Mediaboss Marketing

After waking up at 6:30 a.m. and confirming that she was still leading in the Democratic primary for House District 100, Zooey Zephyr got a bacon breakfast burrito and a cafe au lait from her local coffee shop.

While the cafe au lait is her standard for days that are not sweltering, the breakfast burrito was a treat, as following Tuesdays primary election, Zephyr, 33, became one step closer to becoming one of the first two openly transgender candidates elected to the Montana Legislature.

Zephyr and SJ Howell, a transgender non-binary candidate for Missoulas House District 95, will both be on the ballot in November.

Their run for office comes at a pivotal time for the transgender community as more and more bills that advocates say are detrimental for LGBTQ folks are being introduced at state legislatures across the country, including Montana. The Human Rights Campaign, a LGBTQ advocacy group and LGBTQ political lobbying organization, went as far as to label 2021 the worst year for anti-LGBTQ legislation in recent history.

With Zephyrs district located in a decidedly blue slice of central Missoula, her path to victory seems clear in 2020, Rep. Andrea Olsen, D-Missoula, won the seat with 82% of the vote. And the district has voted Democrat in the last four elections, although before the lines were redrawn in 2014, Republicans dominated between 2003 and 2013.

I am feeling good, I am obviously excited, primarily I feel awash in gratitude for the people who helped me, for the people who voted for me, for Missoula theres a lot to do, theres a lot to plan for, but right now I am just overwhelmed with gratitude, Zephyr told the Daily Montanan in a phone interview.

On Tuesday, Zephyr, who has spent much of her career working for the University of Montana, beat her primary opponent David Severson 1,188 to 832, according to preliminary numbers from the Montana Secretary of States Office. She will face Republican Sean Patrick McCoy and Libertarian Michael Vanecekin in November.

Howell, 41, did not have a primary opponent and will be up against Republican Lauren Subith and Libertarian J.C. Windmueller in the general.

Howell is the executive director of Montana Women Vote, a nonprofit advocacy group, and is also in a secure Democratic district. Between 2003 and 2021, voters in the district only elected a Republican to the office once, but Howell said they are ready to dig in going into the general.

I certainly dont take the general election for granted. I am excited to get to work; Ive been knocking on doors already,Howell said.

If Zephyr and Howell win in November, Montana will be the second state to have elected multiple transgender people to a state legislature New Hampshire currently has three transgender women in its House of Representatives.

There is a difference between legislators having a conversation about you compared to having a conversation with you.

S.J. Howell, candidate, Montana Legislature

In total, 11 openly LGBTQ candidates ran for office in this years Montana primary, with six advancing to the general election. For Montana and across the country, LGBTQ candidates make up a minuscule amount of elected officials. There are 1,040 out LGBTQ elected officials nationwide only eight of whom are transgender which amounts to .2% of all elected officials, according to the LGBTQ Victory Institute. And in Montana, there are just six out LGBTQ elected officials, according to the institutes Out for America Map, which tracks out LGBTQ elected officials nationally.

Both Montana candidates advocated for LGBTQ rights at the Capitol during the last session. On Wednesday, they spoke about the importance of having transgender voices in the Legislature after multiple bills were passed last session that affected the trans community.

Its big for Montana. What feels really exciting to me is that we are sort of going from zero to two, which in a lot of ways feels like a big exponential step forward, Howell said. I feel that there is a difference between legislators having a conversation about you compared to having a conversation with you, and I think it changes the tone of the debate; I think we both have the intention of getting in and fighting hard for the rights of queer and trans Montanans.

The Legislature took up bills limiting how transgender youth can participate in sports, putting more restrictions in place for updating a gender marker on birth certificates and restricting gender-affirming care for trans youth. While the last of the three failed to pass out of the state house, the other two passed and are currently being challenged in court.

Republicans at the time defended the bills as necessary safeguards for protecting children.

For Zephyr, its all about representation. Zephyr decided to run after watching Senate Bill 280, which changed transgender Montanans ability to update their birth certificates, pass the Senate 26-24.

I remember it passed by one vote, and I thought, I know I could change that heart, I know I could be the difference between a yes and a no there. It would have only taken one person to protect my community from discrimination, Zephyr said. We will be the best defense there is against this particular brand of hate.

