Since Kamala Harris's defeat to Donald Trump in the 2024 presidential election, there have been countless autopsies made of the Harris campaign. While a select few argue that Harris ran a strong campaign and the election came down to factors beyond the control of her or her team, most commentators believe that the Harris campaign made some mistakes. That's about as far as their agreements go, however. Their diagnoses for what went wrong run all across the spectrum, ranging from reasonable to completely detached from reality.
One of the most popular diagnoses being shared by analysts is that the Democrats simply didn't take border security seriously enough.The narrative goes that while President Biden, Democratic Party operatives, and affluent liberals cheered on high immigration rates and neglected the border, a resulting 'crisis' of immigration created anxieties among everyday Americans that these same 'out of touch' liberals ignored. This alleged crisis built until the 2024 election, when voters cast a definitive vote for the man promising to do more to fix it- Donald Trump.
Simply put, this narrative belongs in the 'completely detached from reality' pile of post-election takes. Pundits are getting so many things wrong by parroting this line, from Biden's immigration policy to their analysis of Harris's campaigning on the issue to what the 'crisis' is in the first place, that it's hard to imagine a worse talking point. Let's take a look at why, step by step.
Was Biden an 'Open Borders' President?
Simply put: no. But since we're here, let's get into a little more detail!
Of course, we can't talk about Biden's immigration policy without making passing reference to Trump before him. According to a thorough study done by the Migration Policy Institute, Trump "successfully narrowed grants of humanitarian protection, increased enforcement, and made legal immigration more difficult" as president. In other words, he made immigration harder across the board. This, of course, became a rallying cry for Democrats going into the 2020 election. While Biden was relatively conservative compared to many of his rivals in the 2020 Democratic primary, he still promised a much more humane immigration policy than Trump.
As president, his record on immigration policy has been mixed. On the one hand, he did genuinely undo some Trumpian policies. For example, Trump had instituted a policy forcing asylum seekers coming to the US to wait in Mexico, exposing them to kidnaps, assaults, rapes, and murders as they waited in makeshift encampments near the US-Mexican border. Biden undid that policy. On the other hand, after Trump invoked Title 42 during his presidency to allow for expedited deportations of immigrants without due process, Biden kept this Title 42 evocation in place as president.
While it'd be hard to fully quantify in exact numbers how many Trumpian immigration policies Biden kept versus how many he got rid of, it's safe to say he did a fair amount of both. An example (also from the previously linked BBC article) that further encapsulates this is Biden's response to Trump's policies that separated migrant children from their families, perhaps the biggest specific immigration policy of his that provoked outrage across the country. Whereas Trump separated about 3,900 migrant children from their parents, Biden worked to undo some of these separations- but not all of them. As of April 2024, there were still about 1,400 children waiting to be reunited with their parents.
All in all, Biden undid some of Trump's immigration policies, but not all of them. Considering the US didn't have anything resembling an open border before Trump's election, and that Biden kept some of Trump's policies that made immigration of all kinds much harder, calling Biden anything like an 'open border president' just does not hold up at all.
Where Did the Narrative Come From?
This is a more complex question to answer than the last one. There were genuinely more immigrants who attempted to come to the United States during Biden's term than during Trump's. As that was happening, the United States experienced a lot of unrelated difficulties, particularly inflation caused by corporate greed. All this happened while the federal government allowed many popular covid-era public assistance programs to expire, such as the expanded child tax credit. As more and more Americans felt the pinch of rising prices and fading public programs, as well as seeing things like rising rates of fentanyl use and minor increases in certain types of crime, rightwing media came up with a narrative: all of these hardships the US faced could be traced back to Biden's 'open border' policies. And mainstream media increasingly followed suit in order to capitalize on this mounting border hysteria.
