Category: Uncategorized

Fighting fascism in the US — in Marseille

by Michel Welmond, posted in Uncategorized

We held a small but vibrant rally in Marseille last Saturday to protest the slide towards fascism in the US.  It was in support of the events held on April 19 throughout the US and in other countries. Democrats Abroad France also held rallies in Toulouse, Paris and Nice. Organizing and participating in something like this was invigorating and motivating. We even ended up on the evening news over here!

As one of the organizers, I navigated the French bureaucracy to get a permit for the event. After a fair amount of back and forth (continuously being referred to one office after another), I was finally able to get to the right person and receive the green light. Then getting the word out to the American community in Marseille and Aix-en-Provence was another adventure. Making signs was fun, though. And the event was as well. 

Seeing my country melt while living abroad, however, leaves me with a tremendously despairing sentiment. I want to feel part of what is going on to resist this slide. Writing this blog has helped, as has being a member of Democrats Abroad Marseille.

I’ve had plenty of discussions with French friends and acquaintances about what is happening in the States. Everyone has an opinion, of course, and many want to tell me what they think. They rarely ask me how I feel, though. Opinions tend to fall into one of three basic buckets. The most common one I have heard is one of exasperation. Why has the Democratic party been so silent? Why haven’t Americans taken to the streets? The subtext is that the French would have reacted sooner and more aggressively to the onslaught on democracy. I’m not sure they are right – a lot of romanticism about the French taking to the streets and changing (or stopping) things here. The public protests to the change in the retirement age, while impressive, did not prevent that from going forward.

The second group seems to believe that everything is being blown out of proportion. Eventually, cooler heads will prevail, and the most egregious actions will be reversed. I call these the “institutionalists” because they argue that institutions and norms will play their part and dampen and contain the power grab. They are taken by surprise by the more unsettling actions of the administration, however. The tariffs (reversed, some state with confidence) and the distancing from NATO (just bluster to get the Europeans to pay more) are examples. They recoil at words like fascism or autocracy.

The last group wholehearted embraces the American administration and its agenda. I don’t know many people in this group (I don’t know many people in this category in the States, for that matter – a personal issue I’m dealing with). They usually possess a strong dislike of immigrants, admire the “strongman” approach to leadership, and (unendingly) express disgust with “wokeism”. But even they have been thrown for a loop by the anti-European bent of the American administration. They also tend to rationalize, saying that setbacks are temporary, and that Trump will prevail – and that he will recognize that Europe is a true friend.

Can this also happen in France? When the far right takes power, will they be able to constrain civil liberties, fire civil servants, and establish an autocracy? Most of my friends and acquaintances say no. They point to the Italian case of Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni who appears to be hindered in her more dramatic ventures. Or Dick Schoof in the Netherlands. But France is different. Like in the US, the president has considerable power to set and execute policy. The retirement age struggles are a case in point. Furthermore, there has been a tirade on the right against the justice system here, particularly with the recent conviction of Marine Le Pen. It appears that Trump sympathized with her plight.

On the other hand, De Gaulle has made a strong, “told you so”, comeback. On the (center) right and the (center) left, the argument for independence from the US on strategic and economic fronts is regularly made. More than 70% of the French no longer consider the US an ally, following the shocking exchange between Trump and Zelensky. Euro-skepticism seems to be in retreat. This may augur well for those fighting the rise of fascism in France.

In any case, the exasperated group (the first bucket), which is most vehement in their disgust and anger at what is happening in the US is, in many ways, also the most pro-American. Despite the usual criticism of the States, there is a real affection, for what the US represents in terms of democracy, freedom and creativity and they are genuinely worried about the US’s future. Raphael Glucksman, an up-and-coming Socialist party personality suggested that France should take back the Statue of Liberty, considering the racist, close-minded and ultra-nationalist bent of the current American administration. But he ended his indictment with the following: “We all in Europe love this nation to which we owe so much. It will rise again. You will rise again. We are counting on you.”

A subject of many discussions I’ve had with other Americans living abroad is whether we will be hassled at the border when we visit our home country. We get all kinds of advice on this – erase all messages and musings on my phone, tablet, and computer, for example. However, I don’t know if I want to “comply in advance”. Nothing I have said or done is illegal and it is none of their business. It would be a badge of honor if they pester me. I’m going to Los Angeles on May 8th, so we’ll see what I say on this blog after we clear customs.

I want to draw attention to a somewhat depressing website, that is nevertheless very informative. Factcheck.org seems to do a pretty good job at contradicting virtually every inanity the current administration comes up with.

I understand that the next big event in the US is on May 1st. I don’t think the American community here in France will do something specific on that day since France will already be in the streets, as they are every May 1st.

Are we all becoming enemy combatants?

by Michel Welmond, posted in Uncategorized

So happy that many of you made it to the demonstrations on April 5th. I wish I could have joined in. Democrats Abroad had organized events all over France, but unfortunately, not in Marseille. We are organizing one in my town (Marseille) on April 19th though. Some people are nervous about attending because it might incur the wrath of customs officials when they come visit the States.

Today, I want to discuss immigration, a subject that is of great importance to me as the son of immigrants to the US. The front page has been consumed lately by the tariff discussions, but the administration’s other attempts to undermine our polity, society, and economy continue unabated. And central to this is the aggressive attempt to punish the immigrant community through threats of and actual imprisonment and deportation.

For example, the New York Times reports that the administration has moved aggressively to revoke the temporary legal status of hundreds of thousands of immigrants who were allowed into the country under President Biden by revoking their social security number. The move moves individuals to the “death list” of the Social Security system with the objective that they would “self deport”. Without a social security number, it because exceedingly difficult to find work, housing, credit, or anything else needed to live normal lives. The initial names are limited to people the administration says are convicted criminals and “suspected terrorists.” But officials said the effort could broaden to include others in the country without authorization.

