Chronicle of a death foretold: Eviction’s `adverse impact’ on parenting college students

New America, in collaboration with Princeton’s Eviction Lab, released a brief this week, “Ousted from Opportunity: Eviction’s Adverse Impact on Parenting College Students”. While the report is dire and grim and much of the findings are tragically predictable, it’s still worth consideration, especially this, the last of the major seven findings: “Parenting Students Threatened with Eviction Die at Higher Rates 10 Years Post-Enrollment: Parenting students who were threatened with eviction were more than twice as likely to die over the 10 years immediately following enrollment than parenting students who were not threatened (see Figure 8). Threatened parenting students’ mortality rates were even significantly higher than those of nonparenting students who were threatened with eviction.” What else is there to say? What more do you need to know? People who are parents and attending college have a difficult time, often and even typically. People who are parents and attending college who receive an eviction notice die relatively soon after. What more do you need to know?

The data concerning mortality rates come from a report published this month, “Consequences of Eviction for Parenting and Non-parenting College Students”. The authors found the following: “The mortality rate 10-years post-grad is 290 (200-380) per 100,000 for threatened parenting students compared to 140 (110-160) for non-threatened parenting students; in other words, an eviction filing is associated with a 107% increase in risk of death over the next ten years.” Where will you be in ten years? Where were you ten years ago?

To be clear, this slow-moving massacre does not concern parenting college students who have actually been evicted. This 107% increase in risk of death over the next ten years involves those who have had eviction filings. Who are they? You already know the answers. Parenting students disproportionately come from historically underserved groups. They are more likely to be women, especially women of color, and tend to be older. They are also more frequently first-generation college goers, low-income, and veterans. Student fathers are more likely to be Black than any other racial group. Parenting students have higher rates of food insecurity and are more likely to be working full time. 20% of undergraduate students care for one or more children while enrolled in college. What else is there to say?

The report had seven major findings. Parenting students threatened with eviction tended to be younger than parenting students not threatened by eviction. Parenting students threatened with eviction tend to come from lower-income backgrounds, compared to parents and non-parents who were not threatened with eviction. Black students, whether parenting or not, were far more likely to be threatened with eviction, but Black parenting students are the most at risk. Parenting students who were threatened are much more likely to identify as female, at 81%, compared to 63% of non-threatened parenting students. These are both extraordinarily high percentages. 37% of parenting students who were never threatened with eviction completed a bachelor’s degree, while only 15% of parenting students who were threatened completed a bachelor’s degree. Parenting students threatened with eviction had significantly reduced family income five years post-enrollment.

Parenting students who were threatened with eviction were more than twice as likely to die over the 10 years immediately following enrollment than parenting students who were not threatened

Twenty-two years ago, Achille Mbembe opened his seminal article “Necropolitics”, with these words, “The ultimate expression of sovereignty resides … in the power and the capacity to dictate who may live and who must die.” Who may live and who must die. A young person receives a notice saying they face eviction. No matter what happens, whether they are evicted or not, within ten years they are dead. What else is there to say? What more do you need to know?

Who may live … and who must die?

(By Dan Moshenberg)

(Image Credit 1: Day Gleeson and Dennis Thomas, “Title Deed Second Ave.” / hyperallergic)

(Image Credit 2: New America)

Welcome to the age of the tolerated Intolerable

“To regard the lives of those your country is subjugating as being equal to your own would make even one death intolerable.” Owen Jones, 2014

In the past twenty-four hours, the word “intolerable” has figured prominently, a kind of keyword marking this moment. Perhaps what set this off is the joint statement by Canada, France and the United Kingdom, which deplored current Israeli actions in Gaza, adding, “The level of human suffering in Gaza is intolerable.” During his address to the House of Commons, Keir Starmer explained “I would like to say something about the horrific situation in Gaza, where the level of suffering innocent children being bombed again is utterly intolerable.” In an interview on the BBC yesterday, an aid worker, just returned from Gaza, called the withholding of food “simply intolerable.”

