Sloganeering as a means of politiciking

Of the recent slogans I am seeing, the only one that is really new is "Abolish the Senate."

I have to admit that one surprised me.

In general, I see a lot of points in favor of bicameral legislatures. The problems we have with them are things like the institutional racism and cult-like devotion to a terrible leader... getting rid of the Senate without getting rid of that would not take away the basic problem.

I would imagine the reasoning behind it is that the Senate gives low-population states equal votes, which tends to favor conservatives. 

I get that, but Texas has the second highest number of representatives, right behind California. Add Texas and Florida together and they outnumber Texas. 

Southern states tend to have higher populations than Northern states. New York is the big exception, but that's one state. 

Yes, sometimes we have an advantage in the House, but it's not reliable. 

I could get behind abolishing the Electoral College.

I would be skeptical about getting behind one of the other ones: "Medicare for All"

Previously I have thought that it would be better to expand Medicaid than Medicare. Having some familiarity with both, there are ways in which Medicaid is better. Expanding both what it covers and whom it covers would make it better still.  

Now that we have a president shutting off Medicaid payments to certain states and eliminating price protections that had previously gone in, maybe it is not good to have everything run by the government 

If we had shifted to Medicare for All under Biden, what damage would Trump be doing to it now?

Would that be a problem with the legislation, or just with electing a malignant narcissist?

All of that requires thought, and slogans don't encourage thought. They are designed to stir up an emotional response.

That doesn't have to be bad if the original idea holds up logically and encourages more investigation. 

Current slogans focus on division and destruction:

"Abolish ICE"

"Defund the Police"

I have a lot of sympathy for both of those.

When ICE is a bunch of newly-hired thugs who don't have the intellect or fitness level to join the police who then get huge bonuses to go around tailing brown people, maybe just to seize them but too frequently assaulting and even killing them, yeah, I don't want that to happen.

Then do you go back to just INS? In this environment where you are encouraged to blame everything on immigrants and vilification and hostility are getting built in, what happens then? Are there plans for changing the environment?

Sure, with said current malignant narcissist in office, it might be hard to change the political climate, but it would be hard to abolish ICE with him still in there too.

What is the greater plan?

I totally support less funds going to police and more to housing and mental health care and programs like that, especially when the police budgets are going to militarized weapons.

I also know that wealthy areas will hire private security firms (sometimes even with police still funded) which have even less accountability. Is that an improvement?

I don't support the vigilantism that prison abolitionists rely on. 

Changing the tools of the power structure without changing the psychology of the power structure does not make the world a better place.

Thank you for telling me what you want to destroy, but what are you going to build and how are you going to do that? That's what I want to hear.

If we are just going to focus on sounding powerful and tough, well, I can see how things so easily fall back into racism and misogyny without closer examination. 

We have to be examining all of it.

Disability Pride Month quotes

Going over the quotes, I notice something I missed now.

It is common with these months that there will be one or two people (usually two) who have more than one great quote, where I don't like repeating but I don't want to choose. My compromise is generally trying to separate them by several days, with one quote at the beginning of the month and one toward the end. I have to work that out while I am still finding enough quotes to fill the month.

FDR is on the 5th and the 31st; that's pretty good.

Judith Heumann is on the 4th and the 6th, only separated by FDR's first quote. 

I was obviously trying.

The most striking thing from this month was the number of likes and reposts that Dana Elcar's quote got on the 12th. 

It isn't a great quote, but I like him... maybe it was mainly sentimental, but the quote also makes sense.

"The fact that you are losing your eyesight does not mean you have forgotten how to act."  

Dana Elcar played Pete on the original MacGyver, which ran from 1985 to 1992. Around 1991 he started losing his sight to glaucoma, and they wrote it into the show. 

I mean, a lot of liked the show and liked him, but maybe we also remembered that and maybe it resonated because of that.

The next closest thing I could think of was Daryl Mitchell.

He was on Veronica's Closet from 1997 to 2000, then the motorcycle accident was in 2001. In 2002, he shows up in a wheelchair in Ed.

In television terms, that's a pretty fast turnaround, but I don't know that a lot of people would have seen both shows; they kind of appealed to different audiences. I have only seen an episode of Ed because of a friend.

