Tuesday: Hili dialogue

July 9, 2024 • 6:45 am

Welcome to the Cruelest Day: Tuesday, July 9, 2024, and National Sugar Cookie Day, the simplest of all cookies but not the worst. This photo, from Wikipedia, suggests to me that they should be dunked in coffee:

AceDragonfly, CC BY-SA 4.0 via Wikimedia Commons

It’s also Martyrdom of the Báb, Cow Appreciation Day, National No Bra Day (this was the norm when I was in college), Fashion Day, Constitution Day in Australia and Nunavut Day (in Nunavut, of course).

Readers are welcome to mark notable events, births, or deaths on this day by consulting the July 9 Wikipedia page.

Da Nooz:

*The French elections were a surprise with the right-wing Rally Party not winning. Actually, nobody won. From the BBC:

Nobody expected this. High drama, for sure, but this was a shock.

When the graphics flashed up on all the big French channels, it was not the far right of Marine Le Pen and her young prime minister-in-waiting Jordan Bardella who were on course for victory.

It was the left who had clinched it, and Emmanuel Macron’s centrists – the Ensemble alliance – had staged an unexpected comeback, pushing the far-right National Rally (RN) into third.

Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the veteran left-wing firebrand seen by his critics as an extremist, wasted no time in proclaiming victory.

“The president must call on the New Popular Front to govern,” he told supporters in Stalingrad square, insisting Mr Macron had to recognise that he and his coalition had lost.

His alliance, drawn up in a hurry for President Macron’s surprise election, includes his own radical France Unbowed, along with Greens, Socialists and Communists and even Trotskyists. But their victory is nowhere big enough to govern.

Here’s Matthew’s take on it, posted with permission:

It’s all rather complicated.

France has a two-round system. In the first round, if a candidate gets >50%, they are elected straight away (this is relatively rare). If no one gets a majority in the first round, all candidates with >12.5% of the vote can go through to the second round, which is straight first-past-the-post.

In the first round, the Rassemblement National (National Rally – ex-Front National) was the largest single party, but did not win any seats outright. The evident threat was that they would go on and win a parliamentary majority in the second round. In the run-up to the election, the left parties – Unbowed France, Socialist Party, Communist Party, Greens, and some small groups – came together as the New Popular Front (a reference to the Popular Front of 1936) put forward a common programme and a single candidate in each constituency. As soon as the results of the first round were known, the NPF said they would stand down their candidates in the second round where they came third, behind a right-wing candidate, in order to beat the FN. The right-wing parties were much less prepared to reciprocate, and in many cases maintained their candidacy, even when they had come a poor third.

In the week or so before the election, although the pollsters and pundits were predicting an RN absolute majority, the racist and anti-semitic nature of some of their candidates was revealed; together with the mobilisation of the left parties, this was sufficient to ensure that the RN were pushed into third place, with the NPF getting the largest number of seats. This was a huge relief to many people – hence the joyous scenes in many cities around France. In the cases where right-wingers stood as a third candidate, they were all defeated.

However, no party, and no group of parties on the same political wavelength, has a majority. This is a hung parliament. Whoever is the future prime minister (the current PM, from Macron’s party, has offered his resignation but has been asked to stay on for a while) will have to negotiate legislation on a case-by-case basis. This is not new – Macron’s party has been a minority government for the last two years.

Macron called the early elections because he wanted to lance the boil of the RN, which had done remarkably well in the European elections. He obviously really wanted his party to gain a majority (the only reason he was elected – twice – is because he was standing against the leader of the RN, Marine Le Pen, and he clearly hoped that might happen again, at a parliamentary scale). Things didn’t work out quite as he hoped – he now has to deal with the legitimate claim of the NPF that it should form the new government. There will be a lot of horse-trading in the coming weeks. If the NPF does form a government, one of its key measures would be to halt the attacks on pensions that have been a key part of Macron’s policies and which have provoked enormous discontent. While this policy would be opposed by the traditional parties of the right, it did feature in the RN”s manifesto, so could technically pass in parliament…

*Biden is holding very firm about remaining the Democratic candidate for President, and he even wrote a letter to Congressional Democrats saying he’s committed to staying in the race:

President Biden issued defiant responses on Monday to high-ranking lawmakers calling for him to step aside, challenging Democrats to run against him and telling congressional Democrats in a letter that he was “firmly committed to staying in the race.”

