https://www.politico.com

  • Feds likely to challenge Microsoft’s $69 billion Activision takeover - POLITICO
    https://www.politico.com/news/2022/11/23/exclusive-feds-likely-to-challenge-microsofts-69-billion-activision-takeov

    The Federal Trade Commission is likely to file an antitrust lawsuit to block Microsoft’s $69 billion takeover of video game giant Activision Blizzard, maker of the hit games Call of Duty and Candy Crush, according to three people with knowledge of the matter.

    #jeu_vidéo #jeux_vidéo #business #finance #acquisition #rachat #microsoft #activision_blizzard #activision_blizzard_king #ftc #régulateur #rumeur #mobile #sony #jeu_vidéo_call_of_duty #take_two #king #jeu_vidéo_candy_crush #xbox #playstation #console_xbox #console_playstation #cma #google #game_pass #console_stadia #epic_games #jeu_vidéo_fortnite #google_play #tencent

  • U.S. privately asks Ukraine to show it’s open to negotiate with Russia - The Washington Post
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/11/05/ukraine-russia-peace-negotiations/?bezuggrd=NWL

    November 5, 2022 by Missy Ryan, John Hudson and Paul Sonne - The encouragement is aimed not at pushing Ukraine to the negotiating table, but ensuring it maintains a moral high ground in the eyes of its international backers

    The Biden administration is privately encouraging Ukraine’s leaders to signal an openness to negotiate with Russia and drop their public refusal to engage in peace talks unless President Vladimir Putin is removed from power, according to people familiar with the discussions.

    The request by American officials is not aimed at pushing Ukraine to the negotiating table, these people said. Rather, they called it a calculated attempt to ensure the government in Kyiv maintains the support of other nations facing constituencies wary of fueling a war for many years to come.

    The discussions illustrate how complex the Biden administration’s position on Ukraine has become, as U.S. officials publicly vow to support Kyiv with massive sums of aid “for as long as it takes” while hoping for a resolution to the conflict that over the past eight months has taken a punishing toll on the world economy and triggered fears of nuclear war.

    While U.S. officials share their Ukrainian counterparts’ assessment that Putin, for now, isn’t serious about negotiations, they acknowledge that President Volodymyr Zelensky’s ban on talks with him has generated concern in parts of Europe, Africa and Latin America, where the war’s disruptive effects on the availability and cost of food and fuel are felt most sharply.

    “Ukraine fatigue is a real thing for some of our partners,” said one U.S. official who, like others interviewed for this report, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive conversations between Washington and Kyiv.

    Serhiy Nikiforov, a spokesman for Zelensky, did not respond to a request for comment.

    In the United States, polls show eroding support among Republicans for continuing to finance Ukraine’s military at current levels, suggesting the White House may face resistance following Tuesday’s midterm elections as it seeks to continue a security assistance program that has delivered Ukraine the largest such annual sum since the end of the Cold War.

    On Nov. 3, Defense Secretary Llyod Austin said Ukraine is capable of retaking Kherson, a strategic southern city occupied by Russian forces. (Video: Reuters, Photo: AFP/Getty Images/Reuters)

    In a trip to Kyiv on Friday, White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan said the United States supported a just and lasting peace for Ukraine and said U.S. support would continue regardless of domestic politics. “We fully intend to ensure that the resources are there as necessary and that we’ll get votes from both sides of the aisle to make that happen,” he said during a briefing.

    Eagerness for a potential resolution to the war has intensified as Ukrainian forces recapture occupied territory, pushing closer to areas prized by Putin. Those begin with Crimea, which Russia illegally annexed in 2014, and include cities along the Azov Sea that now provide him a “land bridge” to the Ukrainian peninsula. Zelensky has vowed to fight for every inch of Ukrainian territory.

    Veteran diplomat Alexander Vershbow, who served as U.S. ambassador to Russia and deputy secretary general of NATO, said the United States could not afford to be completely “agnostic” about how and when the war is concluded, given the U.S. interest in ensuring European security and deterring further Kremlin aggression beyond Russia’s borders.

    “If the conditions become more propitious for negotiations, I don’t think the administration is going to be passive,” Vershbow said. “But it is ultimately the Ukrainians doing the fighting, so we’ve got to be careful not to second-guess them.”

    While Zelensky laid out proposals for a negotiated peace in the weeks following Putin’s Feb. 24 invasion, including Ukrainian neutrality and a return of areas occupied by Russia since that date, Ukrainian officials have hardened their stance in recent months.

    In late September, following Putin’s annexation of four additional Ukrainian regions in the east and in the south, Zelensky issued a decree declaring it “impossible” to negotiate with the Russian leader. “We will negotiate with the new president,” he said in a video address.

    That shift has been fueled by systematic atrocities in areas under Russian control, including rape and torture, along with regular airstrikes on Kyiv and other cities, and the Kremlin’s annexation decree.

    Ukrainians have responded with outrage when foreigners have suggested they yield areas of their country as part of a peace deal, as they did last month when billionaire Elon Musk, who has helped supply Ukraine’s military with satellite communication devices, announced a proposal on Twitter that could allow Russia to cement its control of parts of Ukraine via referendum and give the Kremlin Crimea.

    In recent weeks Ukrainian criticism of proposed concessions has grown more pointed, as officials decry “useful idiots” in the West whom they’ve accused of serving Kremlin interests.

    “If Russia wins, we will get a period of chaos: flowering of tyranny, wars, genocides, nuclear races,” presidential adviser Mykhailo Podolyak said Friday. “Any ‘concessions’ to Putin today — a deal with the Devil. You won’t like its price.”

    Ukrainian officials point out that a 2015 peace deal in the country’s eastern Donbas region — where Moscow backed a separatist campaign — only provided Russia time before Putin launched his full-scale invasion this year. They question why any new peace deal would be different, arguing that the only way Russia will be prevented from returning for further attacks is vanquishing its military on the battlefield.

    Russia, facing a poor position on the battlefield, has proposed negotiations but in the past has proved unwilling to accept much other than Ukrainian capitulation.

    “Cynically, Russia and its Western supporters are holding out an olive branch. Please do not be fooled: An aggressor cannot be a peacemaker,” Andriy Yermak, head of the Ukrainian presidential administration, wrote in a recent op-ed published by The Washington Post.

    Ukrainian officials also question how they can conduct negotiations with Russian leaders who fundamentally believe in Moscow’s right to hegemony over Kyiv.

    Putin has continued to undermine the notion of a sovereign and independent Ukraine, including in remarks last month when he once again asserted that Russians and Ukrainians were one people, and argued that Russia could be “the only real and serious guarantor of Ukraine’s statehood, sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

    While Western officials also hold profound skepticism of Russia’s aims, they have chafed at Ukraine’s harsh public rebukes as Kyiv remains entirely dependent on Western assistance. Swiping at donors and ruling out talks could hurt Kyiv in the long run, officials say.

    The maximalist remarks on both sides have increased global fears of a years-long conflict spanning the life of Russia’s 70-year-old leader, whose grip on power has only tightened in recent years. Already the war has deepened global economic woes, helping to send energy prices soaring for European consumers and causing a surge in commodity prices that worsened hunger in nations including Somalia, Yemen and Afghanistan.

    In the United States, rising inflation partially linked to the war has stiffened head winds for President Biden and his party ahead of the Nov. 8 midterms and raised new questions about the future of U.S. security assistance, which has amounted to $18.2 billion since the war began. According to a poll published Nov. 3 by the Wall Street Journal, 48 percent of Republicans said the United States was doing “too much” to support Ukraine, up from 6 percent in March.

    Progressives within the Democratic Party are calling for diplomacy to avoid a protracted war, releasing but later retracting a letter calling on Biden to redouble efforts to seek “a realistic framework” for a halt to the fighting.

    Speaking in Kyiv, Sullivan said the war could end easily. “Russia chose to start it,” he said. “Russia could choose to end it by ceasing its attack on Ukraine, ceasing its occupation of Ukraine, and that’s precisely what it should do from our perspective.”

    The concerns about a longer conflict are particularly salient in nations that were already hesitant to throw their weight behind the U.S.-led coalition in support of Ukraine, either because of ties with Moscow or reluctance to fall in line behind Washington.

    South Africa abstained from a recent U.N. vote that condemned Russia’s annexation decrees, saying the world must instead focus on facilitating a cease-fire and political resolution. Brazil’s new president-elect, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, has said Zelensky is as responsible for the war as Putin.

    Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who has tried to maintain good relations with Moscow and Kyiv, offered assistance on peace talks in a call with Zelensky last month. He was spurned by the Ukrainian leader.

    Zelensky told him Ukraine would not conduct any negotiations with Putin but said Ukraine was “committed to peaceful settlement through dialogue,” according to a statement released by Zelensky’s office. The statement noted that Russia had deliberately undermined efforts at dialogue.

    Despite Ukrainian leaders’ refusal to talk to Putin and their vow to fight to retake all of Ukraine, U.S. officials say they believe that Zelensky would probably endorse negotiations and eventually accept concessions, as he suggested he would early in the war. They believe that Kyiv is attempting to lock in as many military gains as it can before winter sets in, when there might be a window for diplomacy.

    Zelensky faces the challenge of appealing both to a domestic constituency that has suffered immensely at the hands of Russian invaders and a foreign audience providing his forces with the weapons they need to fight. To motivate Ukrainians domestically, Zelensky has promoted victory rather than settlement and become a symbol of defiance that has motivated Ukrainian forces on the battlefield.

    While members of the Group of Seven industrialized bloc of nations seemingly threw their weight behind a Ukrainian vision of victory last month, endorsing a plan for a “just peace” including potential Russian reparation payments and security guarantees for Ukraine, some of those same countries see a potential turning point if Ukrainian forces approach Crimea.

    Reports of a Russian withdrawal from the southern city of Kherson have raised the question of whether Ukrainian forces could eventually march on the strategic peninsula, which U.S. and NATO officials believe Putin views differently than other areas of Ukraine under Russian control, and what a likely all-out fight for Crimea would mean for Kyiv’s backers in the West.

    Not only has Crimea been under direct Russian control for longer than areas seized since February, but it has long been the site of a Russian naval base and is home to many retired Russian military personnel.