Now, it's worth pointing out here that while conservative media has proliferated in recent years, it hasn't done so organically. What some people discuss as a 'grassroots' explosion of conservative media has actually been funded by mega-donors. For example, billionaire Texan oil brothers Farris and Dan Wilks fund PragerU and The Daily Wire. Dark money groups also funnel money to rightwing media personalities like Charlie Kirk. Basically, the ultra-wealthy like it when there are widely viewed media figures and organizations getting the public mad at scapegoats, such as immigrants, rather than these ultra-wealthy people who continue to lobby politicians to let them get even richer and the rest of us get poorer. Because immigrants don't have nearly the same resources to defend their humanity as these big media outlets do to attack them, it's easy to make them the villains.
While rightwing media enjoyed a huge funding push to push their content onto everyone's social media feeds, the Democrats simply didn't have a good counter-narrative to respond with. Which takes us to the next question...
Was Harris Too Soft on Immigration in Her Campaign?
So, what was Harris's general position on immigration in the election? Well, let's just look directly at what her campaign website said:
"Vice President Harris and Governor Walz believe in tough, smart
solutions to secure the border, keep communities safe, and reform our
broken immigration system. As Attorney General of California, Vice
President Harris went after international drug gangs, human traffickers
and cartels that smuggled guns, drugs, and human beings across the
U.S.-Mexico border. As Vice President, she supported the bipartisan
border security bill, the strongest reform in decades. The legislation
would have deployed more detection technology to intercept fentanyl and
other drugs and added 1,500 border security agents to protect our
border. After Donald Trump killed the border deal for his political
gain, she and President Biden took action on their own — and now border
crossings are at the lowest level in 4 years, their administration is
seizing record amounts of fentanyl, and secured funding for the most
significant increase in border agents in ten years. As President, she
will bring back the bipartisan border security bill and sign it into
law. At the same time, she knows that our immigration system is broken
and needs comprehensive reform that includes strong border security and
an earned pathway to citizenship."
Yeah, not exactly a whole lot about helping immigrants of any kind there. Only a passing reference to an "earned pathway to citizenship" at the very end.
And what about that "border deal" her website talks about? Well, early in 2024, the Democrats saw that the border was becoming an increasingly talked about issue thanks to how much rightwing media kept harping on immigration and blaming immigrants for people's problems. Rather than trying to push back on the narrative, they simply decided to try to shift right on immigration. So they proposed a Trumpian immigration bill. It went nowhere, so they tried it again in May. It still went nowhere, as Trump told Republicans not to vote for it. But, as we saw in the previous blurb from Harris's campaign website, the Democrats ran with it as a campaign strategy. The Democratic Party strategy of the late 2010s of advocating for more humane immigration policy died.
Beyond Harris's website, Harris made multiple attempts to appear tough on immigration in interviews. She vowed to continue Biden's crackdown on asylum seekers and hire more Border Patrol agents. She also did a complete pivot when it came to Trump's border wall, now talking about how she would continue funding for it. When directly asked at a CNN Town Hall about whether or not she now supports the border wall after criticizing it so harshly in the past, she avoided directly answering the question at all costs (seriously, watch that video, you will cringe at how hard she avoids answering directly). All of this, of course, was also paired with constant references to the previously mentioned border bill.
This is just a small sample of how much Kamala Harris, and Democratic politicians in general, have shifted on immigration. As I said at the beginning of this post, calling Kamala's campaign 'soft' on immigration is simply delusional. There's no other way to put it.
What Does Public Opinion Look Like on Immigration, Anyway?
So, we've looked at how Harris was in no way an 'open borders' candidate. But did her and her team have to take that approach?
The Democrats faced a tough question going into this election. Thanks to the proliferation of this 'open border' narrative, many people going into the election worried about immigration much more than they have in any other point in recent history. A Gallup poll in June of this year showed a marked increase in worries. For example, when asked if immigration to the US should be increased, decreased, or kept roughly the same, the answers were 16%, 55%, and 25%, respectively, with the rest having no opinion. In other words, 55% of people in the US wanted a decrease of immigrants coming to the US, which outweighed all the other three answers combined. When asked about significantly expanding construction of the border wall between the US and Mexico, 53% supported or strongly supported the idea, while 46% opposed or strongly opposed it.