Maybe watching Pete lose his sight left an impact on us.

Otherwise, a few of the names here and a lot of my awareness about disability and accessibility comes from my attendance at #AffectConf.

Years later, I am still glad I did.  

Daily quotes: 

7/1 "The best and most beautiful things in the world cannot be seen or even touched - they must be felt with the heart." -- Helen Keller

7/2 "Too often, I think, children are required to write before they have anything to say. Teach them to think and read and talk without self-repression, and they will write because they cannot help it." -- Anne Sullivan Macy

7/3 "Access to communication in the widest sense is access to knowledge, and that is vitally important for us if we are not to go on being despised or patronized by condescending sighted people. We do not need pity, nor do we need to be reminded that we are vulnerable. We must be treated as equals — and communication is the way we can bring this about." -- Louis Braille

7/4 “When other people see you as a third-class citizen, the first thing you need is a belief in yourself and the knowledge that you have rights. The next thing you need is a group of friends to fight back with.” ― Judith Heumann

7/5 "Human kindness has never weakened the stamina or softened the fiber of a free people. A nation does not have to be cruel to be tough." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt

7/6 “Change never happens at the pace we think it should. It happens over years of people joining together, strategizing, sharing, and pulling all the levers they possibly can. Gradually, excruciatingly slowly, things start to happen, and then suddenly, seemingly out of the blue, something will tip.” -- Judith Heumann

7/7 "Every great dream begins with a dreamer." -- Harriet Tubman

7/8 "Americanism is not a matter of skin or color." -- Daniel Inouye

7/9 "We are all dishonored when a veteran sleeps on the same streets that he or she has defended. We are all dishonored when a veteran's family has to live in a shelter while he or she is out fighting for us." -- Tammy Duckworth

7/10 "I waited a long time out in the world before I gave myself permission to fail. Please don't even bother asking. Don't bother telling the world you are ready. Show it. Do it." -- Peter Dinklage

7/11 "Silence is the last thing the world will ever hear from me." -- Marlee Matlin

7/12 "The fact that you are losing your eyesight does not mean you have forgotten how to act." -- Dana Elcar

7/13 "Anytime I was challenged and told I couldn't do something, I would absolutely have to prove the opposite. And I did." -- Heather Mills

7/14 "Being happy isn't the same as being perfect - it's learning to live with imperfection." -- Adam Pearson

7/15 “My advice to other disabled people would be, concentrate on things your disability doesn’t prevent you doing well, and don’t regret the things it interferes with. Don’t be disabled in spirit as well as physically.” – Stephen Hawking

7/16 “A hero is an ordinary individual who finds the strength to persevere and endure in spite of overwhelming obstacles.” – Christopher Reeve

7/17 “That one letter, scrawled on the floor with a broken bit of yellow chalk gripped between my toes, was my road to a new world, my key to mental freedom. The new word which I had learned to write for the first time was—M-O-T-H-E-R.” -- Christy Brown

7/18 "When I was younger I was looking for this magic meaning of life. It's very simple now. Making the lives of others better, doing something of lasting value. That's the meaning of life, it's that simple." -- Temple Grandin

7/19 "Passion is the bridge that takes you from pain to change." -- Frida Kahlo

7/20 "... I want to pave the way so that all people who live with a disability can occupy decision-making spaces, because our condition does not silence our voice, will and ability to contribute to improving our state.” -- Ana Victoria Espina de Santiago (first person with Down syndrome to graduate law school)

7/21 "I say, 'You can never use excuses because they always run out.'" -- RJ Mitte

7/22 “There is so much that able-bodied people could learn from the wisdom that often comes with disability. But space needs to be made. Hands need to reach out. People need to be lifted up." -- Alice Wong

7/23 “Love whomever you want to love. Just make sure they’re deserving of your love.” ― Tee Franklin

7/24 “It is my belief that sometimes we keep secrets and our deepest insecurities because we believe that if other people found them out they would agree and believe them to be true, too.” ― Keah Brown

7/25 “Ableism is the bedrock of all forms of oppression because it dictates whose bodies and minds are valuable and whose are disposable.” -- Talila A. Lewis (TL)

7/26 “There’s no more innovative group of people that I’ve met than disabled people because our innovation, our creativity, our community is how we survive.” -- Imani Barbarin