Calling into “Morning Joe” on MSNBC, Mr. Biden said he didn’t care about any of the “big names” urging him to drop out of the race, his voice rising considerably as he spoke.

“If any of these guys don’t think I should run, run against me,” he said. “Go ahead, announce for president. Challenge me at the convention.”

Less than an hour earlier, Mr. Biden’s campaign released a letter to congressional Democrats in which he wrote that he was “firmly committed to staying in the race.”

His pledge to remain in the race kicks off what could be the most crucial week of his presidency, as he faces crumbling support from Democratic lawmakers and mounting fears of a rout by former President Donald J. Trump and his followers in November’s races for the White House and Congress.

Here’s an excerpt from his letter:

Let’s have a poll. Will he stay or will he go?

Will Biden drop out of the race before the Democratic National Convention?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

*The descriptions of negotiations between Israel and Hamas have been confusing, but yesterday Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu has issued a list of  four “nonnegotiable demands” that, he says, he’ll stick to during the negotiations. From the Times of Israel:

Ahead of the Israeli negotiating team’s departure for further hostage deal talks in Cairo and Doha later this week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu presented a list on Sunday evening of what he said were four nonnegotiable Israeli demands, including a guarantee that Israel could resume fighting, which would need to be met in any hostage release and ceasefire deal with Hamas.

Netanyahu’s statement, at a crucial phase ahead of the resumption of talks, sparked anger, both in Israel and among mediators, with some accusing him of attempting to sabotage hard-won progress.

The renewed negotiations in both Egypt and Qatar come after the Hamas terror group said on Saturday that it was ready to discuss a hostage deal and an end to the war in Gaza without an upfront commitment by Israel to a “complete and permanent ceasefire.” That statement constitutes a shift in the position Hamas has held in all previous negotiations since November.

Here are the four nonnegotiable demands:

1. “Any deal will allow Israel to return to fighting until its war aims are achieved.”

2. “Weapons smuggling to Hamas from the Gaza-Egypt border will not be possible.”

3. “The return of thousands of armed terrorists to the northern Gaza Strip will not be possible.”

4. “Israel will maximize the number of living hostages who will be returned from Hamas captivity.”

#1 is probably not acceptable to Hamas, for it would force them surrender (see also #3), though it’s not clear that this will eventually remove Hamas from power.  And #4 is a bit ambiguous; it should say “Hamas must return ALL the hostages, living or dead. Despite the fact that many of the Israeli public seem willing to keep Hamas in power if they just let the hostages go, I don’t think keeping Hamas in power is in Israel’s interests.

*Columbia University has fired the three deans who became infamous for exchanging anti-Semitic text messages during presentations about antisemitism by rabbis and other pro-Jewish people. (The text messages were photographed over the shoulders of the texting deans.)

Three Columbia University administrators have been removed from their posts after sending text messages that “disturbingly touched on ancient antisemitic tropes” during a forum about Jewish issues in May, according to a letter sent by Columbia officials to the university community on Monday.

The administrators are still employed by the university but have been placed on indefinite leave and will not return to their previous jobs.

Nemat Shafik, the Columbia president, described the sentiments in the text messages as “unacceptable and deeply upsetting, conveying a lack of seriousness about the concerns and the experiences of members of our Jewish community.” She said the messages were “antithetical to our university’s values and the standards.”

The announcement came about a month after a conservative website published photos that showed some of the text messages sent by the administrators.

And it followed weeks of unrest at Columbia over the war in Gaza as the university emerged as the center of a nationwide protest movement. Pro-Palestinian demonstrations led Dr. Shafik to order the arrest of students on trespassing charges this spring. In late April, protesters occupied a campus building, leading to more arrests. In May, citing security concerns, the university canceled its main commencement ceremony.

The three Columbia administrators involved in the text message exchanges are Cristen Kromm, formerly the dean of undergraduate student life; Matthew Patashnick, formerly the associate dean for student and family support; and Susan Chang-Kim, formerly the vice dean and chief administrative officer. They did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Josef Sorett, the dean of Columbia College, also engaged with the administrators in the text exchange.

He will remain in his post, according to the university provost, Angela V. Olinto.