The immigrant community is made up of persons with a diversity (can I still use that word?) of different administrative statuses. There are many who are American citizens, others who have green cards, others with temporary visas of varying lengths of time, and yet others who have acquired one of a panoply of authorizations to remain in the US. Then there are those in “limbo” awaiting a change in status and finally those who have no status at all (either they never could acquire one or the one they had “expired”). The line between these different categories is blurring as the administration attempts to lump everyone into the same category.

The administration has basically used the argument that the US is at “war” with immigrants, who should be treated as “enemy combatants”. This is the underlying logic of using the Alien Enemies Act as a legal justification for imprisonment and deportation without due process.  It is important to keep this in mind as actions proliferate against the US immigrant community. It is an effort to transform many who live in the US into less than human.

The legal arguments over the use of the Alien Enemies Act are very telling. Sotomayor wrote that the implications of the administration’s legal stance is that “not only noncitizens but also United States citizens could be taken off the streets, forced onto planes, and confined to foreign prisons with no opportunity for redress if judicial review is denied unlawfully before removal.”

There have been court cases galore to challenge the administration’s immigration policies. Some successful and others not. For example, although the Supreme Court has allowed the use of the AEA, it has ruled that the administration cannot deport people without giving them a chance to defend themselves.  The Supreme Court also endorsed a trial judge’s order that requires the government to “facilitate and effectuate the return” of a Salvadoran migrant it had wrongly deported to a notorious prison in El Salvador. Federal judges in both New York and Texas have blocked the deportations of Venezuelan.

Even with the courts against them, the administration seems to find ways to ignore the rulings. In the case of Abrego Garcia, the Salvadoran who the administration admits was wrongly deported, they are claiming that because he is in El Salvador, the president has the only authority (not the courts) to determine whether Mr. Garcia’s return should be pursued because it has become a matter of foreign policy!

The administration is also prioritizing those who express opinions that it considered counter to its ideological stance. Foreign students who demonstrated against the treatment of Gaza’s Palestinian are being rounded up. More than 300 have had their visas revoked. Even lawyers who are US citizens who defend these students are being threatened. The U.S. border officials are using more aggressive tactics at ports of entry as the administration scrutinizes green card and visa holders who have expressed opposition to its policies.

Whatever the legal tussles that are happening, people are being treated with cruelty. Men, women and children are being traumatized by these actions. These are our neighbors, friends, colleagues, employees and we have a responsibility towards them.

What can we do? First and foremost, we must protect those of the immigrant community who are threatened. In Sonoma County in California, the North Bay Rapid Response Network has a hotline that can reached if someone is being threatened by ICE. There are certainly similar resources available in your community.

The National Immigrant Law Center has many resources for immigrants and those who want to support them. For example, they delineate what you should do if you are arrested or detained.

Voting and the SAVE Act

This is another good week to call your members of Congress and express outrage. The House passed the SAVE Act, which will make it dramatically more difficult for millions of eligible American citizens to register to vote if the Senate passes it too, so it’s time to start campaigning for the Senate to reject it. The Capitol switchboard phone number, where you can ask to be connected to your members’ offices, is (202) 224-3121.

Fighting fascism – facing down intimidation

by Michel Welmond, posted in Uncategorized

A key tactic of the administration’s fascist project is the use of intimidation. Intimidation is defined by Cambridge Dictionary as “the action of frightening or threatening someone, usually in order to persuade them to do something that you want them to do.” Thus, the question we must always ask is what does the “intimidator” want us to do (or not do). Keeping our eye on that can help us to better determine our plan of action as we fight fascism. Globally, the administration recognizes that any resistance to its fascist agenda could lead to a setback – otherwise why resort to intimidation?

The administration is intimidating the immigrant community by menacing deportation, regardless of immigrant status. The overall objective is to show “strength” by creating a false threat that is addressed in a violent and spectacular manner.

The administration is intimidating those who are different such as trans individuals by removing their right to identity and employment. Here the objective is to create a category of “unhumans” (see Vance’s endorsement on the book about how “unhumans” (basically those who fight fascism) have ruined this country

The administration is intimidating scientists by limiting research in fields of import, such as climate change, and preventing studies from being undertaken that differentiate subjects by race, gender, income level or disability.

The administration is intimidating institutions of learning. The instrumentalization of antisemitism is a clever ploy to mask the fascist project to scare universities management into towing certain ideological lines. Who can defend antisemitism, after all?

The administration is intimidating civil servants by firing those it does not agree with and creating a general atmosphere of fear by dismissing workers indiscriminately.

The administration is intimidating lawyers and judges by threatening impeachment and  limiting access to business opportunities. The objective here is clear: when the administration’s actions can be challenged by the third branch of government, its project is weakened.

The administration is intimidating us all because by fighting fascism, we might just win and they would lose!  

You may counter that these isolated acts do not constitute overall strategy. However, the administration is actually testing the waters with each action, ready to ramp up if the conditions exist. The recent move against Harvard University signals that the administration has seen the backing down of Columbia University as a success.

The strategies used by the Trump administration to intimidate us all are impressive in their scope and cleverness.

According to an article by Damon Beres in the Atlantic Intelligence: “President Donald Trump’s administration is embracing AI. According to reports, agencies are using the technology to identify places to cut costs, figure out which employees can be terminated, and comb through social-media posts to determine whether student-visa holders may support terror groups.”

The list of words that are now banned by the government (now numbering more than 250) only gets longer and more ridiculous: activism, climate crisis, male dominated, gay, gender, inclusion, measles, underserved, women – but also verbs such as belong to and promote. By the way, please visit this PEN webpage to send a letter to your congressperson expressing your disdain to these acts of censorship.

If the Trump regime can “detain” a graduate student with a green card for peacefully protesting the policies of the Netanyahu government, what’s to stop the regime from “detaining” full citizens who engage in such protest or in any protest against the Trump regime?