Yet, the same Gallup poll showed that 64% of people in the US believe immigration is a good thing for the country, as opposed to 32% who thought it was a bad thing. Asked if they supported undocumented immigrants earning citizenship of some kind "if they meet certain requirements over a period of time", 70% of people supported or strongly supported the idea versus 30% who opposed or strongly opposed it. For those undocumented immigrants brought into the country as children, the numbers change to 81% supporting or strongly supporting them having a pathway to citizenship, whereas 19% opposed or strongly opposed.
In other words, yes, people are more worried about the border than they have been for a long time (again, thanks to a well-funded rightwing propaganda campaign). But that doesn't tell the whole story. There is still an openness to pathways to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, and people still generally view immigration as a good thing. That's pretty remarkable considering how much money has been spent to try to convince the public otherwise. And this poll was taken after the Democrats started shifting their immigration stance- in other words, during a time when there weren't many people in the public discourse (especially not in the halls of power) speaking up on behalf of immigrants.
Simply put, it didn't have to be like this.
Closing Thoughts
I've been following politics almost my entire adult life. Immigration is one of the issues I've been following most closely. The way people think and talk about it, and the way politicians discuss it and try to change the laws around it, has shifted a lot over the last decade and a half or so. For a while, attitudes in the US became more open to immigration reform. Now, however, thanks to the manufactured "crisis" at the border, things are at a standstill.
Yet nothing is forever, including panics over a political issue. Especially when the reality of public opinion is a lot more complex than what pundits and politicians will have you believe.
I don't know what the future holds. There's no way any of us could've predicted five years ago where things would be now, and that'll probably be true for any definitive predictions we try to make now about the future. I don't know what will happen around the topic of immigration, including what policies will be put in place that will have effects on millions of human beings in this country, whether immigrants or the loved ones of immigrants. But I hope this piece can at least do a little bit to make the conversation around the issue a little more honest and clear-sighted.
Another year, another year's worth of memories and big events. If you haven't seen my end of year posts before, at the end of each year I like to do a "best of" list that encompasses all my interests. I'm fascinated by too many things to only choose one thing to write about when reflecting on an entire year.
This is, incidentally, my tenth year doing this, which is weird to think about. How the time flies! I've done one every year, so if you want a blast of nostalgia- or maybe even just wanna remember highlights from previous years- be sure to check out some of my older yearly review posts.
Btw, just a heads up: it's been quite a year for me, especially with the birth of my daughter earlier this year. I've never been busier in my life. Because of that, the writing I do for many of these entries will be shorter than usual.
Another, more specific heads up: I haven't watched very much MMA this year. Part of it is, of course, because how busy I've been. I have way less leisure time than before. On top of that, though, I've become less and less able to tolerate the ignorance, greed, and bullshit around the sport. I love martial arts, I love the art and science of MMA, I love watching two fighters test their craft against one another. But everything else about the sport has become increasingly alienating for me. So my writing this year is pretty meager, and frankly, it may be that way for years to come. Perhaps even for as long as I continue this blog. We'll see where the future takes us.
Anyway, that aside, I hope y'all enjoy.
MOVIE: Oppenheimer
I have a confession: each year I always hope to put a somewhat lesser known choice here. It doesn't have to be a super obscure or indie choice, but I like to at least avoid picking something that seems obvious. Part of it is because I genuinely want to use this spot to plug a movie that I feel hasn't gotten enough love. But if I'm being honest with myself, part of it is also probably some sort of desire to be able to pat myself on the back for having a favorite movie choice that is different and special.