7/27 “I wish people would look at us and say, wow, I wonder what she can do that is really cool, because that’s how I look at my community. I don’t look at the fact that they can’t walk. I look and wonder what they could do. I would like to see [more of] that, so I’ll keep offering my help. People need to realize not to make assumptions. Be open and curious about the abilities of everybody.” -- Dana Bolles

7/28 "The goal you set must be challenging. At the same time, it should be realistic and attainable, not impossible to reach. It should be challenging enough to make you stretch, but not so far that you break." -- Rick Hansen

7/29 "True gratitude requires the ability to appreciate others and the work that is before us. Compassion is more than just what is in your heart. We must demonstrate care and respect through words and actions and show empathy for others.” -- Anne Carlsen

7/30 “Two things… One is how much everything has changed. The other is that it’s in jeopardy again right now.” -- Stephanie Thomas

7/31 "We must especially beware of that small group of selfish men who would clip the wings of the American Eagle in order to feather their own nests." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt

Related posts: 

https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2017/11/affect-access-and-acceptance.html  

Prison abolition

I am sure it is because of the recent primaries, but I have been seeing a lot of extreme position slogans being floated around. 

I want to get more into the overall issue next week, but for now I have seen some good discussions around prison abolition. That can be a good introduction.

One reason I find the discussion interesting is that in the past I did not see a lot of honest engagement; the people in favor would not accept any compromise and the people against dismissed the people in favor as unreasonable and out of touch.

To be fair, the discussions I am seeing are not the two sides engaging. Instead, the people who are confused are asking questions and the people who are against are answering, but they are giving substantive answers with sources, something that I hadn't seen before.

Prison abolitionists are not wrong that the current system is corrupt. Privately-owned systems that can be run for profit, which crimes are pursued and prosecuted, the privilege that money buys, the racism, and the way it encourages some of the worst people to get jobs where they can act on their worst impulses... this is all bad. 

Those wrongs may be more related to dominator culture than the concept of prison itself.

Current discussions have primarily focused on two points.

One is that prison abolitionists believe that by creating a more just society the need for prisons will be eliminated.

No, the evidence doesn't really support that. Epstein gets mentioned as an example, but there are others.

With those goals, the need for prisons should be seriously reduced in ways that make life better for everyone. I love that. 

However, there is plenty of evidence that rich people do terrible things all the time. This is not due to a lack of resources. 

Okay, maybe a rich person has the food, shelter, health care, and educational opportunities they need, but they never received love or any instruction in ethics or integrity... I get that can cause problems and I can have some sympathy, but I don't see how you can legislate a fix for that.

I certainly don't agree that having lots of privilege should keep you out of prison for crimes where prison is appropriate.

The other question that came up was what to do with murderers. 

I had never seen an answer to this before; the closest was an insistence that murders wouldn't happen.

I had seen suggestions that in more nomadic societies the remedy was banishment, which could easily be a death sentence. I don't think that works with these high populations. The other answer is just killing them, in a very civilized way that would not devolve into vigilantism or endless revenge or purges.

You can read something here, if you want: 

https://x.com/ChristianityOn/status/2083221114331844653 

That's pulling from Mariame Kaba, whom I did follow once and then stopped. Even so, she's not on my "never believe again" list; she's more "take with a grain of salt."

That did not come up on the topic of murder, but on the topic of rape and her continuing support of serial rapist Malcolm London.

You know, I have never found a good summation of that whole story. There are parts here and there, like the missing stair warning. There is the privacy of victims to consider and legal liability, because even some of the victims don't want him to go to jail; they want him to stop doing it. I get it. Here are two things that give an idea:

https://x.com/so_treu/status/1296585551500529665  

https://www.tumblr.com/transformharm/626907682811576320/statement-by-mariame-81920 

Maybe there is a spot in between the "never" and the "grain of salt" and Kaba needs to go there. I didn't used to need such an elaborate filing system.

Anyway, here's what I know from watching some "circle way" material from New Zealand: when there is a lack of understanding and economic problems and chances to make amends, you can build empathy and a sense of community to prevent future crimes. That will probably be most effective with property crimes. Working to make sure people's needs can be met will work well with that.