One of the reasons SB280 was so impactful for Zephyr is prior to the passage of the bill, she was able to update her own birth certificate.

The office of vital records told me as far as the state of Montana is concerned we are updating a 30-year clerical error. It was one of those moments that felt like a full recognition of who I am it meant an extra layer of safety and acknowledgment of who I am, Zephyr said.

Bills that affect people who are transgender and the rest of the LGBTQ community have proliferated beyond Montana. A spokesperson for the Human Rights Campaign said in an email that it is tracking 341 bills across the country it views as harmful toward LGTBQ people; of those bills, more than 143 are anti-trans, including more than 40 healthcare bans, 76 sports bans, and 15 bathroom bills.

An analysis by NBC News found that the annual number of anti-LGBTQ bills filed in state legislatures across the U.S. increased from 41 bills in 2018 to 238 in the first three months of 2022.

However, during the same period, more LGBTQ candidates have filed to run for office.

We coined it the rainbow wave. Weve seen a number of candidates run and win. And this year, in particular, we have about 50 candidates from the trans community running for office up and down the ballot across the country, said Ceasar Toledo, deputy political director at the LGBTQ Victory Fund a political action committee that focuses on increasing the number of openly LGBTQ public official. The fund endorsed both Howell and Zephyr in their races this year.

Surveys by the Trevor Project, an LGBTQ youth suicide prevention and crisis intervention organization, outlined how these types of bills and the debates surrounding them negatively impact transgender youth. One survey found that of the 35,000 LGBTQ youth questioned, 42% had considered suicide within the prior year. And another found that two-thirds of LGBTQ youth surveyed said debates about anti-trans legislation had negatively impacted their mental health.

Shawn Reagor, director of equality at the Montana Human Rights Network, said the organization has seen a recent uptick in reports of vandalism and harassment toward the LGBTQ community, which he attributed to increased activity by white supremacist and militia groups in the state.

But Reagor said more LGBTQ representation in the Legislature will help combat those attacks.

We know that when people are able to build relationships with transgender and nonbinary community members, they are significantly less likely to vote against the needs of the community and make statements that further misunderstanding of who trans and nonbinary people are, he said. Not only do Howell and Zooey represent role models for the community, but they also provide an important opportunity for other legislators and the state as a whole to further get to know some of the wonderful trans and nonbinary people that live in Montana.

Toledo said having LGBTQ voices present during debates on bills impacting their communities humanizes the policy. He added, Its those voices at the table that can be the difference.

And in general, Reagor said he is excited about the likely wins by Zephyr and Howell.

As a trans person, I am incredibly proud and excited at the possibility that our community could be represented in the state Capitol by great leaders like Zooey and Howell. After the attacks during the last legislative session, I am thrilled to see trans candidates run for office and receive this level of support, he said. They are smart, hard-working, and have a deep understanding of the needs of our state.

Bryce Bennett, a former Democratic lawmaker and first openly gay man elected to the Legislature,echoed Reagors message.

For the first time in Montana history, young people coming to terms with their gender identity will look to their Legislature and see people like Zooey Zephyr and SJ Howell who know their story, their struggles, and the bright possibilities ahead. When they get to the Legislature, the day of people talking about trans people will be over; they will finally have to talk with them. That is why representation is so incredibly powerful, Bennett said in a text message to the Daily Montanan.

More here:
Montana on track to make history with election of two transgender candidates Daily Montanan - Daily Montanan

Muses Matt Bellamy has told NME that society wants a new type of revolution.

Following the coronavirus pandemic, the war in Ukraine and the current cost of living crisis, the frontman said he believes change is coming.

I think everyone knows we want a revolution, but we definitely dont want a bunch of authoritarian lunatics from the right. Thats the last thing we want, he told NME in this weeks Big Read cover story, ahead of the Devon rockers new album,Will Of The People, being released in August.

And also we dont want a total communist situation on the hard left either. I think what we want is something completely new. I dont think it exists out there at the moment, but I think theres a new type of politics that could emerge.

I would call it Meta-Centrism. Its an oscillation between liberal, libertarian values for individuals your social life, the ability to be whatever gender you are, all that kind of stuff but then more socialist on things like land ownership, nature and energy distribution. Its oscillation between the two poles.