While any actions to end the atrocities being committed in Gaza are welcome, the question of timing hovers and with it the meaning of “intolerable”. What makes the situation “intolerable” today, rather than, say, three months ago, when the Israeli blockade of Gaza formally began? A complete blockade of any assistance to a population desperately needing aid and assistance is always meant to starve that population. The Israeli government said as much from the very beginning. For weeks, we’ve seen, read and heard reliable reports of children suffering malnutrition, hunger on their way to dying, or, for the “lucky ones”, “merely” living with the consequences of prolonged starvation for the remainder of their lives, however brief they may be. Wasn’t the situation simply intolerable then?

Intolerable: that which physically, mentally, or morally “cannot be tolerated, borne, or put up with; unendurable, unbearable, insupportable, insufferable.” It doesn’t mean that which no longer can be tolerated; it means that which, in its essence, cannot be tolerated. Again, while the recognition of the intolerable situation is preferrable to the denial, while any action emerging from that recognition is welcome, we live today with the painfully obvious fact of our ongoing, deepening and expanding capacity to tolerate the intolerable and thereby to contribute to the intolerable.

(By Dan Moshenberg)

(Image Credit: Simon Pemberton / The Guardian)

Landmark case: In Australia, Raya Meredith leads class action case against strip-searches

In 2018, at the Splendour in the Grass music festival in Byron Bay, New South Wales, Australia, Raya Meredith was strip-searched. Not that it matters, but nothing illegal was found. In 2022, then-27-year-old Raya Meredith filed a class action suit against the police of New South Wales, arguing that the strip-searches conducted at music festivals from 2016 to 2022 were unlawful and constituted assault, battery, and false imprisonment. Her landmark suit now represents 3,000 people who were strip-searched. That case is currently being heard in court. Today, Raya Meredith’s attorneys explained that the New South Wales police admitted the strip-search was unlawful but “objectively reasonably necessary.” What?

Kylie Nomchong, Raya Meredith’s attorney, responded to that claim, ““We get to the quite outrageous submissions … where the defendant is asking your honour to infer that it was objectively necessary to search the plaintiff’s breasts and genital area,” Nomchong told the court. It is unbelievably offensive to assert, without any evidence whatsoever, that there was some objectively reasonable basis on the part of the searching officer to inspect the plaintiff’s vagina, to ask her to pull out her tampon, to ask her to bare her buttocks and anal area and to bend over and drop her breasts. It’s just offensive.”

Justice Dina Yehia, the presiding judge in the case, agreed with Nomcholeng, “I’m not quite sure I understand those submissions, given the way this matter has proceeded.”

What else is there to say? For the police, the violation of a woman’s body and person was, and continues to be, “objectively reasonably necessary.” The objective and reasonable necessity of the strip-searches is so self-evident that just days before the hearing began, the police withdrew 22 witnesses, mostly police … because it was objectively reasonably necessary for them not to speak under oath.

Raya Meredith’s attorneys note that strip-searches seldom “work”, as in produce any evidence of illegal activity. But police engage in them anyway. So, what’s the point and purpose of strip-search? A study published in 2021, the year before Raya Meredith’s encounter with the police, considered the scale and scope of strip-searches conducted by New South Wales police from 2014 to 2018, As Raya Meredith’s attorneys suggest, most of those searches produced nothing, other than trauma and pain. Nevertheless, the use of strip-searches “at music festivals, at train stations, in police vehicles and at other locations” increased. What did the few strip searches that did produce any evidence of illegal activity show? 96% involved drugs, either possession or distribution: “It can be inferred from these data that the strip search regime is primarily being used for the enforcement of the summary offence of drug possession, rather than the serious indictable offences for which the power to strip search was envisaged.” A War on Drugs was declared, and strip-searches were normalized, naturalized, deemed “objectively reasonably necessary”.

When the State declares War on its population, as in a War on Drugs or a War on Crime, it declares a state of exception. That is, it declares a crisis so grave, so threatening to the State that the elimination, ostensibly temporary, of constitutional rights and protections is reasonably objectively necessary. The police in New South Wales were just following orders.