But folks... this movie is excellent. I expected to like it, but I wasn't expecting to be blown away by it the way I was. Part of that is because Nolan- who I like!- has never shown any particularly deep political interests in his movies. He can ask basic thematic political questions in his movies, such as the questions about surveillance in The Dark Knight, but he's never really delved in and asked more profound, difficult questions about some of the very political underpinnings of our modern world. I expected this movie to be a standard biopic about a tortured genius scientist who helps create the atomic bomb, then comes to regret the horror he unleashed.
Now, to an extent, that is the movie we got- except for the "standard" part. While this movie does all the things I expected, it also goes layers deeper. And it doesn't necessarily let Oppenheimer off the hook, either. Rather, it interrogates Oppenheimer about his role in everything. It asks: why did he continue working on the atomic bomb despite his misgivings? Why do his actions often go so strongly against his self-professed beliefs? What does he truly believe deep down, anyway? Does any of his guilt or conflicts of principle absolve him of his part in unleashing what he did?
Of course, asking these questions of a long-dead nuclear scientist is hardly compelling in and of itself. But what I think makes this movie effective is that it shows how these compromises and terrors helped build the modern world, and in a way even wants us to ask these questions of ourselves. The fact this movie can ask us to seriously question Oppenheimer, the world he helped build, and our place in it while being so compelling, and even entertaining, is impressive. This is probably now my favorite Nolan movie, and is my favorite movie of the year.
COMEDY MOVIE: Polite Society
This is one of the most charming movies I've seen in years. It's a martial arts action-comedy about a Pakistani-British teenager named Ria, who trains martial arts and dreams of being a stuntwoman. She is close to her older sister, Lena, who helps her record a bunch of short videos showcasing her martial arts skills. Ria lives with her traditional but loving Pakistani parents, as does Lena at the beginning of the movie after dropping out of art school. Ria adores her older sister, and has her back when it comes to her art in part because Ria sees it as her sister's equivalent to her own love for martial arts and stunt work. In other words, the more she can believe in her sister's art, the more she can believe in her own.
Things get shaken up when Lena meets and falls in love with a man named Salim. Ria has to learn to make peace with everything that is happening- or does she? The movie is full of fun, charm, and genuine heart. The entire story is rooted in Ria's sincere love for her sister and her martial arts training. It ranges from grounded to absurd in a way that never feels incoherent or sloppy because of how strongly this movie is guided by its heart. There have been few movies I've had as much fun with this decade as this one.
ANIMATED MOVIE: The Boy and the Heron
Hayao Miyazaki is one of my favorite film makers of all time. Anytime he puts something new out, I'm there. This latest feature, on the surface, is very similar to Alice in Wonderland, or even his own other work Spirited Away, where a child is whisked away from their mundane life to a magical world full of novelty and adventure. In this case, the boy is going to save his new step-mom (who is also his dead mom's younger sister), who is abducted in circumstances I leave for you to discover when/if you watch this movie.
In a lot of ways, though, this movie is about movies themselves, and Miyazaki's legacy. Miyazaki is on the record saying he made this movie for his grandson. In the movie itself, there's a great uncle who essentially serves as a stand-in for Miyazaki himself. Again, I'll spare the details to avoid spoilers, but while this movie is about the main character, it's also about the legacy that the great uncle is leaving behind. That legacy mirrors Miyazaki's own metaphorically; the duties and questions of the great uncle are the duties and questions Miyazaki has about what he leaves behind.
Overall, I'm not exactly sure how I can "rate" this movie in a traditional sense. The main character's journey doesn't have a clear thematic through-line, which is how we (including myself) are conditioned to watch and understand movies. Rather, it's a series of adventures, obstacles, and questions that bring him to the ultimate question: "what will your own legacy be?" It's a question that prompts thought, especially with the way Miyazaki is so openly vulnerable and uncertain about his own legacy as represented through the great uncle. I can't say that this movie directly, viscerally struck me in the same way many of his other movies have. But it's left me with questions about art, life, death, and legacy that few movies have- especially animated movies. For that reason, even though this movie doesn't feel as cohesively stimulating as an average Miyazaki movie, it's still my favorite animated movie of the year for how much it's prompted me to reflect.