Matt Bellamy of Museon the cover of NME

He continued: I think theres a way of doing that but theres no language that enables people to think that way. Youre either hard left or youre hard right Im not with any of these; I feel like theres a third way. Theres no existing side that describes what Im looking for yetIm fundamentally anti-authoritarian thats just my nature; I was born that way. So if I see certain things, on either side, that [make you think], Dont start telling me to do that or live like that, it doesnt matter where its coming from: I will probably resist it.

Bellamy also said he believes society is on the brink of a disruptive transition.

He added: Everyones doing everything they can to pretend thats not going to happen or to try and maintain the status quo [but] the longer they hold on to this, the worse its going to be when it happens. If we can just make the transition a little bit more gradual, it might happen a bit less violently.

But its gonna be a big, big shift. Youre talking about an economic collapse, shift and reinvention, total energy transition.

In the same interview, the frontman also claimed thatDonald Trumps reign of division in the US allowed Vladimir Putin to cause chaos in the West.

Meanwhile, Muse kicked off their summer tour earlier this monthat Rock Am Ring 2022, dusting off rarities and performing the unreleased track Kill Or Be Killed and recent single Will Of The People for the first time. The set also included a live debut for Bellamys solo track Behold, The Glove.

The bands summer dates will see them perform at festivals across Europe, including Firenze Rocks, Isle Of Wight Festival, Mallorca Live and more.

Read the original here:
Muse's Matt Bellamy says "everyone wants a new type of revolution - NME

The ballot for the North Carolina General Election in November may become a little more crowded if a U.S. Senate third-party candidates approval to appear on the ballot is granted.

Green Party candidate Matthew Hoh said on his Twitter account on June 8 that his campaign has turned in over 22,000 signatures of which 16,000 were verified. The states requirement is 13,865.

According to Patrick Gannon, public information director for the N.C. State Board of Elections, the board wont know for sure how many valid signatures they received until a review by the State Board and county boards of elections is completed by the end of June. Once the review is complete, a meeting of the State Board of Elections will be scheduled to consider the recognition of the party.

A political party can be recognized in the state if it meets one of three criteria. The Green Party chose the option of filing petitions with signatures from 0.25% of all voters in the most recent election for governor, with at least 200 registered voters from each of 3 N.C. congressional districts. Alternatively, a partys candidate for governor in the most recent state election qualifies by winning at least 2% of the total vote. Lastly, a party can qualify if it was recognized in 70% of all states in the preceding presidential election.

If Hoh is certified by the NCSBE, a state party convention announcing the nomination would also have to take place before July 1 for Hoh to appear on the ballot in November, along with Republican U.S. Congressman Ted Budd, Democrat Cheri Beasley, and Libertarian Shannon Bray, who are vying for the seat of the retiring Republican U.S. Sen. Richard Burr.

The North Carolina Green Party bills itself as an anti-racist, feminist political party that supports gender equality and gender diversity and rejects capitalism in favor of a democratically run economy that responds to the needs of the community and planet.

According to his campaign website, Hoh, of Wake Forest, served in the U.S. Marines and worked at the State Department until resigning in 2009 in protest over what he calls the American escalation of war. He supports abortion rights, universal health care, legalizing all forms of narcotics, housing as a human right, abolishing the Electoral College, term limits for members of Congress, and giving control of police forces to the communities they serve, including hiring, firing, and disciplinary action, not only for the officers themselves, but would also include councils, mayors, county commissioners, district attorneys, and other officials for the policies they create and implement, among other progressive ideas.

The Green Party was officially recognized in the state in 2018 after the General Assembly voted to lower the qualification requirements for a party to appear on the ballot. The party lost its recognition in 2021 after failing to turn out 2% of the vote for gubernatorial or presidential candidates in the 2020 general election. It has never won a major election in North Carolina.

What impact will Hoh have on the other candidates if he is certified to be on the ballot?

The Green Partys impact on the 2022 election will be minimal, said Andy Jackson, director of the John Locke Foundations Civitas Center for Public Integrity. Their presidential candidate got less than one-half of one percent of the vote in North Carolina in 2020 (0.22%) and they did not even nominate a candidate for governor or any other office in the Council of State. The weak performance of their candidates is why they lost their official party status in North Carolina after the 2020 election.

