Podcasts about Antebellum

Singer-Songwriter Mark Geary is the latest inductee into the Culture Club.His latest six-tack EP, Antebellum, is out now. Mark runs through his musical influences, as well as his favourite TV shows, music, books and more.To catch the full conversation, press the 'play' button on this page.

Irish singer-songwriter Mark Geary left Ireland with a one-way ticket to New York and a heart full of hope over twenty years ago. There, in Sin-é cafe, Mark honed his craft and sang alongside the best of them, including the late Jeff Buckley. Time Out NY said, “His delicate songs about love and defiance recall Richard Thompson and John Lennon.” Geary has featured on bills with musicians as diverse as Glen Hansard, John Prine, Joe Strummer, Elvis Costello, The Pretenders, Coldplay and The Frames amongst others, plus extensive headlining tours in Europe, the US and Switzerland. He has composed the full score for three films - Loggerheads (2005), Steel City (2006) and Sons of Perdition (2010) - and has had many songs featured in films and TV programmes. In 2022, he completed a sell-out month-long residency in the new Little Whelan's in Dublin where, with his band, he welcomed special guests each week and personally curated the shows. 2023 saw Geary tour the north and central regions of Italy as well as Ireland, selling out Whelan's (upstairs), Couglan's, Phil Grimes (Co. Waterford) and Castle St. (Co. Mayo). His latest album, In The Time Of Locusts, was released in February 2024, and was recorded in his cottage in the forest with the help of Ruth O' Mahony Brady, Glen Hansard, Dave Hingerty, Dave and Karl Odlum. Following his acclaimed 2024 album, In The Time of Locusts (4 stars, The Irish Times), Antebellum is an intimate six-track EP bound with tender acoustic instrumentation and the familiar warmth of Geary's sincere vocals and reflective lyricism. Recalling, vulnerability and enduring hope, the EP reflects Geary's creative response to one of Ireland's stormiest New Year's on record. He says, “I stared out to a January of rain and cold and thought, ‘I need to get back to my desk'. If I stayed watching the news, or in a cycle of streaming shows, I'd crumble. I threw out my telly and set up a writing room by my bed. Tuned all my guitars and would jump out of bed and sing. These songs are what came of it: Fear, regret, love, romance, terror, and the weather forecast.” Navigating moments of reposeful contemplation to passages of trepidation, Geary reflects on the human condition within a more concentrated run time, where each track emerges as a resonant meditation on fear, love, regret, and hope. With six studio albums, three live albums and what will be his second ever EP release with Antebellum, writing, touring and live performance remain Geary' s lifeblood. Treating Antebellum with trademark Geary honesty, his lyrics slice right through to the core, revealing a life laid bare of human emotional frailty, failed relationships, tenderness, hurt, making amends, desire and parting. His treasured guitar collection is always close at hand, each set up in a different tuning and ready to capture any emotion.

Live music by Mike Geary, who has a new EP out called Antebellum. Poison by acclaimed Dutch playwright Lot Vekemans is getting its Irish premiere and director Lianne O'Shea and actor Naoise Dunbar, who plays “He” join Rick in studio. Latin America's leading dance company, Ballet de Santiago brings its acclaimed production of Swan Lake to Dublin.

NATCHEZ is a documentary set in Natchez, Mississippi, a town whose main economic source is tourism. What kind of tourism? Antebellum-era mansions. If you're an old, white boomer looking to travel back to an era wherein you could bask in the sun-kissed mansions draped in Spanish moss, where ladies wore hoop skirts and glided across opulent dining halls, these house tours were made for you.But as is with all things Southern, there's a seedier underbelly. There's no way to get that level of rich through cotton without exploitation. without abuse, without slavery.And as more recent generations trend to back away from these kinds of tours, the town starts to reckon with the ways it presents its history, what image they present to the world. Are they willing to weave back in difficult truths regarding slavery and its long-term effects into these historical presentations or will they reject truth?Shot intimately (like where I swear, some of theses subjects are close enough to breath on the lens), Herbert's award-winning documentary (Tribeca 2025, Best Documentary Feature) looks to mix in spoonfuls of Southern charm & wit to make the medicine go down. It's punk as fuck: one of my favorite discoveries of 2026.NATCHEZ is now available to watch for free as part of PBS' INDEPENDENT LENS series.---⁠Follow The Movies on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ & ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Letterboxd⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Throw a couple dollars in the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠tip jar!

PREVIEW FOR LATER TODAY. GUEST. Professor John Yoo analyzes Supreme Courtoral arguments regarding birthright citizenship, tracing the history of English common law and the antebellum practicewhere individual states determined citizenship status for residents. (5)1876 SCOTUS