Actor: Ryan Gosling
How can one man be this funny, talented, and charming? Idk. But Gosling's Ken is one of my favorite roles from a year of movies full of great performances. While there were plenty of other great performances in 2023, including many Serious and Meaningful performances from some great actors, I gotta go with the guy who stuck out to me most. That was Gosling's Ken.
Actress: Teyana Taylor
This was the hardest movie-related category for me this year. There were two contenders for this spot: Lily Gladstone (in Killers of the Flower Moon) and Teyana Taylor (inA Thousand and One). How close are the performances of these two in my eyes? I started typing this paragraph thinking I would choose Lily Gladstone, but then switched to Taylor. This is in part because A Thousand and One is a smaller movie than Killers of the Flower Moon, and therefore Taylor has gotten less recognition for her performance than Gladstone has for hers. With that reasoning I'll stick with Taylor, because if I stuck to just looking at merit alone I'd probably keep switching back and forth while writing this post since both women did such fantastic jobs.
A Thousand and One is about a woman who kidnaps her son from foster care in order to try to raise him herself. She has to struggle to make it in 90s/00s New York, raising her boy despite having so little to get by on herself. Thanks to the spirit of community bred through poverty in the hood she's able to have some support, but she received nothing from the system itself. Something you can't help but think about when watching this movie is how reluctant this system is to help those who struggle, yet how happy it is to criminalize, police, and displace them.
Taylor's character Inez is extremely sympathetic because of her circumstances, but she's not a perfect character. As a foster child herself, Inez has some deep wounds she was never given the tools to heal from. And as a young woman trying to raise a child almost on her own in the hood, she has even less breathing room and chances to heal. In her struggle for survival, she makes a lot of mistakes. She is not very nurturing or understanding. She's just a scared, traumatized, angry woman trying to do her best.
Taylor does a fantastic job imbuing Inez with a mixture of pride, toughness, and inner pain that will stay with you well after the credits finish rolling. She embodies the character of a wounded but tough mother from the hood perfectly. One scene she'll be a struggling mother you're rooting for with your whole being, the next scene she'll be borderline abusive- but in a way where you can clearly trace what pushes her in that direction. It's a tough movie to watch sometimes, but it's very good, and an immense amount of that is thanks to the quality of Taylor's performance.
TV SHOW: I'm a Virgo
Boots Riley is one of my favorite creators in entertainment today. The radical hip hop group he's a part of, The Coup, is one of my favorite musical acts of all time, and his movie Sorry to Bother You is right next to Dr Strangelove as my favorite dark comedy. With I'm a Virgo, he's now made a show I greatly enjoy. The guy really can do it all.
The story follows a thirteen foot tall teenager in Oakland named Cootie. His aunt and uncle, who raised him after his mom died delivering him, hid him from the world, knowing he'd be dangerously ostracized from society. The story follows him as a naive, sheltered teenager beginning to put himself into the real world. As he does so, there is a superhero simply known as the Hero. But how heroic is he really?
What I love about Boots Riley is his sense of style. The man has strong politics and always puts them at the forefront of his creative projects, but but his ability to make things cool and interesting means his work doesn't come off as corny or flatly didactic. Yes, he has characters talk explicitly about police racism and the exploitation of the working class, but there's so much cool, interesting shit happening around these monologues that you always feel his artistic vision alongside his overtly articulated views.
MMA PROSPECT: Diego Lopes
Like I said at the top, I've become increasingly disconnected from MMA. A decade ago I knew the names of all the upcoming prospects in MMA, both those new to the UFC and those making waves in other organizations like Bellator, Rizin, and One. Today I don't even know all of the top fifteen fighters in each UFC weight class. I was pretty much thinking that I'd watch my remaining favorite fighters- those like Charles Oliveira, Zhang Weili, and Stipe Miocic- finish out their careers, and leave the sport as they did. But a few fighters on the cusp of their prime right now, such as Ilia Topuria, have kept my interest as well. And then there's newcomer Diego Lopes.