Jackson said the party will be the strongest in progressive areas such as Durham and Asheville and will mainly pull votes from Democrats in those areas. But Democrats have such a strong advantage in those areas that Green Party candidates will not win enough votes to act as spoilers and help Republicans win there.

He added that the Green Party will almost certainly cost Democrats fewer votes than the Libertarian Party costs Republicans, and that research has found that Libertarians pull about twice as many votes from Republicans as they do from Democrats.

RELATED

Read the original post:
Green Party Senate candidate may appear on N.C.s ballot in November - The Richmond Observer

The U.S. Supreme Court has denied review for a case brought by an Oakland couple regarding their owner move-in eviction, in a blow to all landlords who want to legally challenge city requirements regarding tenant buyouts in no-fault evictions.

The real estate lobby and landlords in Bay Area cities that have strict rules about tenant relocation payments were closely watching this case, which dates back to 2018. Landlords Lyndsey and Sharon Ballinger, who were both enlisted in the Air Force when they moved out of their Oakland home in order to be transferred to Washington, D.C. in 2015, came back in late 2018 to find that they could not just politely ask their tenants to leave. They were required under Oakland law to pay $6,582 in relocation expenses to the tenants, which they paid, but they then sued the city over what they considered illegal government seizure of property.

Libertarian activists nationwide, and real estate interests, saw this as a good case to run up the chain in the hopes of invalidating pro-tenant laws like this, the likes of which have been on the books in San Francisco, Berkeley, San Jose, and Los Angeles for years but Oakland's law only took effect in 2018. The libertarian-leaning Pacific Legal Foundation took on the case.

In 2019, a federal judge ruled against the Ballingers, saying that the "[Oakland] City Councils legislative purpose, to promote community stability and help tenants avoid displacement and high moving costs, was a legitimate one."

They appealed the case to the Ninth Circuit, which ruled against them in February. "The Ballingers voluntarily chose to lease their property and to evict under the ordinance conduct that required them to pay the relocation fee," wrote Trump-appointed Judge Ryan Nelson in the 3-0 ruling. Nelson further wrote that the Oakland ordinance was not an illegal government seizure of money or property, but was a standard "regulation of the landlord-tenant relationship," which the Supreme Court had consistently upheld. Cities are permitted to charge taxes and fees to property owners for various reasons, including for things like hazardous waste cleanup.

And as the Chronicle reports, the Supreme Court has essentially concurred, though without any written decision or evidence of dissent.

The Pacific Legals Foundation has tried to set this up as a conflict between two hard-working members of the military and their former tenants, who were apparently tech workers.

"The Ballingers are disappointed that the court failed to recognize that the Oakland law forcing them to pay their software industry tenants $6,500 before they could re-occupy their own home, in accordance with the terms of lease executed before the law was even enacted, is unconstitutional," the foundation said in a comment after the Ninth Circuit ruling four months ago.

But tenants' rights advocates argue that such laws are necessary especially in places like the Bay Area with extremely high rents.

Oakland City Attorney Barbara Parker said, in response to the Supreme Court's denial, that "the modest relocation assistance landlords must provide to tenants who are displaced, by no fault of their own, in an owner move-in eviction, provides critical support for those facing unanticipated moving expenses and other relocation costs," and can help tenants avoid homelessness. Parker previously has cited the fact that many displaced tenants lose the rent-control protection they may have had for years, and they face a rental market with exorbitantly higher rents than they were paying, leading to potential displacement out of their community altogether.

J. David Breemer of the Pacific Legal Foundation said in a statement, per the Chronicle, that the Ballingers are disappointed but they hope the Supreme Court, in a future case, "will ultimately agree that rental owners are entitled to real constitutional protection when government requires them to pay off tenants before moving back into their own home."

Previously: Oakland Landlords Lose Case Over Paying Tenants $6,500 To Leave

Photo: Ian Hutchinson

More here:
Supreme Court Rejects Oakland Couple's Case Opposing Tenant Payouts, In Win For Tenants' Rights - SFist

Elon Musk at the opening ceremony of a new Tesla Gigafactory for electric cars in Gruenheide, Germany, March 22, 2022. Photo: Patrick Pleul/Reuters

Elon Musk styles himself as a character out of science fiction, posing as an ingenious inventor who will send a crewed mission to Mars by 2029 or imagining himself as Isaac Asimovs Hari Seldon, a farseeing visionary planning ahead centuries to protect the human species from existential threats. Even his geeky humour seems inspired by his love for Douglas Adamss Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.