About a week ago, a French researcher was refused entry to the US because he had written about his distress at what was happening under the current administration. They “found” this on his computer and smartphone at customs and accused him of spying (for whom exactly?).

What do we do about intimidation? Robert Reich proposes three categories of actions, of which I share two below. The first is to protect those who are being intimidated:

  • We can contribute to the legal defense of Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil, here.
  • We can ensure that students and faculty know what to do if ICE comes to their campus, here.
  • We can contribute to groups such as the PhD project, a nonprofit that helps students from underrepresented groups earn doctoral degrees in business — which the Trump regime absurdly claims violates the Civil Rights Act by discriminating against white students.

The second thing we can do is show up. 

We can show up at town halls where our senators and representatives are appearing, tell them exactly what we think of the Trump-Vance-Musk regime, and ask them to join us in opposition.

But the most important thing you can do is attend one of the demonstrations organized for tomorrow April 5th

A final request for everyone. Please oppose the SAVE Act (H.R. 22) – A Voter Suppression Bill – House Vote THIS WEEK. This bill will makes it a requirement that voters present a birth certificate or a passport to vote. This particularly affects those who vote from abroad. If you could kindly call your congressperson, I would greatly appreciate it.

Fighting fascism – is resistance futile or essential?

by Michel Welmond, posted in Uncategorized

The main purpose of these blogs has been to promote the idea that we should all resist the slide towards fascism in the US through small and large actions in an ongoing manner. The posts have mostly provided links to organizations that are working diligently in that direction and that would benefit from your support. They have also identified examples of how to express one’s disagreement through communication, mobilization, demonstrations, and boycotts. The principal actions have been to communicate with our “leaders” through petitions, telephone calls, emails or in townhall meetings. They have also called for demonstrations and boycotts.

In terms of this approach, we are reaching an important point that many who have opposed fascism in other countries have also faced: how forcefully do you resist? There appears to be two camps.

The first, the “moderates”, claim we must wait for the administration to make some fatal flaws and then resist. James Carville made this argument, provocatively calling it the “roll over and play dead” strategy. Essentially, he claims that mobilizing a fervent resistance now will only turn off those who may be ready to mobilize when the right issue comes around. “Moderates” maintain that Democrats lost because they went to far with the culture wars: MeToo, Black Lives Matter, wokeism, LGBTQ+, Palestine, immigration, etc. and didn’t take into consideration the concerns of the average working person (i.e., man). We forgot what Clinton said: it’s the economy, stupid. The Economist published a poll indicating that most Democrats wanted the party to be more “moderate”, rather than more “liberal”.  Generally, the position is that our attention should be on the next elections – not protesting every single egregious act.

The second, the “progressives”, warn that without forceful resistance by leaders and citizens now, the administration will successfully and quickly put in place the key pillars of a fascist regime. They point to the very long list of actions that have already been taken during the first 60 days in power (I want to thank my dear friend Richard Sack for having put together this list). Exasperated with the leadership of the Democratic party, the term “capitulation” is readily used to label Charles Schumer’s agreement on the budget continuing resolution, Columbia’s decision to put the Middle East studies program into “receivership”, and the law firm of Paul Weiss folding to the whims of the administration. The progressives commit to developing a mass movement of dissidence that we need to build now. How to build it? There is much debate, but the urgency is palpable.

I mostly sit with the second group, although I certainly do not want to see a screaming match between the two. I believe that more is better and that now is the time. I come to this conclusion through my reading of the history of fascism and autocracy, as well as scanning more progressive critics. I recently listened to Larry Diamond, a prominent political scientist who was recently interviewed by John Avlon on the Bulwark, and who makes several convincing arguments (much recommended). He asserted that those who successfully pushed back on “autocratic projects” mobilized early, were coordinated and put continuous pressure on the autocratic regimes. Groups need to stand collectively – he uses the example of universities that should coordinate their efforts to defend the right of free speech on campus and academic freedom. He says that we shouldn’t be “obeying in advance” because it will only encourage the autocrats. He advocates that pressure needs to be continuously brought to bear on Congress (even if they now seem to have their tail between their legs), particularly Republicans.

And then there are the courts! Many of us say with some relief. More than 100 cases have been filed and many temporary restraining orders and strong condemnations from lower courts have been issued. However, most cases have not made it to the Supreme Court yet and so we don’t know if SCOTUS will side with the administration or not. Also – and this the elephant in the room – will the administration defy them (if they indeed do not side with it)? V.D. Vance says he welcomes a constitutional crisis defined as the administration just ignoring the court decisions. He is right that it will be the key test for the autocratic project. Will we descend into the streets at that point? I don’t think that the moderates would oppose. Or will it be too late?

I don’t think that moderates want everyone to stop calling congressional offices or boycotting Amazon or filing court cases. And many are probably as fed up with the Democratic Party as the progressives. Nor do I think that most progressives want to start throwing Molotov cocktails. Although I have strong opinions on most culture war issues (well left of center), I think that we need to learn to talk to those who wear MAGA hats (at least those who do so sheepishly). Ben Rhodes walks a middle line where we focus on issues and act more locally. Others have soundly criticized the progressives for being too focused on rallies and not enough on strategy. Others claim that it is because Democrats don’t know how to fix things and need a new “can do” approach to gain back legitimacy.

So, back to the purpose of these blogs. I don’t want to play dead. I think we need to keep the pressure on the best we can. I plan to re-publish all the actions that I had proposed in previous blogs with a bit of an evaluation. So, what can we do now? There is something that is coming up soon: I would like to encourage you to attend the day of action on April 5 that is being organized by Indivisible and other organizations. I think that the major event will be in DC, but there are calls for action in just about every city and town in America. Nothing organized yet in Marseille, though – so I will be cheering from the sidelines.