    Illustrating Russia’s elevation of Crimea, the Kremlin responded to an explosion last month on a bridge linking the region to mainland Russia — a symbol of Moscow’s grip of the peninsula — by launching a barrage of missiles on Ukrainian cities, including Kyiv, ending a long period of peace in the capital.

    In the meantime, Ukrainian leaders continue to telegraph their intention to pursue total victory, not only to their beleaguered citizens but also to Moscow.

    Zelensky told an interviewer on Wednesday that the first thing he would do after Ukraine prevails in the war would be to visit a recaptured Crimea. “I really want to see the sea,” he said.

    https://www.stimson.org/2022/u-s-security-assistance-to-ukraine-breaks-all-precedents

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/10/31/republican-split-on-ukraine-aid/?itid=lk_interstitial_manual_15

    https://www.politico.com/news/2022/09/21/zelenskyy-ukraine-russia-ap-00058201

    https://www.ft.com/content/7b341e46-d375-4817-be67-802b7fa77ef1

    https://www.president.gov.ua/documents/6792022-44249

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/11/03/kherson-kakhovka-water-crimea-battle/?itid=lk_interstitial_manual_27

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/10/20/andriy-yermak-russia-aggressor-not-peacemaker/?itid=lk_inline_manual_37

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/10/25/ukraine-pessure-liberals-negotiation-putin/?itid=lk_interstitial_manual_45

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/10/25/democrats-ukraine-letter/?itid=lk_inline_manual_49

    https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/brazils-lula-says-zelenskiy-as-responsible-putin-ukraine-war-2022-05-04

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/05/06/zelensky-demands-ukraine-biden-funding/?itid=lk_interstitial_manual_56

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/10/11/g7-statement-on-ukraine-11-october-2022

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/10/09/putin-crimea-bridge-attack-ukraine/?itid=lk_inline_manual_63

    https://twitter.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/1587820560687501318?s=20&t=Lm2RlYtSmj6a0ewttMg7BQ

    #USA #Russie #Ukraine #OTAN #guerre #propagande

  • The Trouble With the Havana Syndrome
    https://jfkfacts.substack.com/p/the-trouble-with-the-havana-syndrome

    Isikoff studies the reports that scores of U.S. diplomats and intelligence officers have suffered debilitating symptoms after serving in Havana, Moscow, and Beijing. He finds the claim that Russia or Cuba or some foreign power is responsible both factually dubious and politically motivated.

    When John Cohen took over as chief of intel at DHS [Department of Homeland Security] in 2021, he feared the country was facing an urgent threat: US diplomats & spies were getting sick all over the world. “I was initially very convinced that this was some type of offensive operation by a foreign government.

    But the more he dug into the issue, the more skeptical he became. “As I began to read the data, read the intel, it just became harder and harder to explain these instances as an attack”, he tells me in the new episode of @Conspiracyland

    https://twitter.com/Isikoff/status/1570788726082785283

    • Intel community bats down main theory behind ‘#Havana_Syndrome’ incidents
      https://www.politico.com/news/2023/03/01/havana-syndrome-cia-intelligence-00085021

      The assessment, compiled by the CIA and six intelligence agencies, also said the U.S. found no evidence that the symptoms experienced by American intelligence officers, diplomats and other government employees were the result of an intentional weaponized attack, according to two U.S. intelligence officials.

      [...] The assessment is based not just on a lack of evidence but also existing evidence that actually “points against” a foreign actor being involved, the second official said.

  • Battles over Israel divide Democratic primaries - POLITICO
    https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/25/israel-divide-democratic-primaries-00047625

    AIPAC’s super PAC has been the top spender in Democratic primaries this year. Its latest target: Rep. #Andy_Levin, a prominent Jewish congressman.

    Mehdi Hasan sur Twitter :
    https://twitter.com/mehdirhasan/status/1551370403809054720

    “I’m not just Jewish, I’m one of 2 former synagogue presidents in Congress... I’m really Jewish. But #AIPAC can’t stand the idea that I am the strongest Jewish voice in Congress standing for... human rights for the Palestinian people.”

    https://video.twimg.com/amplify_video/1551369140136562695/vid/640x360/rWqTdAB48k_eYTYL.mp4?tag=14

    #Palestine

  • Biden Could Make the World Safer, but He’s Too Afraid of the Politics
    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/09/opinion/iran-deal-irgc-biden.html

    Since taking office, Mr. Biden has pledged to re-enter the #Iran nuclear deal that Barack Obama signed and Donald Trump junked. That’s vital, since Tehran, freed from the deal’s constraints, has been racing toward the ability to build a nuclear bomb. Now, according to numerous press reports, the United States and Iran have largely agreed on how to revive the agreement.

    But there’s one major obstacle left: The Trump administration’s designation of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps — a branch of the Iranian military charged with defending Iran’s theocratic political system — as a foreign terrorist organization. Tehran wants the designation lifted. Secretary of State Antony Blinken told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in late April that the United States wouldn’t do that, at least not without unspecified conditions that Tehran appears disinclined to meet. He also warned the senators that failing to reach a deal that arrests Iran’s nuclear progress would have grave consequences. The Islamic republic, he estimated, is only a “matter of weeks” from being able to construct a nuclear weapon.

    Given all of that, something else Mr. Blinken said is even more shocking. He said the terrorist designation doesn’t matter. “As a practical matter,” he explained, “the designation does not really gain you much because there are myriad other sanctions on the I.R.G.C.” By its own admission, the Biden administration is risking the Iran nuclear deal for nothing.

    [...] This timidity has become a pattern for the Biden administration. On foreign policy, it often retreats from the policies it believes are best in the face of political opposition.

  • Supreme Court has voted to overturn abortion rights, draft opinion shows

    https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/02/supreme-court-abortion-draft-opinion-00029473

    The Supreme Court has voted to strike down the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, according to an initial draft majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito circulated inside the court and obtained by POLITICO.

    The draft opinion is a full-throated, unflinching repudiation of the 1973 decision which guaranteed federal constitutional protections of abortion rights and a subsequent 1992 decision – Planned Parenthood v. Casey – that largely maintained the right. “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito writes.

    • La Cour suprême des États-Unis s’apprêterait à annuler le droit à l’avortement - Monde - Le Télégramme
      https://www.letelegramme.fr/monde/la-cour-supreme-des-etats-unis-prete-a-annuler-le-droit-a-l-avortement-

      La Cour suprême des États-Unis s’apprête à annuler l’arrêt historique de 1973 dans lequel elle a reconnu le droit à l’avortement, a assuré lundi soir le journal Politico. Il s’appuie sur une fuite inédite de document.

      Dans un article qui a fait l’effet d’une bombe à Washington, Politico dit s’être procuré l’avant-projet d’une décision majoritaire rédigé par le juge conservateur Samuel Alito et daté du 10 février.

      L’arrêt Roe v. Wade qui, il y a près d’un demi-siècle, a estimé que la Constitution américaine protégeait le droit des femmes à avorter, était « totalement infondé dès le début », selon ce texte de 98 pages qui peut faire l’objet de négociations jusqu’au 30 juin.

      « Nous estimons que Roe v. Wade doit être annulé », écrit Samuel Alito dans ce document, appelé « Avis de la Cour » et publié sur le site internet de Politico.

      « L’avortement constitue une question morale profonde », estime Samuel Alito. « La Constitution n’interdit pas aux citoyens de chaque État de réglementer ou d’interdire l’avortement », selon lui.

      « La conclusion inéluctable est que le droit à l’avortement n’est pas profondément enraciné dans l’histoire et les traditions de la Nation », a-t-il ajouté. Selon lui, il « n’est protégé par aucune disposition de la Constitution ».

      Si cette conclusion est bien retenue par la Haute cour, les États-Unis reviendront à la situation en vigueur avant 1973 quand chaque État était libre d’interdire ou d’autoriser les avortements.

      Compte tenu des importantes fractures géographiques et politiques sur le sujet, une moitié des États, surtout dans le sud et le centre conservateurs et religieux, devraient rapidement bannir la procédure sur leur sol.

      « Soyons clairs : c’est un avant-projet. Il est scandaleux, sans précédent, mais pas final : l’avortement reste votre droit et est encore légal », a tweeté l’organisation Planned Parenthood, qui gère de nombreuses cliniques pratiquant des avortements.

      Du jamais vu
      La Cour suprême a été profondément remaniée par l’ancien président républicain Donald Trump qui, en cinq ans, y a fait entrer trois magistrats, solidifiant sa majorité conservatrice (six juges sur neuf).

      Depuis septembre, cette nouvelle Cour a envoyé plusieurs signaux favorables aux opposants à l’avortement. Elle a d’abord refusé d’empêcher l’entrée en vigueur d’une loi du Texas qui limite le droit à avorter aux six premières semaines de grossesse contre deux trimestres dans le cadre légal actuel.

      Lors de l’examen en décembre d’une loi du Mississippi, qui questionnait aussi le délai légal pour avorter, une majorité de ses magistrats ont clairement laissé entendre qu’ils étaient prêts à grignoter, voire à tout bonnement annuler Roe v. Wade.

      Le document présenté par Politico porte sur ce dossier. Sa publication constitue une fuite rarissime pour la Cour suprême, où le secret des délibérations n’a quasiment jamais été violé.

      « Je suis presque sûr qu’il n’y a jamais eu une telle fuite » à la Cour suprême, a commenté sur Twitter le juriste Neal Katyal qui a plaidé à plusieurs reprises pour le gouvernement de Barack Obama devant la haute juridiction. Pour lui, « plusieurs signes » laissent entendre que le document est un vrai.

      Interrogée par l’AFP, la Cour suprême a refusé de commenter.

  • White House sends Congress $33B request for Ukraine
    https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/28/ukraine-funding-request-congress-biden-00028552

    The Biden administration is asking Congress for a massive new $33 billion funding request to bolster #Ukraine’s military as its war with Russia enters its ninth week, ensuring that Washington, and Europe, remain all-in on beating back Russia’s Feb. 24 invasion.