(By Dan Moshenberg)

(Image Credit: Roberto Matta, “Nuremberg Judgment” / MoMA)

Michigan’s special hell for women, the Women’s Huron Valley Correctional Facility, belongs to everyone

I had said I wasn’t gonna write no more poems like this
Gil Scott-Heron

Michigan has one women’s prison, the Women’s Huron Valley Correctional Facility in Ypsilanti, and it is a piece of work. On Monday, attorneys representing 20 women filed a $500 million lawsuit, claiming that recorded and recording strip searches constitutes invasion of privacy, intentional abuse, and violation of rights. According to the filing, “Defendants … implemented a policy of recording strip searches that they knew or should have known would trigger trauma responses in a population with high rates of sexual abuse history …. What these women continue to endure is nothing short of horrific. This case exposes a grotesque abuse of power that directly retraumatizes survivors of sexual assault …. This history of problematic strip search practices at WHV demonstrates a recurring pattern.” Since its inception, Women’s Huron Valley Correctional Facility has a demonstrated recurring pattern of willful, intentional violence against women.

In 2012, Carol Jacobsen, founder and Director of the Michigan Women’s Justice and Clemency Projectnoted, “Abu Ghraib has nothing on Huron Valley.” She was describing the irony that Huron Valley was meant to solve the crisis of abuse of women prisoners in the Robert Scott Correctional Facility. As a result of widespread torture and abuse, Scott was closed in 2009, and all the women were moved to Huron Valley, which, according to Carol Jacobsen, was worse than Scott.

In 2014, Women’s Huron Valley Correctional Facility was investigated for human and civil rights abuses against mentally ill female patients.

In November 2015, a twenty-five-year-old Black woman, Janika Nichole Edmond died, or better was executed, in the Women’s Huron Valley Correctional Facility. Janika Edmond’s story is short and terribly familiar: Janika Edmond lived with mental illness. Once in Michigan’s `criminal justice’ system, her condition deteriorated. She had a history of assaulting prison guards, which resulted in her being sent to solitary, which resulted in her becoming more aggressive. The rate of `incident reports’ skyrocketed. No one did anything. In 2014, Janika Edmond made a rope out of a towel and tried to hang herself. Earlier in 2015, Janika Edmond was found with a razor. She said, repeatedly, that she was “tired of being here” and was hearing voices. Unfortunately, no one on staff heard or listened to Janika Edmond’s voice. The day she died, Janika Edmonds asked for a suicide prevention vest. The guards laughed. Hours later, she lay dead on the floor. “The death report provided by the MDOC [Michigan Department of Corrections] for Edmond shows her presumed cause of death was suicide.” That was no suicide. That was murder at the hands of the State.

In 2019, the Women’s Huron Valley Correctional Facility was sued for “perilous” conditionsAccording to the lawsuit, “The women have complained about the presence of mold in the facility for years, and continue to do so, but their pleas have been ignored.” Huron Valley “is operating under a state of degradation, filth, and inhumanity, endangering the health and safety of incarcerated women.” One of the attorneys described Huron Valley as “medieval and dungeon-like.” Three weeks ago, six years after the lawsuit was filed, a Michigan community forum heard the following, “The Women’s Huron Valley Correctional Facility is accused of having severe cases of black mold.”

Six years ago, we wrote, “Michigan’s only women’s prison, the Women’s Huron Valley Correctional Facility, is the architecture of shame in the United States of America. Michigan built a special hell for women, the Women’s Huron Valley Correctional Facility, and it’s been going on for years and it’s going on now. Have we no shame?” Nine years ago, we wrote, “What happened to Janika Nichole Edmond? Absolutely nothing out of the ordinary, just another Black woman crying out for help, dying in agony, “tired of being here.” In her death, she joins “the most common.” Who cares? Who cares? Who cares?”

How many more lawsuits will it take, how many more tortured and traumatized women, how many more corpses? How often must we discover the brutality of our “caring” before we finally demolish the special hell for women we have constructed not once but every day that we allow it to continue. Michigan’s special hell for women, Women’s Huron Valley Correctional Facility, belongs to each and every one of us.

