

I find this passage helpful because sometimes people do ask about the point of trying to leverage the old system at all if it's already broken and overtaken. The hope is that the old system may have some useful tools to take power from the authoritarians and build a better future.

Real easy: Don't deliberately misgender people

In May, the Quakers in Britain published a Statement of policy on provision of transinclusive facilities on BYM’s estate.

They also wrote up a toilet presentation (PDF) in June.

On 26 June, an organization wrote to the Quakers. They identified themselves as Sex Matters to Quakers, apparently deriving their name from Helen Joyce's organization, Sex Matters. They also have an X account that says "Joined September 2023." The day after writing to the Quakers, they posted their complaint to Facebook. Their complaint is simply an elaboration of the idea that the category of women belongs to cis women, that trans women mustn't exist within it, and that trans/cis coexistence is a philosophical question that must be subjected to ongoing debate where the terms of the debate involve ongoing consultation with anti-trans people.

On 16 July, the Britain Yearly Meeting Trustees responded publicly (PDF), restating their policy. They said they don't answer to Helen Joyceists — not in the ethical sense of "answer," anyway. ("...as you highlighted, Sex Matters to Quakers is not a Quaker Recognised Body, and therefore there is no relationship of accountability between BYMT and it – we are accountable solely to Yearly Meeting.") They may, however, answer a letter in the mere sense of writing a letter: "We respond to you as a matter of courtesy."

At the end of the Quakers' five-page reply, they gave this list of pointers I rather like (I'm quoting it):

• Deliberate misgendering of a person is transphobia.
• Referring to trans women as men is transphobia.
• Assuming a trans person poses a risk simply for being trans is transphobic.
• Stating that trans men are vulnerable and “groomed” into transition is a transphobic trope.
• References to “trans activism” as anything other than the legitimate effort to protect and advocate for the rights of people who are trans or non-binary is transphobic.
• Alleging that Quakers have been “infiltrated” by trans activists is a transphobic conspiracy theory and we are particularly offended by it.
• The notion that supporting and advocating for the safety, wellbeing, and inclusion of trans people could be damaging to the Religious Society’s reputation, or even “might be the thing that finally destroys them” is shocking and dangerous. It is fearmongering, threatening, and extreme.

A reframe of these tips I might use and offer to others:

People belong to a gender on their own say-so. Don't deliberately call someone by a gender other than what they say they are. Don't assume that trans women are predators, that trans men are helpless victims of someone who convinced them that they're trans, that trans people in general are delusional, or that transness itself puts others at risk. Apart from activism for trans rights, there's no such thing as "trans activism" — so don't use that phrase as a bogeyman, and don't imply that cis people who are trans-inclusive have been somehow infiltrated, captured, brainwashed etc. by trans people or by some trans-inclusive agenda that has forced them to speak in a trans-inclusive way. Trans and cis people alike can mutually support each other's safety, wellbeing, and inclusion. Trans inclusion will not undermine our shared civilization (in which trans people already live and have always lived) and there is probably no reason to expect it will sink any particular organization.

DC takeover is a 'red trial balloon'

Brad Reed:

"In a post on his Truth Social page on Monday morning, Trump framed the decision to deploy the National Guard as necessary to combat crime in the nation's capital.

"Washington, D.C. will be LIBERATED today!" Trump claimed. "Crime, Savagery, Filth, and Scum will DISAPPEAR. I will, MAKE OUR CAPITAL GREAT AGAIN! The days of ruthlessly killing, or hurting, innocent people, are OVER!"

However, the president's claim that the National Guard is needed to protect Washington, D.C. residents from purportedly unprecedented criminal violence does not hold water given that the city has seen a dramatic fall in crime recently.

* * *

Karen Attiah, a columnist for The Washington Post, warned her Bluesky followers against writing off the deployment as an effort by the president to distract from his administration's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal.

"Threats of the militarization of cities—including D.C., which has been fighting for self determination for generations—isn't a 'distraction,'" she said. "It's a massive, giant, red trial balloon for what an American president can do [in] YOUR city... I need people to wake up.""

— Trump Plan to Deploy National Guard in DC Called 'Giant, Red Trial Balloon': "Trump's move to mobilize the National Guard against Americans in D.C. is another telltale sign of his authoritarian ambitions," said Democratic Illinois congressional candidate Kat Abughazaleh. Common Dreams, August 11, 2025

Brad Reed again:

"Shortly after Trump made his announcement, Washington, D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb indicated that he was not taking the president's attempt to take over his city's police force lying down.

"The administration's actions are unprecedented, unnecessary, and unlawful," he declared in a post on X. "There is no crime emergency in the District of Columbia. Violent crime in D.C. reached historic 30-year lows last year, and is down another 26% so far this year. We are considering all of our options and will do what is necessary to protect the rights and safety of District residents."