    [...] “The president’s funding request is what we believe is needed to enable Ukraine’s success over the next five months of this war,” an administration official told reporters on a call Wednesday. “And we have every expectation that our partners and allies … will continue to provide comparable levels of assistance going forward.”

    The latest request comes after Congress approved nearly $14 billion in emergency funding to help Ukraine last month, including billions to fund deployments of thousands more U.S. troops in Europe and to replenish depleted U.S. stocks of weapons shipped to Kyiv.

    • Our commitment to Ukraine will be tested. Americans must stay strong.
      https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/04/27/america-must-maintain-ukraine-commitment-despite-costs

      We want to see Russia weakened to the degree that it can’t do the kinds of things that it has done in invading Ukraine,” Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said Monday after he and Secretary of State Antony Blinken met with Ukrainian leaders in Kyiv.

      The next day in Germany, Austin opened a meeting of defense officials from more than 40 countries allied with Ukraine with a statement that would have been astonishing at the outset of the conflict, given conventional perceptions of Russia’s military power and Ukraine’s relative weakness.

      “We’re here to help Ukraine win the fight against Russia’s unjust invasion — and to build up Ukraine’s defenses for tomorrow’s challenges,” Austin said.

      [...] Ukraine will need more than weapons. A senior Biden administration official said that in addition to military aid, Ukraine seeks assistance to finance its government. A nation whose economy has been shattered by war requires help in maintaining the rudiments of public services.

      Ukrainian authorities, the official said, estimate that for Ukraine to keep functioning, outside help might have to run as high as $5 billion a month. Military aid could represent a comparable amount.

      NATO allies will also have to replace weaponry going to Ukraine from their own stockpiles. Austin spoke Tuesday of what the effort to help Ukraine “will take from our defense industrial bases” and the need to meet “our own requirements and those of our allies and partners.”

      The United States will not have to finance all of this alone. European nations are expected to cover roughly a third of the costs, and democratic allies elsewhere another third.

    • The U.S. is expanding its goals in Ukraine. That’s dangerous.
      https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2022/05/11/ukraine-war-expansion-risks-nuclear

      Fortunately, there is an alternative, one that is consistent with continued substantial military support to Ukraine. The West should frame its infusion of aid as a means to help Kyiv achieve an acceptable settlement. These military resources can help Ukraine regain portions of its lost territory in the south and east and better preserve its economic and institutional relationships with Europe in whatever deal Kyiv eventually makes to end the war. Policymakers will have to be flexible as they assess prospective settlements, but President Biden himself recently broached the key idea, arguing that “Congress should quickly provide the requested funding to strengthen Ukraine on the battlefield and at the negotiating table.”

      Effectively shaping a negotiated outcome to the war will also require the West to put diplomatic pressure on Kyiv to come to that deal sooner rather than later. This includes demonstrating a willingness to turn off the spigot of military aid if needed. The present tranche should be given time to work its effect, but its ultimate purpose should be to hasten the conclusion of a war that carries awful risks and tragic humanitarian consequences for all involved.

  • Quelques nouvelles sur l’Ukraine et les objectifs guerriers des États-Unis Par Moon of Alabama − Le 25 avril 2022
    https://lesakerfrancophone.fr/quelques-nouvelles-sur-lukraine-et-les-objectifs-guerriers-des-et

    Jeudi dernier ont eu lieu les premières destructions de ponts le long des voies ferrées ukrainiennes dans l’est de l’Ukraine. Ces voies étaient importantes https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/04/newsbits-on-ukraine-gonzalo-lira-war-aims-railway-supplies-and-incomi pour l’effort de guerre ukrainien et notamment pour le réapprovisionnement qui arrive de l’ouest vers le front oriental :

    L’armée ukrainienne, comme celle de la Russie, dépend des chemins de fer pour tous les approvisionnements de masse sur les longues distances, car toutes deux disposent de relativement peu de camions logistiques.
     
    Les États-Unis et d’autres pays ont déclaré qu’ils fourniraient à l’Ukraine des dizaines de canons d’artillerie tractés de 155 mm et des dizaines de milliers d’obus. Les canons américains sont livrés avec un camion chacun pour les remorquer.
     
    Tout cela était jusqu’à présent gérable, mais regardons maintenant la logistique (surtout sans chemins de fer). …
    J’ai estimé que l’Ukraine n’avait pas assez de camions pour remplacer la logistique ferroviaire alors que cette logistique est en train de s’effondrer : 
    Les forces armées russes ont frappé 7 sous-stations situées dans l’ouest de l’#Ukraine :


    Zdolbunov (trains arrêtés dans la zone de Dubno, retard des trains vers Kovel), Kazatin-2, Krasnoye, Podolskaya, Sknilov, Slavuta (mise hors service de toute la zone des stations Zdolbunov et Slavuta), Fastov.

     
    Le chef des chemins de fer ukrainiens, Oleksandr Kamyshin, a déclaré sur Telegram : « Les troupes russes continuent de détruire systématiquement l’infrastructure ferroviaire. Ce matin, en l’espace d’une heure, 5 gares du centre et de l’ouest de l’Ukraine ont été la cible de tirs. » 19 trains retardés ; nombre de blessés inconnu.
    Les « sous-stations » détruites par la Russie sont des sous-stations électriques qui alimentent les lignes de train longue distance électrifiées. 
    Une sous-station électrique à Krasne, près de Lviv, a été touchée par un missile russe plus tôt dans la journée. Des dégâts importants ont été causés et un grand incendie s’est déclaré.
    Les sous-stations transforment la haute tension en fonction des besoins du réseau ferroviaire. Sans les sous-stations, qui ne sont pas faciles à remplacer, la plupart des locomotives ukrainiennes ne fonctionneront pas.
    Une partie du trafic se poursuivra en utilisant des locomotives diesel. Cependant, celles-ci sont relativement rares, comme l’explique l’article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Railways de Wikipédia sur les chemins de fer ukrainiens :
    Nombre de locomotives – 1 944 (électriques – 1 627, diesel – 301)
    Les locomotives diesel sont plus lentes que les locomotives électrifiées. Elles ont également besoin de beaucoup de diesel, produit qui est devenu rare en Ukraine et doit être importé par voie ferrée (!) de Slovénie.
    Il ne sera pas possible de fournir des locomotives diesel supplémentaires à partir d’autres pays d’Europe orientale. L’Ukraine a, comme la Russie, des voies à écartement large de 1 524 mm (5 ft). La plupart des autres pays européens utilisent un écartement normal de 1 435 mm (4 ft 8+1⁄2 in).

    Pendant ce temps, les États-Unis ont annoncé un vague nouvel objectif pour leur guerre par procuration contre la Russie :
    Austin était en Pologne, répondant aux questions des journalistes après un bref voyage dimanche avec le secrétaire d’État Antony Blinken à Kiev, où ils ont rencontré le président ukrainien Volodymyr Zelensky et d’autres responsables ukrainiens.
    On a demandé au secrétaire à la défense comment il définissait « les objectifs de l’Amérique pour réussir » en Ukraine. Il a d’abord répondu que Washington souhaitait voir « l’Ukraine rester un pays souverain, un pays démocratique, capable de protéger son territoire souverain ».
    Ensuite, a-t-il dit, les États-Unis espèrent que la Russie sera « affaiblie » par la guerre. « Elle a déjà perdu beaucoup de capacités militaires et beaucoup de ses troupes, très franchement, et nous voulons qu’elle ne soit pas en mesure de renouveler très rapidement ces capacités », a déclaré Austin. …

    S’exprimant dans un hangar en Pologne rempli de caisses d’aide humanitaire, dont des couches, destinées à l’Ukraine, les hauts responsables de l’administration Biden ont annoncé plus de 700 millions de dollars de nouvelle aide militaire à l’Ukraine et à d’autres pays, et ont déclaré que les États-Unis avaient l’intention de reprendre leurs activités diplomatiques en Ukraine cette semaine.
    Toutes les couches, les armes et les munitions que les États-Unis et d’autres pays fournissent à l’Ukraine vont maintenant rester coincées dans l’ouest de l’Ukraine où elles pourriront jusqu’à ce que le plus malin des oligarques ukrainiens parvienne à les vendre à un pays tiers.
    Les retombées des attaques contre les lignes ferroviaires toucheront également les fournitures civiles en Ukraine. Elles entraveront le trafic de passagers civils, notamment pour les personnes qui ont fui vers l’ouest et qui disposent désormais de moins de moyens de transport pour rentrer chez elles.
    Depuis le début de la guerre, la Russie a intentionnellement évité de frapper les infrastructures civiles en Ukraine. Les réseaux d’électricité et de communication ainsi que l’approvisionnement en eau sont tous restés intacts. (Les attaques contre les chemins de fer ukrainiens ne sont devenues nécessaires que parce que les États-Unis et d’autres pays fournissent de plus en plus de matériel de guerre à l’Ukraine. La Russie ne permettra pas à ses troupes de subir le feu de ces armes devant être livrées.)
    Bien que la Russie ait averti l’Ukraine de ne pas lancer d’attaques sur le sol russe, les groupes de sabotage ukrainiens semblent avoir un certain succès dans la destruction des infrastructures russes :
     