(by Dan Moshenberg)

(Image Credit: Jenny Holzer,  MoMA)

The cruelty is the pointlessness

 

To sacrifice God for nothingness—this paradoxical mystery of the ultimate cruelty has been reserved for the rising generation; we all know something thereof already.
Friederich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil

In a recent interview, a person who recently voted for Trump reflected on the pain and suffering imposed by the current reign of detention and deportation for immigrants: “You could say it seems really cruel, but at the same time, wasn’t it really cruel when we had an open border and just let all these people in?” No.

No matter one’s view on the “open border”, having an open border is not really cruel, and saying so empties the word cruel of all its meaning. From its inception, in the late 13th century, to today, cruelty has meant wanting to inflict suffering; taking pleasure in the pains of others; being completely devoid of kindness or compassion; being merciless, pitiless, hard-hearted. Being dead, and worse, inside.

The real issue isn’t the “correct” definition of cruelty, but rather the complete gutting of the word and concept. In what universe is the violence committed against immigrants equivalent to an “open border” (an entity which the United States never countenanced anyway, but that’s another conversation)? In what universe is the terror imposed upon children, women, men, nonbinary people, families and others equivalent to the free passage of migrants across a border, any border? In the universe of grievance, in which meaning become meaningless.

In the universe of grievance, any complaint becomes reality, and that reality imposes equivalence, which then becomes identity, and there you have it. And so really the open border, which again never existed, is the same as abducting, terrorizing and torturing the most vulnerable people and community. Isn’t it? Isn’t it? No.

No matter what aspect of social, political, economic, emotional, personal, environment or other justice you may be engaged in pursuing or caring about, the current administration is not only attacking it but trying to exterminate it and its exponents. More often than not, our responses have involved the discovery, “The cruelty is the point.” In 2018, Adam Serwer wrote “The Cruelty Is the Point”, noting, “President Trump and his supporters find community by rejoicing in the suffering of those they hate and fear.” In the same year, Julianne Hing wrote “For Trump, Cruelty Is the Point”, noting, “Under Trump, the country has embarked on an enforcement policy that willfully causes suffering and that doesn’t even factor into the decisions of desperate people trying to escape dangerous situations …. Like so much else with this administration, the US immigration agenda is now being driven by a disdain for the most vulnerable communities among us.”

Well, it’s 2025, and the “cruelty is the point” argument has returned. While at one level, the argument is correct: those supporting the current administrative policies take pleasure and find community by rejoicing in the pain and suffering they’re causing others. But the argument doesn’t go far enough. For those who formulate and implement the policies, the point is there is no point. There is no point to the policy, there is no point of no return, there is no middle point and no end point. There is only power, sacrificing all for nothingness. The cruelty is not the point; it’s the pointlessness.

(By Dan Moshenberg)

(Image Credit: Sandro Botticelli, “The Abyss of Hell” / Vatican Apostolic Library)

 

In England and Wales, where are the women? Still in prison, still awaiting trial, still under attack

In the United Kingdom, the Prison Reform Trust recently released its report, Resetting the approach to women’s imprisonment, which it describes as follows: “This briefing sets out the latest facts about women in contact with the criminal justice system in England and Wales. It contains statistics on the number of women imprisoned, the characteristics of women in prison and the drivers to their offending, as well as information about community-based services and solutions.” The only problem with this description is that many of the imprisoned women have not committed any offense. They are remand prisoners, women awaiting trial, women presumed innocent until proven guilty, women awaiting their day in court, their encounter, however brief, with due process.

According to the report, “The number of women in prison, especially on remand and on short sentences, has remained stubbornly high …. On 30 December 2024, 26% of women in prison were being held on remand. Almost nine in 10 women on remand are considered a low to medium risk of serious harm to the public. In 2023, 3,622 women were remanded into custody from the Magistrates’ Courts, of which 32% went on to receive a custodial sentence. By contrast, 2,639 women were remanded into custody from the Crown Courts and 54% went on to receive a custodial sentence. In 2023, 26% of self-harm incidents by women in prison were by those held on remand.”

