World news you may have forgotten about

January 5th, 2009

It’s often hard to know, when a country drops out of the headlines, whether it’s done so because whatever strife brought it headlines has ended, or whether it’s simply been pushed out by some other new crisis. Gaza’s grabbed the headlines from most everywhere else in the world, with good reason, but other people are way better than me at blogging that conflict, so instead I’ll give you updates on some countries you may not be noticing now.

First, Greece, because, small though it may be, it’s the small country where my father was born. You may recall that a few weeks ago, Greece was experiencing its worst riots in many, many years, in response to two cops shooting a fifteen-year-old. What happened to those riots? Well, both riots and peaceful protests died down over Christmas. The #griots Twitter channel is now concerned with organizing protests in Greece against Israel’s actions in the Gaza. Prime Minister Karamanlis’ political problems, though, aren’t over, and the latest word is that he’s mulling over two choices for his cabinet reshuffle, and that said new cabinet will be announced in the next couple of days.

The Democratic Republic of Congo remains torn by fighting, as the UN feeds 18,000 victims of rebel attacks, and denounces “appalling atrocities” by the rebels. The Lord’s Resistance Army (which you may recall as rebels against the government of Uganda) has killed 400 Congolese villagers and attacked a Congolese army base. These attacks in the DRC lead to fear among the Acholi of northern Uganda (where the LRA started out) that the LRA will cross back over the border and resume attacks in Uganda. The president of the DRC has vowed to destroy the LRA rebels.

A piece of better news from Africa: Ghana has just completed elections in which the opposition party won. ECOWAS observers declared the election free and fair. The losing candidate congratulated the President-Elect, and the UN lauded the elections. A columnist in Ghana writes

… it is interesting enough to know why the world became curious because of election in one Sub-Saharan African country.

The answer is that for some years now the county has been referred to as a good example of democracy in Africa and any failure would have proven to the international community that we cannot get it right.

Thus when the Electoral Commission (EC) announced that Prof. John Atta-Mills has beaten his opponent, Nana Akufo-Addo to clench the presidency, the whole fear of the country being under tension dissolved like a piece of made up wax thrown into a burning furnace. Everyone one heaved a sigh of relief.

It is very remarkable to note that the election went so smoothly that there are no rumours or threats of suing the winners….

Links

January 3rd, 2009

Dubai, Shanghai, Mumbai, or the Highway.

Until hearing this speech, I had failed to realize how upset the rest of the world might be with the U.S. for its subprime crisis.

Think about it. U.S. banks make ill-advised loans to poor U.S. citizens. And what happens to the rest of the world? They lose half the value of their stocks. The annoyance over our high-leverage loans is particularly high in Muslim countries, where mortgages are inconsistent with Shariah.

Our defective state constitutions? (Or, does this crisis portend the end of what remains of robust federalism?)

We will kill you if you go to school.

Take the latest one from the Taliban: they have warned that in North-West Pakistan they will kill all girls who still go to school on January 15th, and that they will blow up schools who will enrol female students after that date.

A Global First: Openly Gay Appointee to a Nation’s Highest Court in South Africa.

Matthew Alexander on Torture. A former Special Operations interrogator on why torture does not make America safer.

On the Dignity of the Flesh in Christmastide: A Christian Response to Censoring Images of Breastfeeding on Facebook.

New Year’s resolution: Make 2009 the ‘Year of Africa’

Tragedy and the Commons: A Crowdsourcing Appeal. On different states’ approaches to roadside memorial shrines.

Ushahidi mapping war on Gaza.

Ushahidi was developed a year ago to map the violence last January following Kenyan elections. It has since been used in the DRC and now Al-Jazeera is using it to map and document the Israel’s attack war on Gaza.

Fires.. Meanwhile, NASA is mapping global fire activity.

England Pilots Non-Prescription Birth Control Pill Program.

Every Closet Door.

Metropolitan Community Church Initiates Fledging Church In Malaysia.

Brazilian taskforce frees 4,634 slaves after raids on remote farms.

Original Essay: The Not Rape Epidemic.

The Politics of Wizards and Vampires.

Save the Gays!

Scientists Isolate Genes that Made 1918 Flu Lethal.

It’s Academic.

In 2009 I Shall Wear Purple

January 1st, 2009

Open thread for fun New Year’s resolutions. If your resolution for 2009 is to floss more and eat more vegetables, you should be all means keep it, because dental work costs money and is a nuisance. But in that case don’t put it in the comments of this thread. This thread is for resolutions more in the spirit of this poem.

African Ingenuity Blogwatch

December 30th, 2008

Rwandan Diasporan Investment Fund-RDGN.

Re-using a wheeled carriage for babies to make a living.

IPhone to Kenya.

RPT-FEATURE-Women farmers toil to expand Africa’s food supply.

Farmer Innovation.

Hind Ali talks about her experience with the African Institute of Mathematical Sciences.

Episcopalians and Jews

December 30th, 2008

Razib produces lots of charts to examine how similar Episcopalians and Jews are.

Open Thread: Books for Fourth Graders

December 29th, 2008

Because I’m still being lazy about blogging, I’m declaring this an open thread, for suggestions of books fourth grade aged children might like to read for fun. Books for boys, girls, fiction, non-fiction, whatever.

Tomorrow I’ll do the African ingenuity blogwatch for the week.

“Barack the Magic Negro”

December 28th, 2008

As many people have already noted, this was a really dumb move for a candidate for RNC chair to make. The Economist’s Democracy in America blog notes

It means that the Republican chairman race pits two black candidates against a guy who once belonged to a whites-only country club and a guy who laughs at songs about “magic negroes.” Oh, and two other white guys.

But it’s the Economist’s half-hearted defense of Saltsman that I wanted to comment on.

In fairness to Mr Saltsman, the song parody (by Paul Shanklin, who contributes to Rush Limbaugh’s radio show) was a take-off on an opinion piece about the “magic negro” in pop culture. In fairness to everyone else, no one who thinks the Republican party needs to take its cues from talk radio can lead them to anything but another electoral defeat.

I’m sure the song was a comment on the op-ed, but it strikes me that both showed a tin ear for what the “Magic Negro” term actually means as pop-culture criticism. The point isn’t about movies showing benevolent black characters that white people like. It isn’t even about benevolent black characters that allow white people to feel good about themselves for liking them. The point is about black characters, often with some sort of magical/mystical power, who don’t get their own wishes and goals, but rather exist only to serve the white characters in the story. In the most extreme cases, they die in self-sacrificing ways. Certainly they don’t get the girl. Or otherwise get the story to be about their own success or failure at reaching their goals. They’re characters as plot devices.

So I don’t really see it as particularly enlightening to borrow that term and apply it to black people that happen to be popular among white people - whether it’s Obama, or Colin Powell, or Bill Cosby, or whoever. None of these guys is an especially benevolent and self-sacrificing guy who gives up any dreams of his own to ensure that the white people in the story thrive. Those guys are only found in fiction.

Links

December 27th, 2008

Philocrites: Megachurch pastor: UUs just don’t do transformation.

… This strikes me as keenly perceptive because it points to an aspect of Unitarian Universalism that we UUs seem deeply ambivalent about. Is it a feature or a bug that Unitarian Universalism is the religion you may already be practicing on your own without knowing it? …

Slate on What’s Going On in Greece? (Written on 12/22/2008. As of today, 12/27, it looks as if the protests have quieted down; ekathimerini isn’t relating any new ones, and the last posts on the #griots Twitter channel are from three days ago.)