    Grand incendie dans le dépôt pétrolier de #Druzhba dans la région russe de #Bryansk. La Russie a déclaré qu’elle allait enquêter sur la cause d’un grand incendie qui s’est déclaré aux premières heures du matin dans un dépôt pétrolier de la ville de Briansk à 154 km au nord-est de la frontière avec l’Ukraine. Photos https://twitter.com/A7_Mirza/status/1518596399553724416
    C’est la deuxième grande installation de stockage de pétrole qui, ces dernières semaines, a été victime d’un tel accident ou d’une attaque potentielle. Il est toutefois peu probable que cela entrave les opérations russes. Contrairement à l’Ukraine, la Russie dispose de nombreuses raffineries, de réserves très importantes et elle peut transporter de grandes quantités de diesel par train dans tout le pays.
    En plus de ses attaques contre l’infrastructure du trafic ukrainien pour empêcher le réapprovisionnement « occidental », l’armée russe continue d’affaiblir les lignes de défense ukrainiennes le long de la ligne de front du Donbass. Voici un extrait de la « liste matérielle » publiée https://eng.mil.ru/en/special_operation/news/more.htm?id=12418720@egNews ce matin par le ministère russe de la Défense :
    Des armes à longue portée de haute précision tirées de la mer et du ciel ont détruit, dans la périphérie nord de Kremenchuk, les installations de production de carburant d’une raffinerie de pétrole, ainsi que les installations de stockage de produits pétroliers destinés à alimenter l’équipement militaire des troupes ukrainiennes.
    Pendant la nuit, 6 bâtiments ennemis ont été touchés par des missiles de haute précision tirés du ciel. Parmi eux : 3 zones de concentration de militaires et de stockage d’équipement militaire, ainsi que 3 dépôts de munitions à Barvenkovo et Novaya Dmitrovka dans la région de Kharkov.
    L’aviation opérationnelle-tactique et l’aviation militaire des forces aérospatiales russes ont frappé 56 cibles militaires ukrainiennes. Parmi eux : 2 postes de commandement et 53 zones de concentration de militaires et de matériel militaire, ainsi qu’une installation de stockage de carburant près de Novaya Dmitrovka. …
    Une série de missiles ont effectué 19 frappes pendant la nuit. Détruit : 4 postes de commandement des nationalistes, dont la 81e brigade séparée d’assaut aéroportée et la 110e brigade de défense territoriale, et 3 dépôts de munitions. 21 zones de concentration de militaires et d’équipements militaires ukrainiens ont été touchées. …
    Les unités d’artillerie ont effectué 967 missions de tir au cours de la journée. Détruit : 33 postes de commandement, 929 points forts, des zones de concentration d’hommes et de matériel militaire, ainsi que 5 dépôts de missiles, d’armes d’artillerie et de munitions.
    Les moyens de défense aérienne russes ont abattu 13 drones ukrainiens près de Mezhurino, Balakleya, Borodoyarkoe, Nevskoe dans la région de Kharkov et Vysokoe et Chernobaevka dans la région de Kherson.
    En outre, le système de canons et de missiles anti-aériens Pantsir-S a abattu un missile Tochka-U ukrainien et 18 roquettes d’un système de roquettes à lancements multiples au-dessus de Tchernobaeka.
    Depuis le début de la phase 2 de la guerre, la semaine dernière, il n’y a pas eu de grandes batailles. Ce que nous avons vu jusqu’à présent du côté russe ne représente pas plus qu’une reconnaissance par des blindées.
    Les quelque 1 000 tirs d’artillerie effectuées au cours des dernières 24 heures et des jours précédents témoignent d’une préparation intense aux attaques à venir des forces mécanisées russes. Dans l’ensemble, c’est l’artillerie qui fera le plus de dégâts aux troupes ukrainiennes. Au cours de la Seconde Guerre mondiale et d’autres guerres mécanisées modernes, environ 65 % de toutes les pertes ont été causées par des frappes d’artillerie. Le taux récent du côté ukrainien sera probablement plus élevé.

    J’ai dit il y a plusieurs semaines que l’Ukraine n’avait aucune chance de gagner cette guerre. Elle perd de plus en plus de soldats et son économie a presque cessé d’exister.
    Mais les États-Unis veulent « affaiblir » la Russie en la combattant jusqu’au dernier Ukrainien. Le président ukrainien Zelensky est manifestement prêt à suivre ce programme. Il devrait plutôt accepter les conditions de paix raisonnables de la Russie. Il détruit l’Ukraine en les refusant.
    Un article de Politico sur la situation en Ukraine confirme le point de vue exposé ci-dessus : Les armes lourdes affluent en Ukraine car les commandants sont de plus en plus désespérés. https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/25/ukraine-weaponry-russia-war-00027406
    Les pays occidentaux envoient des armes lourdes à l’Ukraine alors que la guerre entre dans une nouvelle phase qui s’annonce meurtrière et potentiellement longue.
    Ces livraisons interviennent alors que les commandants ukrainiens sur le champ de bataille lancent des appels de plus en plus désespérés pour faire face aux tirs d’artillerie et de roquettes russes qui pourraient durer des semaines, voire des mois.

    Voici un aperçu réaliste de la façon dont la guerre se déroule sur le terrain :
    À 80 km au nord de [Marioupol], le lieutenant Ivan Skuratovsky, qui sert dans la 25e brigade aéroportée, a déclaré à POLITICO que l’aide doit arriver immédiatement.
    « La situation est très mauvaise, [les forces russes] utilisent la tactique de la terre brûlée », a déclaré par texto cet homme de 31 ans, marié et père de deux enfants. « Ils détruisent tout simplement tout avec l’artillerie, en bombardant jour et nuit », a-t-il ajouté par texto.
    Il craint que si des renforts en hommes et en armes lourdes, en particulier un soutien aérien, n’arrivent pas dans les prochains jours, ses troupes pourraient se retrouver dans la même position que celles de Marioupol.
     
    Skuratovsky a décrit la situation de ses soldats comme « très désespérée ».
    « Je ne sais pas quelle force nous restera-t-il », a-t-il déclaré, ajoutant que les troupes sous son commandement, autour de la ville d’Avdiivka, près de Donetsk, n’ont pas connu de repos depuis le début de la guerre. Au moins 13 d’entre eux ont été blessés ces dernières semaines, a-t-il ajouté et, manquant dangereusement de munitions, ils en sont réduits à rationner les balles.
     
    La veille, il a déclaré à POLITICO que ses soldats étaient bombardés par des obusiers, des mortiers et des systèmes de roquettes à lancement multiple russes « en même temps ». Quelques heures auparavant, dit-il, ils avaient été attaqués par deux avions de guerre Su-25, « et notre journée est devenue un enfer. »
     
    Skuratovsky a un message pour les États-Unis et les autres pays de l’OTAN : « Je voudrais leur dire que les lance-grenades, c’est bien, mais contre les frappes aériennes et l’artillerie lourde, nous ne pourrons pas tenir longtemps. Les hommes ne peuvent plus supporter les bombardements quotidiens. Nous avons besoin d’un soutien aérien maintenant. Nous avons besoin de drones. »
    Je me sens très désolé pour ces soldats et je maudis leurs chefs qui les ont poussés dans cette situation.
    Alastair Crooke met en garde https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2022/04/25/the-dynamics-of-escalation-standing-with-ukraine contre une escalade de l’« Occident » lorsqu’il reconnaîtra enfin que sa guerre par procuration contre la Russie est perdue :
    La conviction que la vision libérale européenne risque d’être humiliée et méprisée si Poutine venait à « gagner » s’est installée. Et dans le nexus Obama-Clinton-Deep State, il est inimaginable que Poutine et la Russie, toujours considérée comme l’auteur du RussiaGate par de nombreux Américains, puissent l’emporter.
     
    La logique de ce nœud gordien est inexorable : l’escalade.
    Pour Biden, dont la cote de popularité continue de chuter, le désastre est imminent lors des élections de mi-mandat de novembre. …
    La seule issue possible à ce cataclysme imminent serait que Biden sorte un lapin du « chapeau » ukrainien (qui, à tout le moins, détournerait l’attention de l’inflation galopante). Les Néo-cons et l’État profond (mais pas le Pentagone) sont tous pour. …
    J’espère que Biden est encore suffisamment compétent pour reconnaître que toute escalade conduira à une guerre bien plus importante et, au final, à une défaite bien plus grande des forces « occidentales » que celle qui surviendra en Ukraine.

    Moon of Alabama
    Traduit par Wayan, relu par Hervé, pour le Saker Francophone.

    • L’onéreux entretien des yachts de luxe confisqués aux oligarques russes RTS Cab
      https://www.rts.ch/info/monde/13028315-lonereux-entretien-des-yachts-de-luxe-confisques-aux-oligarques-russes.

      La guerre fait souvent émerger des problématiques inattendues, et celle d’Ukraine ne fait pas exception. Dans le cadre des sanctions infligées à la Russie, les biens confisqués aux oligarques peuvent parfois coûter très cher aux contribuables des autres pays.

      Résident du canton de Zoug, l’oligarque Viktor Vekselberg a vu son yacht, le « Tango », séquestré dans le port d’Astilleros à Majorque, dans les Baléares, sur ordre de l’unité « KleptoCapture » du ministère américain de la Justice, mise sur pied spécialement dans le but d’appliquer ce type de sanctions.


      Or, le pays qui ordonne la saisie est tenu d’assurer l’entretien et le maintien de la valeur du bien en question. Et l’entretien annuel du Tango se chiffrerait à environ 10 millions d’euros. Un travail nécessaire. À la charge, donc, des contribuables américains. Pour rappel, Viktor Vekselberg n’est pas visé par les sanctions de l’Union européenne.
      Son yacht mesure 78 mètres de long, peut accueillir 36 passagers, dont 22 membres d’équipage, et sa valeur oscillerait entre 95 et 120 millions d’euros.

      Facture salée en Italie également
      Situation similaire en Italie, où le A, un trois mâts de 12’000 tonnes et 142 mètres de long appartenant à l’oligarque russe Andreï Melnitchenko, reste amarré dans le port de Trieste. Saisi par les autorités italiennes le 12 mars, les frais d’entretien sont entièrement à la charge de l’Etat italien.


      Le A, un trois mâts de 12’000 tonnes et 142 mètres de long appartenant à l’oligarque russe Andreï Melnitchenko. [Sabri Kesen / Anadolu Agency - AFP]

      Le quotidien La Repubblica explique que ces biens sont gelés et non séquestrés. Il s’agit d’une procédure administrative et non pénale, qui implique que le patrimoine en question doit être maintenu dans les conditions dans lesquelles il a été saisi. Les propriétaires sont censés rembourser ces frais lors de la restitution du bien. Le journal italien estime que les dépenses atteignent 150’000 à 200’000 euros par mois.

      Pas la même règle partout
      En France et en Espagne, les frais d’entretien d’un yacht « gelé » ou saisi restent en revanche à la charge du propriétaire.