A weekly magazine-style radio show featuring the voices and stories of Asians and Pacific Islanders from all corners of our community. The show is produced by a collective of media makers, deejays, and activists. Annie Lee moderates a panel with African and Asian Americans about the impacts of Birthright Citizenship and the need for Surviving Through Solidarity. Guests include: Lisa Holder, Ming Hsu Chen, Don Tamaki and Michael Harris.   Link to an APEX Episode on Wong Kim Ark from March 20, 2025 Show Transcript [00:00:00] Opening Music: Apex Express Asian Pacific expression. Community and cultural coverage, music and calendar, new visions and voices, coming to you with an Asian Pacific Islander point of view. It's time to get on board the Apex Express.   [00:00:40] Miko Lee: Welcome to Apex Express. I'm your host, Miko Lee, and tonight we will listen to a recent event, Birthright Citizenship, Surviving Through Solidarity that took place at Chinese for Affirmative Action. Just yesterday, on April 1st, the Supreme Court heard the case around birthright citizenship. This event that you're gonna listen to was highlighting Asian and African American solidarity. As you might know, the cases of dread Scott in 1857 and Wong Kim Ark in 1898 are linked as landmark Supreme Court cases that directly defined and redefined American citizenship specifically about race and birthright. While Dred Scott denied citizenship to people of African descent, Wong Kim Ark's case utilized the subsequent 14th Amendment to solidify birthright citizenship for children born to foreign nationals. I'm just noting that in this conversation, because it was a panel discussion that was live, there was some irregular use of microphones, so sometimes the audio can be a bit spotty. Please bear with us, and if you want to review the transcript, check out our website, kpfa.org, apex Express. And last year we also covered the story of Wong Kim Ark and have included this past show in our show notes. Now let's listen in to moderator Annie Lee, Lawyers Michael Harris and Don Tamaki, Lisa Holder of Equal Justice Society and Ming Chen of UC Law.   [00:02:20] Annie Lee: Everyone. My name is Annie Lee and I am the managing director of policy at Chinese for Affirmative Action. Welcome to CAA's office here in San Francisco, Chinatown. And thank you all for being here today for our discussion: Birthright Citizenship Surviving through Solidarity. CAA and Stop AAPI Hate are proud to co-sponsor this event because it matters to us. CAA has been around since 1969 and we are a community based organization that provides direct services to lingual working class Chinese immigrants. And we also try to improve their lives through policy and advocacy. And in 2020, we co-founded Stop AAPI Hate, which is the national leading aggregator of anti-Asian hate incidents. And we know at Stop AAPI Hate that anti-immigrant policies are anti-Asian hate. So why are we here right now? March marks two anniversaries of two Supreme Court cases. One is Dred Scott and the other is Wong Kim Ark. These are two seminal cases in US history. And next week on April 1st, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the lawsuits challenging Trump's birthright citizenship executive order. So we are here to talk about birthright citizenship because it's an issue that is near and dear to both the Black and Asian communities.   [00:03:46] Without further ado, I am so thrilled to welcome this panel of amazing folks. Let's start with Michael Harris. Michael Harris here on my right is a retired attorney. He, for many, many years led the juvenile justice division at the National Center for Youth Law, an incredible litigator and advocates, and I'm so proud that he's here. He's also on the Equal Justice Society Board. Next to Michael is Don Tamaki. Don is a lawyer at the firm Minami Tamaki, and you might know him because he was part of the legal team that successfully got reparations for Japanese Americans after decades of fighting that injustice. So thank you Don. Don and Lisa, actually, spend time together on the California Reparations Task Force. And so this is Lisa Holder next to Don. Lisa is the president of the Equal Justice Society, which is based in Oakland, an incredible legal organization that has been in many, many fights, including, they filed an amicus brief in support of birthright citizenship, and that brief discusses why this is an issue for the Black community. And last but not least, we have Professor Ming Chen, who is a law professor at UC Law, and she's also the faculty director of the RICE Program, which is Race, Immigration, Citizenship, and Equality. So thank you so much to my panel and let's dive in. So some of you know, but I am a former US history teacher, so I often worry that people don't adequately understand American history and I fear that people don't understand reconstruction and the 14th Amendment. So let's start with the origin of birthright citizenship. What is birthright citizenship and where did it come from and why does its origin matter for understanding what's happening today? So Ming, I'm gonna start with you because you're a law professor and then others chime in. Lisa, Michael, Don. 'cause I think you'll have more to add.   [00:05:45] Ming Chen: Great. Thank you so much Annie, and thank you to CAA for having us all. I'm really excited to be part of this conversation, which I think is going to be really the beginning of a series of conversations over the next few months. So you're starting in the right place, Annie, in asking us what birthright citizenship is, because that is the heart of what the common lawsuit will be about: who gets to be a citizen in the United States. And that's actually why I named my organization RICE. I think the emphasis is on the “C” [citizenship], because I do think it is something that brings together immigrant communities, as well as all of the different communities within the United States that have been expanding, over time. Getting to the, legal text I, I think it's important to remember first that birthright citizenship is bigger than the United States. Worldwide there are at least two ways of becoming a citizen. One is by birthright and the other is by naturalized citizenship. So we're talking about the birthright half. And the United States is not alone. It's among countries mostly in the Western hemisphere that have chosen to focus on the “jus soli” version of birthright citizenship, which is “soli” is soil. So it's birth by touching US soil. And the idea behind that theory was always meant to be an egalitarian one. It's one that is about the idea that anyone can become a citizen, right? In contrast to the older system that Europe and other countries use, “jus sanguinis,” which is to say that citizenship could only be inherited by blood and heritage. Right? So I think right from the very beginning, it tells us what the text and the history of our 14th amendment citizenship clause intended to accomplish, which was to have an egalitarian spirit, a fresh start, and a continual renewal of what it means to be an American.   [00:07:33] Lisa Holder: Just sort of continuing on the path that Ming just opened up for us, birthright citizenship is very much connected to the African American experience. Particularly because the genesis of that right, really was a reversal of the construct and the regime of the enslavement era, right? Everyone's aware that during that era, descendants of Africa were not considered humans, much less citizens. And the legal cases that were brought where people try to have their citizenship, and their humanity acknowledged, the courts universally said, no, you are not citizens and Black people have no rights that white people need to respect. Right. And so that was the case, law of the land until, after the Civil War, when we had the 13th, 14th, and 15th, amendments were lifted up and embedded into our laws. You also had the Civil Rights Act of 1866 where that body of law was overturned and enshrined into our constitution was a new law that said that freed people are citizens and they do have rights that everyone needs to respect and rights to equality. You know, we know that there have been problems executing that [laughs] but at least enshrined in our laws and enshrined in our constitution that is where the birthright citizenship, constitutional law came from. It came out of that experience.    [00:09:21] Michael Harris: I just want to add a couple things to that. I mean, it's very distinguished scholars, they're hitting it really hard. Two things, universality and so I wanna talk about that first. I got one more coming forward. It's universal. Birthright citizenship is universal. And what I mean by that is everybody gets to be a citizen who's born here in the United States. Period. It's universal, applies to everybody. It doesn't matter if you're Black or white or Asian, none of that matters. That's really important. The other thing is it's that this criteria is not something that's subjective, nobody gets to decide. It's automatic. If you're born here, you automatically have citizenship. Those two things being automatic and being universal I think are really important. And this, we'll talk about this more as we go through the conversation, but those two things are what makes birthright citizenship so powerful and why they keep coming to try and take it down because it's universal so everybody gets it and it's automatic. Nobody can take it away. So let's, we'll I'll just leave it there for now, but we'll come back to that.   [00:10:33] Annie Lee: Don, this one's for you. So the 14th Amendment passes in 1868. Like Lisa said, it's to reverse Dred Scott, where the Justice Taney wrote that Black people had no rights, which the white man was bound to respect. And so they had to repudiate that through the 14th amendments, they have universal and automatic birthright citizenship with very, very few exceptions for like diplomats kids. Okay, that's like so, so narrow. So 14th Amendment passes in 1868, but it takes another 30 years for a Chinese American man named Wong Kim Ark to establish that birthright citizenship actually applied to the children of immigrants. So Don, can you tell us Wong Kim Ark's story, who was he, what happened to him and why did the federal rural government make him this test case?   [00:11:22] Don Tamaki: Just a couple words about context. I mean, one of the remarkable things about the case is it occurred during especially California's ultra racist, ultra virulent racist period. It's a contradiction in that regard. So just taking you back to the origins of where this racial pathology comes from, of course we focus, tend to focus on Asian American history, but actually you have to begin with Black history and indigenous history in the country. So in 1619, the first enslaved people were brought to America. And you know, 12 million people were kidnapped off the west coast of Africa. 2 million died during the middle passage. 400,000 were dropped off in America, and the million other millions ended up in the Caribbean, in the Brazil in Haiti, Jamaica, et cetera. And from there, slavery in America continued for 246 years. Two and a half centuries. Civil war happened in 1865. It concluded, and for another 100 years, Jim Crow exclusion infected America. And San Francisco, by the way, was heavily Jim Crow until the 1960s and into the 1970s. The vestiges of that exclusion and discrimination directly are rooted in the Black American experience.   [00:12:52] Michael Harris: And it's still present here today. That's why we have a Chinatown. That's why we have a Japantown in San Francisco because of what Don just did.    [00:13:00] Don Tamaki: Redlining and racial covenants.    [00:13:02] Michael Harris: That's right.    [00:13:03] Don Tamaki: Exclusions, redevelopment, and so on. So people think of California as being like a enlightened state. Well, California did enter the union in 1850 before the Civil War. 1849 enslavers came to California and they brought their human property with them. So there were probably at least 1500 enslaved people in California. 1865 Civil War ended, but Democrats in 1868 rose to power saying they would vote against any law that would have any equality between , Black Californians, indigenous people, and Chinese folks. And beginning toward late 1800s, that's when the bulk of Asian American immigration began. First Chinese American coming during the gold rush, and then Japanese Americans have followed and so on. And so, Jim Crow seeped into all that. Chinese Exclusion Act was passed in 1882. California was known as a strong Klan state by the end of the 1800s with strong Ku Klux Klan chapters in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Oakland, Riverside, San Jose, Anaheim and so on. And so this was a toxic stew that Chinese immigrated into and other groups too. So unsurprisingly, tons of anti-Asian legislation policies, exclusion, follow. So Wong Kim Ark was born in San Francisco in 1873 to Chinese parents who lived and operated a business here. His parents continued to reside and remain in the United States until 1890, and then they departed for China. Probably no doubt because of the inhospitable conditions here. And racial terror was part of that, including the race riots here in Chinatown. And now that I mention it between 1865 to 1935, 352 people were lynched in California. Eight of those were Black Californians, but the rest were indigenous, Chinese, and persons of Mexican descent.   [00:15:18] So that was the environment. Wong Kim Ark continued to live in California into his twenties, reportedly working as a cook in San Francisco. And at the age of 21 he actually made two trips to China. He made a trip to China when he was 17 to visit his parents. Stayed there a year, came back without incident worked, came back here, worked till he was 21, then went back to China to visit his parents at that point. And when he attempted to reenter the United States, he was denied entry and detained with a threat of deportation upon the sole ground that he was not a citizen of the United States. Of course he was born here. So the issue was you know, birthright citizenship was the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment did it apply to Wong Kim Ark. And the interesting thing is about the case is that the court ruled in his favor. All persons born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof. And those words are now, today becomes crucial. And people, I think we on the panel will talk about the implications of that language subject to the jurisdiction thereof. And it established this principle that basically was reaffirmed repeatedly throughout our history for this 100 year plus period. To get to your last question, why did the court do this? I think scholars smarter than me can explain this, but I'll give you some clues. The court ruled in Wong Kim Ark's favor despite the virulent context of the era, because that's what the plain and expansive language of the 14th Amendment says.   [00:17:02] All persons didn't say formally enslaved, didn't say Black Americans. It said all persons. That's what the plain expensive language of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 says: all persons and as Lisa referred to. And the congressional record of the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Act of 1862, where legislators are debating these issues they clearly understood, and the record shows that if you include this expansive language, it will apply to groups like Chinese and Asians. And so with that understood it was adopted and ratified in 1868, 14th Amendment, and it was reaffirmed in other legislation like the Immigration Act of 1940. They just assumed that if you're born in this country, you're an American citizen. It was applied throughout the turbulent history involving my community, Japanese Americans. As you recall, 1942, 125,000 people were rounded up and put in concentration camps and the first generation were ineligible to become citizens. They were given identity cards marking them as enemy aliens. 2000 people died in those camps, but people were born in those camps. And the government, despite the fact that we were at war with Japan, understood that if you're born in this country. And even if your parents were quote, “enemy aliens,” you're gonna be classified as American citizens. And maybe lastly, the court ruled in favor of Wong Kim Ark because the 14th Amendment was trying to repair the harm done by Dred Scott v. Sandford, which was to provide human beings who've been here for two and a half centuries, the right to become an American citizen with all the benefits that go with that, like voting for instance. And recognizing that if you don't have those rights, you don't have anything, you are you, you're nothing. And for Japanese Americans, for instance, who are born in those camps, can you imagine if they didn't have birthright citizenship? They're not part of Japan. They're not part of America. Where are they? They're stateless. They have no home. They have no rights. And so it would create another underclass of people who have no rights for, and for which the 14th Amendment was trying to remedy which was you know, to provide a pathway. And so I guess you could say that's why, that's the incongruity of why Wong Kim Ark came out that way. In my opinion.   [00:19:59] Ming Chen: Maybe what I could add to the conversation is not just sort of who is included but who is not included. Because I think that's actually a much more small and specific group than the current dialogue would have you believe. So in the very language of the 14th Amendment, this idea of subject to the jurisdiction thereof. It refers to three exceptions and only three exceptions. One is for Native Americans, and that is because as of 1924 there wasn't a need to grant citizenship through the 14th Amendment because there were other provisions to grant citizenship to Native Americans. The second exception is for those who are children of diplomats. And the reason for that is because they have citizenship in their home country and their parents are only on a temporary post to the United States with the understanding that they're here in the United States in service to their home country. And I think that actually points to the limited meaning of the third exception, which is the one that I have to say, I have a really hard time understanding is part of the debate now. Because I think up until now, you know, this debate renews itself a couple times every year. Every time there's a new census, every time there's redistricting on all of the anniversaries, and usually the fight is about subject to the jurisdiction thereof. But the third exception, which has come into the dialogue, is about the language of accepting children of invading armies. And that is one that I have not thought we needed to argue about. It really becomes a touch point as Don mentions this history with internment and the children of a group of enemy aliens. I think that gives it a whole new historical read.   [00:21:48] But one of the reasons that this argument, I guess I should first explain the argument because it may not be obvious to you as it was not obvious to me the first time I heard it, which was about 18 months ago. And so the argument is that the children of invading armies referring mostly to the children of immigrants coming across the US Mexico border should not be considered birthright citizens. So that's kind of what the public debate, what the insinuation is behind some of the current effort to chip away at Wong Kim Ark through the executive order. There have been many efforts to chip away through legislation. I don't know how frequently it's been attempted through constitutional amendment, which is what it would actually require. That's a very, very high bar that's almost never met. I think most people haven't really made a serious, serious effort there. But what I think is kind of stunning to me in the sort of momentum behind the current moment is that Judge Ho who himself is a birthright citizen. Took up this language and this argument about the children of invading armies after previously saying that he agreed with this interpretation that children of undocumented immigrants, children of temporary visas all of these different legal statuses in addition to all of these racial groups, would immediately be citizens. And the argument he tried to make is that it wouldn't include the group at the border because historically it wouldn't have included enemy aliens or invading aliens either. And I think that what is so surprising to me is that a) that there is meant to be this historical analog between what would've been happening at the time of the Civil War and what is happening now at the US Mexico border. We are not having a civil war. We are not in active military conflict at the US Mexico border. I'll set aside other US military conflicts and how we wanna use that terminology. But I think that's really important because I, I feel like it's almost a trick, you know, to turn what is a media frame that's meant to be like clickbait, right? The idea that there is an invasion at the border, right. That we're being flooded with people who don't belong here. And to try to turn that into a legal argument saying this is actually an invading army and that takes this group outside of the 14th Amendment.    [00:24:19] Michael Harris: That's, I was gonna ask you a follow up question because we haven't been invaded that many times by armies I mean, maybe the War for Independence when the British sent ships over and took over Boston for a while. I could see how if they had kids, I mean, that's a stretch, that might apply to this. But I think the rhetorical device, they're touching on where they speak of people who come into the United States without proper documentation as an invading army or an invading whatever. They use that terminology quite often. Is that enough to bootstrap into this exception?    [00:24:59] Ming Chen: I, not to me, [audience and panel laughter] I think not to serious legal scholars and jurists. I mean, and you know, I'm not trying to be inflammatory by saying that. I think there are a lot of people who are pretty far away from me on a legal and political spectrum who would also say that this argument is pretty unprecedented. To try to say that that would be enough to bootstrap it into the actual text of the constitution or the spirit of Wong Kim Ark. So I think it's going really, really far. And I think too far, and I hope that if that becomes a line of discussion during the oral argument, that it would be cut off pretty quickly.   [00:25:38] Annie Lee: Well, let me punt it to Lisa then. If it's pretty clear based on the text, based on the legislative history, based on, just everything in the last 125 years that has said very clearly that birthright citizenship is universal and automatic. Why is Trump doing this? Like, what is being attempted legally, but also politically? And Lisa, you take a stab at this first and then others can chime in.    [00:26:04] Lisa Holder: Yeah. You know, why is Trump doing this? [audience and panel laughter] There's many layers, you know? And it, this is a strategic play and you have to sort of think about this in a layered way. Like there's a long term strategic play. There's a short term strategic play, there's a procedural strategic play, but that sort of bootstraps and brings in a much more moral and narrative rhetorical play. Procedural play. The short term strategic play has a lot to do with the midterm elections. Right, right. And also limiting people of color's ability to pick people who look like them as their representatives. Right. Because all of a sudden you're not only putting into question people's citizenship based on birth and turning this into a lineage thing where you have to bring me proof that your parents or their parents were born here or something like that, or were naturalized. So you're starting to put into question in a practical measure, people's access to the franchise, people's access to the voting booth. Right. And you're also starting to create a chain effect. So people are actually afraid to go to the voting booth. Right. And then you couple that with moving the migration of ICE. Now ICE is in the airports. Guaranteed by November, ICE will be in the voting booth, right? So you create this chilling effect. And then in terms of having representation that looks like you having people of color represent you in the US House of Representatives, your state representative. When you put birthright into question in this way, you're also gonna be able to challenge people who are running for office, people of color, running for office and say, well, you can't really run because you need to prove. And that is a rhetorical issue that we have seen being used already with both Harris and Obama, you know, because they were brown, Black people. Their birthright citizenship was, they were manipulating that rhetoric and that narrative.   [00:28:25] So this is not coming out of the outta left field. It's iterative and it's a it's rhetoric that has been, you know, percolating up for a long time. This is just a culminating moment. The long term strategy is really about white supremacy. We know that, you know, all of the social science shows that in 20 years this, the country will be a majority minority country, right? And people of color will have a huge amount of power in terms of, you know, in terms of the vote, right? Because of that, switch to majority minority and white people will be in the minority. And so, this is about, from a long term perspective, ensuring that certain people maintain their power as an electoral block. Right? So that's sort of like a long term electoral politics play. And then finally, the procedural issues are what's outstanding, okay? As Ming mentioned, if you are going to use procedure to overturn a constitutional amendment that is a, an astronomical feat to accomplish, right? Because you need two thirds of all of the representatives in Congress, and then on top of that, you need 75% of the states to ratify that process. So overturning a constitutional amendment is virtually impossible. But what we have here is trying to do the same thing. One person trying to do the same thing using the powers of the executive office. It is unprecedented. It is absurd. It has no legal viability, but it is a political moment where this man sees an opportunity because of the bias that we see in the judicial branch, in the court system. And that is being leveraged for the executive to to do something that is unprecedented and that is actually procedurally impossible, right? For one person by just signing a document all of a sudden disenfranchising 13 million people. That is not the democratic process. It's quite the opposite.   [00:30:38] Michael Harris: I just wanted to add to that. The Senate and the House of Representatives are both very narrowly controlled by the Republicans, and so it's really important to Trump to maintain that control. He'll only be able to continue doing these outrageous things by virtue of getting a rubber stamp from Congress. And so either house going the other way would put a stop sign in front of him and make it much more difficult for him to do all those things. All this money he's spending he would not be able to do that if Congress was actually active in doing it's job. Cause under the Constitution, spending is supposed to be controlled by the Congress, not by the Executive. So everything's upside down, but that's only working because Congress is allowing him to do that and not trying to stop him. If the Democrats are able to take over the Senate or the House where there's only a three or four seat margin right now that would make it much, much, much harder for him to pull these things off. And so anything he can do to get an advantage in that way I think is also part of what they're trying to do and trying to pull off.   [00:31:48] Ming Chen: One other thought, and you know, I'm trying very hard to not be professorly in the sense of using jargon or highfalutin terms, but I'm just curious, has anyone in this room heard the term perpetual foreigner before? A few of you have, I mean, I think it's really pertinent here. The first time I heard of this idea was when I started to learn from other Asian American law professors when I was still in college. I think that idea was that for certain groups of people, including Asian Americans, it doesn't matter whether you are actually a citizen by law or how many generations you've lived in the United States, right? So I'm a birthright citizen like Wong Kim Ark, but I think the first time I heard about it was, you know, this idea of Asian Americans not being able to be Americans socially in terms of belonging regardless of whether they are themselves, the child of citizens or immigrants and if they're the sixth generation children, right. I remember taking a Chinatown tour with David and is that where we are about six generations out for a lot of the descendants. So even if you were in the sixth generation that if you look Asian, that you will still be seen as being foreign. And so I think that idea has animated a lot of the work that I do. Like why it is that a lot of the work I do on race centers Asian Americans and then a lot of the work I do on immigrants centers, the naturalization process.   [00:33:16] But I think it's also important to recognize the breadth of that idea. Again, this idea of trying to blur the line between actuality, like what is real and what sounds like a fancy argument. Right. And I think what Lisa said, you know, her brief reference to the challenges against Barack Obama and Kamala Harris when they were running for a highest offices. You know, I think again, there's not, it's not a coincidence. I mean, to me that's the perpetual foreigner at work again. Because it's the idea that not only that Black people cannot possibly be the leader of this country, right? Sort of the, the figurehead of this country, but that for Barack Obama, the child of one international student on a lawful, probably f visa at the time, or that for Kamala Harris, the child of two lawful immigrants, that they cannot be birthright citizens that would be eligible for president. So there's a lot of commonality in that argument. And I think, you know, people forget, I think people assume that if you're talking about groups who are not Asian right, or who are not Latinx, that we're not talking about foreignness, we're only talking about race. And certainly we are talking about race, but we're not talking about it exclusively.   [00:34:33] Michael Harris: And then in addition to all of that is just the straight up racism of it. And that's supported by this notion of white supremacy. And what I mean when I say that, Lisa has touched on this already, is that there is a hierarchy of racial groups. And we're not all created equal. There's a hierarchy and the top group is, you already know, I don't have to say it, is the whites [laughter], and then below that are the other people like us who look different. And the reason there's, they're able to put these groups out there and get people to buy into that belief system is because we look different. And so this is why the perpetual thing is perpetual it's because we still look different. And that is a key part of the white supremacy. They still want to buy into this notion that white people are superior. And the only way they can make that work is by saying that people who look different are inferior.   [00:35:34] Annie Lee: I love this discussion because it's so real. And what you are saying essentially is you're talking about belonging and you're talking about power. Like who gets to belong in America? And then that is necessarily connected with who has power in America, who deserves to have power in America. But I know that we all belong in America and that we have power. So I wanna shift this conversation now to what can we do? And so beyond the courts everybody tune in next week. But beyond the courts, what is the role of community organizing, state and local policy advocacy? Public education in defending birthright citizenship and fighting against the attack on birthright citizenship is one sliver of everything that he has done. So many executive orders that came out on day one. So how, how do we, as everyday people fight white supremacy? What can we do when they are redistricting and trying to take away our franchise right before the midterm elections? What do we do when they're using courts that they've already packed with their federal society judges? And so what, what can an average regular person do? And Don I'm gonna go to you first.    [00:36:47] Don Tamaki: Let me say something in a very far less intellectual way than my colleagues here. This is a very old playbook. The playbook of demagoguery is very old. He said the old is humanity. And there are three elements to that playbook. One, appeal to prejudice, however, that is, race, skin, color, religion, whatever. Secondly, fear monger and scapegoat. And thirdly trafficking, conspiracy theories, fake news, false information, erasure of history. That's how you control the culture. And it worked in 1619. It worked in 1882. It worked in Germany in 1933. And it works today, you know, 2016, 2020. You know, when Chinese were blamed as spreaders of the Chinese virus. Asian Americans, when Mexicans were characterized as drug dealers and rapists when Jews and immigrants were portrayed as replacing good white people. This dehumanizing [of] people where one more Black man killed during an encounter with law enforcement barely evokes a shrug because it is so normal. It is so normal, folks, and so it works. And so, you have the candidate Trump running for office and say to a national audience that, to the people of Springfield, Ohio, that Haitian immigrants are eating your dogs and cats and getting away with it. Or the images of the Obamas transposed on cartoon apes. And this is really Jim Crow stuff. This is Antebellum stuff. And it's a recycling of the same playbook. And so the first part of organizing is being aware of what's going on. This is not a new thing. Okay, it's just a racial pathology that churns in one form or another, and it has an origin. It predates us. And so I, I think part of that is educating ourselves how everything is interconnected.   [00:38:58] And since we're talking about Black Asian solidarity, I'll just say a couple things. I mean, the civil rights movement had three triumphs that we all should remember. The Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of '65 began the dismantling of Jim Crow, which I, as I said, was a hundred year phenomenon following the end of the Civil War and the Immigration of Act of 1965. The third act. It ended as, you know, racist quotas. It prioritized family ties and skills and it greatly increased Asian immigration. As a result, the majority of AAPIs today are post 1965 Americans whose very presence here was made possible by the Black Civil Rights Movement. How many of us know that, you know? I mean, everybody focuses not everybody, but people tend to focus on their own peculiar predicament as if it's unique to our own situation. And in fact, it's all, quite connected. So I think part of this organizing process is realizing, you know, it's Martin Luther King, the oft quoted statement where he says we may have come on different ships, but we're in the same boat now. And especially in connection with what's happening and, and you're seeing it in different parts of the country where sure, immigrants are being targeted in Minneapolis, but then you have thousands of Minneapolitans that, you know, ordinary people, business folks, teachers, laborers, protesting in Sub-Zero weather against what, what happened? And, and yeah. You know what, can we do protest work? I hope everybody's out there on March 28th, you know, this Saturday on the No Kings March.    [00:40:51] Michael Harris: Not just protesting, running them out of town.    [00:40:55] Don Tamaki: Well, [audience and panel laughter] Gregory Bovino, Gregory Bovino, who was the leading charge? Gone. Kristi Noem. Gone.    [00:41:03] Michael Harris: Yes, right.    [00:41:05] Don Tamaki: 2000 ICE agents in Minneapolis reduced to much smaller numbers. That's right. Their plans then launching Ohio trashed. You know, so that's why you, so boycotts, boycotts work. Ask Elon Musk. Ask Target. Local elections, Michael mentioned the midterm elections. It is if we don't, if Democrats don't get back the House, the country's cooked. So, I mean, everybody should be involved one way or the other in that. Raising money, you know, we are part of a, a fundraising group called CAPA21, and there are other groups out there, but those are, those things are crucial to funnel money toward swing elections and critical races. The education part I think is essential. If you consider the velocity change in terms of the civil rights movement, Japanese American redress and reparations was a 20 year movement. And it was full of education of the public. Civil rights movement, same thing. The philosophy of change on marriage equality or LGBTQ rights and all those things happened because they became normal. They were, they started out as ideas that people thought were preposterous. You know, that'll never change.    [00:42:26] Michael Harris: Right.    [00:42:26] Don Tamaki: And Jim Crow will never end. And San Francisco can segregate Asian Americans within Japantown and Chinatown. It, it will never change. But that idea of change, which were thought preposterous happens. But it requires civic engagement. So just examples.   [00:42:46] Michael Harris: I want to amplify two things that Don said. One is there will be a march this Saturday a No Kings March, and it's really, really important for people to show up for that march. ‘Cause the one thing that's devastating to a government is to have its people out there visible on the streets saying what the government is doing is wrong. Because you can spin certain things, you can lie about certain things, but bodies in the streets you can't lie about. It's there and it's real. So that's one thing that's really important, really. But I would encourage all of you if you can, if you are able, please join us and come out on Saturday. The other thing I want to add to the Don's excellent list is there's a few groups in the Bay Area and in San Francisco that does postcards. And their strategy is they identify particular jurisdictions where it's a very close race and it'll be pivotal if a Democrat can win over a Republican, say in a House or maybe even like the Texas Senator race. That one's probably gonna be very close too. And they send postcards to people encouraging them to vote. Don't sit it out. And those extra votes can be the difference between winning and losing. And that might flip the House might flip the Senate. So those are some other additional items.    [00:44:11] Ming Chen: I think at a much more basic level, it's just like telling, telling your story, telling the story of America. Because, you know, when we talk about all these rhetorical tricks, I mean, I think what it means is that that narrative is gaining a lot of power. And so I think you have to reclaim the narrative, right? You have to tell the counter story which happens to be the real story of what's happening. This is something that I actually haven't talked about this publicly, but my daughter she's like on the brink of being 13, not yet a teenager. It made me really sad that she came back from her well-funded, pretty liberal public school about a month ago crying because she said that in her Mandarin Chinese class, there was a child who was saying that Asian people eat dogs. And then writing swastikas on the chalkboard and singing Nazi songs making fun of the women in the room, I guess they're girls in the room saying that they're all lesbian without knowing anything about them. And it just made me really profoundly sad because I'd like to think that a lot of ignorant narrative is because people don't know better, right? I mean, as an educator, I hope that education will simply solve it. And it made me really sad to hear that again. You know, I'm, I'm on the brink of Berkeley. I basically live in Berkeley, right? So one of the most densely populated PhD overeducated people in America. And to be three generations in and to still have this story being told in the classrooms was really distressing to me. And even more distressing that it isn't just the like Chinese people that eat dogs as being a stereotype from those who are not educated, but it's something she might have heard on TV from the highest offices in the land, right? Something she might've heard the vice president say, for example. And so I just think it's so important and doesn't take education, doesn't take a law degree, right? To be able to tell that story. And so I was really, really proud that my daughter you know, did file a complaint with the principal that she came home and told us about it. And you know, her two parents who are civil rights and immigration lawyers, [laughter] but also that she's been like talking to her classmates right, about the fact that that's not true. That's not right. She's been comforting the other kids in the classroom who don't share the same background that she does. And I feel like that kind of work is just as important.    [00:46:45] Michael Harris: I want to add something to that. We have to take note of the fact that a lot of these types of comments really vile, racist things and not just about Asians, it's also some of the things about Black people, young people are saying. Part of it is because it's very easy to say things like that online because you can do it anonymously and not have to, you know, stand up and back up your comments, so to speak. And another part of it is our culture. We gotta be real about this. When I was growing up, I'm sure you were told this too, as the country became more educated and got more exposed to people of color and more people got higher education, all this crazy stereotypical racist stuff would go away because people would know better. That's what they told me the whole time I was growing up and now we know that's not true [audience laughter] because the reverse is happening. It's growing because some people are making money by putting stuff like that online and selling t-shirts and hats and stuff like that. Or starting, you know, whatever they start. There's this guy, Alex Jones, who made millions of dollars doing that kind of stuff. So some people are making money off of it. Other people are just buying into that ideological tip and are using that to gain power and influence and clicks. So we just have to be aware that this is a current going on in our society right now. And it's happening and it's growing and we, we need to be aware of it and start thinking about ways how we can put it to rest. Cause it's, it's happening.    [00:48:30] Annie Lee: Thank you so much. I do wanna give our audience some time to ask any questions that you all might have. So if you have a burning question to ask our illustrious panel now is your opportunity.   [00:48:45] Audience member: I was wondering how does this with, with the rhetoric of, of Washington pushing for IDs for voting how will that impact on people's presence at the voting booths and validating their ability to vote?   [00:49:04] Michael Harris: I think what you're referring to is the Safeguard [SAVE America] Act is now in Congress, and if it's passed and signed by the president, then it'll become law. And what it will require is anyone who wants to vote will have to have a photo ID. And even if you registered, you have to prove you're a citizen. So those two steps are, I think, designed to suppress the vote of people of color. I mean, I think it's very straightforward. This has been what Republicans have been trying to do for ever since the case that Don just mentioned passed and they were able to start doing this stuff. And I agree. It goes back to the notion that in 20 years, America's going to be a majority minority country. There's gonna be more people of color than white people. And I think that I'm just gonna come out and say that freaks them out. It really freaks 'em out. I think a lot of them have lived their whole lifetime where only white people were in charge, running stuff, and they can envision a future not too far off where that might not be the case anymore. And that's scary. It shouldn't be. I mean, we're all the same. It's all gonna be, you know, and there's Black Republicans and Black Democrats and there's Asian Republican. I don't know why they're so freaked out about it, but but they are freaked out about it. And a lot of this is to suppress the vote so that they can continue to stay in power and will not have to give up the power that they would lose otherwise.   [00:50:35] Lisa Holder: Yeah, I mean, it's always been about limiting the franchise, right? And since the time that it expanded beyond white males with property, there's been a battle to keep it as limited as possible. You know? And when you think about what happened after the Civil War, after the 13th, 14th, and particularly the 15th Amendment were passed and African Americans were allowed to vote, you had a 100 year backlash. Where 10,000 African Americans were murdered and lynched. Most of those were people who were trying to mobilize their communities to enter into the franchise and exercise the right to vote. That's the retrenchment that we're seeing being reiterated right now. Right. And we know that during that period, there were all kinds of hoops that, for instance, Black people had to jump through because of those Black Codes where you had to, for instance, prove that you can read this particular statement. Right. Or, you know, just like all kinds of random hoops that you had to jump through. And so when we see these barriers, these gatekeepers, like, oh, you have to have an ID. If this birthright citizenship goes through, no, no, no you can't bring in your birth certificate. You know, we need some proof of your parent, of your lineage. Right. And it's really is combined with that narrative and that rhetorical aspect, that Ming was articulating because although in fact we are America. America looks like us, Americans look like us. The alternative narrative where white predominance is the point is always going to be pushed where no, no, no, we are different. We are not normal and we are not America. And so that's, that's the narrative piece that all of this leads to. And that's why this story of storytelling that Ming talked about is so important. And also it is so important to just constantly push back to resist, to vote. To run for office when you look like an American.   [00:52:45] Audience member: My question is, if the executive order passes, what can we do to resist? Because one of the things is it will also disenfranchise women because it's about proving your identity that matches your birth certificate. Right. And there are really so many people that will not have their names to match their identities. And so what can people do to, to, to counter if that should happen?   [00:53:11] Don Tamaki: The legislative answer? Well, there'll be court challenges, no doubt    [00:53:15] Audience member: but, but before, let's say the midterm election.   [00:53:18] Michael Harris: Call your representative, fax 'em, email 'em, get your friends to do that, because it's pending in Congress right now.   [00:53:25] Don Tamaki: But elections have consequences is the point. And it people who says, well my vote doesn't count, doesn't matter. Everybody, both parties the same. Elections have consequences. I, I guess the only other thing to remember, I keep, you know, repeating this, the solidarity and connectedness bears repeating because the story keeps recycling. It's very recycled story about voter suppression. You know, the Civil War ended in 1865, 12 years of reconstruction. Lincoln is assassinated shortly after during the beginning of reconstruction and thereafter, you know, a deal was struck in the contested election of 1876. Federal troops are withdrawn from the south and then the voter suppression comes in literacy tests, poll taxes.   [00:54:19] Annie Lee: Mm-hmm. Grandfather clauses.   [00:54:21] Don Tamaki: Yeah. I mean in Virginia. During reconstruction 140,000 formerly enslaved people registered to vote after the collapse of reconstruction it was reduced to 21,000. California had you know, poll taxes. Other states had literacy tests and whatever, and it's now repeating because folks don't like the results of an election. The answer is not to, you know, broaden your net and appeal to upfront (?) policy. The answer is to suppress voting, stop people from voting. And so again, it's a matter of awareness I think we have to realize the game plan. And it makes it so important about who is voted into the dials and levers of the controls that run the country. So that's critical.    [00:55:13] Ming Chen: I can jump onto that. go vote. But I think it's also, you know, it's early enough to say, get your documents in order. Right? Go and be ready to vote in a way that won't draw question, right? So you don't have to wait for the lawsuit. And I will say for that, as someone who spends most of my days working with 20 something year olds who move all over the country, a lot of it is about sort of get your ducks in order, right? So if you don't have a driver's license with the current address that matches your name, you can fix that now. So many people who don't have a normal ID because they never learn how to drive, right? So make sure you go get that document. You mentioned marriage, Anna, and I remember I moved to New York at the same time that I got married and trying to get my name on the document when I was it, you know, it's like this endless loop, right? Because you're getting a new ID because of your address. If you don't have that, you can't get your social security card, if you don't have that you can't validate the marriage certificate, right? There's just this endless loop. And you have to get all of that in order, right? So I think maybe there needs to be two parts to our voter mobilization this year, right? It's get yourself ready, sort of like arm up and then vote so that your vote will actually end up counting.    [00:56:33] Miko Lee: Please check out our website, kpfa.org/program/apexexpress to find out more about our show and our guests tonight. We thank all of you listeners out there. Keep resisting, keep organizing, keep creating, and sharing your visions with the world because your voices are important. Apex Express is produced by Ayame Keane-Lee, Anuj Vaidya, Cheryl Truong, Isabel Li, Jalena Keane-Lee, Miko Lee, Miata Tan, Preti Mangala-Shekar and Swati Rayasam. Tonight's show was produced by me Miko Lee, and edited by Ayame Keane-Lee. Have a great night.   The post APEX Express – 4.2.26 – Surviving Through Solidarity. appeared first on KPFA.