I'm someone who has a background in striking and jiu-jitsu. My favorite fighters to watch are those who excel at either of those specialties. There is, fortunately, no shortage of great strikers in MMA. But jiu-jitsu is another matter. Most modern MMA is really a fusion of striking and wrestling, with jiu-jitsu only mattering insofar as you have good submission defense and an ability to escape bad positions. The overwhelming majority of fighters in the present want to either avoid the ground, or only go to the ground if they can be on top.
Lopes is a great jiu-jitsu practitioner, though, and he brings it to his MMA style. He's always active off of his back, going for incredibly cool moves and chaining things together in a way that's fun to watch. I first caught him in his first fight of 2023, which also happened to be his first fight in the UFC. He lost a decision, but he made me a fan in his loss because of how dynamic and exciting his skills are. As long as fighters like him are around, maybe I'll have a reason to stick around with this sport.
MMA FIGHT OF THE YEAR: Volk vs Islam I
I almost chose Moreno vs Pantoja III for this spot, but what can I say? Alexander Volkanovski and Islam Makhachev are two of the best pound for pound fighters on the entire planet- or, in other words, fighters who could beat almost any other fighter on the planet if they fought at the same weight. This fight was MMA at its highest level. Both brought their A game, and Volkanovski came very close to winning the fight despite coming from the lower weight class. Volkanovski may be the best pound for pound fighter on the planet.
At thirty five years old, Volkanovski is exiting past his physical prime. But he's so well-rounded as a fighter, with so few areas of weakness, that he may still have a strong run left in him. Islam, for his part, has incredible grappling, as well as surprisingly crisp striking technique (even if he could stand to have a better sense of when to throw certain strikes sometimes). Of course, he made good strike selection in the rematch, where he knocked Volk out. With this fight, though, we got to see a real battle that showed MMA at its highest level while still being entertaining. Those are always the best kinds of fights.
MALE MMA FIGHTER: Leon Edwards
In terms of skill and quality of opposition, this spot should probably go to Islam Makhachev for his victories over Volk. Even if Volk is from a lower weight class, his skillset is incredible and Islam showed some of the highest level craft in his fights against Volk. But after settling his trilogy with Kamaru Usman, Leon Edwards dismantled the single most annoying person in MMA, Colby Covington, which I think is neat. We love to see it!
FEMALE MMA FIGHTER: Alexa Grasso
Someone finally beat Valentina Shevchenko. To be clear, I'm not celebrating Shevchenko's defeat the way I am Colby's. I'm just impressed. Women's flyweight is a bit of a shallow division, with Valentina having stood well above the top of everyone else for the last five years. Now finally someone beat her, and it's cool to see it be a Mexican fighter with a fun fighting style.
Grasso beat Valentina by creating forward pressure with her boxing base and utilized a southpaw stance heavily in order to throw Valentina off. This is in contrast to Grasso normally being both a more elusive fighter and an orthodox one in terms of stance. These adjustments really threw her off, and created the conditions for Grasso to win. Grasso then beat Valentina in a rematch, though it was a closer fight and ended in a split decision. We'll see what happens with her next. But for now, hats off to her for having a great year.
SCIENTIFIC ACHIEVEMENT: Nuclear Fusion Reaction
Often in science, initial feats are important, but replicating those feats can be even more important. Doing so shows that an accomplishment can be reproduced. My pick for scientific achievement of the year is just such a story.
In December 2022, scientists created a nuclear fusion reaction that produced more energy than it consumed. In fact, it was my choice for scientific achievement in my top everything of 2022 post. In July of 2023 they reproduced the experiment- this one even gave a higher energy yield than the first. Basically, what this means is a potential new energy source that is much more environmentally friendly than fossil fuels. And in a way that is much easier and safer to harness on a wide scale than another leading alternative energy: nuclear fission.