Finally, despite the ongoing crisis of incarcerated women’s self-harm, they continue to be remanded to prison “for their own good”: “Women in contact with the criminal justice system who are considered to be in ‘mental health crisis’ are being remanded to prison for their ‘own protection’ or ‘as a place of safety’.”

While all of this is distressing and alarming, none of it is new or surprising, and therein lies the both the real crisis and the real shame. Consider the following, from these pages.

December 5, 2024: “According to the Howard League, “`proportion of women on remand is both higher than in the men’s estate and growing at a faster rate, and vulnerable women are still remanded to custody as a ‘place of safety’, while the government is struggling to keep women in prison safe …. Over half of the receptions into prison are of women on remand and a third are of women serving short sentences.’ Finally, according to arecent report from the National Police Chiefs’ Council, “Proportionately, more women than men are remanded in custody, and women remanded in custody at Crown Court are much less likely to go on to receive a custodial sentence than men (52% vs 71%).”

January 17, 2023: “Two-thirds of the women remanded to prison are found not guilty or given a community outcome. There are little to no services in the remand sections of prisons, and yet “acutely mentally unwell women” are remanded to prison, often.”

September 29, 2014: “Between 1997 and 2007, there was a 40% increase in the number of women in prison awaiting trial. In the same period, men prisoners awaiting trial decreased by 11%. More than 40% of women prisoners awaiting trial have attempted suicide at some point in their lives; for men that number is a little over 25%. Nearly two-thirds of women remand prisoners suffer from depression, a figure far higher than that of sentenced women prisoners. Half of all women on remand receive no visits from their family (for men, that number is 25%).”

Since at least 1997, the issue of the high incidence of women remand prisoners and of the mental health of many of those women has been pretty much public knowledge … and yet, decades later, here we are … again: “On 30 December 2024, 26% of women in prison were being held on remand. Almost nine in 10 women on remand are considered a low to medium risk of serious harm to the public.”

Part of the issue here is the gender constitution of due process.

In the United States, we hear and read and talk a great deal these days about due process, as it is being assaulted, battered, besieged by the current presidential administration. The concept itself first seems to have arisen in the Magna Carta. Clause 39 of the original 1215 version of the Magna Carta reads, “No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.” Subsequent editions of the Magna Carta were shortened, and so, in 1354, Clause 39 became Clause 29, “No man of what state or condition he be, shall be put out of his lands or tenements nor taken, nor disinherited, nor put to death, without he be brought to answer by due process of law.”

Whatever the earlier, and later, authors may have meant by “man”, the practices of the State in terms of women make it clear that the centuries old exclusion of women continues, in the courts, in the police stations, in the prisons and jails, as well as in the streets. Women are disproportionately remanded to prison because they are women, because as women they are excluded from any sense of due process. Women haunt due process.

(By Dan Moshenberg)

(Image Credit: Smithsonian)

 

To universities “choosing to stay neutral”, despise, abhor, and spew out all neutralities!

 

“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse, and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.”
Archbishop Desmond Tutu

According to a headline in today’s New York Times, “More Universities Are Choosing to Stay Neutral on the Biggest Issues”. According to the report, “148 colleges had adopted “institutional neutrality” policies by the end of 2024”. There is no neutrality here, there is, at best, compromising of values foundational to the liberal arts. In the immortal words of Rastaman, played by Amiri Baraka in the film Bulworth, universities have chosen to be ghosts in a time when we need spirits.

Neutrality: not taking sides in a controversy, dispute, disagreement, impartial, unbiased. Neutrality: In relation to war or armed conflict: not assisting, or actively taking the side of, any belligerent party, state, etc.; remaining inactive in relation to belligerent powers. Neutrality: Not belonging to or controlled by any belligerent party, state, etc.; belonging to a power which remains inactive during hostilities; exempted or excluded from the sphere of warlike operations.

