Everyone should know that there are people serving our country who believe that disorderly, law-breaking and violent response to police killing Black Americans are an overreaction. As was said on Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: We should be glad that all Blacks want it equality and not revenge.
“As we go through our busy days it’s normal to want to establish I-It relationships — with the security guard in your building or the office worker down the hall. Life is busy, and sometimes we just need to reduce people to their superficial function.
But personalism asks, as much as possible, for I-Thou encounters: that you just don’t regard people as a data point, but as emerging out of the full narrative, and that you try, when you can, to get to know their stories”
Beautiful, and important to remember especially in a time with such limited contact.
This is all well and good but the reason the US military does so many things that the writer (and many others) would prefer to be done by the private sector or other public entities is that few other organizations have the capacity. H/t to Rosa Brooks for eloquently making this point (How Everything Became War and the Military Became Everything) and proposing how we might begin to change that.
"Sexual violence is a political act... Women’s violent responses, ones we are often unwilling to treat even as self-defense are perhaps more usefully understood as a political act: a collective struggle for self-determination."
"Our already-outdated vision of national security as mere military primacy must finally be consigned to history, replaced by one that centers on human security." A little bit one-dimensional interpretation of military security but otherwise valid and important points.
'Even those who are ardently pro-choice rarely understand the layers of logistical, financial, informational and emotional difficulty intentionally added to the process of terminating an unwanted pregnancy in the United States."
Not in total agreement with the author's position - I think many previous admins, both republic and democrat, have chosen either soft power or indirect challenges. I believe Trump, while challenging China head on, has given more power to China's methods by acknowledging them as the large problem that they are.
What I did find very through provoking about this piece was another issue: the way the author describes Realism vs Institutionalism: "that the state remains the irreplaceable agent of international power and effective action, that international institutions have limited capacity to transform the behavior and preferences of states." I have always considered myself an institutionalsit (from my freshman year of college, and maybe even before that through high school Model UN) but I think what I've actually been, upon reflecting on this quote, is an aspirational institutionalist who is actually, when push comes to shove, a realist.
SO so important to understanding the three issues at stake in the upcoming supreme court hearing (this week!!): But allowing any part of Louisiana’s argument to become law would be no rhetorical exercise. It would have a devastating effect on millions of people. If that happens, don’t be fooled — Roberts will be making a choice.
I met Modi on a grad school trip in 2016 and he held a private meeting with us - just 20 students! But we were warned not to ask questions about violence against Muslims. What most struck me during the meeting is that he spoke in Hindi through a translator - even though he is fluent in English. The Indian students in our group described him talking as "like we were listening to Obama".
I resonate with absolutely everything in this piece. I run organized, regular dinner parties where people pay to attend. And all the time I am asked about my “side hustle”. I actually do have a side hustle, a part time job in addition to my full time job, which is about making money efficiently to supplement my regular income. But it is not hosting dinner parties, a labor of love (and time, sweat, brain energy, and physical energy) I charge people because I need to help cover costs and it is an effective way to stop people from flaking. I have often thought about what it would be like to quit my job and try to do this as a true source of income, usually during moments when I am mindlessly scrolling through IG. But then I remember, and the writer out this beautifully, “that admiration is not the same as envy.” I want my cooking to remain (and grow!) as a space for experimentation and risk taking - and not worry if people will continue to RSVP or meet my bottom line. I should post that quote on my fridge.
"...a feminist-driven, rights-based approach may be less effective than more “instrumental arguments of operational effectiveness.” Because “equality is simply not perceived as having anything to do with military operations.” Nor, I would argue, is equality yet perceived in many men’s minds as having anything to do with business results." This is an issue that many organizations struggle with, particularly in the progressive policy and social change space. We want to move the issue along for moral reasons. But that doesn't actually achieve the change we're looking for. Great article. One point the author doesn't address, though, is what to do when the business case doesn't work. In some sectors or organizations, it just doesn't make better business sense to gender balance. Then what? Do we still have an imperative to work towards or mandate gender balance?