People who like hurting others and dominating others are really good at learning how to mimic empathy to manipulate people and extend their crimes.

It's not even uncommon. I couldn't remember Hugo Schwyzer's name, so my search describing what he did brought up two others. 

It wasn't even an extensive search.

When their unmet need is exerting control over someone else, when they get a charge from having a respected public facade and then privately being abusive... your ideal society is not going to fix that.

It might be more humane to put them in prison than to kill them. If you do nothing, I promise they will continue raping. 

Okay, they do that now, and it is barely prosecuted and punished now... there are limits to what the system can do, but if the response is going to be "Poor baby! Thank you for admitting it," that system will only perpetuate abuse. 

There are people who are manipulative. If you try and fix everything by extending understanding and sympathy, the system will end up favoring the abusive ones. It's not good or right, but it's how it works.

That's why I keep harping on dominator culture; if you don't understand that it will hamper your understanding of everything else.  

What if you just hate the people?

Yesterday's post was about combining care for humans and non-humans. 

Some people find it easier to care for animals than humans... I don't think that's right, but I get it.

Some people really seem to hate humans and I want to use that to explore extreme thinking.

Actually, I don't know if some of the attitudes are based in hatred for humans; maybe it's contempt, or maybe there is something against animals.

A proposed Oregon ballot initiative recently failed. Claiming to fight animal cruelty, it was also going to stamp out hunting, fishing, ranching, pest control... a lot of interactions with animals would be classified as cruelty.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/oregon-ballot-measure-that-would-have-criminalized-hunting-and-fishing-fails-to-qualify-for-vote/ 

An interesting point in the article, referring to some Florida legislation, is that "wildlife policy must be driven by science rather than "emotions or feelings." 

There is a trend toward vibes-based politics now; it has some weaknesses.

You will also see people say they are going on science when the science doesn't back it up. That's something worth considering.

My desire to have pets is largely emotional. 

If I decide to become vegetarian or vegan, that would probably be largely emotional and that can be valid. 

It shouldn't shove logic or kindness out the door.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals has a shelter in Norfolk, Virginia that doesn't turn away any animals. 

They also kill a lot of those animals.

https://blogs.duanemorris.com/animallawdevelopments/2026/02/05/petas-shelter-kill-rate-is-down-but-still-deadly/ 

It is true that shelters are full and that many will say that they can't take any more. I have still known volunteers to call other shelters looking for a spot and to relent and take in the "just one more"... I have seen a lot of love and caring shown for animals by people who are more interested in giving companion animals a good life than in giving them a good death.

(Though PETA members are probably not kidnapping pets most of the time: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/peta-taking-pets/) 

PETA's philosophy of enjoying animals at a distance seems to want to remove those interactions, but can we?

I know there can be a lot of issues. I certainly know of birds and reptiles who bonded with their owners even if never having been in captivity might have been better.

However, the dogs and the cats really want to be with us. That is very clear.

Yes, it is human breeding that got them there, but there are cows that need to be milked daily and sheep that need to be sheared regularly. Taking away their humans would be cruel.

Domesticated animals have needs. If we want to break that bond, then what? Killing them all at once? Gradually letting them die out?

There are problems that are caused by humans that need human solutions. That means the human race simply disappearing -- even if that sounds good to some -- isn't a cure-all. 

If human encroachment has messed up the balance in the food web, that can fix itself over time, but sometimes human intervention can fix things more smoothly. 

Feedlots are a terrible way of raising food, bad for the animals, the people, and the environment. 

Is that because eating meat is bad and shouldn't be done? Or are there better ways of doing it but greed and capitalism get it done that way?

(Is the real problem dominator culture?)

I do eat meat, and when I want beef I try and get it from a local, non-factory farmed source. 

I have had to decide to just not eat veal.

It's more complicated than "Meat is Murder" and fixing the existing issues would be more complicated, but I know things can be better if we have the will to make it so.

And if it seems weird that today's examples involved so much death, that should make more sense when we get to tomorrow's examples. 

For the animals to be okay, the people need to be okay

This is sort of a continuation of Thursday's post. 

I had said the two topics would not be overtly political, but I might have hinted at politics in the post on libraries, at least with one of the links.

Here we go with cats.