Universities who “choose to stay neutral” have chosen sides, and not only in the matter of Palestine and Israel. They have chosen to be the property of major donors. They have chosen to forsake inquiry, debate, difficulty for … for what? Survival? As what? As ghosts of their former selves. They have chosen the elephant, and the mouse will not thank them.

In the twentieth century, thinker after thinker decried the claim of neutrality in periods of crisis, especially those of mounting state violence. Desmond Tutu stands in a crowd of righteous survivors and martyrs who faced injustice and oppression and warned against the neutral stand. In the seventeenth century, Robert Herrick wrote Neutrality Loathsome.

Neutrality Loathsome

God will have all, or none; serve Him, or fall
Down before Baal, Bel, or Belial:
Either be hot, or cold: God doth despise,
Abhorre, and spew out all Neutralities.

From Herrick in the 1600s to the Rastaman today and beyond, spew out all neutralities! You can’t be no ghost! Be a spirit!

 

(By Dan Moshenberg)

 

The New Delhi railway “stampede” was a planned massacre of women and children

 

      “how everything turns away
Quite leisurely from the disaster”
W.H. Auden, “Musée des Beaux Arts

The stampede at New Delhi Railway station on February 15 that resulted in 18 deaths and left many injured was caused by a lethal combination of factors.” Of the 18 deaths reported thus far, 14 were women. Once again, there was no stampede, but there were many deaths, mostly women and then children. The purported cause will be disputed or determined, but what will not be examined is the gender composition of the mass of the dead. No one will ask, “Why did 14 women die that day, in that way?” In order to find the causes, the cause, of this disaster, it’s important to name it correctly. There was no stampede. There was a massacre of women and children … again.

Stampede is a relatively new word, and it seems to be North American. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, it was coined early in the 1800s, Cowboys in the United States borrowed the Spanish word, estampido, which means crash, explosion, or report of a firearm, and estampida, which means a stampede of cattle or horses. It was an early example of transnational vaquero cowboy culture. The word didn’t come from Spain, it came from Mexico. Stampede, or stompado, was a “sudden rush and flight of a body of panic-stricken cattle” or horses. Later, stampede came to mean a “sudden or unreasoning rush or flight of persons in a body or mass”.

“At its inception, stampede meant a thundering herd, powerful, dangerous. Today, when referring to people, it means a mass of people in flight who are threat mostly to themselves. At the beginning, stampede was virile, masculine, big roaring animals and big riding cowboys. People stampeding was panic. In fact, the word in Spanish for the phenomenon of people rushing as a crowd and crushing one another in the process is precisely pánicoPanic. Sudden, wild, unreasoning, excessive, at a loss and out of control. And what is the term for mass panic?  Hysteria, the women’s condition: “Women being much more liable than men to this disorder, it was originally thought to be due to a disturbance of the uterus and its functions”.  Hysteric: “belonging to the womb, suffering in the womb”.

What began as an articulation of masculinity, the enraged capacity to destroy all in its path, became the embodiment of womanhood, the helpless implosion of self. What began as a roar became a whimper. When you read that a group was in a stampede, know this. It is not a neutral word. It is a gender, and the gender is woman. Know this as well. There was no “stampede” in India. There was a massacre of women and children in a space and place of human construction.

The report concerning this week’s event concludes: “At least 30 people were killed in a stampede at the six-week festival last month after tens of millions of Hindus gathered to take a dip in sacred river waters.” This is how everything turns away quite leisurely from the disaster, a glancing mention, a wisp of concern, an erasure of women and children, and it’s done. All that remains are the ghosts.

(By Dan Moshenberg)

(Image Credit: Pieter Bruegel, the Elder, ” Landscape with the Fall of Icarus,” / Royal Museum of Fine Arts)

For it is a mournful truth that devastation is incomparably an easier work than production

 

The abandonment of all principle of right enables the soul to choose and act upon a principle of wrong, and to subordinate to this one principle all the various vices of human nature. For it is a mournful truth, that as devastation is incomparably an easier work than production, so may all its means and instruments be more easily arranged into a scheme and system.