Fighting fascism – RIP Department of Education?

by Michel Welmond, posted in Uncategorized

I am particularly saddened by the decision to close the Department of Education. I am not an expert on the American education system, having spent my career focusing on developing countries (even though my kids did all their schooling in the US). So, I am not particularly knowledgeable regarding the implications of the closure. However, I find it upsetting that the administration has decided to closethe one institution that holds education as a national mandate.

By shutting down the department, the administration claims that it is returning the responsibility of education to the states, thus reducing bureaucracy and increasing “choice” (a many-edged sword, by the way). However, considering that the states have always managed and financed education in the US, it is unclear what responsibilities (and resources!) would consequently be transferred to the states following the dismantling of the department.

The Education Law Center states that, “…the Department’s core functions have been to support states’ and school districts’ efforts to provide educational access and opportunity, equity, and excellence for students and families across the nation and to ensure that states and districts comply with key federal laws including those that protect civil rights” and claims that this objective is directly challenged by the Department’s closure.

It appears that closing the department could lead to the following:

  • The loss of federal funding (such as Title I and Pell Grants) to poorer schools and poorer students, equaling at least $100 billion. Many of these poorer schools are in districts and states that have voted for the current administration. Wealthier states and districts would likely thrive under greater autonomy, while poorer areas could suffer from the absence of federal support and regulations that ensure more equal access to resources. Ironically, but we know this from many cases, it will be the state governments that have been strong advocates of the administration that will probably suffer the most.
  • The loss of educational standards: The Department of Education sets and enforces key national standards and policies related to education, such as the “Every Student Succeeds Act” and federal guidelines on Title IX. With more variation in educational standards, funding formulas, and teacher qualifications from one state or district to another, well-funded and efficient education systems will benefit but those less capable of managing education independently will suffer.
  • The loss of education statistics: The Department of Education conducts research and collects data on educational outcomes, helping to shape evidence-based policies. The absence of this data would hinder the ability to track national trends, evaluate policies, and assess the effectiveness of educational interventions. This would make it more difficult to address issues like achievement gaps or adapt to new challenges in education.
  • Narrowing of Civil Rights and Equal Access to Education: The Department enforces civil rights laws, including those that prohibit discrimination based on race, gender, disability, and other factors. Its absence might lead to weaker protections against discrimination, potentially reversing progress in civil rights and equal access to education. It could also spell the end of special programs for underserved populations, including students with disabilities, English-language learners, and minority students.

These are only a few of the implications of the closure. I haven’t mentioned the impact on higher education, which I understand is also signficant.

Ultimately, such a move would require restructuring of how education is governed and funded in the United States. Moving responsibilities around from the top to the bottom or from one bureaucracy to another (student loans going to the Small Business Administration; nutrition programs to HHS) just creates chaos rather than efficiency.

Furthermore, and perhaps most importantly, every nation has a national education strategy and system for a reason. I am not sure, but I think that the US would become one of the only countries in the world that would not have the equivalent of a national education ministry. Other federal countries such as Brazil, Germany, and Pakistan have federal/national education ministries. The point being that having a national education strategy is important in such a politicized field as education. Having none and no political instrument for defining or monitoring one is certainly a recipe for disaster.

BTW, the Department is using Title IX to go after districts and states where trans athletes can still participate in sports activities (including having access to locker rooms). The key mechanism that the government has had to fight discrimination is being used in a completely cynical manner. The administration seems more concerned about this than student academic achievement or racial equality or student disability. Regarding the future of civics education, it appears that the Oklahoma education authorities have included how the 2020 elections were “stolen” as a social studies topic. A fine example of state authority.

What can we do about the frontal assault on the education system? The American Federation of Teachers and the American Association of Professors have sued the administration regarding the closure of the Department. I came up with a few things in my last blog about education that I will copy below. I don’t really have anything new to add at this point. If you do, please let me know.

I remember a conversation I had many years ago with someone who was arguing that the most important educational investment that could be made was to elite schools. That training leaders should be the priority of education systems. I responded at the time, who wants to be the leader of a bunch of uneducated fools? I guess we have the answer to that question now.

From my blog last month on education: “…I think that the future of resistance across the board, not just education, lies at the local level. It will need to consolidate at the state level (irony of course, considering all the blabbering about states rights), but things happen at the school and school board level. Make sure that the right people (maybe you) are elected to school boards and PTAs. Attend local townhall meetings and demand to know how the disabled, other disadvantaged groups, children of undocumented workers and others are going to get a good education; challenge attempts to silence teachers, ban books, allow ICE agents into schools, or post the ten commandments; and just generally be irritatingly vocal about protecting children and education at the local level. Network with those in other school districts and other schools. Here is a list of organizations that are fighting the good fight, from what I understand.

  1. American Federation of Teachers (AFT): aft.org
  2. National Education Association (NEA) : nea.org
  3. Education Law Center (ELC) : edlawcenter.org
  4. Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) – Learning for Justice: learningforjustice.org
  5. Network for Public Education (NPE): networkforpubliceducation.org
  6. Parents Together : parents-together.org

Fighting fascism – Day Fifty-Three – A Reckoning

by Michel Welmond, posted in Uncategorized

In my initial blog, written after the inauguration on January 21, 2025, I stated: “The new American administration intends to constrain civil liberties, freedom of speech, and opposition. It will remove economic opportunities for those who are not already rich and protections for minorities. It plans to undermine the nation’s education system, health care system, social safety net, and other institutions that provide support and reassurance to the average person. It will try to reverse efforts to protect the environment. It will “deregulate” or, in other words, remove guardrails that prevent the greedy from further ravaging our land, people, and spirit. It seeks to orient the justice system to protect the interests of the few rather than everyone and to weaken the rule of law. It will more readily resort to violence. It will try to undermine our democracy. It will try to stay in power forever. This is fascism.”