Sandy Levinson: Can there be too much democracy? Yes.

Nichols concludes by writing that we currently have “an anti-democratic model for choosing senators. In fact, it is worse than the pre-1913 system of allowing state legislatures to do the picking.” There may be something to his general point, though the embrace of the pre-1913 system seems more than passing strange. But Nichols’s more important failure is to think of contingencies that make his suggestion really a terrible one. They involve what has come to be known as the “continuity in government” problem, triggered by, say, a hi-jacked plane crashing into the Capitol and killing or disabling lots of representatives and senators. Under the present Constitution, killed senators are no particular problem, since they can be replaced the very next day by senatorial appointment. (Disabled senators are another matter, precisely because they are not dead and therefore don’t create a “vacancy” that needs to be filled.) Both dead and disabled representatives, on the other hand, are a significant problems, precisely because the Constitution requires precisely what Nichols wishes for with regard to the Senate: All members of the House must be elected, none can be appointed….

The future is a shoe being thrown at a human face - forever! Actually about estimating the job-related death hazards of jobs like President, Prime Minister, and Pope.

Brazilian Military Blogging.

Paul Krugman: Bubble blindness.

… The big mystery is the failure to see the housing bubble. The data screamed “bubble”, even in real time….

Actually, the odd thing about this, to me, is that looking back I think I suspected a housing bubble myself, barely knowing anything about economics. At least, when I kept getting offers of home equity loans that assumed a value of way, way more than I’d paid for my house, and I passed them up, in the back of my mind was the thought that, yeah, I’d expected my equity to go up over time, but equity that went up by that much shouldn’t be relied on enough to take out loans on it.

Not that I can claim a whole lot of financial savvy just for not borrowing more money; it just occurs to me that people who know more than me about such things probably should have been suspicious.

Off to walk the dog.

Watching Milk in “Orange Fucking County”

December 23rd, 2008

There’s a point in “Milk” where Harvey Milk receives the news that John V. Briggs is attempting to qualify an initiative that would bar gay people from teaching in schools. How many signatures do they need to qualify? One of Milk’s associates wants to know. It doesn’t matter, says another. “They can get those signatures in one Sunday in Orange Fucking County.”

Watching the movie in Lake Forest, smack in the middle of “Orange Fucking County,” the audience laughed. And laughed again, a little later, when Milk asks Briggs for a debate anywhere, no matter how Briggs-friendly and Milk-hostile, “Give me Orange County.” And moments later you see the hostile faces in the audience in Fullerton, Orange County.

Orange County, the OC Register says, plays the villain in “Milk.” And not without reason; historically, Briggs was from Orange County, and had his base of support here, while Milk, of course, had his base in the Castro area of San Francisco. (The OC Register is careful to point out, though, that Proposition 6 went down to defeat even in Orange County. “Although Prop. 6 was more popular in Orange County than it was statewide, it still went down to defeat here by a margin of 53.8 percent to 46.1 percent. The statewide vote against it was 58 percent to 42 percent.”)

What’s striking, though, watching the film, is how much has changed in the past 30 years, and the ways in which it’s now safer to be gay here in “Orange Fucking County” than it was then in San Francisco.

The cultural gap between the two places is still there. Here in Orange County, Rick Warren is mainstream. Very mainstream. After we’d seen the movie, we drove to get dinner, right behind a car that sported one of Saddleback Church’s “You Matter to God” license plates. They’re all over our neighborhood, since we live right up the hill from the church. I’ve worked with several Saddleback Church members; Joel sometimes runs into one of their ministers when walking the dog. When the fires hit, last year, Saddleback was the big local church providing relief for people displaced by fire. Even among people who don’t attend the church, Pastor Rick is popular in this county, with his book, his work on hunger and AIDS, and his gentler evangelical style.

San Francisco, in contrast, is the place where the kindergarten class went to attend their teacher’s wedding to another woman - an event that was often referenced during the Proposition 8 battle as a sign of how same-sex marriages would be pushed on schoolchildren if legalized. And that outing (not, from what I’ve heard, an event organized by the school, but one organized by one of the kindergarten parents) actually strikes me as pretty much mainstream San Francisco, just as much as Rick Warren is mainstream Orange County.

And yet.

Orange County’s also the home of Laguna Beach, which has long housed a significant gay enclave, and which, in the early 1980s (not so long after Harvey Milk’s death) elected an openly gay mayor. Laguna Beach was one of the first cities to offer employment benefits to same-sex couples. San Francisco, whose Castro district was such a gay Mecca, was also the home of Dan White and his socially conservative Irish Catholic neighborhood. And the much resented Rich Warren has his complexities - openly lesbian performer Melissa Etheridge, over on the Huffington Post, relates a meeting with Rick Warren in which she finds him more open to her than she’d expected.

In fact, though Orange County does play something of a villain’s role in “Milk,” the bigger driving force in the movie is the internal politics of San Francisco. And it’s there, as I watch the repeated clashes between gay and lesbian people and cops, and Milk’s multiple attempts to win office before he’s finally elected supervisor in 1977, that I realize how much has changed.

I remember those days, even if I wasn’t as much in the thick of them as Milk or Cleve Jones. I came to California in the fall of 1978, to go to Stanford. Anita Bryant had just led her successful campaign to vote down that gay rights ordinance in Florida. (The movie shows a trend, as several gay rights ordinances are repealed by popular vote.) When I arrived, Proposition 6 was on the ballot, and my first political act in California was to join the campaign against it. I knew we could lose, but I didn’t realize, what the movie shows, how much the odds seemed to be stacked against us in the pre-election polls. I was young, the initiative seemed obviously unjust to me, and I expected obvious injustive to lose.

At the same time, how I felt walking up those stairs to the Gay People’s Union for the first time? Scared. I had grown up in the suburbs of New York and come to the suburbs of San Francisco, which you might think, in social conservative terms, would be moving from Sodom to Gomorrah. But in fact I had known zero openly gay people, not one, in my childhood hometown. One of my teachers was rumored to be gay, because his mannerisms were just a bit swish. One of my classmates confided in me that she had been attracted to other girls, but it was a phase she’d moved past. And that was it.

I remember other things. Where I was when I heard of the assassination of Moscone and Milk (student health center), the candlelit march I attended in San Francisco three years after the fact commemorating Milk (which almost erupted in anger, as people around me began shouting “No more singing! Fight back!”), the first Gay Pride parade I went to (right before the news of AIDS hit the major papers, with the Shanti Project the lone voice sounding the warning) and the second (the first post-AIDS one, where condom and safe sex promotion was suddenly big). The time I met someone who’d been at the White Night Riots. “Were you scared?” I asked, since the thought of being in the middle of a riot for any reason has certainly always scared me. And heard the answer, no, he wasn’t scared, but rather thrilled to be joining in the riot.

The movie, in what I think is a good dramatic choice, ends not with the trial, or the anger at White’s diminished capacity “Twinkie Defense,” and certainly not with the riots, but with the moment, after Milk’s death, when hordes of people gather to honor him in a candlelight march to City Hall. You need no recap of the “Twinkie Defense” controversy, though, to see why a manslaughter conviction brought on a riot, because the movie does show something else - the way in which Milk’s assassination by an ex-cop was the culmination of years of conflict between the San Francisco cops and the San Francisco gay community. And so, when White got the most lenient available conviction and sentence for his act, twelve police cruisers went up in flames.