— Trump Says 'Other Cities Are Hopefully Watching' as He Deploys National Guard, Takes Over DC Police: "The administration's actions are unprecedented, unnecessary, and unlawful," declared Washington, D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb. Common Dreams, August 11, 2025

Hapless humanoid holding balloon by OpenClipart-Vectors from Pixabay

Balloon envelope by Hans from Pixabay

Arthur Delaney: "It’s the first time a president has invoked the D.C. Home Rule Act of 1973 to take over the city’s police, but it’s become routine for Trump to declare dubious emergencies expanding his power." (Trump’s D.C. Police Takeover Is His Latest Made-Up ‘Emergency’ Power Grab: The president offered misleading statements about crime trends in the nation’s capital. HuffPost, Aug 11, 2025)

A year ago, Judd Legum wrote:

"Violent crime, however, is not "skyrocketing" in D.C. in 2024. According to data maintained by the D.C. Metropolitan Police, after a significant increase last year, violent crime is down 27% through May 17 compared to 2023. This includes a 24% reduction in homicide, a 29% drop in assault with a dangerous weapon, and a 27% decline in robbery."

— "The truth about crime in DC", Popular Information, May 20, 2024

Speaking as a DC resident: statehood now. It is absurd that Trump can do this in our city.

[image or embed]

— Aaron Reichlin-Melnick (@reichlinmelnick.bsky.social) August 10, 2025 at 9:05 PM

Here's how I figure out my day

I show up where I'm needed. Not where someone else is needed, but where I'm needed. I take the parts of me that are most valuable in today's situation, and I contribute them to work that matters. As much as possible, I do so directly and actively, as that feels honest.

I don't show up where I'll waste my own time, set myself back, or exhaust myself to no good purpose.

I believe that the answers are out there. Someone created them. Someone remembers them. I find them, engage them, tweak them, and keep them working for us today.

If I don't know the answer, I find someone who does, and I listen to them or observe their work. If I don't understand what they're saying or doing, I learn their "why." I try to perceive the conditions that enable their choices or restrict them from choosing something else.

I don't let my auto-pilot run too long. I pause to check in — with myself or with others — to verify that I'm walking the right path. I don't have to stick to my routine. Sometimes, I want and need to change. Often, others want and need me to change.

Please also see Rachel Addison's essay, "Outside of What I’m Doing, I Have No Idea What I’m Doing: What I‘ve learned about writing, what I’ve learned about myself." (August 10, 2025)

Climate change damage compensation in Australia

Fossil fuel companies created an environmental disaster, and the Aus and WA governments are paying them to clean it up with taxpayer money. Almost HALF the royalties collected from Barrow Island will be paid back to clean up the environmental degradation it’s created, at least $500 million! #auspol

[image or embed]

— The Australia Institute (@australiainstitute.org.au) July 22, 2025 at 9:10 PM

Great write up from Peter Milne: www.boilingcold.com.au/governments-...

[image or embed]

— The Australia Institute (@australiainstitute.org.au) July 22, 2025 at 9:10 PM

“Chevron has transformed Barrow Island from a pristine Class A nature reserve to a contamination site. They are trashing Australia’s environment, and taxpayers are footing the bill.” - Mark Ogge Read our media release: australiainstitute.org.au/post/oil-and...

[image or embed]

— The Australia Institute (@australiainstitute.org.au) July 22, 2025 at 9:10 PM

A climate damage compensation levy on fossil fuel (coal and gas) exports from Australia could raise billions of dollars every year to pay the costs of climate change, without raising prices in Australia. ✍️ Add your name to the call: nb.australiainstitute.org.au/climatedisas...

[image or embed]

— The Australia Institute (@australiainstitute.org.au) July 22, 2025 at 9:10 PM

Israel using AI in Gaza (sources for more info)

Yesterday, July 20, MPower sent out an email: "Tell Bill Gates. Tell Microsoft: No AI for War. No AI for Genocide"

The email provided the following sources:

🔒“How Israel built an ‘AI factory’ for war, use in Gaza,” The Washington Post, Dec. 29, 2024.
“Microsoft says it provided AI to Israeli military for war but denies use to harm people in Gaza,” AP, May 16, 2025.
🔒"Israel's War in Gaza Has Killed Over 17,000 Children. These Are the Stories of 28 of Them," Haaretz, June 26, 2025.
“UN report lists companies complicit in Israel’s ‘genocide’: Who are they?,” Al Jazeera, July 1, 2025.
“U.S. Companies Honed Their Surveillance Tech in Israel. Now It’s Coming Home,” The Intercept, April 30, 2025.
"Microsoft Statement on the Issues Relating to Technology Services in Israel and Gaza," Microsoft, May 15, 2025.
“Microsoft investors prod company over work with Israeli military,” The Seattle Times, July 11, 2025.
“U.S. deportation tracker: Counting arrests, deportations,” NBC News, April 15, 2025.