It's been a while, but I have seen complaints about people (usually white people) showing more compassion for animals than people.

There is some truth to that. 

Sometimes it may not be so much people versus animals as people versus an individual animal. Presenting an individual, especially a vulnerable one, affects people more, even if it is part of an appeal for a larger group.

I always felt a little guilty when I saw those complaints, because I love animals so much. I love people a lot, too, and try and respond and help, but an animal in trouble does in fact squeeze my heart (just in case our house full of rescued animals did not tip you off already).

What I want to do here is try and bring the two sides together. 

For the animals to be okay, the people need to be okay.

One of the areas where that disagreement comes up is people getting inordinately angry when homeless people have pets.

"It's not fair to the animals!" 

"Oh, so you're saying that homeless people don't deserve companionship?" and sometimes "But you're okay with the person living on the streets?"

Those are fair responses, and the initial point of it being a hard life for animals on the street is also fair. Maybe even points made that sometimes it is exploitative, with people using the animal to get more handouts can be fair, though I think the need for love and companionship is the bigger issue. 

You know what would solve everything? Getting those people into housing. It would be better for them and for the animals. What a neat idea!

"You shouldn't have pets if you can't afford them!"

Yes, they say this about children too, except maybe when they first came it was fine and then things went terribly wrong and finances changed, but there is still a living being needing assistance.

You will sometimes see cases of donations being requested for an animal who is only being treated because the owner surrendered them.

You might think that sounds like a  heartless owner and then a vet or rescue group stepping in. That might be how it goes sometimes, but sometimes you might have a cat that needs a $10,000 procedure, and you are asking about payment plans or credit, but those aren't being allowed so you are being advised to surrender the cat. That makes you a bad owner, but not having the $10,000 ready to go also makes you a bad owner. Then the choice is whether you lose the cat to death or to another family.

That assumes they will find another family. 

Here's the thing; we have connections with a few rescue groups and they are all pretty full. There are not enough homes. If people are willing to step in and make payment happen for a surrendered cat that they then hope can find a home, what if we helped the people who already love the cat with the medical needs?

No, people need to be punished for being poor. Everyone knows that.

Let me point out that is a true story, and also that it did not happen to us. The biggest vet bill we have ever faced was $5000 (for a greyhound with a bad reaction during a dental cleaning) and I charged it. I'm not sure I've ever had a card that would have absorbed $10,000. Care Credit might, but they need to leave room for other lenders. Pet insurance might come through, but usually you have to pay out of pocket first and then get reimbursed. Theoretically Hannah solved those things, but that seems to have left a lot of complaints and lawsuits.

(Speaking of caring about humans, having medical technology that can save and improve lives but that no one wants to pay for... that's not just a pet problem.)

The bond is real. It is something where it has taken a while, but emergency shelters and domestic violence shelters are starting to take it into account too. 

It would help even more if we worked to reduce domestic violence and forest fires and climate change-induced disasters... there are a lot of things we could do to make the world and society better that would help both humans and animals.

Because of Greater Good, I am aware of some Ukrainian groups that rescue pets found in the war zones and try and give them medical care and get them new families.

Wouldn't it be great if that weren't necessary?

I am only saying that not only is there room to care about both people and animals, but that doing so is actually more effective for helping everyone.

Okay, but what if you really hate people?

It turns out I have some thoughts on that. Maybe not the ones you'd expect. 

Disability Pride Month: July songs

Going way back in time, to the second Family Blood book, the band's rhythm guitarist (sometimes bass player) has a badly injured arm and struggles with not being able to play. 

(The drummer has a pretty bad injury too, but there's not as immediate a need for him to be able to pound on the drums, plus the new bass player is dead. Vampires, man; they'll mess you up.)

Trying to be able to work out some way he can play something, his mind goes to guitarists with injuries. First he thinks of James Hetfield's burns when Metallica played in Montreal:

https://www.loudersound.com/music/albums/when-did-james-hetfield-catch-on-fire-metallica-guns-n-roses 

(We watched that VH1: Behind the Music a lot, as well as the Def Leppard one, which will also be pertinent.)

Back to our injured guitar player, Hetfield is his first thought, but Hetfield got better; what if he doesn't?