Now, thirty years later, we’re still in conflict over gay rights, but the boundaries have shifted. Openly gay public officials are all over, including in Congress. Gay rights ordinances are commonplace. And the battle is joined, instead, over same-sex marriage. And gay and lesbian life seems more normalized, here in “Orange Fucking County,” than it felt thirty years ago in the San Francisco Bay Area.

As for the quality of the movie, I thought it was very good, with good acting both from Sean Penn as Harvey Milk and from Josh Brolin as Dan White.

As

Links

December 21st, 2008

I just got back from watching Milk, which brought back a lot of memories (I came to California in 1978 to go to Stanford, was involved in the campaign against the Briggs Initiative, and remember where I was when I heard of the deaths of Moscone and Milk). More on that later.

In the meantime, I want to promote a link that Peter Hoh suggested in a comment: incubators for premature infants, made entirely out of car parts. The idea is to have something that’s maintainable in developing countries, since

In truth, experts say, the developing world doesn’t need more incubators. It needs incubators that work. Over the years, thousands have been donated from rich nations, only to end up in “incubator graveyards” — most broken, some never opened. According to a 2007 study from Duke University, 96 percent of foreign-donated medical equipment fails within five years of donation — mostly because of electrical problems, like voltage surges or brownouts or broken knobs, or because of training problems, like neglecting to send user manuals along with the devices.

Some links found on the #griots Twitter channel:

Greece unrest eyewitness reports - 20 December 2008.

Anarchists (not in Greece) write about the importance of anarchists in the current unrest in Greece, and the ways in which Greek anarchists are more effectively organized than those in other countries.

Some updates on several conflicts in Africa:

Talks between Mugabe and the Zimbabwe opposition are still deadlocked.

Violence intensifies in Darfur.

A proposed UN force to replace the European peacekeepers in Chad next year.

Lord’s Resistance Army leader Joseph Kony is on the run and headed back to the Central African Republic.

The LRA have been moving between South Sudan, DR Congo and the Central African Republic via Dungu for the last two years. They were able to access fertile and populated areas of Haut Mbomou Prefecture, southeastern CAR.

(Reminder: the LRA are rebels against the government of Uganda, though Kony seems to manage to be everywhere but in Uganda.)

Peace talks resume in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Though I’m putting off the Milk blogging for later, I do want to point out this, written by my husband some years ago: The Martyrdom of
Mayor George Moscone.

Conscience and birth control

December 21st, 2008

I decided my response to José’s comment might prove to be longer than would do for a comment, so I’m making a post of it instead. José writes, of “conscience” laws:

Hi Lynn. We will remember that as pacifists we have historically often had our consciences assaulted as we refused to go to war when our nation was at war. We have been considered cowards and persecuted in many ways. As you know, some countries still do not recognize conscientious objectors and we would be imprisoned (at least men) if we refused military service. I know you understand how strongly pacifists seek to live up to their principles.

I’ll agree so far; in fact, that history of conscientious objection to military service, and a resulting concern, as a Quaker, for the importance of respect for conscience, is why my initial reaction to hearing of pharmacists’ requesting “conscience” protection was uncertainty, rather than automatic dismissal of the idea. (Liz Ditz wondered at the time why I was as sympathetic as I was.) Even conscientious objections that seem irrational to me - such as objections to dispensing birth control - are ones I’d want to be accomodated where they can be.

On the other hand, there’s a difference between asking a conscience exemption from being compelled by the government to do something - as in being drafted - and asking to be allowed to work for a company and being exempted from doing certain things one finds contrary to conscience. At a certain point, asking to take a job and not do things against one’s conscience can undercut the job itself. For instance, if I should apply, as a Quaker, to be a security guard, I might find that my options for accomodating my conscience while holding that job are limited; perhaps the company hiring me would no longer be willing to employ me should I not carry a gun.

Now, being employed in the medical field shouldn’t necessarily mean one has to give up on conscientious objections to all legal procedures whatsoever. In particular, the more a thing can reasonably be understood to be killing, the more I think a conscientious objection to it should be protected. I mentioned the assisted suicide laws in Oregon and Washington (which may yet spread - we’ve had multiple attempts to institure the same in California); I would hope that even the most avid supporters of such laws would understand why it would be horrible to compell Catholic hospitals, or for that matter individual doctors and nurses, to actively assist in such a thing contrary to their conscience. Some of the existing conscience laws (which can be found in one form or another in 46 states) are reasonable accomodations of moral objections to abortion.

Other factors that influence how reasonable it may be to respect a refusal to treat in a particular situation: 1) Is this a refusal to treat a particular class of patient, or a refusal to perform a particular type of procedure? The former would seem, in general, less worth respecting as a matter of conscience than the latter. 2) Is this an emergency situation? Refusing emergency contraception to a rape victim in the ER (something that becomes rapidly less effective in preventing pregnancy if delayed) is considerably more of an imposition than refusing fertility treatment (something people normally plan and schedule in advance). 3) Are you giving advance warning of your conscientious objection, or springing it on someone in the middle of treatment? If you have been filling a birth control prescription regularly, and suddenly announce when the woman shows up to have it refilled that you’ve developed a conscientious objection to continuing to dispense it, that’s a considerably greater imposition than if you’d announced the policy from the start and had it clearly posted. Similarly, if you’re employed at a pharmacy that does dispense birth control, and tell them ahead of time that you have an objection, it may be possible for them to accomodate both you and their customers. 4) Are you willing to refer to someone who doesn’t have an objection, or do you believe you should be protected from doing that as well?

We should not come up with exceptional scenarios of how someone may be somewhat inconvenienced so that we might thereby justify universally denying the sincere conscientious objections of pharmacists and others who may not dispense condoms or doctors who will not perform abortions, sterilization operations, etc. We are not asking too much to have our conscience respected by society. It’s a very small request.

And here’s where we have a major disagreement. I am not trying to come up with exceptional scenarios; I am relating situations that have already come up. Refusal to dispense birth control (particularly emergency contraception, but sometimes regular birth control pills as well) is the major battlefield here, and there have been repeated newspaper reports of such refusals. Sometimes pharmacists have been fired for such, and appealled to courts about the firing. The BBC reports, for example,

Julee Lacey, a mother of two, had used the Pill for nine years when a pharmacist at her local chemist in Texas refused her prescription.

“She [the pharmacist] began to tell me she personally does not believe in birth control,” says Ms Lacey.

“I was a little caught off-guard and shocked… I asked her again. She said: ‘No, ma’am, I don’t believe in birth control. I can’t help you’…

“I really couldn’t believe she had the right to withhold my medication from me,” she adds.

At first these were just isolated cases, mostly in the Midwest. But recently they have increased dramatically.

Refusal to have your ongoing Pill prescription dispensed (sometimes accompanied by refusal to transfer the prescription elsewhere) is not a small matter of being “somewhat inconvenienced.” Like other prescriptions, the Pill loses effectiveness if you are unable to refill in time and miss doses. This can have serious health consequences.

