Daily Brief Audio Series
If there’s one thing I’ve learned in my thousands of hours on social media over the years, it’s this: block early, block often.
I have a personal set of “blocking rules” I post frequently – on Bluesky, LinkedIn, Mastodon, and Twitter/X – explaining who gets blocked. For example, when I see someone in my replies supporting war crimes - boom, instant block. Pushing the propaganda lines of abusive governments? Block. Flinging hate? Block.
But wait, some say, aren’t you a human rights guy? Don’t you believe in freedom of speech?
Of course, I believe in freedom of speech. But just because someone is free to speak, does not mean I am obligated to listen to them – nor share their ideas.
There’s a responsibility I feel I have – that we all have – when using social media. We can control parts of these online spaces, and like a micro-editor of a micro-publication, we get to decide what we want our readers to see, and not to see.
Not only do we have control over our own posts and replies, we have some control over the replies of others. And for both: control implies responsibility. Blocking accounts that are spreading poisonous ideas in the replies to your social media posts is simply responsible behavior.
This always becomes an issue for me when I post about ongoing conflicts. Yesterday, I saw it in replies to social media posts linking to my latest Daily Brief article on Israel/Palestine, but it happens with every conflict. I block people who still seem to think the laws of war and other standards should only apply to the “other side” and not to “their side.”
Defending atrocities is appalling. Those who do so are denying the suffering of innocent individuals, and in doing so, they are denying the fundamental humanity of everyone, including themselves, actually.
In a way, it’s not their fault, of course. Conflicts can negatively impact people’s brains, push their minds into vicious desires for, or at least acceptance of, revenge and punishment, even of the innocent.
But that doesn’t mean I want to see their verbal violence and incitement to hatred in social media replies. And I don’t want my inaction to help such ugliness spread.
So, yes, I block people on social media. Often. I encourage you to do the same.
There were ten or twelve of them, all in civilian clothes. They were armed with knives, handguns, and assault rifles. They came to the small, rural community of about 40 people and started piling up stones in the road, blocking the only way out.
On the third day, dozens more arrived, all armed. Some went into the fields with dogs to steal hundreds of sheep. Some went door to door, telling people to leave their homes within the hour, or else…
They threatened to “cut our throats, and pointed at us, including our kids,” one victim later described. “I told my wife to take the kids and run.”
Residents fled for their lives. None of them have been able to return to their homes in al-Qanub, near Hebron in the southern West Bank. These kinds of Israeli settler attacks on Palestinians in the West Bank have been increasing since October.
Over the past six months, most international eyes have been focused on the horrific events in and around Gaza. That’s understandable, given the unprecedentedly gruesome Hamas-led attacks on October 7 and the Israeli military’s half year of massive collective punishment of the Palestinian people in Gaza in response.
But the worsening situation in the West Bank is worthy of the world’s attention, too. Israeli settlers have assaulted, tortured, and committed sexual violence against Palestinians. They’ve stolen their phones, cars, and livestock; threatened to kill them if they did not leave permanently; and destroyed their homes and schools.
Israeli security forces should be stopping this violence and reining in the settlers. They are not.
Israeli police, which have law-enforcement jurisdiction over settlers, have reportedly been instructed not to enforce the law against violent settlers. The military, which has jurisdiction over Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, are either standing by or actively taking part in the attacks. Of the more than 700 settler attacks the UN has recorded between October 7 and April 3, soldiers in uniform have been present in nearly half of them.
Authorities in Israel are ultimately responsible for this rising settler violence against Palestinian communities. It’s on them to maintain security, to protect human life and property, and they are clearly failing to do so. What’s more, authorities have done nothing to help people return safely to their homes.
The international community – especially Israel’s friends – has tools available to try to rein in this campaign of violence.
The UK, US, and France have announced visa policies that bar entry to some violent settlers. The US and UK have also imposed financial sanctions on eight settlers and two settlement outposts. The EU has yet to impose sanctions, due to staunch reluctance by EU members Hungary and the Czech Republic.
But what about outside pressure on the Israeli government itself, given its ultimate responsibility here? Governments could suspend military support to Israel. They could review or suspend bilateral agreements. They could boost efforts to hold war crimes suspects to account.
That’s the kind of outside pressure that would probably be more likely to stem settler attacks.
There’s an old slogan from rights activists that says: “Some people are gay. Get over it.”
It’s pithy, memorable, easily repeatable – as with all good slogans. It’s also easily repurposed for other uses, like, “Some people are trans. Get over it.”
Most importantly, it puts responsibility on the receiver of the message. It says, it’s not the scapegoated groups that’s the issue here. The issue is you, the individual reader or listener. You are called on to reassess your thinking. Its bluntness is a challenge: this is how reality is, and if what’s in your head can’t accept reality, the problem is what’s in your head.
Authorities in Belarus should maybe meditate on this. The other day, they again attacked lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people. Specifically, they changed the definition of pornography under Belarusian law so it now categorizes depictions of LGBT folks as it does depictions of necrophilia and pedophilia. In short, they’re labelling LGBT lives as “pornography.”
Of course, it’s nothing new exactly in Belarus, which under the dictatorship of Aliaksandr Lukashenka is a human rights hell hole generally. Authorities have attacked LGBT folks there before, too, and public officials are pushing to introduce even criminal penalties for “non-traditional sexual relationships and gender change propaganda.” Belarus is marching in lock-step with its ally, Russia, which has expanded its anti-gay propaganda law and banned the “international LGBT movement” – an organization which, as you know, doesn’t exist.