      Cependant, en raison du blocage des comptes bancaires dans le cadre des sanctions européennes, les personnes concernées sont souvent dans l’incapacité d’effectuer le paiement, a déclaré Rachel Lynch, du syndicat Nautilus International, qui représente les gens de mer et les travailleurs apparentés.

      Ainsi, le chantier naval de La Ciotat, dans les Bouches-du-Rhône, dresse les factures liées aux frais d’amarrage du superyacht Amore Vero, mais il ne sait pas à qui les adresser. Long de 86 mètres, le navire a été immobilisé par la douane française alors que son équipage s’apprêtait à quitter le port dans la nuit du 2 mars, deux jours après que l’Union européenne a placé l’oligarque russe Igor Setchine, patron du groupe pétrolier russe Rosneft, sur la liste des personnalités visées par les sanctions suite à l’invasion d’Ukraine.
      https://image.yachtcharterfleet.com/charter-AMORE-VERO/AMORE-VERO-1.jpg
      Le superyacht Amore Vero de l’oligarque russe Igor Setchine, patron du groupe pétrolier russe Rosneft, bloqué à La Ciotat, en France. [Douane Francaise/AP - Keystone]

      Vingt yachts immobilisés aux Pays-Bas
      Les autorités douanières néerlandaises ont annoncé mardi avoir immobilisé 20 yachts dans des chantiers navals aux Pays-Bas, après les sanctions décidées contre la Russie et le Bélarus.

      « Parce que ces 20 yachts sont sous surveillance accrue, ils ne sont pas autorisés à être livrés, transférés ou exportés », ont expliqué les autorités douanières.

      La plupart de ces navires de luxe, 14, sont en construction, deux sont en stockage et quatre en maintenance.

      « Pour deux de ces yachts, il a été établi qu’ils sont liés à une personne figurant sur la liste des sanctions de l’UE », ont précisé les douanes. Un autre yacht fait l’objet d’une enquête.

      Les autorités douanières néerlandaises avaient déjà annoncé mercredi l’immobilisation de 14 yachts, construits notamment pour des « bénéficiaires effectifs russes ».

  • The U.S. is pushing Russians to defy Putin. But don’t call it regime change. - POLITICO
    https://www.politico.com/news/2022/03/02/u-s-russians-putin-regime-change-00013249

    The U.S. strategy is often blunt and relies on information war tactics, such as […] the State Department’s new Russian-language Telegram account, unveiled just days ago. But it likely also includes some clandestine elements, according to former intelligence officials, such as stepped-up efforts by American spies to recruit informants within the Russian political sphere.

    #Etats-unis #Russie

  • Academic freedom is in crisis ; free speech is not

    In August 2020, the UK think tank The Policy Exchange produced a report on Academic Freedom in the UK (https://policyexchange.org.uk/publication/academic-freedom-in-the-uk-2), alleging a chilling effect for staff and students expressing conservative opinions, particularly pro-Brexit or ‘gender critical’ ideas. This is an issue that was examined by a 2018 parliamentary committee on Human Rights which found a lack of evidence for serious infringements of free speech (https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt201719/jtselect/jtrights/1279/127904.htm). In a university context, freedom of speech is protected under the Human Rights Act 1998 as long as the speech is lawful and does not contravene other university regulations on issues like harassment, bullying or inclusion. Some of these controversies have been firmly rebutted by Chris Parr (https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/free-speech-crisis-uk-universities-chris-parr) and others who describe how the incidents have been over-hyped.

    Despite this, the government seems keen to appoint a free speech champion for universities (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/15/tories-war-on-the-woke-ministers-statues-protests) which continues a campaign started by #Sam_Gyimah (https://academicirregularities.wordpress.com/2018/07/06/sams-on-campus-but-is-the-campus-onto-sam) when he was minister for universities in 2018, and has been interpreted by some commentators as a ‘war on woke’. In the current climate of threats to university autonomy, many vice chancellors wonder whether this might be followed by heavy fines or reduced funding for those institutions deemed to fall on the wrong side of the culture wars.

    While public concern has been directed to an imagined crisis of free speech, there are more significant questions to answer on the separate but related issue of academic freedom. Most university statutes echo legislation and guarantee academics ‘freedom within the law to question and test received wisdom, and to put forward new ideas and controversial and unpopular opinions, without placing themselves in jeopardy of losing their jobs or privileges they may have at their institutions.’ [Section 202 of the Education Reform Act 1988]. In reality, these freedoms are surrendered to the greater claims of academic capitalism, government policy, legislation, managers’ responses to the pandemic and more dirigiste approaches to academics’ work.

    Nevertheless, this government is ploughing ahead with policies designed to protect the freedom of speech that is already protected, while doing little to hold university managers to account for their very demonstrable violations of academic freedom. The government is suspicious of courses which declare a sympathy with social justice or which manifest a ‘progressive’ approach. This hostility also extends to critical race theory and black studies. Indeed, the New York Times has identified a right wing ‘Campaign to Cancel Wokeness’ (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/26/opinion/speech-racism-academia.html) on both sides of the Atlantic, citing a speech by the UK Equalities Minister, Kemi Badenoch, in which she said, “We do not want teachers to teach their white pupils about white privilege and inherited racial guilt…Any school which teaches these elements of critical race theory, or which promotes partisan political views such as defunding the police without offering a balanced treatment of opposing views, is breaking the law.”

    This has now set a tone for ideological oversight which some university leaders seem keen to embrace. Universities will always wish to review their offerings to ensure they reflect academic currency and student choice. However, operating under the cover of emergency pandemic planning, some are now seeking to dismantle what they see as politically troublesome subject areas.

    Let’s start with the most egregious and transparent attack on academic freedom. The University of Leicester Business School, known primarily for its disdain of management orthodoxy, has announced it will no longer support research in critical management studies (https://www.uculeicester.org.uk/redundancy-briefing) and political economy, and the university has put all researchers who identify with this field, or who at some time might have published in CMS, at risk of redundancy. Among the numerous responses circulating on Twitter, nearly all point to the fact that the critical orientation made Leicester Business School distinctive and attractive to scholars wishing to study and teach there. Among those threatened with redundancy is the distinguished former dean, Professor Gibson Burrell. The sheer volume of protest at this anomaly must be an embarrassment to Leicester management. We should remember that academic freedom means that, as a scholar of proven expertise, you have the freedom to teach and research according to your own judgement. When those in a field critical of structures of power have their academic freedom removed, this is, unarguably, a breach of that expectation. Such a violation should be of concern to the new freedom of speech champion and to the regulator, the Office for Students.

    If the devastation in the School of Business were not enough humiliation for Leicester, in the department of English, there are plans to cancel scholarship and teaching in Medieval and Early Modern literature. The thoughtless stripping out of key areas that give context and coherence within a subject is not unique to Leicester – similar moves have taken place in English at University of Portsmouth. At Leicester, management have offered the justification that this realignment will allow them to put resources towards the study of gender and sexuality. After all, the Vice Chancellor, Nishan Canagarajah, offered the keynote speech at the Advance HE conference in Equality, Diversity and Inclusion on 19th March (https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/programmes-events/conferences/EDIConf20#Keynotes) and has signalled that he supports decolonising the curriculum. This might have had more credibility if he was not equally committed to extinguishing critical scholarship in the Business School. The two positions are incompatible and reveal an opportunistic attempt to reduce costs and remove signs of critical scholarship which might attract government disapproval.

    At the University of Birmingham, the response to the difficulties of maintaining teaching during the pandemic has been to issue a ruling that three academic staff must be able to teach each module. The explanation for this apparent reversal of the ‘lean’ principle of staffing efficiency, is to make modules more resilient in the face of challenges like the pandemic – or perhaps strike action. There is a consequence for academic freedom though – only the most familiar, established courses can be taught. Courses that might have been offered, which arise from the current research of the academic staff, will have to be cancelled if the material is not already familiar to other colleagues in the department. It is a way of designing innovation and advancement out of courses at the University of Birmingham.

    Still at Birmingham, UCU is contesting a proposal for a new ‘career framework’ (https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/strike-warning-over-birminghams-or-out-probation-plan) by management characterised as ‘up or out’. It will require newly appointed lecturers to achieve promotion to senior lecturer within five years or face the sort of performance management procedures that could lead to termination of their appointment. The junior academics who enter on these conditions are unlikely to gamble their careers on academic risk-taking or pursue a challenge to an established paradigm. We can only speculate how this apprenticeship in organisational obedience might restrain the pursuit of discovery, let alone achieve the management’s stated aim to “develop and maintain an academic culture of intellectual stimulation and high achievement”.

    Meanwhile at the University of Liverpool, Vice Chancellor Janet Beer is attempting to apply research metrics and measures of research income over a five-year period to select academics for redundancy in the Faculty of Life Sciences. Staff have been threatened with sacking and replacement by those felt to hold more promise. It will be an unwise scholar who chooses a niche field of research which will not elicit prime citations. Astoundingly, university mangers claim that their criteria are not in breach of their status as a signatory to the San Fransisco Declaration on Research Assessment (https://news.liverpool.ac.uk/2021/03/08/project-shape-update). That is correct insofar as selection for redundancy by grant income is clearly such dishonorable practice as to have been placed beyond contemplation by the international board of DORA.

    It seems we are reaching a pivotal moment for academic freedom for higher education systems across the world. In #Arkansas and some other states in the #USA, there are efforts to prohibit the teaching of social justice (https://www.chronicle.com/article/no-social-justice-in-the-classroom-new-state-scrutiny-of-speech-at-public).

    In #France, the education minister has blamed American critical race theory (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/11/france-about-become-less-free/617195) for undermining France’s self-professed race-blindness and for causing the rise of “islamo-gauchisme”, a term which has been cynically deployed to blunt any critique of structural racism.

    In Greece, universities are now bound by law to ensure policing and surveillance of university campuses (https://www.crimetalk.org.uk/index.php/library/section-list/1012-exiting-democracy-entering-authoritarianism) by ‘squads for the protection of universities’ in order to suppress dissent with the Orwellian announcement that the creation of these squads and the extensive surveillance of public Universities are “a means of closing the door to violence and opening the way to freedom” and an assertion that “it is not the police who enter universities, but democracy”.