The question for today is how far along have we slipped towards fascism in the U.S.? As I wrote in an earlier blog post, I have been counting the days since the inauguration of the current president because Adolf Hitler was able to establish his fascist regime in 53 days. Well, today’s blog on Day 53 is a reckoning.

The good news is that we are nowhere near where Hitler stood 53 days after he was appointed chancellor. He was able to take advantage of weak opposition, a constitution he twisted to his ends, economic and social chaos and a well-organized and loyal party base to essentially establish a fascist regime. I do not believe that the U.S. have fallen that far yet, although we have certainly made a lot of “progress” in the wrong direction. The administration has successfully taken action on many fronts that represent a definite slip towards fascism.

  • The administration’s purge of the civil service and the witch hunt of those in the Department of Justice and the FBI appear to be proceeding according to plan.
  • The dismantling of USAID and other federal agencies has left thousands unemployed, key programs in tatters, and beneficiaries bereft of much needed and promised assistance.
  • The defunding of scientific research and the removal of data sets from the public view. The emasculation of the CDC. All this will contribute to an attack on the health of the American public.
  • DOGE has been one of the most controversial actors put in play by the administration, what with the unequal power and responsibility that has been given to Elon Musk, an individual who has not been vetted by any government institution.
  • Deportations seem to be proceeding more slowly than expected, but the administration will certainly want to do everything it possibly can to accelerate. In any case, the fear that has been spread throughout the immigrant community is tremendous.
  • Trans persons have been singled out as being practically inhuman.
  • The continuous onslaught on free speech has been crowned with a particularly egregious act: undermining the right to protest at universities. Behind flimsy excuses that this is in fact a call to combat antisemitism, we know that the freezing of grants to Columbia and threats to other universities is just a test case for squashing any future student protest.
  • The U.S. government’s attempt to silence Mahmoud Khalil, a peaceful protester, by stripping him of his legal residency and deporting him. This is an attack on the First Amendment that sets a particularly dangerous precedent.
  • The administration has literally turned the international order on its head as the president demonstrates over and over again that he is in fact a Russian asset. Allies are re-assessing their relationship with the U.S., bracing for trade wars, considering the potential end of a world order that was established by the U.S., and reeling in disgust as they watch the U.S. drift towards fascism. The irony is that this administration may end up becoming the great unifier of Europe. Of note: We’ve learned that there are a number of American researchers that have asked the Marseille-Aix University to accept their applications.
  • The list goes on.

The Democratic Party has not yet stepped up to truly play the role of an opposition party. But there have been many actions taken across the country to protest the administration’s fascist tendencies. Boycotts and demonstrations, disruptive townhall meetings, a vibrant resistance movement at local levels, mostly theme oriented, and the development of media sources that are outside the mainstream. Bernie Sanders and others have been holding rallies all over the country as part of a “Stop the Oligarchy Tour”. State level authorities in California, Oregon, Minesota and New York appear to be taking the lead on many issues, although there are also states that are at the forefront of eroding democracy (Florida, Texas, and others that have restricted voting rights, for example).

The court system has been fully mobilized to fight the administration’s constitutional overstep. According to the litigation tracker, 119 cases are currently winding their way through the justice system, many led by a grouping of state attorneys. These cases are challenging everything from the very existence of DOGE to the constitutionality of executive orders on birthright citizenship, punishment of sanctuary cities, expedited deportation, disclosure of personal and financial information, defunding of USAID, termination of probationary employees, the ban of transgender individuals serving in the military, immigration enforcement at schools and places of worship, denying press access to the White House, banning of DEI programs, removal of information from websites, actions against FBI/DoJ employees, as well as many others.

There have been some wins, but time is working against us. The administration is aggressively carrying out its self-anointed “mandate” and not waiting for (and might not have any intention of complying with) the results of these cases. There have been some bright lights, such as the recent Supreme Court case and that of lower courts that have challenged the cancelling of foreign aid. The trillions of dollars question: will/can the administration ignore these rulings? If they do, that will be a clear indication that fascism is taking hold. The administration has requested the Supreme Court to rule on the executive order regarding birthright citizenship – it will be very telling how it rules on this.

Will it take 100 days rather than 53? I’ll stop counting but will continue to post blogs. I have encouraged readers to resist in any way they can and even take small steps – every day: writing or phoning congresspersons and state delegates to express disfavor on select issues, engaging in boycotts, signing petitions, attending demonstrations and townhall meetings, talking to strangers and focusing on both the local and the national, and supporting organizations that are taking on the fight. Of course, at this point, it is easy to get discouraged. However, they expect us to “roll over and play dead” – the infamous advice of James Carville. The goal of attacks on free speech, for example, is largely to get Americans to self-censor. If we collectively refuse to do so, then these attacks on the First Amendment will fail. We must continue to resist. We can’t depend on anyone else to do this for us.

Fighting Fascism – Day Forty-Seven– Is Artificial Intelligence a tool of fascism?

by Michel Welmond, posted in Uncategorized

This is a different kind of blog that intends to spur discussion more than action. I am very interested to know what you think about the political potential (positive and negative) of artificial intelligence. It will definitely disrupt labor markets, that is for sure, if it lives up to its promise of performing more complex tasks. However, can it also effectively limit liberties, thwart democracy, and enable those who have a fascist agenda, such as the current administration? Dan McQuillan, in his book “Resisting AI: An Anti-Fascist Approach to Artificial Intelligence” claims that AI is inherently fascistic: “AI not only undermines due process but produces thoughtlessness.”

But can’t the opposite also be true? Can it serve the resistance? It appears that AI’s increasing role in our economy, polity and society is inevitable. Discussing what we do about this is essential for any resistance strategy going forward.

Finally, there is the tremendous use of water and energy needed to run these huge language models, an environmental cost that should also be considered. It is a very wasteful technology and some of argued that it should be limited for that reason only. Others argue that technological solutions (always technological solutions) can be found to that problem.