Putin has been attacking LGBT folks in part to try to boost his support among conservatives abroad, especially in the West over the war in Ukraine. Putin often ludicrously presents his atrocity-ridden invasion of Ukraine as a battle for “traditional values.”
A few months ago, my former colleague Graeme Reid (now with the the UN as an Independent Expert) wrote an article on “Russia, Homophobia and the Battle for ‘Traditional Values.’” In it, he described a competition between two visions of the world:
On one side is the vision of a social order in which the individual is subordinated to [the state’s] notion of ‘culture’ and tradition, brooking no dissent. The competing vision is rights-based and accommodating of diversity.
What anti-LGBT dictators, like Lukashenka and Putin, and their admiring Western demagogues are calling for when they talk about “traditional values” is obvious. They want a world where the state, the government, can deny you your individual freedoms – even your own bodily autonomy – based on “tradition,” which conveniently for them, they get to define. No thanks.
In their authoritarian efforts, they even take steps that deny the very existence of LGBT people.
Those of us who believe in freedom and accept the reality of human diversity have the opposite view. And we say, “Some people are gay. Get over it.”
No war can be reduced to few hundred words.
But today, on the one-year anniversary of Sudan’s ongoing conflict, let’s try to de-complexify the situation by highlighting the four key actors involved in the horrific tragedy that’s been unfolding.
The first two are the main warring parties, which, over the past year, have committed one atrocity after another: the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF).
The SAF have unlawfully killed civilians. They’ve carried out airstrikes deliberately targeting civilian infrastructure, including hospitals. The SAF has recruited children as fighters and repeatedly obstructed humanitarian aid from reaching those who need it.
On the other side, the RSF and their allied militias have carried out widespread killings of civilians, many ethnically targeted, as in West Darfur. The RSF has engaged in widespread sexual violence and pillage, as well. They’ve also recruited children, and they’ve also hampered humanitarian aid, including by massive looting.
The third of our four groups of people involved in Sudan’s conflict are the victims of the first two, the millions caught up in the horrific viloence of the SAF and the RSF.
In addition to the thousands abused and killed, the conflict has forced 8.5 million people from their homes. About a fifth of them have fled to neighboring countries. Millions who remain make Sudan the world’s largest crisis of internal displacement.
Some 25 million people – that’s about half of the population of Sudan – are now dependent on emergency food supplies. Five million could be at risk of starvation in the coming months.
This brings us to the fourth and final actor in Sudan’s tragedy: the international community.
As we’ve discussed here several times over the past year, the outside world has not been addressing the Sudan crisis with anything like the urgency it demands. Alarm bells have been ringing, but there’s been a spectacular silence in response.
Today could see a shift in the world’s approach. Global and regional leaders are meeting in Paris to put the spotlight on Sudan. They’ll push for an end to the fighting and, hopefully, for a much-needed, massive boost in global funding for humanitarian action.
The Paris conference should also make clear that those responsible for atrocities in Sudan will be held to account. In particular, they should announce concrete measures against those deliberately obstructing aid. Getting the aid to folks who need it has to include discouraging the warring parties from blocking it and stealing it.
One year ago today, Sudan began spiraling out of control. Of the four actors involved, we know what’s been happening with the first three. We need to see a lot more of the fourth.
I spent some time this morning looking at house prices in Texas. I wanted to know what 400 million US dollars could buy you.
No, I’m not planning to move to Texas, and no, I don’t have 400 million lying around.
But that’s the amount of money – Texas taxpayers’ money – the Texas Military Department will reportedly be spending to construct a massive new “Forward Operating Base” near the town of Eagle Pass, on the border with Mexico.
The base is just one part of the US state’s anti-migrant program, called “Operation Lone Star.” We’ve talked about Operation Lone Star’s huge budget and deadly abuses in the Daily Brief before, and highlighted the ugly immorality at the core of the program.
We could also mention that it even hasn’t done what the authorities promised it would do. There is no evidence Operation Lone Star has slowed migration. However, it has cost Texas residents as much as US$ 10 billion.
The pointless new military base is expected to house up to 1,800 national guard members. Given average real estate prices in the area, 400 million dollars could buy every one of them an actual house.
Here’s the math. Divide 400 million by 1,800, and you get US$ 222,222. In Maverick County, where Eagle Pass is located, the median sale price of a home is US$ 258,000, which is a bit high, but in the neighboring counties of Dimmit, Kinney and Zavala, it’s 144,000, and 198,000, and 140,000, respectively. So, yes, 400 million could buy 1,800 nice houses in the area.
Or, you could use that money instead to send those 1,800 national guard members to full, four-year degree programs at Texas A&M University. That costs US$ 30,608 a year for in-state residents, including tuition, fees, housing, food, books, transportation, and other expenses. In fact, you could do that and still have nearly 180 million left over. [400,000,000 – (30,608 x 4 x 1,800)]
Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m not really suggesting these spending alternatives. I’m not saying these 1,800 people should be prioritized over others in the state.
I’m simply pointing out that 400 million dollars is a lot of taxpayer money. There are thousands of things authorities could be spending it on.
Can they really think of nothing better to do with that money than further militarize the border and plan to commit yet more human rights abuses under Operation Lone Star?