    Conclusion

    It occurs to me that those public figures who feel deprived of a platform to express controversial views may well be outnumbered by the scholars whose universities allow their work to be suppressed by targeted intellectual purges, academic totalitarianism and metric surveillance. It is telling that assaults on academic freedom in the UK have not attracted comment or action from the organisations which might be well placed to defend this defining and essential principle of universities. I hereby call on Universities UK, the Office for Students and the freedom of speech champion to insist on an independent audit of academic freedom and autonomy for each higher education institution.

    We now know where intervention into the rights of academics to teach and research autonomously may lead. We also know that many of the candidates targeted for redundancy are UCU trade union officials; this has happened at University of East London and the University of Hull. Make no mistake, this is a PATCO moment (https://www.politico.com/story/2017/08/05/reagan-fires-11-000-striking-air-traffic-controllers-aug-5-1981-241252) for higher education in the UK as management teams try to break union support and solidarity in order to exact greater control in the future.

    Universities are the canary down the mine in an era of right-wing authoritarianism. We must ensure that they can maintain their unique responsibility to protect against the rise of populism and the dismantling of democracy. We must be assertive in protecting the rights of academics whose lawful and reasoned opinions are increasingly subject to some very sinister threats. Academic freedom needs to be fought for, just like the right to protest and the right to roam. That leaves a heavy responsibility for academics if the abolition of autonomy and academic freedom is not to be complete.

    http://cdbu.org.uk/academic-freedom-is-in-crisis-free-speech-is-not
    #liberté_académique #liberté_d'expression #UK #Angleterre #université #facs #justice_sociale #black_studies #races #race #approches_critiques #études_critiques #privilège_blanc #économie_politique #Leicester_Business_School #pandémie #crise_sanitaire #Birmingham #Liverpool #Janet_Beer #concurrence #Grèce #Etats-Unis #métrique #attaques #éducation_supérieure #populisme #démocratie #autonomie #canari_dans_la_mine

    ping @isskein @cede

    • The Campaign to Cancel Wokeness. How the right is trying to censor critical race theory.

      It’s something of a truism, particularly on the right, that conservatives have claimed the mantle of free speech from an intolerant left that is afraid to engage with uncomfortable ideas. Every embarrassing example of woke overreach — each ill-considered school board decision or high-profile campus meltdown — fuels this perception.

      Yet when it comes to outright government censorship, it is the right that’s on the offense. Critical race theory, the intellectual tradition undergirding concepts like white privilege and microaggressions, is often blamed for fomenting what critics call cancel culture. And so, around America and even overseas, people who don’t like cancel culture are on an ironic quest to cancel the promotion of critical race theory in public forums.

      In September, Donald Trump’s Office of Management and Budget ordered federal agencies to “begin to identify all contracts or other agency spending related to any training on ‘critical race theory,’” which it described as “un-American propaganda.”

      A month later, the conservative government in Britain declared some uses of critical race theory in education illegal. “We do not want teachers to teach their white pupils about white privilege and inherited racial guilt,” said the Tory equalities minister, Kemi Badenoch. “Any school which teaches these elements of critical race theory, or which promotes partisan political views such as defunding the police without offering a balanced treatment of opposing views, is breaking the law.”

      Some in France took up the fight as well. “French politicians, high-profile intellectuals and journalists are warning that progressive American ideas — specifically on race, gender, post-colonialism — are undermining their society,” Norimitsu Onishi reported in The New York Times. (This is quite a reversal from the days when American conservatives warned darkly about subversive French theory.)

      Once Joe Biden became president, he undid Trump’s critical race theory ban, but lawmakers in several states have proposed their own prohibitions. An Arkansas legislator introduced a pair of bills, one banning the teaching of The Times’s 1619 Project curriculum, and the other nixing classes, events and activities that encourage “division between, resentment of, or social justice for” specific groups of people. “What is not appropriate is being able to theorize, use, specifically, critical race theory,” the bills’ sponsor told The Arkansas Democrat Gazette.

      Republicans in West Virginia and Oklahoma have introduced bills banning schools and, in West Virginia’s case, state contractors from promoting “divisive concepts,” including claims that “the United States is fundamentally racist or sexist.” A New Hampshire Republican also proposed a “divisive concepts” ban, saying in a hearing, “This bill addresses something called critical race theory.”

      Kimberlé Crenshaw, a pioneering legal scholar who teaches at both U.C.L.A. and Columbia, has watched with alarm the attempts to suppress an entire intellectual movement. It was Crenshaw who came up with the name “critical race theory” when organizing a workshop in 1989. (She also coined the term “intersectionality.”) “The commitment to free speech seems to dissipate when the people who are being gagged are folks who are demanding racial justice,” she told me.

      Many of the intellectual currents that would become critical race theory emerged in the 1970s out of disappointment with the incomplete work of the civil rights movement, and cohered among radical law professors in the 1980s.
      Editors’ Picks
      5 Minutes That Will Make You Love Brahms
      After Genetic Testing, I Took a Chance on an ‘Imperfect’ Pregnancy
      Europe Plunders Paris for Talent, and P.S.G. Pays the Price
      Continue reading the main story

      The movement was ahead of its time; one of its central insights, that racism is structural rather than just a matter of interpersonal bigotry, is now conventional wisdom, at least on the left. It had concrete practical applications, leading, for example, to legal arguments that housing laws or employment criteria could be racist in practice even if they weren’t racist in intent.

      Parts of the critical race theory tradition are in tension with liberalism, particularly when it comes to issues like free speech. Richard Delgado, a key figure in the movement, has argued that people should be able to sue those who utter racist slurs. Others have played a large role in crafting campus speech codes.

      There’s plenty here for people committed to broad free speech protections to dispute. I’m persuaded by the essay Henry Louis Gates Jr. wrote in the 1990s challenging the movement’s stance on the first amendment. “To remove the very formation of our identities from the messy realm of contestation and debate is an elemental, not incidental, truncation of the ideal of public discourse,” he wrote.

      Disagreeing with certain ideas, however, is very different from anathematizing the collective work of a host of paradigm-shifting thinkers. Gates’s article was effective because he took the scholarly work he engaged with seriously. “The critical race theorists must be credited with helping to reinvigorate the debate about freedom of expression; even if not ultimately persuaded to join them, the civil libertarian will be much further along for having listened to their arguments and examples,” he wrote.

      But the right, for all its chest-beating about the value of entertaining dangerous notions, is rarely interested in debating the tenets of critical race theory. It wants to eradicate them from public institutions.

      “Critical race theory is a grave threat to the American way of life,” Christopher Rufo, director of the Center on Wealth and Poverty at the Discovery Institute, a conservative think tank once known for pushing an updated form of creationism in public schools, wrote in January.

      Rufo’s been leading the conservative charge against critical race theory. Last year, during an appearance on Tucker Carlson’s Fox News show, he called on Trump to issue an executive order abolishing “critical race theory trainings from the federal government.” The next day, he told me, the White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, called him and asked for his help putting an order together.

      Last month, Rufo announced a “new coalition of legal foundations and private attorneys that will wage relentless legal warfare against race theory in America’s institutions.” A number of House and Senate offices, he told me, are working on their own anti-critical race theory bills, though none are likely to go anywhere as long as Biden is president.

      As Rufo sees it, critical race theory is a revolutionary program that replaces the Marxist categories of the bourgeois and the proletariat with racial groups, justifying discrimination against those deemed racial oppressors. His goal, ultimately, is to get the Supreme Court to rule that school and workplace trainings based on the doctrines of critical race theory violate the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

      This inversion, casting anti-racist activists as the real racists, is familiar to Ian Haney López, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, who specializes in critical race theory. “There’s a rhetoric of reaction which seeks to claim that it’s defending these higher values, which, perversely, often are the very values it’s traducing,” he said. “Whether that’s ‘In the name of free speech we’re going to persecute, we’re going to launch investigations into particular forms of speech’ or — and I think this is equally perverse — ‘In the name of fighting racism, we’re going to launch investigations into those scholars who are most serious about studying the complex forms that racism takes.’”

      Rufo insists there are no free speech implications to what he’s trying to do. “You have the freedom of speech as an individual, of course, but you don’t have the kind of entitlement to perpetuate that speech through public agencies,” he said.

      This sounds, ironically, a lot like the arguments people on the left make about de-platforming right-wingers. To Crenshaw, attempts to ban critical race theory vindicate some of the movement’s skepticism about free speech orthodoxy, showing that there were never transcendent principles at play.

      When people defend offensive speech, she said, they’re often really defending “the substance of what the speech is — because if it was really about free speech, then this censorship, people would be howling to the high heavens.” If it was really about free speech, they should be.

      https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/26/opinion/speech-racism-academia.html

      #droite #gauche #censure #cancel_culture #micro-agressions #Trump #Donald_Trump #Kemi_Badenoch #division #critical_race_theory #racisme #sexisme #Kimberlé_Crenshaw #Crenshaw #racisme_structurel #libéralisme #Richard_Delgado #Christopher_Rufo #Ian_Haney_López

    • No ‘Social Justice’ in the Classroom: Statehouses Renew Scrutiny of Speech at Public Colleges

      Blocking professors from teaching social-justice issues. Asking universities how they talk about privilege. Analyzing students’ freedom of expression through regular reports. Meet the new campus-speech issues emerging in Republican-led statehouses across the country, indicating potential new frontiers for politicians to shape campus affairs.

      (paywall)
      https://www.chronicle.com/article/no-social-justice-in-the-classroom-new-state-scrutiny-of-speech-at-public

  • VACCIN, IL EST PLUS EFFICACE D’ATTRAPER LE VIRUS ET DE SE RÉTABLIR

    Merck abandonne ses vaccins contre le COVID et affirme qu’il est plus efficace d’attraper le virus et de se rétablir

    Le fabricant de vaccins Merck a abandonné le développement de deux vaccins contre le coronavirus, affirmant qu’après des recherches approfondies, il a été conclu que les vaccins offraient une protection moindre que le simple fait de contracter le virus lui-même et de développer des anticorps.