For starters, “the pill” is not just used for birth control. It turns out that “the pill” is used for many conditions where hormonal regulation is a must–PCOS (in which “the pill”, longterm, can be both lifesaving and fertility-saving; the only treatment for PCOS other than “The Pill” or Depo-Provera is surgical removal of the ovaries, and untreated PCOS can lead to morbid obesity, type II diabetes, and certain forms of cancer), as well as other problems of hormonal regulation, are commonly treated with “The pill”. Newer versions of “The Pill” such as Seasonale (that only have a “period cycle” once every three months) are also becoming frequently used for treatment of endometriosis.

Secondly, there are conditions where it would be very harmful–to the mother, to the fetus, or both–for her to become pregnant, and not having effective hormonal therapy could well deprive women of healthcare options unrelated to pregnancy. Among other things, prescriptions for a number of drugs including Thalomid (thalidomide, now used both in leprosy treatment and in clinical trials for various cancers) and Accutane and other retinoids (used in treatment of severe, disabling acne and certain types of psoriasis as well as basal cell carcinoma chemo) require you to be on at least two separate forms of birth control (one hormonal, one a barrier method) unless you have had a hysterectomy–and yes, documentation is required of this.

And even in the case where you don’t have a health related reason to be on the Pill - the case where you’re simply, like Ms Lacey, a mother of two who doesn’t want additional children, having a simple refill your prescription prove to be a gamble, with the prescription suddenly being unexpectedly denied because a different pharmacist is on duty is not such a small inconvenience. It may mean that you miss doses and get pregnant - assuming, that is, that you still want to have sex with your husband (either condoms or the Pill with missed doses are considerably less effective than the Pill properly used and reliably refilled).

Then there’s the matter of emergency contraception. Because this is taken after intercourse, there’s a set of people who treat it as if it were abortifacient in a way the the regular Pill isn’t, but the medical evidence in both cases is toward a primary mechanism of preventing conception, not of allowing conception and preventing implantation. Sperm normally have a longer effective life than eggs; fertilization works best if the sperm get into your reproductive system before the egg does, that is, a little before ovulation. The fact that emergency contraception, such as Plan B, rapidly declines in effectiveness over time and is not much use at all if you don’t get it within a couple of days is an indication that, unlike RU-486, it’s mechanism of action is interference with conception (implantation happens later). The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists writes

The broad debate about refusals to dispense emergency contraception, for example, has been complicated by misinformation and a prevalent belief that emergency contraception acts primarily by preventing implantation. However, a large body of published evidence supports a different primary mechanism of action, namely the prevention of fertilization. A review of the literature indicates that Plan B can interfere with sperm migration and that preovulatory use of Plan B suppresses the luteinizing hormone surge, which prevents ovulation or leads to the release of ova that are resistant to fertilization. Studies do not support s major postfertilication mechanism of action. Although even a slight possiblity of postfertilization events may be relevant to some women’s decisions about whether to use contraception, provider refusals to dispense emergency contraception based on unsupported beliefs about its primary mechanism of action should not be justified.

Now, all of this need not be an issue if accomodations are sought that allow a pharmacist to refuse to dispense ER while preserving a pharmacy’s ability to dispense it to patients who need it. But in fact, a number of the cases reported in the media appear to involve peremptory refusals of applications for emergency contraception, along with an expectation that the pharmacist should have the right to continue to be employed by the pharmacy while making such a refusal. In at least one reported case in Texas, a pharmacist is said to have refused to give ER to a woman who was a rape victim. I think concern for his conscience needs to be balanced against her right to protect herself from becoming pregnant by a rapist; she is certainly under no moral obligation to permit his sperm access to her egg.

Now, mutual accomodations may be able to be reached that respect both considerations, if sufficient advance notice is provided by the party wanting the right of conscientious refusal. And that’s fine. But if a provision is written into law protecting the party that wants the right of refusal, some provision needs also to be made, in law, for the party who wants a reasonably reliable ability to prevent pregnancy (including in the case of rape).

Failing that, straight libertarianism - pharmacies choose whether to dispense birth control and are free to fire employees who don’t comply, anti-contraception pharmacists seek employment with anti-contraception pharmacies while women wanting contraception go to pro-contraception pharmacies - would be a better accomodation of both interests than a law allowing a broad right of refusal and not considering the effect of such a broad right of refusal on the ability to get birth control.

Because, given the number of such refusals, sometimes lacking advance notice, and sometimes including refusal to transfer prescriptions, I really do believe that at least some of the people involved actually want to make it more difficult for women to get birth control, rather than simply looking for accomodation for their own conscience.

Pharmacist Refusal and Require to Fill Laws

December 20th, 2008

Here’s a summary, as of November 2007, by state, of laws either allowing pharmacists to refuse to fill, or requiring pharmacists to fill, prescriptions that they may find objectionable. There is considerable variation by state.

New HHS Rule

December 20th, 2008

New York Times story: Medical ‘Conscience Rule’ Is Issued.

The rule prohibits recipients of federal money from discriminating against doctors, nurses and health care aides who refuse to take part in procedures because of their convictions, and it bars hospitals, clinics, doctors’ office and pharmacies from forcing their employees to assist in programs and activities financed by the department.

Our Bodies, Our Blog, HHS Publishes New “Conscience” Rule — What’s Next?

Link to the full regulation (125 pages long - most of those pages seem to be arguments that all the comments received objecting to the proposed regulation were wrong).

Senators Murray and Clinton Call for Action to Reverse HHS Regulation Limiting Women’s Access To Care. And an earlier related statement from Sen. Clinton.

For the record, there are some possible “conscience” regulations that I’d support. For example, Oregon and Washington now have assisted suicide laws; I totally believe that any hospital, doctor, or nurse who doesn’t want to participate in such should have their conscientious objection respected. And there may be other more narrowly crafted “conscience” exemptions for Catholic hospitals that I could have supported. Preferably legislative exemptions (more open debate that way), and preferably done at the state level (this level of health care regulation seems to me more in the domain of the states than of the Federal government).

But, given that pharmacists have already been attempting to claim “conscience” exemptions to prevent them from being fired should they refuse to dispense birth control, I think any “conscience” rule that gets promulgated should clearly protect the right of health care organizations to fire the ass of any employee whose “conscientious” refusal disrupts their ability to reliably dispense birth control. This regulation doesn’t do this. (The fact that it says “abortion” isn’t sufficient reassurance, since the people making the “conscience” claims about birth control claim that certain forms of birth control are abortion.) So I’m disturbed to see this slipped in at the close of Bush’s term, and hoping for passage of the Clinton-Murray law overturning it.

Ack! Attempt to nullify existing CA same-sex marriages

December 20th, 2008

Proposition 8 sponsors really are trying to get the California Supreme Court to nullify the marriages of the gay and lesbian couples already married here. That’s ugly.

Both Attorney General Jerry Brown, whose office is scheduled to submit its own brief to the court Friday, and gay rights groups maintain that the gay marriage ban may not be applied retroactively.

The Supreme Court could hear arguments in the litigation as soon as March….

I know even some people who voted for the proposition here didn’t expect it to apply retroactively. Forcibly divorcing people that the state already allowed to be married is creepy. Also troubling given that they may already have entered contracts that were based on their being married couples.