But while he may take inspiration from science fiction, as Jill Lepore has observed, hes a bad reader of the genre. He idolises Kim Stanley Robinson and Iain M. Banks while ignoring their socialist politics, and he overlooks major speculative traditions such as feminist and Afrofuturist science fiction. Like many Silicon Valley CEOs, he primarily sees science fiction as a repository of cool inventions waiting to be created.

Musk engages with most science fiction in a superficial manner, but he is a careful reader of one author: Robert A. Heinlein. He named Heinleins The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress from 1966 as one of his favourite novels. The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress is a libertarian classic second only to Ayn Rands Atlas Shrugged in its propaganda value for neoliberal capitalism. It inspired the creation of the Heinlein Prize for Accomplishments in Commercial Space Activities, which Musk won in 2011. (Jeff Bezos is another recent winner.)

The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress popularised the motto Theres no such thing as a free lunch, often used by defenders of capitalism and opponents of progressive taxation and social programmes. Its about a lunar colony that frees itself, via advanced and cleverly applied technology, from the resource-sucking parasitism of Earth and its welfare dependents. In this instance, it appears that Musk correctly caught the authors drift.

No such thing as a free lunch

Heinlein filled his fiction with loudmouthed men who claim to be accomplished polymaths. They boss everyone around, make decisions on a whim and ignore advice regardless of the consequences. In other words, they act just like the CEO of Tesla, Inc. Likewise, Musk often attracts investors through publicity stunts rather than proven science and engineering, a self-marketing strategy that puts him, as Colby Cosh has pointed out, in the same dubious company as Heinleins space entrepreneur D.D. Harriman in his story The Man Who Sold The Moon.

But Heinlein wasnt in the business of criticising free-market capitalism far from it. The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress depicts a Moon colony forced by the centralised Lunar Authority to ship food to Earth where it goes to feed starving people in places like India. The lunar citizens, or Loonies, revolt against the state monopoly and establish a society characterised by free markets and minimal government. The Loonies welcome the Malthusian catastrophe that will follow their withdrawal of nutritional assistance from Earth because they believe population collapse will ultimately make the welfare dependents down there more efficient people and better fed in the long run.

In addition to basic libertarianism, the novel promotes what Evgeny Morozov would call technological solutionism, the belief that every social or political problem can be solved with the right technical fix. This ideologys roots go back to the 1930s technocracy movement, which, as Lepore points out, numbered Musks grandfather among its adherents. Musk has taken up this legacy, promoting the electric car as the solution to climate change. In Musks view, private innovation rather than state intervention or activist politics will save the world.

The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress follows the same mindset. Although the Loonies advocate libertarian principles we learn that the most basic human right is the right to bargain in a free marketplace these prove secondary to the practical problem that Earth is draining Lunas water and other resources at a rate they predict will result in mass starvation on the Moon.

Their solution to this problem touts itself as equally scientific. In the book we learn that an insurrectionary group is no different from an electric motor: it must be designed by experts with function in mind. The Loonies revolutionary conspiracy decides that revolutions are not won by enlisting the masses. Revolution is a science only a few are competent to practice. It depends on correct organisation and, above all, on communications.

Acting on this principle, one of the co-conspirators, Mannie the computer technician, designs their clandestine cell system like a computer diagram or neural network, mapping out how information will flow between revolutionists. They determine the best way of organising a cadre not through democratic deliberation or practical experience but through cybernetic principles.

Mannies disinterest in the messy business of political persuasion is a strength, not a weakness, because it allows him to see people as mere nodes in the network. Indeed, Mannys narration throughout the novel uses engineering terms to describe human beings and social interactions. He describes one woman as [s]elf-correcting, like a machine with proper negative feedback. Mannie, who boasts a cyborg arm, treats others as mechanisms in need of tinkering. Musks brain-machine interface company, Neuralink, attempts to operationalise this idea.