    La société a annoncé que les vaccins V590 et V591 étaient “bien tolérés” par les patients testés, mais qu’ils généraient une réponse du système immunitaire “inférieure” par rapport à une infection naturelle.
    https://www.merck.com/news/merck-discontinues-development-of-sars-cov-2-covid-19-vaccine-candidates-cont

    Des scientifiques allemands ont affirmé que le vaccin britannique Oxford/AstraZeneca est efficace à moins de 8 % chez les plus de 65 ans.
    https://www.politico.com

    --

  • Certains émeutiers du Capitole voulaient « capturer et assassiner des élus », selon le parquet fédéral américain
    https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2021/01/15/violences-au-capitole-certains-emeutiers-voulaient-capturer-et-assassiner-de

    Un grand nombre des personnes mises en cause jusqu’à présent ont été facilement identifiées par le FBI grâce aux multiples photos et vidéos publiées. M. Trump a de son côté été mis en accusation mercredi pour « incitation à l’insurrection », pour avoir encouragé ses partisans à marcher sur le Congrès.

    Plus de 20 000 soldats de la garde nationale ont été mobilisés à Washington, dont le centre était verrouillé tôt vendredi, par crainte de nouvelles violences en lien avec l’investiture de Joe Biden, le 20 janvier.

    • on retrouve dans divers medias américains le fait que les enquêtes fédérales semblent converger vers la même conclusion : un groupe d’énervés était vraiment là pour en découdre et trucider du parlementaire :

      https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/15/feds-edge-closer-to-sedition-charge-459573

      Mais en même temps c’est étonnant. C’est le truc qui était en haut des titres du washington post, du new-york times aussi en début de journée, et qui disparaît au fil des heures...

      En gros ils additionnent les trois gus QAnon qui se targuent d’avoir rencontré des représentants républicains pour organiser le coup du capitole, plus le fait qu’untel avait des colliers plastiques permettant de menotter dans l’enceinte du capitole, plus le fait que les flics aient confisqué plein d’armes à feu (ce qui au étaits-unis n’est pas le truc très original).

      Au bout du bout ça fait pas encore corps j’ai l’impression.

    • États-Unis.Des dizaines d’émeutiers du Capitole étaient surveillés pour risque terroriste
      https://www.courrierinternational.com/article/etats-unis-des-dizaines-demeutiers-du-capitole-etaient-survei

      Alors que les arrestations liées à l’assaut du 6 janvier contre le Capitole se multiplient, le Washington Post révèle que des dizaines de manifestants pro-Trump étaient sur une liste de surveillance du FBI pour terrorisme. La plupart sont des #suprémacistes blancs.

      Selon des sources interrogées par le Washington Post et familières avec l’enquête du FBI dans ce dossier, “la plupart des personnes sur la liste de surveillance présentes à Washington ce jour-là sont des suprémacistes blancs présumés, dont la conduite passée a tellement alarmé les enquêteurs que leurs noms avaient déjà été saisis dans la base de données nationale de dépistage du terrorisme”.

      D’anciens et d’actuels responsables de la sécurité intérieure ont confié au journal que “la présence en un seul endroit de tant d’individus ainsi fichés est un autre exemple de l’échec des services de #renseignements qui a précédé l’attaque mortelle de la semaine dernière, qui a poussé les législateurs à s’enfuir pour sauver leur vie”.

      Ces révélations surviennent après la publication d’un autre article de l’influent quotidien. Ce dernier raconte l’échec du FBI à intervenir malgré un rapport interne faisant état de discussions en ligne au sujet d’une attaque contre le Congrès. Le Washington Post est d’avis que ces divulgations “soulignent les limites de ces listes de surveillance”, qui contiennent des centaines de milliers de noms, car “le fait d’inscrire le nom d’une personne sur la liste de surveillance ne signifie pas qu’elle sera surveillée en permanence, ni même la plupart du temps”.

      Des dizaines d’individus ont été arrêtés jusqu’ici en rapport avec l’assaut contre le Capitole, rappelle le journal, mais il reste à déterminer s’ils figuraient sur la liste de surveillance pour terrorisme. Des responsables américains du FBI et du ministère de la Sécurité intérieure “sont aux prises avec d’épineuses questions touchant la race, le terrorisme et les droits sur la liberté d’expression, alors que certains enquêteurs se demandent s’il aurait pu être fait davantage pour prévenir la violence de la semaine dernière”.

    • sur la préparation de l’assaut à l’avance :

      https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/14/lawmakers-capitol-attackers-legal-459519

      Rep. Mikie Sherrill (D-N.J.) sent a letter Wednesday formally asking the Capitol Police and congressional officials to investigate the tours, which she said were unusual. In a Facebook video, she said the visits amounted to “a reconnaissance of the next day.”

      “The tours being conducted on Tuesday, January 5, were a noticeable and concerning departure from the procedures in place as of March 2020 that limited the number of visitors to the Capitol,” Sherrill and 33 colleagues wrote. “The visitors encountered by some of the Members of Congress on this letter appeared to be associated with the rally at the White House the following day.”

      Sherrill suggested that access raised the possibility that the visitors were casing the building for the assault that unfolded the next day.

      “Members of the group that attacked the Capitol seemed to have an unusually detailed knowledge of the layout of the Capitol Complex,” she wrote. “Given the events of January 6, the ties between these groups inside the Capitol Complex and the attacks on the Capitol need to be investigated.”

    • Capitole : un assaut spontané ? Pas si sûr - Le Capitole envahi par des pro-Trump - Le Télégramme
      https://www.letelegramme.fr/dossiers/le-capitole-envahi-par-des-pro-trump/les-questions-se-multiplient-sur-le-caractere-spontane-de-l-assaut-cont

      Des colonnes d’attaquants disciplinés, une femme criant des instructions au mégaphone, des visites suspectes du bâtiment la veille : les questions se multiplient sur le niveau de préparation de l’assaut du 6 janvier contre le Capitole et la possibilité de complicités à l’intérieur de l’institution.

      Les experts ont souligné que les violences du 6 janvier étaient globalement chaotiques, désorganisées et typiques d’une émeute spontanée. Mais les vidéos, photos et communications analysées depuis ces violences menées par des partisans de Donald Trump suggèrent un niveau inquiétant de préparation.

      Sur une vidéo, une douzaine d’hommes vêtus d’un attirail militaire grimpent, par exemple, en file indienne les marches du Capitole, traversant la foule des manifestants jusqu’aux portes du bâtiment.

      Et à l’intérieur, plusieurs hommes ont été photographiés portant des liens en plastique pouvant être utilisés comme des menottes, ce qui a été interprété comme une potentielle volonté de prendre des otages.

      Oui, quelqu’un à l’intérieur du bâtiment a été complice
      Plusieurs élus ont, par ailleurs, remarqué que les manifestants pro-Trump qui ont vandalisé le bureau de Nancy Pelosi, présidente de la Chambre des représentants, semblaient familiers du bâtiment, qui tient pourtant du labyrinthe. « Ils savaient où aller », a déclaré le démocrate James Clyburn. « Oui, quelqu’un à l’intérieur du bâtiment a été complice », a-t-il ajouté.

      « Signes de coordination »
      Une quinzaine de personnes ont été arrêtées et le ministère de la Justice a prévenu que plus de 200 autres pourraient être inculpées. Mais la justice n’utilise pas les termes « conspiration » ou « complot » pour décrire les violences du 6 janvier.

      Ce vendredi, Michael Sherwin, procureur de Washington qui supervise l’enquête, a indiqué qu’elle révélait des « signes de coordination », notamment des communications entre ceux qui étaient à l’intérieur du bâtiment et ceux à l’extérieur.

      Découvrir s’il y avait une « structure de commandement globale » et des équipes organisées est la « priorité n°1 » des enquêteurs, a-t-il insisté.

      « Cela va prendre des semaines, si ce n’est des mois pour découvrir les réelles motivations de certains de ces groupes », a-t-il dit. Mais « il n’y a pas de preuve à ce stade de l’existence d’équipes chargées de tuer ou capturer, voire d’assassiner ».

      « Visites de reconnaissance » la veille
      L’élue démocrate Mikie Sherrill a affirmé que des groupes de partisans de Donald Trump avaient effectué des « visites de reconnaissance » du Capitole la veille, des visites qu’elle a qualifiées de « suspectes ».

      « Ces visiteurs n’ont pu avoir accès au complexe du Capitole que par l’intermédiaire d’un élu ou d’un employé du Congrès », a-t-elle noté dans une lettre ouverte à la police du Capitole.

      Une vidéo attire particulièrement l’attention. On y voit plusieurs manifestants qui se regroupent dans une pièce du Capitole pour décider de la suite à donner après avoir réussi à pénétrer dans le bâtiment.

      Une femme arborant un chapeau rose donne des instructions au mégaphone à ceux qui ont pu pénétrer dans le bâtiment, à travers une vitre brisée. « Il y a deux portes dans l’autre pièce. Une à l’arrière et une à droite quand vous entrez », lance-t-elle. « Il faudra vous coordonner si vous voulez prendre ce bâtiment ».

      Signes de « terrorisme »
      Mais pour Matthew Feldman, du centre de réflexion britannique Center for Analysis of the Radical Right, cela ne suffit pas pour parler d’opération planifiée ou de conspiration. « Les manifestants n’apparaissaient pas organisés, mais il est clair que dans la foule, il y en avait certains qui étaient organisés », estime-t-il, notant la présence de membres de groupes d’extrême droite connus pour leur violence comme les Three Percenters, Oath Keepers et les Proud Boys.

      D’après lui, leur présence, la découverte de bombes artisanales non loin de là, les menaces verbales et les appels à capturer des élus du Congrès représentent des signes de « terrorisme ». « Il y avait une foule d’émeutiers (…) et au milieu, il y avait des terroristes intérieurs » qui étaient « clairement en train de planifier quelque chose ».

      Ce vendredi, Nancy Pelosi elle-même a paru donner crédit à une coordination d’émeutiers. « Si, en fait, il s’avère que des membres du Congrès ont été complices de cette insurrection, s’ils ont aidé et encouragé ce crime, il pourrait y avoir des mesures prises au-delà du Congrès, en matière d’inculpations », a-t-elle dit.