                                                                                    Samuel Taylor Coleridge

In the early 1980s, faced with the ravages of Thatcherism and Reaganism, and the cruelty of the early phases of neoliberalism with its austerity, its newly attired but same old same old war on the poor and working masses and classes, Raymond Williams set out to gather and explain keywords, to layout the intersection of culture, society, vocabulary and power. As Williams explained, “I called these words Keywords in two connected senses: they are significant, binding words in certain activities and their interpretation; they are significant, indicative words in certain forms of thought.” Every period produces its own keywords, though the words themselves are often very familiar, just as every period is produced by its own keywords. You can recognize a period by things people say that they didn’t say before. Listening to, watching, and reading news reports, especially interviews, a keyword of the present moment is devastation.

Well over a hundred years before Williams’ Keywords, from June 1809 to March 1810, Samuel Taylor Coleridge wrote a weekly series of essays, called The Friend. In Essay XVI, Coleridge sets out to understand the implications of people in power choosing evil and renaming it good: “The abandonment of all principle of right enables the soul to choose and act upon a principle of wrong, and to subordinate to this one principle all the various vices of human nature. For it is a mournful truth, that as devastation is incomparably an easier work than production, so may all its means and instruments be more easily arranged into a scheme and system.”

Coleridge chose to emphasize “principle of right” and “principle of wrong.” He looked out a world of abandonment and devastation and understood the ease with which all human vices could be brought together into a scheme and system that insisted on its morality, while demonstrating, day in and day out, the mournful truth that devastation is incomparably an easier work than production. Sound familiar? It should.

Mournful truths are not inevitable truths. They are not destiny. They are choices, made collectively and individually. When faced with a scheme and system whose very core is devastation rather than production, we must remember to cherish those who refuse to abandon all principle of right, whose souls continue to choose and act upon a principle of right. In a world where ruling classes and masses insist on the sanctity of their mournful truths, people will do as they are doing, as they have always done. Mourn for the moment, and fight like hell for the living! You gotta be a spirit! Can’t be no ghost!

(By Dan Moshenberg)

(Image Credit: Gordon Bennett, “Possession Island” / Tate)

Eviction Watch: Who builds the city up each time? A (construction) worker reads history

 

“And Babylon, so many times destroyed.
Who built the city up each time? In which of Lima’s houses,
That city glittering with gold, lived those who built it?
In the evening when the Chinese wall was finished
Where did the masons go? Imperial Rome
Is full of arcs of triumph. Who reared them up?”
Bertolt Brecht, A Worker Reads History

In 1936, Bertolt Brecht asked, “Who built the city up each time?” A recent report brings this question roaring back. According to Cities Where Construction Workers Would Have To Work the Longest Hours To Afford a Home, conducted by Construction Coverage, nationally, a construction worker would have to work 54 hours a week to afford the mortgage on a median priced home. Needless to say, that picture changes drastically, depending on where one goes. For example, Virginia construction workers have to work 66 hours a week to afford a median priced home in the area in which they work. According to the study, Washington-Arlington-Alexandria is even worse. Construction workers have to work 80 hours a week to afford a median priced home. Virginia is the 13th most unaffordable state for construction workers. Washington – Arlington – Alexandria is the tenth most unaffordable metro area, but only by a hair. The fifth through the eleventh most unaffordable metro areas are pretty much clustered together, from 84 to 80 hours a week.

As the study notes, “The construction industry is facing a major worker shortage. Associated Builders and Contractors—a national construction industry trade association—estimates that the industry will require an additional 454,000 new workers on top of normal hiring to meet the booming demand in 2025. However, despite the substantial need for more construction professionals, elevated home prices and an inadequate homebuilding pace are making it difficult for construction workers to afford to purchase a home in the cities where they work.”

Where did the masons go?

(By Dan Moshenberg)

(Image Credit: Terry Gentile, Design for a Textile, Construction Workers / Cooper Hewitt, Smithsonian Design Museum)

Advocates working to improve the status of women in various environments can securely manage digital resources using the wallet login, trusted across the U.S.