When I asked ChatGPT and Deep Seek how to combat fascism, they returned answers in line with much of what I have discussed in these blogs. Here is an example from ChatGPT:

“Fighting fascism requires a combination of awareness, activism, and community engagement. Here are some key strategies:

  1. Educate Yourself and Others
    • Learn about the history of fascism, its warning signs, and how it gains power.
    • Share knowledge to help others recognize and resist authoritarian tendencies.
  2. Promote Democracy and Human Rights
    • Defend democratic values such as freedom of speech, equality, and justice.
    • Support policies and organizations that protect civil liberties.
  3. Engage in Grassroots Organizing
    • Build or join community groups that work to oppose hate speech, discrimination, and extremist ideologies.
    • Organize peaceful protests, campaigns, and petitions.
  4. Support Marginalized Communities
    • Be an ally to those targeted by fascist rhetoric and policies.
    • Volunteer time or donate to organizations supporting refugees, immigrants, and minority groups.
  5. Challenge Misinformation and Propaganda
    • Fact-check and counter false narratives used to spread fear and division.
    • Promote independent journalism and credible sources of information.
  6. Participate in Politics
    • Vote in elections and encourage others to do the same.
    • Support candidates and leaders who oppose authoritarianism.
  7. Build Solidarity Networks
    • Connect with activists and groups internationally to share strategies and resources.
    • Strengthen community ties to resist division and polarization.
  8. Confront Hate Peacefully
    • Avoid violence but remain firm in confronting hate speech and actions.
    • Use creative forms of protest like art, music, and theater to raise awareness.
  9. Protect Vulnerable Institutions
    • Advocate for judicial independence, free media, and fair elections.
    • Hold leaders accountable through legal means and public pressure.
  10. Stay Vigilant and Persistent
    • Fascism often rises during times of crisis, so continuous engagement is necessary.”
    • Keep up the pressure even when threats seem diminished.

Resistance to fascism is most effective when it is organized, inclusive, and consistent.”

It also listed several organizations (many of which I had already cited in earlier blogs) that it deemed important to support when resisting fascism. But was it just telling me what I wanted to hear? I also asked Chat GPT whether AI was fascistic or anti-fascistic. Here was its answer.

The impact of AI on the rise or resistance against fascism is complex and multifaceted. Here are ways in which AI can both contribute to and combat authoritarian tendencies:

Contributing to Fascism:

  1. Misinformation and Propaganda: AI can be used to create and disseminate misinformation, deepfakes, and propaganda, which can manipulate public opinion and sow discord.
  2. Surveillance and Control: Governments may use AI for surveillance and monitoring of citizens, potentially stifling dissent and infringing on civil liberties.
  3. Polarization: Algorithms that prioritize sensational or divisive content can contribute to societal polarization, making it easier for extremist ideologies to take root.
  4. Automated Decision-Making: Bias in AI systems can lead to discriminatory practices, reinforcing existing inequalities and fueling resentment.

Fighting Fascism:

  1. Fact-Checking and Misinformation Detection: AI tools can help identify and counter misinformation, providing people with accurate information and promoting informed discourse.
  2. Empowering Civil Society: AI can assist organizations in mobilizing resources, analyzing data for advocacy, and reaching broader audiences to promote democratic values.
  3. Promoting Transparency: AI can enhance transparency in government operations, helping to hold officials accountable and ensuring that citizens have access to critical information.
  4. Facilitating Dialogue: AI can be used to create platforms for constructive dialogue, helping to bridge divides and foster understanding among diverse groups.
  5. Data Analysis for Social Justice: AI can be utilized to analyze social issues, identify patterns of inequality, and inform policy decisions that promote equity and justice.

In summary, AI has the potential to both exacerbate authoritarian tendencies and serve as a powerful tool for promoting democracy and social justice. The outcome largely depends on how AI is designed, implemented, and regulated, as well as the intentions of those who wield it.

When asked, ChatGPT indicated that AI should be regulated, be driven by ethical guidelines, and designed transparently to prevent more nefarious uses (just what I wanted to hear!), but we can only wonder how that could happen. Dan McQuillan asks, “… whether the giant AI corporations would balk at putting the levers of mass correlation at the disposal of regimes seeking national rebirth through rationalized ethnocentrism.” Considering what we have experienced over the last few weeks, we know the answer to that question. More damning, MacQuillan argues in another paper that any attempt to control potential toxicity of ChatGPT: “can’t change the fact that the underlying language patterns were learned from the raw internet, including all the ravings and conspiracy theories. Considering AI’s inevitability, (some argue that it is not inevitable and it will be proven to be mostly hype – I’m not so sure). do we have a choice but to figure out how the resistance can put AI to use? To subvert its fascistic propensity? What do you think?

Fighting Fascism – Day Forty-three – combatting the assault on knowledge

by Michel Welmond, posted in Uncategorized

Working in the field of international development aid over the last 40 years, I have incessantly been told that policies should always be “evidence-based”. This means we should examine and analyze the data to determine whether an intervention, an idea, or a decision is likely to have the intended outcome. Sometimes I bucked at this mantra when I observed how hard and costly it was to get the necessary data to make fully informed decisions (see my blog from 2011, which injects a bit a humor into the notion of data collection). Sometimes the perfect works against the good. But generally, the notion that the collection of data and a thorough analysis of that data should be at the heart of decision making and opinion formation seemed to me to be a good thing.

According to the current administration, decisions should no longer be “evidence-based” but ideologically based – often falsely sold as “common sense”. When data and research contradict the firmly held belief of the administration, the instinct is to hide it. This is a traditional fascist strategy: When the truth is inconvenient, the best thing to do is to destroy it.