Friday Movie Blogging: The Shooting Party and Jungle Fever

December 19th, 2008

The Shooting Party: Rich, aristocratic mostly English people, and their servants, are gathered at a country estate for a shooting party, just prior to WWI. What will happen with the guy who’s visibly in love with a married woman? What about the animal rights fellow who is trying to stop the shooting? Will the child’s pet duck get loose on duck hunting day and get shot? One thing is clear; in a few years, many of these men will be dead. Nicely done interactions between the large cast of characters. Not sure how better I can describe it without giving away the plot.

Jungle Fever: Joel missed the beginning of this one, on grounds that he doesn’t much like movies about adultery. (”Remember how I didn’t watch that one where Richard Gere was the wronged husband?” “And you knew he was going to be sympathetic because he was Richard Gere?” “Richard Gere was a good slime in Chicago …” “But whether he’s nobly wronged or slimy, he always gets to play sexy.”) He came in after Flipper Purify and Angie had started their liaison, sat through some of the reaction, and left when Angie getting beaten by her father proved too much for him (it is a grim scene).

I liked the early scenes setting up the two families - the opening sex scene with Flipper and his wife, the scenes with his daughter (remembering what Eve said about the child in Eyes Wide Shut, I’ll say that this child introduced in Act One does go off later in the movie - if not so loudly as certain other characters go off), the scene with Angie cooking dinner for her father and brothers.

Does it say bad things about me that I found the Flipper/Angie sex scene hotter than the one with his wife? I generally find this to be the case with adulterous vs. marital sex scenes in movies, and I’m not sure whether the reason is that the movies are all making the adulterous sex scenes hotter, or whether it says that I have some not so desirable pattern of connecting sexiness with illicitness.

I’ve read this movie described as being an expression of Spike Lee’s negative attitudes toward interracial relationships. I don’t know what Spike Lee’s actual attitudes are about interracial relationships, or what he may have said in interviews, but I don’t get that out of the movie. Flipper Purify (whose very name seems meant to express his instability) is, indeed, getting involved with a white woman for all the wrong reasons, even if you set aside the Really Big Red Flag that he’s married, and therefore shouldn’t be getting involved with anyone at all, besides his wife. But he’s carefully balanced with Paulie, and the “Be brave young lovers, and follow your star” that sounds in the background as gentle Paulie finds the nerve to stand up to his father and the guys in the neighborhood and pursue the black woman he likes is about as obvious a sign of approval as any of the red flags are signs that you’re not to approve of Flipper.

Rather, what interracial relationships are in the world of this film is dangerous. The movie’s dedicated to Yusuf Hawkins, and violence crops up repeatedly - Angie’s father’s attack on her, the beating Paulie gets on his way to date the black woman, even the police scene where Angie’s defending Flipper with “he’s my boy friend” while Flipper pleads with her to shut up and insists they’re just friends (FWIW, I empathized with Angie, as I’d probably have reacted about as she did if I’d ever been in that situation). And, if the background music approves of, at least, Paulie, almost none of the movie’s characters are OK with interracial romance (even of the non-adulterous variety).

The black characters in this movie felt more fully rounded, to me, than the Italian-American characters. (I didn’t get this sense, so much, with Do the Right Thing, another Spike Lee movie which also covers racial conflict between Italians and blacks in New York City.) It’s not exactly that the portrayal of the Italians was more negative than the portrayal of the blacks - the Italian working class neighborhood in the movie may have a strong streak of violence, but it’s paired with a pretty darn dysfunctional black family - adulterous son, drug-addicted son, self-righteous father whose religion is headed in a really unpleasant direction. Just about everyone in this movie, black or white, is messed up. And Angie and Paulie both come off positive (even if Angie’s making a big mistake in getting involved with Flipper). And it’s not that the portrayal of Italian-American racism is devoid of nuance (at least, you get to hear where these working class Italian-Americans feel one down relative to WASPs, as well as where they’re bigoted against black people). Partly, I think, it’s the fact that the crackhead brother subplot supplies a family which, however dysfunctional, has other preoccupations besides color, which the plot doesn’t afford the Italian-Americans. And partly it’s that the “war party” conversation of Flipper’s betrayed wife and her friends - one of the best scenes of the movie - just outshines anything the Italian-American characters get. At any rate, Flipper’s family’s the emotional center of the film, and Angie’s neighborhood sometimes seems in danger of slipping into character as portrayal of social problem mode.

Minor personal note: As regular readers know, I’m Greek-American and grew up in the suburbs of New York City. There’s a scene where Flipper gets Angie, who is from Bensonhurst, to admit that she’s never been to Harlem. And I realized that, though I’ve been to Harlem multiple times, and I’ve been to Brooklyn multiple times, I don’t think I’ve ever been to Bensonhurst.

Friday Pirate Blogging

December 19th, 2008

Here’s more fuel for one of those pained Nice Guy(TM) rants about how patiently being a woman’s Best Friend Forever who never dares to make a move just doesn’t win you any women: Not only are Somali pirates playing havoc with trade in the Horn of Africa; in the process they’re getting the attention of a whole lot more pretty women than you are.

While their countrymen suffer through another political crisis and the looming threat of famine, pirates are splashing hundred-dollar bills like play money around the nowhere towns of northern Somalia.

Residents say that the pirates are building houses, buying flashy cell phones and air-conditioned SUVs, gifting friends and relatives with hundreds and sometimes thousands of dollars and winning the attention of beautiful women, who seem to be flocking to pirate towns from miles around.

Meanwhile, food aid to Somalia is threatened by piracy. And also by militia on the land. Islamist militia at the port town of Kismayo seized World Food Programme trucks, and warned the WFP that it should cease operations in the Lower Jubba region. A militia leader claims that the food shipments are making farmers jobless.

UN Secretary General Ban warns that piracy cannot be separated from the overall crisis in Somalia.

“We must be mindful that piracy is a symptom of the state of anarchy which has persisted in that country for over 17 years,” Mr. Ban told the 15-member [Security Council], which unanimously adopted a resolution reiterating earlier calls to countries and regional organizations with the necessary capability to deploy naval ships and military aircraft off the coast and laying out additional measures to bring the pirates to justice and possibly go after them on land.

Some lighter posts from the African blogosphere

December 18th, 2008

Good news: Men who read Mandela turn women on.

They’ve Been Served: On Facebook! What An African Woman Thinks writes about an Australian story about legal documents being served to a Facebook account.

Dell’s Africa Inspired Art Laptops.

Also, on a more serious note from AllAfrica.com, a new malaria vaccine could be licensed by 2011.

Coming tomorrow, updates on Darfur, the Democratic Republic of Congo, etc.

Giant protest banners at Acropolis as Greece awaits Cabinet reshuffle

December 18th, 2008

Embattled Greek Prime Minister Costas Karamanlis spoke Tuesday admitting mistakes in the Vatopedi land swap scandal and vowing to fight corruption. He is expected to announce a Cabinet reshuffle before the end of the month.

Meanwhile, the protests took a dramatic but peaceful turn, as protestors placed giant pink banners at the Acropolis, calling for demonstrations in solidarity all over Europe. There was also a three hour strike by air traffic controllers and an all day hospital walk out that left only skeleton crews at hospitals.

The International Herald Tribune discusses the role of Athens Polytechnic University in the protests.