Unfortunately, slavery was not just propped up by policy in the slave states, but federally. It is often overlooked that the federal government—not just slave states—had implemented legal protections of slavery by policy for decades.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/antebellum-federal-protections-slavery

Unfortunately, slavery was not just propped up by policy in the slave states, but federally. It is often overlooked that the federal government—not just slave states—had implemented legal protections of slavery by policy for decades.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/antebellum-federal-protections-slavery

Please hit Subscribe   Click here to go to our Facebook Page. https://www.facebook.com/222paranormal  Click here to see Jennifers Book. https://a.co/d/0gJSY9Cw  Click here to see Joe's book. https://a.co/d/099rkoQL Clike here to save on Clothing. https://poshmark.com/closet/toledojoe  Click here to see the Ghost gear of the week.  https://a.co/d/06Kk18k0    In this haunting episode of the **222 Paranormal Podcast**, we step back into the shadowed corridors of America's antebellum South—where grand architecture, wealth, and history intertwine with tragedy, trauma, and lingering spiritual echoes. Antebellum homes are often admired for their sweeping columns, elegant staircases, and timeless Southern charm. But beneath the polished wood and historic beauty lies a far more complicated past. Many of these estates were built on the backs of enslaved labor, and with that reality comes a legacy that some believe never truly left. In this episode, we explore several Southern homes with reputations for intense paranormal activity—locations where both former owners and enslaved individuals are said to still be present. Witness accounts describe unexplained footsteps pacing long-empty halls, disembodied voices drifting through locked rooms, and sudden cold spots that appear without warning. Some investigators have even reported shadow figures standing at the ends of hallways, watching silently before vanishing into darkness. One of the most chilling stories discussed centers on a historic home that suffered a devastating fire. According to local legend, during the blaze—and in later years during reported paranormal experiences—witnesses claimed to see human-like figures moving within the flames themselves. Apparitions appearing inside fire is an especially unsettling phenomenon, suggesting that whatever energy remains tied to the location may be replaying moments of trauma or catastrophe. These sightings raise questions about residual hauntings, emotional imprints, and whether extreme events can leave permanent echoes in the environment. We also take time to examine the duality often found in these historic locations. While some reports focus on former owners—figures in period clothing, stern presences, or footsteps on upper floors—other accounts describe sightings believed to be tied to enslaved individuals who once lived and worked on the property. These encounters tend to be quieter but no less powerful: faint singing where no one is present, figures seen near former quarters, or sensations of being watched accompanied by overwhelming emotion. As always, the conversation moves beyond simple ghost stories and into deeper questions. Are these manifestations intelligent spirits, residual energy, or psychological responses to historically charged locations? Can trauma—especially repeated over generations—leave an imprint strong enough to replay itself decades or centuries later? Adding to the episode's atmosphere, a listener-submitted story brings a personal and unsettling firsthand experience into the discussion. Real accounts like this continue to blur the line between folklore and lived experience, reminding us that the paranormal is often most powerful when it intersects with everyday life. This episode of the **222 Paranormal Podcast** doesn't just explore haunted houses—it examines how history, memory, and human experience may shape what we encounter in allegedly haunted spaces. Whether you believe these encounters are spiritual, environmental, or psychological, the stories connected to antebellum homes remain some of the most emotionally charged and deeply compelling in paranormal research. Join us as we walk through candlelit hallways, listen for echoes from another era, and ask the question that always lingers in historic places: does the past ever truly leave—or does it simply wait to be heard? Welcome to the 222 Paranormal Podcast, your gateway to the captivating world of the supernatural. Immerse yourself in our expertly crafted episodes, where we delve deep into a wide range of paranormal phenomena, including ghostly hauntings, cryptid sightings, and unexplained mysteries that defy logic. Each episode is meticulously researched and features engaging discussions with leading experts, seasoned ghost hunters, and renowned paranormal investigators. We cover the latest advancements in ghost hunting technology, offer practical tips for both amateur and experienced investigators, and review essential equipment for your paranormal adventures. Our podcast also explores the rich history of haunted locations, sharing true stories and firsthand accounts that will send chills down your spine. Whether you're a die-hard fan of the paranormal or just curious about the unknown, our content is designed to entertain, inform, and ignite your imagination. Stay tuned as we uncover secrets from the most haunted places around the world and analyze the most intriguing supernatural events. We also provide in-depth interviews with notable figures in the field and explore theories that challenge conventional understanding of reality. By subscribing to our Paranormal Podcast, you'll stay updated with the latest episodes, allowing you to join a community of like-minded individuals who share your fascination with the unexplained. Don't miss out on our exclusive content and special features, which bring you closer to the mysteries that lie beyond our everyday experiences. Dive into the world of the unknown with our Paranormal Podcast and experience the thrill of discovering what lies just beyond the veil of reality.