From the article: "While
nuclear [fission] produces bountiful clean energy, it has long drawn
concerns over safety, though it is getting renewed attention amid an
international push to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and slow global
warming.
Fusion,
on the other hand, creates energy by merging atoms together. It’s long
been a dream because it could create limitless clean energy without the
radioactive byproducts of nuclear power or the risk of meltdown. Plus,
the fuel to make fusion happen is simply heavy hydrogen atoms, which can
be found in something that Earth has in abundance: seawater. No mining
of uranium is required."
Of course, it remains to be seen if this will be able to save us from climate change. The fact that so many world governments have barely taken serious steps to seriously combat it tells me that what we need more than technology is for governments to no long put industry and profits above the well-being of the planet. New technology isn't enough, it's how we use it that will determine our shared fate. However, having more environmentally friendly technology as a tool can only benefit us.
MEME: Do You Guys Ever Think About Dying?
A little dark, but what can I say? Almost every version of this meme I saw made me laugh.
VIDEO: Avoid This Mental Trap as a New Hobbyist in Jiu-Jitsu
If you've read my previous posts before, you know that I often put in videos related my own interests, such as martial arts or reading related ones, that have metaphorical value that go beyond just that interest. This is one of those videos.
This video is about not worrying about "maximizing" your jiu-jitsu training when you first start. In other words, rather than trying to be as efficient and calculated in your initial improvements as possible, it's about learning to enjoy the experience and build your relationship with it. Jiu-jitsu is meant to be fun and fulfilling part of your life, not an extra job or source of stress.
Of course, this idea can be applied to anything. A lot of the time, productivity culture implicitly tells us everything we do in our spare time has to be super productive, efficient, and maximized for the highest possible returns. But what if instead we just... allowed ourselves to exist and have fun? What if we approached our pursuits not as a pressure-filled investment to max out on, but to enjoy as a process while reaping its less tangible benefits?
PHOTO: Asylum Seekers
The border has become a favorite flashpoint for Republican (far right) over the past couple decades. The Democrats (center-right) have been happy to constantly keep conceding ground and allowing the far right to frame the issue. A lot of this occurs in the context of the rightwing media constantly fear mongering about the border to redirect legitimate anxiety about the future for many in the US away from the rich and powerful, and instead toward immigrants and refugees. It's a tactic as old as time. Unfortunately, it's a well-trodden tactic because it works.
A lot of people try to seek asylum in the US. This includes people fleeing places the US has helped to devastate, such as Venezuela, where US sanctions are doing immense harm to the population. Because of that, as well as Nicholas Maduro simply not being as capable a leader as Hugo Chavez, many are fleeing the country to come here. It's only one more episode in a saga full of migrants and refugees coming to the US after the US helped created the conditions they flee. As a Latin American historian, as well as a Latino, I try to do what I can to raise awareness about the role of US meddling in Latin America, its damage, and the responsibility of the US to help those who come here seeking a better life after leaving behind a homeland the US helped destabilize.
Immigrants are human beings. Refugees are human beings. Of course, this country understands that when it's white Ukranians- which is good! But what if we extended that same recognition of common humanity to those outside of Europe? In many ways, a lot of the troubles we face today stem from the West's inability to do that. But in this photo- courtesy of Go Nakamura- we can see a group of migrants just trying to find a place to call home and raise their families.
ACTUAL NEWS STORY: The Israeli Massacre of Palestine
Usually in these posts I have a bullshit news story of the year, followed by the actual news story of the year. This year I switched the categories around to put the actual news story first. You'll probably see why after you've read both.