The National Technical University of Athens, as the Polytechnic is officially called, is one of Greece’s leading universities, training engineers, architects and scientists since 1836. It moved its main campus outside the city center in the 1980s, leaving its downtown buildings, which now house just the architecture and engineering departments and an auditorium, largely to the whims of protest groups.

The university administration has tended to view the demonstrators as uninvited houseguests who overstayed their welcome so long ago that they have become fixtures.

But these protests have been different. “In former times, a couple of years ago, there were only students protesting,” said Konstantinos Moutzouris, the rector of the Polytechnic. “This time there are all kinds of groups — this is difficult to control.”

Conversations with those inside the Polytechnic revealed a mix of students, older anarchists and immigrants protesting everything from police brutality to globalization to American imperialism….

Under an asylum law instituted after the police crushed a student rebellion at the Polytechnic against the military junta in 1973, the Greek police are not allowed on universities’ property unless requested by administrators.

Tensions between the police and protesters are so high that Moutzouris said asking the police to intervene would cause even more disorder….

Adding to the tensions, the police are seen here as both overly aggressive and disconcertingly passive….

More background links:

The best account I can find of anarchism in Greece is Wikipedia’s.

For background on the Vatopedi land scandal, you can check out this International Herald Tribune article from October.

A scandal over more than 250 questionable land swaps is threatening to bring down the Greek government and tarnishing a storied Greek monastic society.

Two government officials have already resigned over the dealings, in which a wealthy Orthodox monastery traded cheap tracts of lakeside property for prime public real estate, including a former housing venue for the 2004 Athens Olympics. An initial judicial inquiry put the loss to the state at $136 million….

In Olden Days, a Glimpse of Stocking …

December 17th, 2008

In the old days, when Dad was young, in Greece, he told me, teenagers didn’t date. They hung out in groups, hoping to meet likely members of the opposite sex. Dad, once he hit his teens and discovered girls, would head for the beach (not far in the harbor town of Volos) to meet girls he liked.

I thought of this when I read Hermione Gray’s In Defense of the “Hook-up Culture.” The post has an unusual history: published at the conservative Culture11 site, it was first removed by a site administrator there, a removal that led to protest about censorship elsewhere. The post was then restored by another site administrator, with a note that

Culture11 is a conservative site. We see the world through a culturally conservative lens. As such the post isn’t something that anyone here particularly agreed with. We don’t believe the hookup lifestyle is good for anyone. That being said, we believe the discussion that the post raised is an important one that speaks to core principles… principles that are vitally important for us to address.

So, let the discussion continue as it already has …

The Gray’s post itself, though, sounds notes familiar to me, as I’ve seen similar criticisms on other blogs of Blow’s New York Times op ed on The Demise of Dating. Blow writes:

(For those over 30 years old: hooking up is a casual sexual encounter with no expectation of future emotional commitment. Think of it as a one-night stand with someone you know.)

According to a report released this spring by Child Trends, a Washington research group, there are now more high school seniors saying that they never date than seniors who say that they date frequently. Apparently, it’s all about the hookup….

It turns out that everything is the opposite of what I remember. Under the old model, you dated a few times and, if you really liked the person, you might consider having sex. Under the new model, you hook up a few times and, if you really like the person, you might consider going on a date.

Hermione Gray counters:

I think that the so-called “hook-up culture” is the natural result of a cultural shift that has permitted men and women to form more and deeper platonic attachments: as fellow students, as work colleagues, as good friends and confidants. The ritual of traditional dating – in which you took an attractive near-stranger to dinner in order to get to know her better – was popular in an era of gender-segregated colleges and workplaces, which offered few other opportunities for meaningful interaction between the sexes.

…While it seems true that men experience, on average, fewer downsides to purely casual sex, the hook-up culture may encourage more rather than less responsibility. After all, you will see a friend again, especially if you have many mutual friends. While sex between strangers does happen, I’d argue that today’s paradigmatic hook-up partners know each other better than a typical 1950s couple on a third date at the drive-in movie theater, and are more likely to be on speaking terms a few months later….

A commenter (who turns out to have her own Hooking Up Smart site argues that, while surveys show hookups to be common, “73% of girls wish dating was more common.”

When I read this kind of debate, here and elsewhere, it strikes me that some things are getting confounded that should be disentangled.

  1. Is it OK to have “no strings” sex - one night stands, “friends with benefits” booty calls, sex that may or may not lead to a “relationship” but certainly isn’t considered to already be part of a relationship?
  2. Are people in college really having sex on more casual terms than people were a generation ago?
  3. Is traditional 1950s style dating the best available model for courtship? One to which we should perhaps be returning?

Now, traditional courtship for my father’s generation in Greece, by his account, didn’t involve a lot of dating. Traditional courtship for my mother’s generation in the US, same time period, was all about dating. But I have no reason to believe that Greek families in the 1940s (in between coping with foreign occupation and civil war) were any more accepting of casual and promiscuous sex on the part of their daughters, in particular, than American families of the same time period. Greeks had their own set of traditional customs for managing courtship, customs that, for my parents’ generation, weren’t particularly about approving one night stands (even for consenting adults) in either country.

So, the question about how people get to know each other is separate form the question of whether sex belongs with some minimal level of love and commitment. And the question of whether 1950s dating norms were better than those of my generation, and whether those of my generation were any better (or any different) from those of the current crop of college students, is at least logically separate from the question of whether “no strings” sex is best avoided. Personally, I think that “no strings” sex is in general a snare and a delusion - that, though some people, with particular care about both expectations and birth control, may be able to have subjectively mutually satisfactory “no strings” sex, stringlessness is very far from being the default condition of sex. That expecting the person you’re having sex with not to fall in love with you is, in fact, itself no small string. And I also believe that the 1950s weren’t some ideal Golden Age of Dating. And I don’t really think those two beliefs are in conflict.

Similarly, Rod Dreher has a beef with hip hop.

Is Marvin Gaye singing “Let’s Get It On,” or Van Morrison singing about getting jiggy with his “Brown-Eyed Girl” in the sweet summer sun more crude, relatively, than Cole Porter or even Shakespeare? Of course. But there is still a generous humanity present, a real artistry, in the sense that art concentrate, refines and beautifies the raw material of life. It’s a humanity about sex that you just don’t see in popular songs today (hip-hop is the most egregious genre, but by no means the only one). And if you don’t think it matters, imagine that the female object of the singer’s attentions is your daughter. Imagine that the young man courting your daughter has had his moral imagination shaped by that singer’s debased art. Imagine that the culture we live in has absorbed that artist’s barbaric worldview, and acculturates the next generation according to its values.

A lively debate ensues in the comments about whether hip hop is, in fact, any more debased than the music of the 60s and 70s. What about the Rolling Stones? At the same time, other commenters question whether, for adults anyway, there’s anything really wrong with rawer sexual lyrics.

In fact, I remember singing along with the Beatles “Why Don’t We Do It In the Road?” as a child (though “I Want to Hold Your Hand” and “Will I wait a lonely lifetime? If you want me to, I will” were actually more typical of Beatles’ songs’ attitudes toward romance). I remember that one of the most popular songs, my freshman year in high school, was about a prostitute, and had a chorus of “Voulez vous couchez avec mois” - will you sleep with me? I remember singing that song, and that chorus, in part because of the shock-your-elders value of those words. I remember the passing line in a Billy Joel song “Your sister’s out, she’s on a date, you just sit at home and masturbate.” And then there’s that good old Hair song “Sodomy,” which I also learned as a small child. Sure, no shortage of sexual lyrics in the songs of the 60s and 70s.