In order to honor Black History Month, every February Progressively Horrified only covers horror movies by black directors. Over the past several years, we have covered quite a few movies by black directors. This year, in addition to our three new episodes, we're also rereleasing all of the previous episodes discussing films by black directors. We believe that, now more than ever, it is important to highlight diverse films by diverse creators.New Films this month:February 6th: "Sweetheart" by JD Dillon February 13th: "Blink Twice" by Zoe KravitzFebruary 21st: "Ash" by Flying LotusSupport our Patreon for bonus episodes, essays, short stories, and stickers! https://www.patreon.com/progressivelyhorrifiedMovies featured this month:Horror Noire, Eve's Bayou, Tales from the Hood, Blacula, The First Purge, The Other Black Girl, The Blackening, Sorry to Bother You, Saloum, Master, His House, Bad Hair, An Angry Black Girl and her Monster, Candyman, Nope, Us, Get Out, Tales from the Crypt: Demon Knight,Directors featured this month:Nia Dacosta, Jordan Peele, Justin Simien, Mariama Diallo, Xavier Burgin, Rusty Cundieff, Ernest R. Dickerson, Kasi Lemmons, William Crain, Gerard McMurray, Nefertite Nguvu, Naima Ramos-Chapman, Tim Story, Boots Riley, Jean Luc Herbulot, Remi Weekes, Bomani J. StoryActors featured this month:Regina Hall, Zoe Renee, Ken Foree, Keith David, Tony Todd, Paula Jai Parker, David Alan Grier, Rachel True, William Marshall, Jada Pinkett Smiith, Samuel L. Jackson, Jurnee Smollett, Meagan Good, Lynn Whitfield, Debbi Morgan, Jake Smollett, Diahann Carroll, Vondie Curtis-Hall, Branford Marsalis, Clarence Williams III, Rosalind Cash, Vonetta McGee, Thalmus Rasulala, Gordon Pinsent, Y'lan Noel, Lex Scott Davis, Steve Harris, Mugga, Luna Lauren Valez, Rotimi Paul, Mo McRae, Jermel Howard, Derek Basco, Rashida Jones, Sinclair Daniel, Ashleigh Murray, Brittany Adebumola, Karina Willis, Cassi Maddox, Carcelle Beauvais, Zele Avradopoulos, Shakirah DeMesier, Langston Kerman, Grace Byers, Jermaine Fowler, Melvin Gregg, X Mayo, Dewayne Perkins, Antoinette Robertson, Sinqua Walls, Jay Pharoah, Yvonne Orji, LaKeith Stanfield, Tessa Thompson, Omari Hardwick, Terry Crews, Danny Glover, Forest Whitaker, Rosario Dawson, Yann Gael, Evelyne Ily Juhen, Roger Sallah, Mentor Ba, Bruno Henry, Marielle Salmier, Babacar Oualy, Ndiaga Mbow, Sope Dirisu, Wunmi Mosaku, Elle Lorraine, Lena Waithe, Yaani King Mondschein, Ashley Blaine Featherson-Jenkins, Judith Scott, Vanessa Williams, Kelly Rowland, Tiffany Black, Usher, Laya DeLeon Hayes, Denzel Whitaker, Chad L. Coleman, Reilly Brooke Stith, Edem Atsu-Swanzy, Yahya Abdul-Mateen II, Teyonah Parris, Colman Domingo, Nathan Stewart-Jarrett, Daniel Kaluuya, Keke Palmer, Lupita Nyong'o, Winston Duke, Shahadi Wright Joseph, Anna Diop, Evan Alex, Madison Curry, Napiera Groves, Betty Gabriel, Marcus Henderson, Lil Rel Howery, Billy Zane, CCH Pounder#BlackHistoryMonth, #BlackDirectorsMonth, #BlackFilm, #BlackHorror, #HorrorNoire, #BlackDirector, #MonkeypawProductions, #Shudder, #Hulu, #DiverseHorrorJOIN JEREMY'S ZOOP CAMPAIGN AND HELP MAKE GREAT COMICS! https://zoop.gg/c/slayTake our listener survey: http://bit.ly/progressivelyhorrified-surveySign up to support Progressively Horrified on Patreon for as little as $5 a month and get bonus episodes! https://www.patreon.com/c/progressivelyhorrified Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, Tananarive talks to debut author and former "Doogie Howser, M.D." actor Markus Redmond about his vampire novel BLOOD SLAVES, set during the Antebellum slavery era.  On how the murder of George Floyd helped inspire his novel, transitioning from acting to writing, on his experiences writing screenplays, and how slavery is the true horror in BLOOD SLAVES. (And it's a series!)  Never miss a live episode! For the link, join one of our mailing lists: Tananarive's mailing list at https://tananarivelist.comSteve's mailing list at https://stevenbarneslist.com Join our social media site! Lifewriting on Circle: https://lifewrite.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Thanksgiving in 1857 was very similar to what it is today. A time to get together with family, reflect on the things we are thankful for , and sharing a huge feast. A plantation owning family soon learned a lesson that their meal wasn't what was expected, especially when you are cruel and inhumane to the "cook".

Emergency relief and recovery efforts are underway in the Caribbean following widespread destruction of Hurricane Melissa. At least 67 people are dead, in addition to the billions of dollars in damages. One of the organizations on the ground providing aid is CARE, a global humanitarian nonprofit that's based in Atlanta. We hear from Jonathan Arogeti, the Caribbean Humanitarian Response Lead at CARE. Plus, as the federal government shutdown continues, groups offering support across Georgia are stepping up to meet growing community needs. “Closer Look” program host Rose Scott speaks with leaders from three local organizations about their expanded efforts to help individuals and families in need of food, as well as jobs following mass layoffs. Guests include: Jenny Taylor, vice president of career services and the chief mission officer at Goodwill of North Georgia Jasmine Crowe-Houston, the founder and CEO of Goodr Nancy Triplett, a board member and donor relations representative for Never Alone Food Pantry Lastly, the documentary, “Natchez,” challenges the stories being told about a small Mississippi city that thrivess from antebellum tourism. The film reveals residents' reckoning with the dual perception of Natchez and its history of slavery. Ahead of the documentary’s exclusive opening at the Tara Theatre on November 7th, we hear from the film’s director, Suzannah Herbert.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We investigate Honey Don't and also talk Bulworth, Tron: Ares, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, The Apparition, American Fable and Archons. Follow the show on Twitter: @thecinemaspeak Follow the show on Instagram: cinemaspeakpodcast Subscribe on Youtube: Cinema Speak Intro/Dewey Decimal of Doom update: 0:00 - 19:05 Review - Honey Don't: 19:05 - 40:53 Movie Roulette - Bulworth: 40:53 - 1:00:17 Micro-Reviews - The Paper, Tron: Ares, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, The Abandoned, American Fable, The Apparition, Antebellum, Archons: 1:00:17 - 1:45:19 This week in new releases/Outro: 1:45:19 - 1:53:57

Kentucky Barracuda: Parker H. French by Joe Goodbody https://www.amazon.com/Kentucky-Barracuda-Parker-H-French/dp/1960224239 Parkerhfrench.com Parker Hardin French was certainly an adventurer and entrepreneur who engaged in elaborate, bold, and ambitious exploits but he was also a magnificent con-man-a barracuda. Those who followed his exploits were variously exasperated, captivated by his audacity and nervy cheek, or humored by his latest escapade. He was judged an incorrigible scoundrel, labeled a chronic megalomaniac, or peddled as a misunderstood victim of his enemies. Many believed him a hero- many just thought him insane. Some of his efforts may have begun as legitimate endeavors, but they inevitably resulted in double-crossed partners, betrayed allies. and swindled creditors. French was reported killed five times-twice killed in gunfights; executed in Mexico by both hanging and firing squad; and once killed in Nicaragua. For a short while there was a lapse of interesting press reports, so many just presumed that he was already dead, the victim of retribution or excessive alcohol. He ultimately died of natural causes-in his bed. In the era of steam, sail and horse, the rapidity of French's movement and breadth of his adventures is almost mind-numbing. As a runaway kid he fought in the British Navy in the first Opium War. When he was just 22 years old, he was a commission merchant and, a year later, built the first ocean going ship on the upper Mississippi. Before he was 30, he was the leader of an infamous gold rush expedition; implicated in an irregular invasion of Cuba; jailed bandit and then a paramilitary hero in Mexico; lawyer, district attorney, legislator, journalist, and political enforcer in California; member of an American cabal which governed Nicaragua; and, appointed but rejected Nicaraguan ambassador to the United States. He did not slowdown in his 30s: he was a real estate developer; lawyer; journalist; part of a conspiracy to invade Mexico; suspected seditionist agitator and Confederate agent; jailed as a political prisoner; and, lawyer and purveyor for Union troops. His final days were spent in obscurity but the period was still peppered with the occasional swindle that garnered both regional and national attention. First and foremost, he was always a barracuda.About the author Author of the historical biography: KENTUCKY BARRACUDA: PARKER HARDIN FRENCH (1826-1878) Subtitle: The Notorious Scoundrel & Delightful Rogue of Antebellum and Civil War America. Parker French swindled my Great Grandfather. Born and raised in Escondido California; a fourth generation Californian. The nuns at St Mary's Elementary (especially Sister Mary Arimathea) would be astonished that I ever learned to write a complete sentence or form a paragraph. A graduate of Escondido High School with a bachelor's degree from University of Nebraska at Omaha and a masters from Florida Institute of Technology. Married for over 50 years to the love of my life; two sons and four grandkids. After a wonderful career of 28 years service, I retired from the United States Army as a Colonel. Retired again as a corporate leader.

You can still find several antebellum homes scattered throughout the southern United States.  While this home has similar roots, it tells the story of an...