This administration has been engaged in a systematic onslaught on knowledge production and the availability of data and information produced by government (or financed by government) that is “inconvenient”. This will lead to extremely damaging consequences in terms of accountability, protecting the public, economic development, scientific progress, freedom of speech, and technological innovation. Any research initiative or data collection initiative that is counter to the firmly held beliefs of the administration is to be dismantled.

Federal agencies, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), have been forced to remove public health data from their websites. Over 3,000 pages were altered or removed from the CDC’s website, affecting information on chronic diseases, sexually transmitted infections, and reproductive health. The CDC’s data portal was also taken offline, hindering access to vital health statistics. Approximately 8,000 webpages containing LGBTQ+ content were removed across various federal agencies, including the Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services.

The administration has frozen billions of dollars in research funding, particularly affecting the National Institutes of Health (NIH). An order suspended NIH grant funding, effectively halting much of its $47 billion budget. Additionally, on February 7, 2025, the NIH announced a cap on indirect cost reimbursements at 15%, a drastic reduction from previous rates that averaged between 30% and 70%. This policy shift threatens the financial stability of research institutions, potentially leading to layoffs, hiring freezes, and the termination of ongoing projects.

The reclassification of federal employees under “Schedule F,” have raised alarms about the potential politicization of economic data. Experts warn that allowing political appointees to replace career civil servants could undermine the objectivity of critical economic statistics, such as unemployment rates and inflation figures, which are essential for informed decision-making by businesses and policymakers.

The administration’s actions have also affected scientific pursuits in ways that go beyond those orders. The dismantling of USAID has halted clinical trials abroad, leaving participants with experimental drugs and devices still in their bodies. 

A recent executive order closed the database tracking misconduct by US police.

In response to these deletions, academic institutions, archivists, and advocacy groups have initiated efforts to preserve endangered data. The End of Term Web Archive and the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine have been instrumental in capturing and maintaining copies of removed content. Legal actions have also been taken; for instance, a federal judge issued a restraining order requiring the restoration of certain health-related websites, acknowledging the critical need for public access to this information.

What can we do about this? First and foremost, we need to provide support and kindness to our friends working for the federal government and for organizations and institutions that are directly and indirectly affected by this assault on science. Second, we need to support efforts by organizations such as the Internet Archive to protect databases and research.

There are events happening that people should know about. Last Friday was the first economic boycott. I don’t know what the outcome of that was. Here is a list of upcoming actions we should know about.

Fighting fascism – Day Forty-One – dealing with shame

by Michel Welmond, posted in Uncategorized

Fighting fascism – Day 41 – Shame on our administration

I am thoroughly disgusted by the grotesque behavior of the President and Vice-President of this administration towards President Zelensky of Ukraine. In today’s blog, I defer to the great Robert Reich, who made today an exceptionally impassioned and eloquent call to action in his Substack article (with some specific suggestions) . I found it both powerful and insightful. I have cut and pasted it here.

The shame of it

But it’s not our shame

Friends,

A brief word today at the end of the sixth horrific week of Trump 2.0 (before I post my weekly cartoon).

After Trump and Vance’s disgraceful treatment of President Zelensky on Friday, some of you might feel ashamed of America. You might even feel ashamed to be an American.

The proper locus of shame is Trump and Vance. I’m ashamed that they, along with Elon Musk, are now leading our nation. I’m also ashamed that their Republican lackeys in Congress are enabling and encouraging them. I’m ashamed that Democrats in Congress are so supine.

Yet I urge you not to give in to the sort of resignation or cynicism that believes nothing can be done — that we are powerless and have no choice but to watch our nation and everything it has stood for be hijacked by Trump, Vance, and Musk.

We have enormous power and many choices. When the American people understand what is happening — as they are beginning to — no Republican in Congress will be safe. Even now, majorities of independents and Democrats, and even some 30 percent of Republican voters, believe we must stand with Ukraine.

The fundamental choice has not been as stark since World War II: democracy and freedom, or dictatorship and tyranny.

Trump and his sycophants are siding with the latter. The rest of us must loudly, proudly, and boldly proclaim our allegiance to the former.

Trump is emboldening the dark forces of dictatorship everywhere. Taiwan is reporting more Chinese military drills around the island.

Europe and all free people around the world must rally at this time of American emergency. If the United States won’t seize Russia’s frozen assets and put them into an account for Ukraine to pay for further arms, Europeans must do this and let Ukraine buy from European defense contractors.

If you yourself want to help Ukrainians, you might consider United 24 (the Ukrainian state platform for donations, including many important projects); RAZOM (an American NGO, tax-deductible for U.S. citizens, that cooperates with Ukrainian NGOs to support civilians); Documenting Ukraine (an initiative that helps give Ukrainians a voice, also tax-deductible for Americans); and Come Back Alive (a Ukrainian NGO that supports soldiers on the battlefield and veterans).

A final thought. What we are witnessing from Trump and Vance and Musk — their bellicose bullying, their outright lies, their fear-mongering, their disrespect and disdain for others, their emboldening of dictators around the world — is not all bad if it awakens America.

The more Americans see and absorb the horrors of this regime, the greater the likelihood we will mobilize against it. Not all of us, of course, but the great majority.

As bad as this regime gets, it will clarify for Americans what is happening to this country, and what we must do to get it back on the track toward social justice, democracy, and widespread prosperity.

Yes, the regime is harming many innocent people. Its lawless cruelty is sickening. But there will be a reckoning.

I have always believed America is not a nation of bullies. We have protected the vulnerable, comforted the afflicted, granted refuge to those fleeing violence and persecution, and given voice to those who otherwise would not be heard.

These ideals are found in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, Emma Lazarus’s poem affixed to the Statue of Liberty, FDR’s second inaugural address, and Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” sermon at the 1963 March on Washington.

They connect us with previous generations of Americans who risked everything —some of whom sacrificed their lives — to preserve democracy and achieve a greater good.

Do not feel shame in America. Feel pride in the ideals we share. Feel honored that you are an activist warrior on the right side of history. Feel strength in our conviction. Feel power in our cause.