Remember that they’re not FULLY fired, as they’re on leave, presumably not getting paid, and one source said that they’re just being “reassigned.” Also remember that the arrested Columbia students, with (I think) one exception, had all their charges dropped, though I don’t know whether they’ll get disciplined internally by Columbia.

At least the school did SOMETHING about the deans, though. It’s pretty damn embarrassing to have several deans joking and making antisemitic remarks during a symposium on Columbia’s Jewish issues. I am surprised that Sorett remains in office, given that he was involved in the text exchange, but maybe he didn’t say anything antisemitic. (Plus he’s the Big Dean.) One might think that this is free speech, but it’s a violation of institutional neutrality and I think deans serve at Columbia’s will.

*The undisputed king of hot-dog eating, Joey Chestnut, didn’t compete in Nathan’s annual wiener-eating contest this year, so somebody else won. But, wolfing down the pups in another location, Chestnut made the winner look bad.

Patrick Bertoletti gobbled up 58 hot dogs to win his first men’s title Thursday at the annual Nathan’s Famous Fourth of July hot dog eating contest, taking advantage of the absence of the event’s biggest star. In the women’s competition, defending champion Miki Sudo won her 10th title and set a new world record by downing 51 links.

Joey “Jaws” Chestnut, the reigning men’s champion and winner of 16 out of 17 previous competitions, didn’t attend this year over a sponsorship tiff. Instead he competed later in the day against four soldiers at a U.S. Army base in El Paso, Texas, where he wolfed down 57 hot dogs in five minutes.

Bertoletti, 39, of Chicago, won in a tight, 10-minute race where the leader bounced back and forth, defeating 13 competitors from around the world. He said he lost weight and practiced for three months with “an urgency” to prepare for the event, thinking he had a good chance of winning.

“With Joey not here, I knew I had a shot,” Bertoletti said. “I was able to unlock something that I don’t know where it came from.”

Bertoletti bested his prior record of 55 hot dogs at the event, which is held every Independence Day on New York’s Coney Island, a beachfront destination with amusement parks and a carnivalesque summer culture.

Chestnut: 57 dogs in five minutes.  Bertoletti: 58 dogs in ten minutes. Chestnut was almost twice as fast. In fact, Chestnut was banned from the Nathan’s contest because he signed a deal with Impossible Foods, which makes vegan dogs! (I’m not sure the 58 dogs Chestnut ate in Texas were vegan or not.) But here’s Bertoletti (the female champion, Miki Sudo, downed 51 dogs, a really good total for a woman).

Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili is kvetching:

Hili: Do people still write books?
A: Of course, why do you ask?
Hili: Its been a long time since you bought any.
In Polish:
Hili: Czy ludzie jeszcze piszą książki?
Ja: Oczywiście, dlaczego pytasz?
Hili: Dawno żadnej nie kupowałeś.

. . . and a lovely picture of Szaron:

*******************

From Cat Memes:

From Jesus of the Day:

From Now That’s Wild: (I am not a fan of IPAs, especially if they’re very hoppy)

From Masih; translation from Farsi:

“What are you supporting?” Strong criticism #بهاره_هدایت of famous figures who are standing by the Islamic Republic today with their backs to the people. Bahare Hedayat bravely said that [her] estimate is that because of this interview, [s]hewill be returned to prison despite his bad physical conditions, but [s]he refused to remain silent. Shame on them for not even remaining silent and showing that they do not deserve people’s trust at every opportunity.

Hedayat is an Iranian woman’s rights activist who’s been imprisoned several times.

From Keith, translation from the Japanese:

[Sad news] Alpaca found looking thin and sad

It just got a haircut!

From Sullivan. This is what happens when you calmly question a person who doesn’t have an answer:

Two tweets from my own feed:

I didn’t know of this place:

From the Auschwitz Memorial, a French girl gassed upon arrival, age one:

Two tweets from Dr. Cobb. Matthew helped organize these Crick letters for the auction. Proceeds go to to the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds:

As Matthew said, “This could mean trouble!”  I hope it doesn’t! The Starmers have a cat!

12 thoughts on “Tuesday: Hili dialogue”

  1. I think the expression for Columbia’s actions is “rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic”. Easy to Monday morning quarterback in the state of incomplete data and since it is a personnel matter, official data will likely remain incomplete…unfortunately.