I’ve also, though my knowledge of rap and hip hop is sketchy, seen some songs which, however sexual their references, do seem to have that humanity present that Rod calls for. The Usher video that one of the younger members of the family put on my Facebook wall isn’t any more disrespectful of women than, say, Marvin Gaye was. The “This revolution is not between my thighs” song that some of the younger feminist bloggers like is sexually overt enough, but it’s anti objectification, all about not being used, and I, for one, wouldn’t be bothered at all by the nephews and nieces hearing it.

That’s a different thing, though, from saying that the tone of how songs talk about sex doesn’t matter at all, that Rod doesn’t have any business protecting his kids from certain lyrics, or even that adults can’t point out to other adults what’s problematic in certain lyrics. Of course they can. Some songs aren’t just sexually raw, they seem to express actual dislike for the objects of desire. And there’s a world of difference between songs that express a dislike or disdain for women and “Let’s Get It On.” I certainly care whether lyrics about sex include, as Rod puts it, a generous humanity.

I’m not prepared to take any position on how bad hip hop lyrics are, in general. Less deserving of sweeping condemnation than Rod says, probably, because Ta-Nehisi Coates (whose values I trust here, and who knows more about hip hop than either me or Rod) defends hip hop. At the same time, when my nieces, a few years ago, gave me Christmas gift lists of nothing but hip hop, I didn’t just pick something off the list that they liked. I went and found people who shared my values and knew enough about the artists to be able to tell me which ones were OK in their attitudes toward women, and which ones not so much, and then I made my picks. So, it’s not that I believe in giving hip hop (or, for that matter, the Rolling Stones) a pass on lyrics. Or even that it couldn’t be the case that lyrics - in hip hop or elsewhere - really are getting worse in some of their attitudes. It’s more that, first, music and lyrics don’t have to be any worse than they were in our generation for it to be OK for parents of young kids to exercise normal parental supervision, and that, second, even if the lyrics are, in some respect or other, getting worse, it’s worth looking for those that are good, rather than condemning the whole lot of them.

Greek youths break into state TV station

December 17th, 2008

From the Huffington Post: Greek Youths Break Into State TV Center, Broadcast Protest Message.

A Greek web site on the same event.

Also at the Huffington Post: the Greek Information Minister defends the government, and here’s a post from last week on Greece Riots: All You Need To Know (VIDEO).

More photos.

Financial Times last week on Greek wildfire:

Greek politics can be correspondingly raw: with family dynasties often treating both party and state as personal patrimony. Two aspects of this culture – vested interests that shade into corruption, and a robust tradition of public protest – keep colliding in ever more combustible ways, as the buildings ablaze in downtown Athens well attest.

It does not help that the Greek left – divided between unreconstructed Stalinists and Socialists who veer between European social democracy and populist nationalism – has left a lot of room for self-styled anarchist groups and a lumpen underclass. . At the moment, however, it is the conservative government of Costas Karamanlis that is fighting for its life, and the Socialists led by George Papandreou who scent electoral opportunity….

Amnesty International, last week, on Greece: Failing system of police accountability.

As anti-government demonstrations continue in Greece for the fourth day running, Amnesty International calls for a clear commitment by the authorities to end the unlawful and disproportionate use of force by police.

Council for Foreign Relations, last week, on the Greek riots:

Kathimerini, the Greek English-language newspaper, reports the escalation of tensions follows a failed attempt by Greece’s Prime Minister Costas Karamanlis to find common ground with opposition leaders. The Economist says Karamanlis appears increasingly vulnerable–his party holds a majority of just one seat in the 300-seat parliament, and he is increasingly unpopular in opinion polls. Moreover, the piece says, Karamanlis has ignored calls for social reform, particularly in education, health, and policing, fueling tensions that have in part worked to fan the current protests. A news analysis from the BBC, meanwhile, says the riots seem likely to continue for the near-term future, adding that a culture of rebellion is deeply embedded in the Greek national psyche.

The Guardian has an article reporting on the various grievances of the demonstrators, in their words. The New York Times has a photo slideshow of the demonstrations….

A Short History of Modern Greece

December 16th, 2008

For whatever it may be worth to those of my readers who don’t have much background on Greek politics, here you are.

After several centuries of Ottoman rule, Greece won its independence in the nineteenth century; the war of independence lasted from 1821-1829, and the treaty settling it was signed in 1832. (Personal note: One of the heroes of Greek independence was a monk named Anthimos Gazis - the same last name as my own family. We don’t know him to be an actual relative, though.)

When it gained independence, Greece was a much smaller country than it is now, containing only about a third of the Greeks in the Ottoman Empire. Major chunks of what is now Greece, including Crete, Epirus, Macedonia, and the Aegean Islands, were still under Ottoman rule. My own grandparents were born under Ottoman rule, in Kozani and Thessaloniki. The Ellis Island immigration records for my great-aunt and great-uncle show them as immigrating from the Ottoman Empire (if I remember right, their nationality actually got listed as Turkish, though they were, of course, ethnically Greek). Greek politics for the rest of the nineteenth century, and the early twentieth century, was dominated by the Megali Idea - the desire to unite all Greeks in one country.

Greece was established as a monarchy, initially with a King Otto, from Bavaria, being installed by the great European powers. When he proved too autocratic for the Greeks and was deposed, the Greek National Assembly brought in a Danish prince to become George I, the first King of the dynasty that would rule Greece for the next century. Under George I and successors, Greece was a constitutional monarchy.

For much of the twentieth century, Greece was politically divided between royalists and liberals. (My own grandmother, my father always said, was a staunch royalist, who named her children after the kings of Greece. Conveniently for her, the first two kings of Greece also had the names of the two grandfathers, who, by Greek custom, would already expect to have her first two sons named for them.) Among the liberals was the greatest of Greek statesmen, Eleftherios Venizelos, who served as Prime Minister multiple times. Venizelos modernized Greece, and his reorganization of the army and navy prepared Greece for its victories in the Balkan Wars.

These Balkan Wars, in 1912 and 1913, first rested Macedonia from the Ottoman Empire, and then divided it between Greece, Serbia, and Bulgaria (which three countries had fought the Ottoman Empire together, but then disagreed about the spoils). Bulgaria, wanting a port, tried to seize the great port city of Thessaloniki. My father told me that my grandmother remembered her father and uncles going out to fight the Bulgarians, singing “What has Bulgaria to do with Macedonia?” Thessaloniki, at this time, was a city with a very large Sephardic Jewish population, in addition to Greeks and Turks; my grandmother grew up speaking Turkish and Ladino (a version of Spanish spoken by Sephardic Jews), as well as Greek. This Jewish community would later be almost entirely killed by the Nazis.

Victory in the Balkan Wars brought popularity to both Venizelos and the king, but Venizelos and the monarchy would later split over whether Greece should enter the first world war. The king at that time, Constantine I, was sympathetic to the German side due to family ties with that royal family, and therefore wished to stay neutral, while Venizelos saw siding with the English and French as in Greece’s best interests. In the end, Venizelos won out, and Greece entered WWI, late, on the Allied side.