Steve Luxenberg has created an unusual history of the famous Supreme Court case Plessy v. Ferguson and the 19th century's segregationist practices in his book Separate: The Story of Plessy v. Ferguson, and America's Journey from Slavery to Segregation (Norton, 2019)  It is unusual because it is chiefly an ensemble biography of Henry Brown, John Marshall Harlan, and Albion Tourgee, three men intimately connected with the Plessy case.  The book covers the Antebellum period youth of the three men, each from a different part of the young nation and each encountering freedmen, slaves, and the institution of slavery in different social and political contexts.  We follow these men through the Civil War, Reconstruction, and the post-Reconstruction period leading up to the Plessy decision.  The Plessy case helped solidify official, state-enforced segregationist practices throughout the United States.  It made the now-infamous phrase “separate but equal” a constitutional doctrine that was the law of the land until the 1950s and 1960s. Ian J. Drake is an Associate Professor of Political Science and Law at Montclair State University. His scholarly interests include American legal and constitutional history and political theory. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Steve Luxenberg has created an unusual history of the famous Supreme Court case Plessy v. Ferguson and the 19th century's segregationist practices in his book Separate: The Story of Plessy v. Ferguson, and America's Journey from Slavery to Segregation (Norton, 2019)  It is unusual because it is chiefly an ensemble biography of Henry Brown, John Marshall Harlan, and Albion Tourgee, three men intimately connected with the Plessy case.  The book covers the Antebellum period youth of the three men, each from a different part of the young nation and each encountering freedmen, slaves, and the institution of slavery in different social and political contexts.  We follow these men through the Civil War, Reconstruction, and the post-Reconstruction period leading up to the Plessy decision.  The Plessy case helped solidify official, state-enforced segregationist practices throughout the United States.  It made the now-infamous phrase “separate but equal” a constitutional doctrine that was the law of the land until the 1950s and 1960s. Ian J. Drake is an Associate Professor of Political Science and Law at Montclair State University. His scholarly interests include American legal and constitutional history and political theory. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

8/25/25: Atty Joel Feldman: rent stabilization now! Megan Zinn w/ Jill Bialosky: "The End is the Beginning,” remembering her mom. Prof Amilcar Shabazz w/ artist Kay Douglas: "Antebellum" at Ctr for Peace through Culture. Amherst Town Mgr. Paul Bockelman & Health Dir Kiko Malin: opioids settlement funds & potholes.

8/25/25: Atty Joel Feldman: rent stabilization now! Megan Zinn w/ Jill Bialosky: "The End is the Beginning,” remembering her mom. Prof Amilcar Shabazz w/ artist Kay Douglas: "Antebellum" at Ctr for Peace through Culture. Amherst Town Mgr. Paul Bockelman & Health Dir Kiko Malin: opioids settlement funds & potholes.

8/25/25: Atty Joel Feldman: rent stabilization now! Megan Zinn w/ Jill Bialosky: "The End is the Beginning,” remembering her mom. Prof Amilcar Shabazz w/ artist Kay Douglas: "Antebellum" at Ctr for Peace through Culture. Amherst Town Mgr. Paul Bockelman & Health Dir Kiko Malin: opioids settlement funds & potholes.

8/25/25: Atty Joel Feldman: rent stabilization now! Megan Zinn w/ Jill Bialosky: "The End is the Beginning,” remembering her mom. Prof Amilcar Shabazz w/ artist Kay Douglas: "Antebellum" at Ctr for Peace through Culture. Amherst Town Mgr. Paul Bockelman & Health Dir Kiko Malin: opioids settlement funds & potholes.

Steve Luxenberg has created an unusual history of the famous Supreme Court case Plessy v. Ferguson and the 19th century's segregationist practices in his book Separate: The Story of Plessy v. Ferguson, and America's Journey from Slavery to Segregation (Norton, 2019)  It is unusual because it is chiefly an ensemble biography of Henry Brown, John Marshall Harlan, and Albion Tourgee, three men intimately connected with the Plessy case.  The book covers the Antebellum period youth of the three men, each from a different part of the young nation and each encountering freedmen, slaves, and the institution of slavery in different social and political contexts.  We follow these men through the Civil War, Reconstruction, and the post-Reconstruction period leading up to the Plessy decision.  The Plessy case helped solidify official, state-enforced segregationist practices throughout the United States.  It made the now-infamous phrase “separate but equal” a constitutional doctrine that was the law of the land until the 1950s and 1960s. Ian J. Drake is an Associate Professor of Political Science and Law at Montclair State University. His scholarly interests include American legal and constitutional history and political theory. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/african-american-studies