    Oh, and thank you, Matthew, for your take on the elections in France.

  2. Matthew’s take is basically correct, but “joyous celebration” included rioting which one would have expected (but should not approve of) if they had lost, most of it just out and out looting. And people wonder why the RN has become so strong? That’s one reason. Note that the RN did not riot after the second round. (I don’t support the RN; they are too friendly to Russia, a big problem with many far-right parties in Europe). Macron might have been right when he said that the extreme left is as dangerous as the extreme right. Note that the anti-semitism of many of those in the leftist alliance didn’t have to be revealed because they trumpet it loudly themselves all the time.

    First past the post, run-off for those with more than 12.5%, runoff requiring absolute majority, instant runoff, runoffs eliminating the least successful candidate after each round, electoral college. The result depends strongly on the system used, even without gerrymandering and even without (perfectly legitimate) cooperation among parties. It is a stretch to call any system without proportional representation (x% of the votes means x% of the seats) democratic.

  3. I saw the screenshots at the New Beacon, and can’t for the life of me see what was antisemitic about these text messages. These firings were made under a most flimsy pretext. People who believe in free expression, diversity of opinion and not punishing people for honesty should not applaud them.

    1. I think the texts can legit be viewed as antisemitic, but I share your concern about the pretext for the firings. I’m pseudonymous because a lot of what I write here is “antithetical to [my] university’s values” including the insistence that trans women are women; that race-based hiring of new faculty members is a good present-day response to historical injustices against black and indigenous people; and that killing, raping, and kidnapping Israelis is bad but also legitimate resistance to colonization.

      1. I am a hereditarian who thinks HBD is at least somewhat correct, so these people would flail me alive 😐

        It is a tough spot to be in, because I do believe in free expression and liberal principles, but yes, I am also aware that the Palestine supporters I am defending (deans, some of the protestors, and other people who should probably have been left alone) usually do not share these values at all.

  4. Those trans activists sure didn’t want to talk. Usually protesters are happy to talk.

  5. If the deans are still employed by the university it’s hard to see how it can get away with imposing indefinite unpaid leave on them. Unpaid suspension for a set term I can see but even if someone is put on leave during adjudication of a transgression, simple fairness would require paying their salary meantime.

    Does academic freedom or the university’s pledge to respect the First Amendment apply to administrative positions, or only to the professors as scholars? An ordinary workplace isn’t bound by 1A. So are the deans, as deans, being treated as ordinary management workers who impugn the reputation of the university? If so, they get the boot as admins but still stay on as tenured professors. I could even see Kalven used against them in their admin leadership capacity depending on what they said.

    Does anyone else see this difference as material, or am I off soundings? (I haven’t read the tweets yet, trying to keep an open mind for now.)

    1. I agree with you. But I think an additional concern is that the distinction you bring up between speech as an administrator (maybe not covered by academic freedom considerations) and speech as a scholar (def covered by academic freedom and by tenure) can be fudged by the university so that any speech the university favours is considered scholarly and any speech the university opposes is considered purely administrative or purely personal. Lots of purely administrative positions are occupied by folx who style themselves “educators”, and ~all tenured faculty members have at least some administrative role or function. The unclear difference between the two roles can give the university flexibility to see anyone’s speech in any way the university chooses. And yes I’m just that paranoid.

  6. In the French/Euro context the antisemitism is real as well as being representative of being anti-western civilization, enlightenment values and anti-west. We see that here as well. Opposing them is the defense of freedom everywhere from here to Europe and especially in the Middle East. (Onwards Israeli heroes.)

    D.A.
    NYC
    https://democracychronicles.org/author/david-anderson/

  7. Anyone not liking sugar cookies hasn’t had the correct one. They’re refrigerator cookies that are rolled out thin. Sprinkles are a choice but they can also be frosted, especially at Xmastime. They’re wonderful. If you want the recipe, I’ll send it to you. It’s my mother’s and the only change my wife and I have made over the years is to add more ground nutmeg. Bob

  8. I think the whistle blowing activist needs to take some lessons from Harpo Marx on how to fully express his message with a simple noisemaker.

  9. BTW, the mentioned Columbia Provost, Angela V. Olinto, was until recently a UChicago person — Astro Dept chair, and then PSD Dean.

Comments are closed.