Then he thinks about Django Reinhardt, working through his permanent burn injuries, and Tommy Iommi losing the tips of two fingers on his fretting hand, and having to change how he played for that.

I felt that scene a lot. Maybe that's weird for someone who is a terrible guitar player, but I still felt the emotions and struggle.  

Cory White (Coalesce, The Esoteric) liked my book. He can play.

My point is that it felt pretty personal.

I remember years ago reading about a band who often ran into accessibility issues at venues. I couldn't find that article. There were some others, including this one that gave me three of the musicians: 

https://batec-mobility.com/en/disabled-musicians-icons-from-beethoven-to-today/

You will see that Metallica is not in there. As Papa Het was only temporarily unable to play and still sang during that time, I did not use him. 

Similarly, Elton John had seizures for a time, but it may have been due to his drug use. That's okay, he's got a song in August. Musicians who can no longer hear because of not protecting their ears are also not included. (The cause of Beethoven's deafness is not certain, but may be from lead poisoning.)

Also, I did not include mental illness as a disability; Joy Division is in there because of Ian Curtis' epilepsy. Also, putting "Love Will Tear Us Apart" right after "Love Will Keep Us Alive" seemed kind of cheeky; love is versatile! 

Joe Walsh has autism, apparently combined with some ADHD and OCD.

That drug abuse thing... sometimes it's self-medication. Hank Williams' spina bifida and the back pain it caused may have been a big part of his alcohol abuse. 

I could have used several more autism cases, mostly self-diagnosed. I don't judge for that, as it is often hard to get diagnosed. Sometimes the balance between including or excluding was how much I like the song.

Having Ray Charles' version of "America the Beautiful" on July 4th was a bit of a protest, because of some flack that people gave to his version. Jose Feliciano's "No Dogs Allowed" is specifically about his service dog not being allowed in England without a 6-month quarantine. (Their dog policies are ridiculous.)

The other thing that struck me was how much effort there was toward concealment. Paul Stanley's hair always covered his microtia. It was very hard to know that Prince had seizures.   

So, if there are people and bands listed here where you don't know how they ended up in this list..., I thought about putting notes on everyone, but maybe it's better to make that something that people have to pursue on their own. None of it is impossible to find.

Though, I do feel like knowing Iggy Pop has scoliosis explains a lot about the way he dances.

Daily songs: 

7/1 “Ode to Joy” from the 4^th Movement of Beethoven’s 9^th Symphony, performed by the National Arts Centre Orchestra, Royal Philharmonic Orchestra and London Philharmonic Choir
7/2 “Minor Swing” composed by Django Reinhardt and Stéphane Grappelli, performed by The Quintet of the Hot Club of France
7/3 “Hey Good Lookin’” by Hank Williams
7/4 “America the Beautiful” performed by Ray Charles
7/5 “No Dogs Allowed” by Jose Feliciano
7/6 “Heart of Gold” by Neil Young
7/7 “Lovely Day” by Bill Withers
7/8 “Higher Ground” by Stevie Wonder
7/9 “White Rabbit” by Jefferson Airplane
7/10 “Love Will Keep Us Alive” by Eagles
7/11 “Love Will Tear Us Apart" by Joy Division
7/12 “Smoky Mountain Rain” by Ronnie Milsap
7/13 “Rock And Roll All Nite” by KISS
7/14 “Iron Man” by Black Sabbath
7/15 “Lust For Life” by Iggy Pop
7/16 “Let’s Go Crazy” by Prince
7/17 “Same Ol’ Situation” by Mötley Crüe
7/18 “Money’s Too Tight (To Mention)” by Simply Red
7/19 “Brass Monkey” by Beastie Boys
7/20 “Angel Eyes” by Jeff Healey
7/21 “When Love and Hate Collide” by Def Leppard
7/22 “Everything to Everyone” by Everclear
7/23 “Vivo por Ella” by Andrea Bocelli feat. KAROL G
7/24 “Factory” by The Vines
7/25 “So Young” by Portugal. The Man
7/26 “Litost” by X Ambassadors
7/27 “Colors” by Halsey
7/28 “Heaven” by The AutistiX
7/29 “TACHI” by Langui, A93, Young Gipsy
7/30 “Moziki” by Staff Benda Bilili
7/31 “Girls Can Fly” by Katcross