After WWI, England and France permitted Greece to occupy parts of the Ottoman Empire (which had been on the losing side), an opportunity that Greece welcomed because it still hoped (in the spirit of the Megali Idea) to unite to itself Greeks in Anatolia (including what had once been the capital Byzantine city of Constantinople). This enterprise, though, was not so successful. Kemal Ataturk, founder of modern Turkey, rallied the Turkish army, England and France abandoned their support for Greece, and the final result was Smyrna in flames. The result of what my aunt called “the Great Catastrophe” (also known, in Wikipedia, as “the Great Disaster”) was the end of the Megali Idea, and massive dislocation, as Greece received 1 million refugees from Turkey (in exchange for 500,000 Muslims going from Greece to Turkey). At this point, a very large portion of the Greek population were refugees from Asia Minor.

I skip over the political details of who got deposed and brought to power when during the following years, but suffice to say that conflict between royalist and anti-royalist factions in Greece continued, until finally Metaxas came to power, and established a military dictatorship. Metaxas ruled Greece at the beginning of WWII; I suppose you could see him as part of a European-wide trend, in those days, toward fascism. He also, in Greek political terms, represented the royalist portion of the army. (At this time, my own grandfather was an officer and civil engineer in the Greek Army, and before the war was involved in the construction of the Metaxas line, which was sort of Greece’s version of the Maginot line.)

Though Metaxas was politically not unlike Mussolini, he wasn’t willing to have Mussolini dictate terms to him; when Mussolini sent Metaxas an ultimatum, Metaxas said no, an event celebrated by Greeks as “Ochi Day” (Ochi being No in Greek). Greece defeated Italy (not bad for a small country), and was then occupied by Germany. (My grandfather died at this point, and my grandmother was left to raise five children alone in occupied Greece. As an officer’s wife, she was to have been evacuated to Athens, but ran into difficulty on the way, and so the family settled in Volos for the duration of the war.) The occupation was brutal, and many Greeks went hungry. Multiple guerrilla groups resisted the occupation, and the Nazis retaliated harshly.

As soon as Allied troops liberated Greece, the country became embroiled in a civil war, between the Communist-friendly guerrillas and the Communist-unfriendly ones. (One of my uncles had run away at the age of sixteen to join the guerrillas, and lost a hand fighting on the anti-Communist side.) The anti-Communist side won.

Hoover Institution, at Stanford, has boxes of documents from Greece during this period, which I’ve looked through. There’s a Greek-American with family ties to ELAS/EAM (the leftist/Communist-friendly guerrilla group), who, in his role of working for the US, is trying to persuade the US to support that side (which, of course, didn’t happen). There are claims that the other side includes people who were Nazi collaborators, and there are pamphlets saying things like “this is what the Communists have done” and showing dead bodies. There are reports, in Greek, of Nazi troop movements. And there are reports of election observers from Greece’s first post-war elections.

Anyway, the civil war, as is the way of civil wars, was brutal, and left some lasting resentments (see Nick Gage’s Eleni, about his mother’s death, for one such story about the Communists).

After the civil war, Greece was a parliamentary democracy, with a king, until 1967, when a military junta came to power. Greece was then under the rule of a military junta from 1967-1974. The fall of the junta was preceded by a massive student demonstration known as the Athens Polytechnic uprising of 1973; this led first to a reorganizing of the junta, but it then fell the next year, after some really bad moves in Cyprus that led to the Turkish invasion there.

When the junta fell, Constantinos Karamanlis returned from self-exile to head the government and found the center-right Nea Demokratia party (the party that now governs Greece and is now led by his nephew Costas Karamanlis). The king, however, was not brought back - he had been removed by the junta after an abortive counter-coup, but remained unpopular in Greece (among other things, for swearing in the junta in the first place), and so his removal was confirmed by plebiscite.

Since 1974, Greece has been a parliamentary democracy, with a prime minister as head of government and a president as head of state. The two largest parties are Nea Demokratia (center-right) and PASOK (center-left); smaller parties trailing far behind these two include the Communist Party of Greece (KKE), the Coalition of the Radical Left, and the Popular Orthodox Rally.

What parts of this history may be relevant to the current strife? Well, the part about the junta and the student resistance to it may have some relevance; the abuses of the junta did degrade trust in the police, and the students in the Athens Polytechnic uprising were heroes for their role in leading up to the fall of the junta. It has, of course, been more than thirty years since the junta - but here in the US we still sometimes find ourselves refighting conflicts of the sixties, even now.

One thing I’m not sure of is where the Greek anarchist movement comes, out of all of this. Greece has a much more active anarchist movement than the US - perhaps that dates back to resistance to the junta? I’m a bit weak in my knowledge of Greek anarchist history.

Today’s ekathimerini brings the news of sit ins in scores of Greek academic buildings, along with three different editorial/commentary pieces.

Calling a spade a spade calls on the leaders of Greek universities to act:

Anonymous protests and theatrics will simply not do this time.

When they know that a university campus has been occupied by individuals who use it as a military depot in which to store their ammunition for street fighting, the academic community must ask the state to intervene.

Six in 10 criticizes the government.

Six out of 10 people questioned in a poll for Kathimerini define the events of recent days as a “social uprising.” This is exactly what the foreign media has been saying for the past 10 days, even if the Greek government refuses to define it as such. The same number also said that this is a mass movement and not the work of individuals. It’s unlikely that all the people questioned are agents of the Coalition of the Radical Left (SYRIZA)….

The government has never defined nor assumed what its political responsibility is in all this, probably because it isn’t sure how well its shoulders will hold up under the burden. It hasn’t assumed its moral responsibility either. And so Evripidis Stylianidis is still our education minister even if he was oblivious to the shooting of the student on the night of the event because, he said, he didn’t hear his cell phone ring over the sound of the nightclub’s music. But asking for a minister to be removed from his post for reasons of morality is seen as nothing more than a populist ploy.

And Veil of illusions lifted argues that

For years we feared that the dangerous game between anti-establishment youths and police would lead to someone being killed. But even so, when the dreadful event did occur, no one could have predicted how terrible it would be nor how it would shake Greece to its core. The murder was not committed in the heat of battle between anarchists and riot police, where it could somehow be explained as a predictable accident. It came in the form of a police officer losing his temper and firing at a group of youngsters, who may or may not have taunted him and his partner when they drove by a bar in the anarchist stronghold of Exarchia. The victim, instead of a hardened firebomb-hurling veteran of years of clashes with the police, was a beardless 15-year-old from a middle-class suburb of Athens, who was celebrating a friend’s nameday in Exarchia.

Things could not have been worse for the police, the government or for Greece itself. Alexis Grigoropoulos, the victim, became an instant symbol for everyone looking for a martyr. For the anarchists and other anti-establishment groups, Alexis personified all victims of state brutality. This gave legitimacy and purpose to the angry young men and women who have made a life out of attacking police and other symbols of state authority with seeming impunity. These tough youths then went on the rampage, exploiting demonstrations staged by other groups to attack police and destroy property. Their new legitimacy and the inexplicable order given to police to stand back from the violence, resulted in the worst civil unrest and property damage ever seen in Athens (and several other cities) during peacetime. In its guilt-tainted passivity, which it presented as restraint, the government managed to humiliate itself and the state machinery twice: It had not prevented a state employee – a policeman – from killing a child and it now abdicated its responsibility to protect its citizens’ property….