  • Feds edge closer to sedition charge in Capitol riot aftermath - POLITICO
    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/15/feds-edge-closer-to-sedition-charge-459573

    (Google Trad)

    "Les médias et les rapports du FBI ont détaillé des tentatives d’insurrection soigneusement planifiées dans tout le pays dans les semaines à venir dans toutes les capitales de l’État, y compris la capitale de l’Arizona", ont déclaré les procureurs. « Comme il l’a admis, et comme corroboré par les éléments dans sa voiture, Chansley s’attendait à y aller après son entretien avec le FBI (s’il n’avait pas été arrêté).

    Le gouvernement a également décrit la libération de Chansley comme particulièrement risquée en raison de son association avec Qanon, qu’il a qualifiée de « conspiration antigouvernementale dangereuse » qui l’a traité comme un dirigeant, l’a aidé à voyager « hors réseau » et « à collecter des fonds rapidement à travers moyens non conventionnels. » Les procureurs notent également qu’il est un « consommateur de drogue répété » qui est « incapable d’apprécier la réalité ».

  • Fin 2018, le community manager de Trump raconte que, lorsqu’il a découvert que Trump savait envoyer lui-même des tweets, ça lui a fait la même chose que lorsque le Dr Grant (le personnage joué par Sam Neill) dans Jurassic Park comprend que les vélociraptors savent ouvrir les portes.

    ’Oh, no’ : The day Trump learned to tweet - POLITICO
    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/20/oh-no-the-day-trump-learned-to-tweet-1070789

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdOcrUtE-UQ

    When Trump’s young social media manager saw the tweet, he was perplexed. He typically typed and sent Trump’s tweets for the boss, but in this case he hadn’t. He did recall that Trump had been spending a lot of time in his office lately playing around with a new Android smartphone.

    The next morning, the handful of staffers with access to the boss’ account told the social media manager, Justin McConney, that they had not sent it either.

    That’s when it dawned on him: Donald Trump had tweeted on his own for the first time.

    “The moment I found out Trump could tweet himself was comparable to the moment in ’Jurassic Park’ when Dr. Grant realized that velociraptors could open doors,” recalled McConney, who was the Trump Organization’s director of social media from 2011 to 2017. “I was like, ’Oh no.’”

    Signalé par Jean-Marie Pottier :
    https://twitter.com/jmpottier/status/1347690314950209536

    • Plus généralement, ça semble être une caractéristique commune à beaucoup des ceusses qui, désormais, s’éloignent de Trump : des gens qui ont travaillé/collaboré avec lui, sachant pertinemment à qui ils avaient affaire (un sociopathe fascisant aux idées nauséabondes), mais qui prétendent qu’ils ont fait le job en croyant pouvoir contrôler la bête à condition de maintenir le clown dans l’ignorance.

      Une belle collection de peigne-culs merdeux qui essaient de se donner une posture.

  • The Eight Pieces of Pop Culture That Defined the Trump Era - POLITICO
    https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/01/02/pop-culture-trump-era-2020-analysis-449495

    Certain cultural figures loom so large that they eventually serve as shorthand for the spirit of their times. There’s Michael Jackson, the personification of the smiley-face maximalism of Reagan’s 1980s; Lucille Ball and the aspirational domesticity of the Eisenhower era; even Homer Simpson, a postmodern joke of a patriarch befitting the irony-soaked Clinton 1990s.

    As America’s Trump years come to an end, there is only one pop culture figure who fits that era-defining mold: Donald Trump himself. But unlike those earlier figures, Trump doesn’t represent any single, unifying truth about our character; rather, he’s a symbol of how fragmented it has become. That’s partially thanks to his waging a relentless, cable news-fueled culture war, but it’s also the result of long-developing trends in media.

    For decades, cultural Jeremiahs have prophesied the death of the monoculture—a shared, unifying cultural experience that spans race, class and regional difference. With the decline of broadcasting, social platforms cannibalizing traditional news, and YouTube and personalized streaming services serving up an endless buffet of new content “based on your viewing history,” the long, slow death of that phenomenon accelerated wildly just as Trump rose to power.

    There is no single story that the books, films and pop cultural miscellany of the Trump presidency can tell us about its character. So, instead of trying to impose a narrative on the cultural chaos of the past five years, we’ve decided to let it speak for itself.

    These eight items represent the social upheaval, cries for justice, death-grip nostalgia, internet-abetted hustle and quietly driftless contemplation that have marked this era. They’ve come in forms both disruptively cutting edge and surprisingly old school. Individually, none can fully explain how we got from Trump’s 2015 escalator ride to this uncertain, transitional moment. But the ways in which they speak to their creators’ own perspectives—and, implicitly, to one another—tell us plenty about the character of a nation that will be seeking to fill the spotlight left empty when Trump finally exits the stage.

    The “Renegade” dance/meme
    The joys and risks that come with the democratization of fame.

    If you’re over the age of 30, the words “mmmxneil,” “dubsmash” and “shiggy” probably mean nothing to you. Nearly everyone else will recognize them as points in the constellation of viral online music and dance trends that bubbled up to the mainstream through their popularity on TikTok, the China-based social media app that launched a thousand tech policy takes in the Trump administration’s waning days.

    If you’re not familiar, the app is home to short (less than a minute) videos, usually featuring some kind of ephemeral joke, dance or meme reference, with about 100 million active users in the U.S. alone. It’s built for virality—you see someone’s dance or joke, you do your own iteration of it, your friends see your version and replicate it, and so on. Most emblematic as a cultural phenomenon is perhaps the platform’s most popular dance, at least for the fleeting moment in which such things burn brightly and flame out: the Renegade.

    Seemingly everyone went viral with their version of the dance, from the Grammy-winning rapper Lizzo to various K-Pop stars to homegrown TikTok superstar Charli D’Amelio. One person who didn’t, however, was its creator: a 14-year-old dance student in the Atlanta suburbs named Jalaiah Harmon.

    In late 2019, Harmon uploaded a simple homemade video of the dance to the internet and it went viral almost immediately, filtering all the way up to the aforementioned million-click-grabbing tastemakers. TikTok, almost by its very nature, would eventually divorce the work from its creator: Her video’s popularity in turn inspired other users to recreate the dance on their own without citation, on and on up the food chain until its embrace by mainstream celebrities. After becoming somewhat of a cause celébrè for those concerned with murky issues of authorship and credit on the internet, Harmon earned a New York Times profile and eventually made it to that great showcase of down-the-middle mainstream culture, “Ellen.”

    Her odd saga—going from the near-universal experience of teens screwing around with their friends and making up silly dances, to national television and the center of a debate around cultural appropriation and credit—is a neat symbol of the emerging media landscape. A social media “creator” is more likely to be the 14-year-old next door, or your ambiguously employed cousin, or your math teacher, than the product of any slick entertainment enterprise.

    The pop culture landscape isn’t just atomized, it’s open source. We’re no longer just members of niche cultural fiefdoms; we have the power to create fiefdoms unto ourselves—and, inevitably, watch them escape our control. Enjoy responsibly.

    #Pop_culture #Culture_numérique #TikTok

  • The inexorable rise of Jake Sullivan - POLITICO
    https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/27/jake-sullivan-biden-national-security-440814

    He is similarly optimistic about one of his loftiest goals: “to rally our allies to combat corruption and kleptocracy, and to hold systems of authoritarian capitalism accountable for greater transparency and participation in a rules-based system.”

    That effort will need to begin at home — as has been well documented, the world’s kleptocratic regimes depend heavily on money laundering networks that commonly extend into Western centers of global finance like New York and London, aided by lax incorporation rules in places like Delaware .

    #kleptocratie #états-unis #blanchiment

  • Why the right-wing has a massive advantage on Facebook
    https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/26/facebook-conservatives-2020-421146

    A company executive responds to claims of bias. Throughout 2020, Democrats have denounced Facebook with growing ferocity as a “right-wing echo chamber” with a “conservative bias” that’s giving an edge to Donald Trump in November. But Facebook says there’s a reason why right-wing figures are driving more engagement. It’s not that its algorithm favors conservatives — the company has long maintained that its platform is neutral. Instead, the right is better at connecting with people on a visceral (...)

    #algorithme #manipulation #élections #extrême-droite

  • USA : Comment miner le droit de manifester...
    Fuite audio : Les avocats ont loué la « beauté » des tactiques controversées de réponse aux protestations
    L’enregistrement d’une session de formation juridique pour les agents de la force publique fédérale a alarmé certains défenseurs des libertés civiles.

    Lawyers running a training session for officers deploying to protect besieged federal property extolled the “beauty” of a protest-response strategy that some legal experts have criticized as potentially unconstitutional, according to an audio recording obtained by POLITICO.

    The training highlights the fierce legal debate over the Trump administration’s push to send federal officers into American cities, sometimes against the wishes of local officials. Images of violent clashes and of vandalism have aired nonstop in conservative media outlets, while President Donald Trump has cast his presumptive 2020 rival, former Vice President Joe Biden, as dangerously indulgent of “anarchists” and “thugs.”

    Videos have shown federal officers in Portland, Ore., pulling protesters into unmarked vans to transport them for questioning. Some protesters have said they were detained without probable cause and never charged with crimes. The incidents have drawn pointed scrutiny to how the Department of Homeland Security legally defends the detention and transportation of protesters.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2020/08/03/federal-protest-response-tactics-390859

    #répression #manifestion #USA

  • Why the tech giants may suffer lasting pain from their Hill lashing
    https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/29/big-tech-ceo-hearing-takeaways-387677

    Lawmakers investigating Facebook, Amazon, Google and Apple made it clear that their allegations of antitrust abuses come with a lengthy paper trail. Wednesday’s much-anticipated antitrust hearing subjected four of the tech industry’s most powerful CEOs to hours of aggressive questioning by Republicans and Democrats alike. But it also may have revealed something far more lasting : A Congress that has largely soured on Silicon Valley is beginning to figure out how to hold it to account, (...)

    #Apple #Google #Amazon #Facebook #algorithme #Android #iPhone #smartphone #manipulation #domination #élections #bénéfices #biais #BigData #marketing #profiling #publicité (...)

    ##publicité ##FTC