I'm going to summarize what happened before, during, and right after the October 7th Hamas attack on Israel. But I'm going to do something special. See, a quantitative data study, conducted by prominent media analyst Adam Johnson and data analyst Othman Ali, showed an immense bias on the part of how most mainstream media outlets report on the Israel/Palestine conflict. You'll notice the staggering amount of bias in favor of Israel. For example, according to most mainstream reports, Israelis are brutally killed by Palestinians, where Palestinians just sorta... die. You'll never see a greater use of passive voice in mainstream reporting than when Israeli attacks kill Palestinians.
So, I'm going to summarize the context for the October 7th attacks, using the same biased language mainstream reporting covers the conflict with- but I'm going to reverse the rolls. Here it goes: in a year where over 234 Palestinians had been viciously killed by the Western-connected Israeli forces, tensions were high. Israeli militants made 2023, before October 7th, one of the most brutal years for Palestinians in recent memory. Then, on October 7th, around 1,000 Israelis passed away. Israel claimed the deaths came from Palestinians, but the IDF-controlled Israeli government is not an impartial source of information, so doubts remain.
Alright, enough being wry. The truth of the matter is that Hamas attacked Israel. This is, of course, rooted in the Israeli occupation and colonization of Palestine. When you create conditions of apartheid, violence, and deprivation, you can't be surprised by the rise of a group like Hamas any more than you can be surprised by getting steam if you boil water. The group Jewish Voice for Peace, a group that opposes Israel's treatment of Palestine, has a solid breakdown about the recent history between the two that helps put everything into context.
In other words, they're carrying what everyone would call an ethnic cleansing, and what many would call a genocide. And the United States has been backing them every step of the way.
BULLSHIT NEWS STORY: Just, Like, Everything From Israel?
I'm not going to spend too much time here, but Israel and pro-Israeli forces have repeatedly leveraged a number of accusations against Hamas, from beheading babies to mass rapes of Israeli women. Of course, no evidence has been produced for any of these big claims. The internet is full of direct video evidence of every atrocity committed against Palestinians, but for some Israel cannot produce evidence for a lot of their most severe accusations despite having far more technology at their disposal. Very curious!!
BADASS: Wael Al-Dahdouh
Normally when I choose this category, it's meant to be celebratory. It's meant to give recognition to a person or group of people who show principle, courage, and dedication. It's like I'm giving an award at my own silly little blog award show. But this one is different.
The people of Palestine have indeed shown unmatched courage, but it's courage in the face of an atrocity. They shouldn't fucking have to be so courageous. The men, women, and children of Palestine should be at home, safe and warm, not being slaughtered, displaced, and starved in mass numbers. So this year we're not being celebratory. But I do, in a somber and respectful way, want to give recognition to a man who has shown principle, courage, and dedication on a level that few living people will or can ever match.
Wael Al-Dahdouh is a Palestinian reporter. He has been a journalist since 1998, working for various news organizations to be a journalistic voice for Palestine. He's a seasoned reporter. He's also a Palestinian, though, which means he has experienced extreme loss during Israel's assault on Gaza. On October 28th, he found out on air that his wife, seven year old daughter Sham, fifteen year old son Mahmoud, one of his grandsons, and various extended relatives were killed. They were residing in Nuseirat refugee camp in the Gaza Strip. They had moved there after Israel told refugees to evacuate from the north of Gaza, but were killed anyway. Al-Dahdouh mourned and held the body of his daughter. The picture is something that will stay with me for the rest of my life. But he kept reporting.
On December 15th, Al-Dahdouh and a colleague were covering an Israeli airstrike on a school. Israel dropped a missile near them, injuring him and killing his colleague. He was treated for injuries, then kept reporting.
On January 7th, his son Hamza al-Dahdouh, a journalist like his father, was killed. Al-Dahdouh will continue reporting.
I don't really know what I can say to appropriately honor him. I don't know what I can say to honor and mourn over 25,000 dead Palestinians, including over 12,000 children. But as a human being I want to bear witness, and as a historian I want to document what I can. Beyond that, all I can say is I've never in my life hoped so hard for those responsible for this mass slaughter to face justice.