Also read: Elon Musk Thinks Neuralink Could Merge Humans With AI Neuroscience Says Wait

For Mannie and his co-conspirators, democratic input from the revolutions mass base is noise that can only interfere with the signals transmitted from the elite leadership outward to their interconnected web of subordinates. Even when it comes time to establish a constitution for the Luna Free State, the conspirators use clever procedural tricks to do an end run around everyone in the congress who is not a member of their clique. Smart individuals always win out over mass democracy in Heinleins fiction and thats a good thing.

The novel takes solutionism to the extreme when Mannie enlists the help of a sentient supercomputer named Mike to lead the overthrow of Earths colonial government on Luna. Anticipating the exuberance of the dot-com era, Heinlein suggests that a computer can foment change better than any movement or organisation. Mikes revolutionary tactics reflect the novels obsession with communications: much of the book is devoted to the conspiracys attempts to shift public opinion against the Lunar Authority and sow confusion among the governments ranks through hacking and media campaigns.

Like the keyboard warriors of our present moment the hyperonline Musk among them Heinleins revolutionary elite hope to change society by manipulating information.

When revolutionary war breaks out, Mikes technical superiority emerges as the deciding factor. Using electromagnetic catapults, the supercomputer hurls rocks at Earth that impact with the force of atomic explosions. The Federated Nations of Earth are forced to grant their lunar colonies independence after this calculated show of force. In the end, the Loonies achieve political emancipation thanks to a gadget.

Markets and machines

These ideas would later feed into what Richard Barbrook and Andy Cameron call the Californian ideology, a combination of techno-utopianism and economic libertarianism espoused by digital artisans such as software engineers working in Silicon Valley. As Barbrook and Cameron note, the Californian ideologys evangelists in the 1990s tended to be science-fiction fans who loved Heinlein and fancied themselves countercultural rebels bringing about a golden age of freedom by building the electronic marketplace. They believed that once unleashed from physical as well as governmental constraints, the free market would produce new technologies to address every possible problem or need.

Even more fundamentally, The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress reflects a prevailing dogma that promotes cybernetics as the key to understanding the universe. Under this belief system, everything from markets to ecosystems appear as information processors operating based on feedback mechanisms. Like a thermostat, they respond to changing circumstances without conscious human control. Because the economy is a self-regulating system too complex for anyone to understand let alone steer, the Californian ideologists suggest, it should be insulated from democratic interference by a global legal order developed by neoliberal experts.

Musk has immersed himself in this ideology since his involvement with PayPal in the 1990s, and so it makes sense that he would be drawn to The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress. Hes so mired in this way of thinking that he entertains the idea that all of reality is a computer simulation. In many ways, Musk models himself on Mannie the computer technician, the wisecracking rebel who only wants the government to get out of his way so he can make things work.

When Musk encounters traffic congestion, he doesnt see it as a failure of urban planning or a problem following from underinvestment in mass transit. Instead, he sees it as an opportunity to build a hyperloop. His solution to everything is an invention developed and marketed by rogue geniuses in the private sector. His faith in technofixes is so great that he imagines machines as potential overlords waiting to take over. There is more than a hint of Mike in his fear of an impending robot apocalypse.

Even his efforts to acquire Twitter and strip it of content restrictions seem to be motivated by the same ideology. Fred Turner argues that Musks opposition to content moderation stems from a belief that information wants to be free. When speech counts as data rather than dialogue, it becomes impossible to see why hate speech might be harmful.

Musks belief system rules out the idea that society is riven by antagonisms, least of all class struggle. He will always see problems like climate disaster as purely technical rather than derived from the profit-seeking behavior of the corporations ruining the planet. If science fiction reveals the contradictions of capitalism and encourages us to imagine alternatives, then Musks sci-fi persona is a cheap imitation. As a libertarian and a technocrat, the best he can do is fantasise about handing the revolution over to the machines.

Jordan S. Carroll is a visiting assistant professor of English at the University of Puget Sound. He is the author of Reading the Obscene: Transgressive Editors and the Class Politics of US Literature (Stanford 2021), and he is currently working on a book on race, science fiction and the alt-right.

This article was first published by Jacobin and has been republished here with permission.

Original post:
Why Understanding This '60s Sci-Fi Novel Is Key To Understanding Elon Musk The Wire Science - The Wire Science