We will prevail against Trump — against his bullying, his brutality, and his barbarity.

A final point regarding Ukraine. I understand that there are demonstrations happening across the country in support of Ukraine. I urge you to look for such actions in your community and participate if you can. I saw that 5calls.org also has an entry for calling representatives on this issue.

Fighting fascism — Day Thirty-Nine – “Fraternizing with the enemy

by Michel Welmond, posted in Uncategorized

One of my previous blogs discussed the importance of talking with strangers. I encouraged readers to take advantage of opportunities to engage with people in public places as a way to combat fascism. Here, I want to delve more into the issue of talking to people you know who are misinformed on a particular topic or hold very strong opinions that are counter to the ones discussed in these blogs.

I must admit that I don’t know anyone who voted Republican in the last elections (maybe I do and it’s a secret). Years ago, I could boast a clutch of Republican friends – now none. This means that I have few opportunities to discuss the political situation with people I know and with whom I do not agree. I know that that is not the case for all of you. A good friend told me that her mother and sister have bought into an extreme version of MAGA (very religious, millenarian, super “anti-DEI”, and in excessive fascination of Trump and Musk). Conversations leave her very upset and for good reason – they often become emotional and vitriolic. Another friend met some Republicans in Egypt and felt ill-prepared to engage in a full-blown discussion on taxes, DEI, and other issues. So here are some tips on how to carry on these conversations.

Be informed as much as possible on the hot topics. Whether you initiate discussions or are ambushed, it is good to know your stuff. I haven’t put much focus on getting informed as a way to fight fascism. This is partly because I thought that we were already drowning in information. Although partly true, I think that it would be a good idea to be prepared to discuss the hot button issues that are on today’s agenda: the attacks on the federal government;  foreign aid, diversity, equity and inclusion, immigration, and Ukraine to start. (I added a few links to get started – you can certainly do some research on AI or search engines to find out more). On the suggestion of a good friend, Colin Woodard is a very interesting source for understanding the enduring and growing split in the American polity between right and left.

Engage as an anthropologist rather than a combatant. I already discussed this in my former blog but it would be good to remind us of some key principles. The following is what I think is a pretty good guide for how to engage that I got from ChatGPT (who would have thought that ChatGPT would want to combat fascism – I’m going to write a future blog on the role of AI in the resistance).

Set the Right Mindset

  • Approach with curiosity, not combat – Think of the conversation as an opportunity to understand their perspective rather than a debate to win.
  • Acknowledge common values – Even if you disagree on policies, you might both care about fairness, safety, or opportunity but see different ways to achieve them.
  • Decide your goal – Are you trying to learn, share your views, find common ground, or persuade? Adjust your approach accordingly.

Listen Actively and Respectfully

  • Ask open-ended questions – “What led you to that perspective?” or “How do you see this issue affecting your life?”
  • Don’t interrupt or dismiss their views outright – Instead of “That’s ridiculous,” try, “That’s an interesting take—I hadn’t thought about it that way.”
  • Paraphrase their argument – “It sounds like you’re saying [X] because you believe [Y]. Did I get that right?” This helps avoid miscommunication.

Express Your Views Thoughtfully

  • Use “I” statements instead of “you” accusations – Instead of “You’re wrong about this,” say, “I see it differently because…”
  • Acknowledge complexity – Say, “I get why people feel strongly about this,” or “It’s a complicated issue with a lot of perspectives.”
  • Find common ground – If possible, highlight shared concerns or values before discussing where you diverge.

4. Manage Emotions and Tension

  • Stay calm and composed – If you feel yourself getting heated, take a breath or suggest a break.
  • Avoid personal attacks – Focus on ideas, not the person.
  • Know when to disengage – If the conversation is unproductive or hostile, it’s okay to say, “I appreciate the discussion, but I think we should pause here.”

5. Accept That You Might Not Change Their Mind

  • People rarely shift political views immediately. If you plant a thoughtful idea, it may influence their perspective over time.
  • Sometimes, simply having a respectful conversation can reduce hostility and reinforce mutual respect.

Use one’s expertise to one’s advantage. We are all experts in something – education, foreign policy, LGBTQ+, immigration, etc. Use your knowledge to advocate for a better world without fascism. Create situations where you can share your expertise. Here are a couple of examples.

My wife volunteers for SOS Mediterranean here in Marseille. SOSM is an organization that rescues refugees who are traversing the Mediterranean Sea in leaky boats for European shores. Most refugees leave from Libya where they experienced unimaginable horrors. SOSM is considered by many on the right in Europe as a very controversial organization, accusing them of increasing the access of immigrants to Europe. They are definitely in the crosshairs of the right-wing government in Italy (many of the refugees that are rescued by SOSM are taken to Italy because that is the closest destination, which is the practice endorsed by international law). As a volunteer, Laurence often makes presentations at schools and other sites to explain what SOS Mediterranean does, the issues that it attempts to address and that they are an organization driven by humanitarian aims, not political ones. The encounters are generally very positive. She is well informed and knows how to address participants who hold different perspectives.

A friend recently went to his mother’s church where he made a presentation on the importance of USAID diplomacy and defense cooperation and why maintaining our alliances is critically important to secure in US national interest. This is a subject on which he has intimate professional and personal knowledge. He continues to seek venues where he can express his deep knowledge on these topics to a variety of stakeholders who might not start from the same place.

I would like to leave you with something that Umberto Eco wrote about thirty years ago on “recognizing fascism”.  He lists fourteen features or that can promote fascism. “These features,” writes the novelist and semiotician, “cannot be organized into a system; many of them contradict each other, and are also typical of other kinds of despotism or fanaticism.” But it is enough that one of these features is present present to allow fascism to coagulate around it. I count about ten features that buttress the current administration. Here is his argument in his own words.