Steve Luxenberg has created an unusual history of the famous Supreme Court case Plessy v. Ferguson and the 19th century's segregationist practices in his book Separate: The Story of Plessy v. Ferguson, and America's Journey from Slavery to Segregation (Norton, 2019)  It is unusual because it is chiefly an ensemble biography of Henry Brown, John Marshall Harlan, and Albion Tourgee, three men intimately connected with the Plessy case.  The book covers the Antebellum period youth of the three men, each from a different part of the young nation and each encountering freedmen, slaves, and the institution of slavery in different social and political contexts.  We follow these men through the Civil War, Reconstruction, and the post-Reconstruction period leading up to the Plessy decision.  The Plessy case helped solidify official, state-enforced segregationist practices throughout the United States.  It made the now-infamous phrase “separate but equal” a constitutional doctrine that was the law of the land until the 1950s and 1960s. Ian J. Drake is an Associate Professor of Political Science and Law at Montclair State University. His scholarly interests include American legal and constitutional history and political theory. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Steve Luxenberg has created an unusual history of the famous Supreme Court case Plessy v. Ferguson and the 19th century's segregationist practices in his book Separate: The Story of Plessy v. Ferguson, and America's Journey from Slavery to Segregation (Norton, 2019)  It is unusual because it is chiefly an ensemble biography of Henry Brown, John Marshall Harlan, and Albion Tourgee, three men intimately connected with the Plessy case.  The book covers the Antebellum period youth of the three men, each from a different part of the young nation and each encountering freedmen, slaves, and the institution of slavery in different social and political contexts.  We follow these men through the Civil War, Reconstruction, and the post-Reconstruction period leading up to the Plessy decision.  The Plessy case helped solidify official, state-enforced segregationist practices throughout the United States.  It made the now-infamous phrase “separate but equal” a constitutional doctrine that was the law of the land until the 1950s and 1960s. Ian J. Drake is an Associate Professor of Political Science and Law at Montclair State University. His scholarly interests include American legal and constitutional history and political theory. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A weekly magazine-style radio show featuring the voices and stories of Asians and Pacific Islanders from all corners of our community. The show is produced by a collective of media makers, deejays, and activists. Tonight Producer Swati Rayasam showcases a community panel of how discriminatory exclusion policies during times of heightened fears of national security and safety have threatened our communities in the past, and how the activities of the current administration threaten our core constitutional rights, raising the specter of politicization and polarization of citizenship, immigration visas, naturalization rights, and the right to free speech.   Deport. Exclude. Revoke. Imprison – “Wong Kim Ark is for All of Us” SHOW TRANSCRIPT Swati Rayasam: You are tuned in to APEX Express on KPFA. My name is Swati Rayasam and I'm back as your special producer for this episode. Tonight we have an incredible community panel titled Deport. Exclude. Revoke. Imprison. This panel explores the history of how discriminatory exclusion policies during times of heightened fears of national security and [00:01:00] safety have threatened our communities in the past, and how the activities of the current administration threaten our core constitutional rights, raising the specter of politicization and polarization of citizenship, immigration visas, naturalization rights, and the right to free speech. I'll pass it on to UC Berkeley Ethnic Studies Professor Mike Chang to kick us off. Mike and Harvey: We're starting on Berkeley time, right on time at three 10, and I want to introduce Harvey Dong. Harvey Dong: Okay. The sponsors for today's event include, AADS- Asian American and Diaspora studies program, uc, Berkeley, Asian American Research Center, the Center for Race and Gender Department of Ethnic Studies- all part of uc, Berkeley. Off campus, we have the following community groups. Chinese for Affirmative Action, Asian Law Caucus, [00:02:00] Asian Prisoners Support Committee, and East Wind Books. Okay, so that's, quite a few in terms of coalition people coming together. My name is Harvey Dong and I'm also a lecturer in the AADS program and part of the ethnic studies department. I can say that I exist here as the result of birthright citizenship won by Ancestor Wong Kim Ark in 1898. Otherwise, I would not be here. We want to welcome everyone here today, for this important panel discussion titled: Deport, Exclude, Revoke, Imprison – Immigration and citizenship rights during crisis. Yes, we are in a deep crisis today. The Chinese characters for crisis is way G in Mandarin or way gay in [00:03:00] Cantonese, which means danger and opportunity. We are in a moment of danger and at the same time in a moment of opportunity. Our communities are under attack from undocumented, documented, and those with citizenship. We see urgency in coming together. In 1898, the US Supreme Court case, US versus Wong Kim Ark held that under the 14th Amendment birthright, citizenship applies to all people born in the United States. Regardless of their race or their parents' national origin or immigration status. On May 15th this year, the Supreme Court will hear a President Donald Trump's request to implement an executive order that will end birthright citizenship already before May 15th, [00:04:00] deportations of US citizen children are taking place. Recently, three US citizen children, one 2-year-old with cancer have been deported with their undocumented parents. The numbers of US citizen children are much higher being deported because it's less covered in the press. Unconstitutional. Yes, definitely. And it's taking place now. Also today, more than 2.7 million southeast Asian Americans live in the US but at least 16,000 community members have received final orders of deportation, placing their lives and families in limbo. This presents a mental health challenge and extreme economic hardship for individuals and families who do not know whether their next day in the US will be their last. Wong Kim Ark's [00:05:00] struggle and the lessons of Wong Kim Ark, continue today. His resistance provides us with a grounding for our resistance. So they say deport, exclude, revoke, imprison. We say cease and desist. You can say that every day it just seems like the system's gone amuk. There's constant attacks on people of color, on immigrants and so forth. And our only solution, or the most important solution is to resist, legally resist, but also to protest, to demand cease and desist. Today brings together campus and community people. We want you all to be informed because if you're uninformed , you can't do anything. Okay? You have to know where things are at. It's nothing new. What they're trying to do, in 1882, [00:06:00] during times of economic crisis, they scapegoated Asian Americans. Today there's economic, political crisis. And the scapegoating continues. They're not doing anything new. You know, it's old stuff, but we have to realize that, and we have to look at the past in terms of what was done to fight it and also build new solidarities today. Wong Kim Ark did not take his situation sitting down. He went through, lots of obstacles. He spent three months in Angel Island he was arrested after he won his case because he was constantly being harassed wherever he went. His kids when they came over were also, spotted as being Wong Kim Ark's, children, and they too had to spend months at Angel Island. So Wong Kim Ark did not take his situation sitting down. We need to learn from him today. Our [00:07:00] next, special guest is Mr. Norman Wong, a good friend of mine. He was active here in the third world Liberation Front strike that led to ethnic studies. He did a lots of work for the development of Asian American studies and we've been out in touch for about, what, 40 years? So I'm really happy that he's able to come back to Berkeley and to talk about yourself, if you wish, maybe during the Q and a, but to talk about , the significance of your great-grandfather's case. Okay, so Norman Wong, let's give him a hand. Norman Wong: Hello, my name's Norman Wong. I'm the great grandson, Wong Kim Ark. Wong Kim Ark was [00:08:00] born in the USA, like my great-grandfather. I, too was born American in the same city, San Francisco, more than 75 years after him. We are both Americans, but unlike him, my citizenship has never been challenged. His willingness to stand up and fight made the difference for his struggles, my humble thanks. Wong Kim Ark however, was challenged more than once. In late 1889 as an American, he traveled to China in July, 1890. He returned to his birth city. He had his papers and had no problems with reentry. In 1895, after a similar trip, he was stopped from disembarking and was placed into custody for five months aboard ship in port. [00:09:00] Citizenship denied, the reason the Chinese exclusion Act 1882. He had to win this case in district court, provide $250 bail and then win again in the United States Supreme Court, March 28th, 1898. Only from these efforts, he was able to claim his citizenship granted by birthright from the 14th Amendment and gain his freedom. That would not be the last challenge to his being American. My mother suffered similar treatment. She like my great-grandfather, was born in America. In 1942, she was forced with her family and thousands of other Japanese Americans to relocation camps an experience unspoken by her family. [00:10:00] I first learned about Japanese American internment from history books. Executive order 9066 was the command. No due process, citizenship's rights stripped. She was not American enough. Now we have executive order 14160. It is an attack on birthright citizenship. We cannot let this happen. We must stand together. We are a nation of immigrants. What kind of nation are we to be with stateless children? Born to no country. To this, I say no. We as Americans need to embrace each other and [00:11:00] cherish each new life. Born in the USA. Thank you. Harvey Dong: Thank you, Norman. And Annie Lee, will moderate, the following panel, involving campus and community representatives who will be sharing their knowledge and experience. Annie Lee, Esquire is an attorney. She's also the, managing director of policy for Chinese Affirmative Action, and she's also, heavily involved in the birthright citizenship issue. Annie Lee: Thank you so much Harvey for that very warm welcome and thank you again to Norman for your remarks. I think it's incredible that you're speaking up at this moment, to preserve your ancestors' legacy because it impacts not just you and him, but all of us [00:12:00] here. So thank you. As Harvey said, my name is Annie Lee and I have this honor of working with this amazing panel of esteemed guest we have today. So I will ask each of them to introduce themselves. And I will start, because I would love to hear your name, pronouns. Title and organization as well as your personal or professional relationship with the US Immigration System. So my name's Annie. I use she her pronouns. I'm the managing Director of policy at Chinese for Affirmative Action, which is a non-profit based in San Francisco Chinatown. We provide direct services to the monolingual working class Chinese community, and also advocate for policies to benefit all Asian Americans. My relationship with the immigration system is I am the child of two Chinese immigrants who did not speak English. And so I just remember lots of time spent on the phone when I was a kid with INS, and then it became U-S-C-I-S just trying to ask them what happened to [00:13:00] a family member's application for naturalization, for visas so I was the interpreter for them growing up and even today. I will pass it to Letty. Leti Volpp: Hi everybody. Thank you so much, Annie. Thank you Harvey. Thank you, Norman. That was profoundly moving to hear your remarks and I love the way that you framed our conversation, Harvey. I'm Leti Volpp. I am the Robert d and Leslie k Raven, professor of Law and Access to Justice at the Berkeley Law, school. I'm also the director of the campus wide , center for Race and Gender, which is a legacy of the Third World Liberation Front, and the 1999, student movement, that led to the creation of the center. I work on immigration law and citizenship theory, and I am the daughter, second of four, children of my mother who was an immigrant from China, and my father who was an immigrant [00:14:00] from Germany. So I'll pass it. Thank you. Ke Lam: Thank you. Thank you all for being here. Thank you, Norman. So my name's Key. I go by he, him pronouns or Nghiep “Ke” Lam, is my full name. I work for an organization called Asian Prison Support Committee. It's been around for like over two decades now, and it started behind three guys advocating for ethics study, Asian and Pacific Islander history. And then it was starting in San Quent State Prison. All three of them pushed for ethics study, hard and the result is they all was put into solitary confinement. And many years later, after all three got out, was Eddie Zang, Mike Romero and Mike no. And when they got out, Eddie came back and we pushed for ethics study again, and we actually got it started in 2013. And it's been going on to today. Then the programs is called Roots, restoring our Original True Self. So reconnecting with who we are. And one of Eddie's main, mottos that really stuck with me. He said, we need to all connect to our chi, right? And I'm like, okay, I understand what chi is, and he said no. He [00:15:00] said, you need to connect to your culture, your history, which result to equal your identity, who you are as a person. So, the more we study about our history and our culture, like, birthright citizen, it empower us to know, who we are today. Right? And also part of that is to how do we take down the veil of shame in our community, the veil of trauma that's impacting our community as well. We don't talk about issue that impact us like immigration. So I'm a 1.5 generation. So I was born in Vietnam from Chinese family that migrant from China to Vietnam started business after the fall of Vietnam War. We all got kicked out but more than that, I am directly impacted because I am a stranded deportee, somebody that got their, legal status taken away because of criminal conviction. And as of any moment now, I could actually be taken away. So I live in that, right at that threshold of like uncertainty right now. And the people I work with, which are hundreds of people, are fixing that same uncertainty.[00:16:00] Annie Lee: Thank you, Ke. I'm gonna pass it to our panelists who are joining us virtually, including Bun. Can you start and then we'll pass it to Chris after. Bun: Hey everybody, thank you for having me. My name is Bun. I'm the co-director of Asian Prison Support Committee. I'm also, 1.5 generation former incarcerated and under, direct impact of immigration. Christopher Lapinig: Hi everyone. My name is Christopher Lapinig, my pronouns are he, him and Sha. I am a senior staff attorney on the Democracy and National Initiatives Team at Asian Law Caucus, which you may know is the country's first and oldest legal aid in civil rights organization, dedicated to serving, low income immigrant and underserved AAPI communities. In terms of my connection to the immigration system, I am, I also am a beneficiary of a birthright citizenship, and my parents are both immigrants from the Philippines. I was born in New York City. My [00:17:00] extended family spans both in the US and the Philippines. After graduating law school and clerking, my fellowship project was focused on providing litigation and immigration services to, survivors of labor trafficking in the Filipino community. While working at Asian Americans Advancing Justice Los Angeles, I also was engaged in, class action litigation, challenging the first Trump administration's practices, detaining immigrants in the Vietnamese and Cambodian communities. Annie Lee: Thank you, Chris. Thank you Bun. Let's start off by talking about birthright citizenship since it's a big topic these days. On the very, very first day of Trump's administration, he issued a flurry of executive orders, including one that would alter birthright citizenship. But I wanna take us back to the beginning because why do we have this right? It is a very broad right? If you were born in the United States, you are an American citizen. Where does that come from? So I wanna pose the first question to Letty to talk about the [00:18:00] origins of birthright citizenship., Leti Volpp: Very happy to. So what's being fought about is a particular clause in the Constitution and the 14th Amendment, which says, all persons born are naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. Okay, so that's the text. There's been a very long understanding of what this text means, which says that regardless of the immigration status of one's parents, all children born here are entitled to birthright citizenship with three narrow exceptions, which I will explain. So the Trump administration executive order, wants to exclude from birthright citizenship, the children of undocumented immigrants, and the children of people who are here on lawful temporary visas. So for example, somebody here on an [00:19:00] F1 student visa, somebody on a H one B worker visa, somebody here is a tourist, right? And basically they're saying we've been getting this clause wrong for over a hundred years. And I will explain to you why I think they're making this very dubious argument. Essentially when you think about where the 14th amendment came from, in the United States, in the Antebellum era, about 20% of people were enslaved and there were lots of debates about citizenship. Who should be a citizen? Who could be a citizen? And in 1857, the Supreme Court issued a decision in a case called Dread Scott, where they said that no person who was black, whether free or enslaved, could ever be a citizen. The Civil War gets fought, they end slavery. And then the question arose, well, what does this mean for citizenship? Who's a citizen of the United States? And in 1866, Congress [00:20:00] enacts a law called the Civil Rights Act, which basically gave rights to people that were previously denied and said that everybody born in the United States is a birthright citizen. This gets repeated in the 14th Amendment with the very important interpretation of this clause in Norman's great-grandfather's case, the case of Wong Kim Ark. So this came before the Supreme Court in 1898. If you think about the timing of this, the federal government had basically abandoned the reconstruction project, which was the project of trying to newly enfranchised, African Americans in the United States. The Supreme Court had just issued the decision, Plessy versus Ferguson, which basically legitimated the idea that, we can have separate, but equal, as a doctrine of rights. So it was a nation that was newly hostile to the goals of the Reconstruction Congress, and so they had this case come before them, whereas we heard [00:21:00] from Norman, we have his great-grandfather born in San Francisco, Chinatown, traveling back and forth to China. His parents having actually left the United States. And this was basically presented as a test case to the Supreme Court. Where the government tried to argue, similar to what the Trump administration is arguing today, that birthright citizenship, that clause does not guarantee universal birthright citizenship saying that children of immigrants are not subject to the jurisdiction thereof, not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States because their parents are also not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. The Supreme Court took over a year to decide the case. They knew that it would be controversial, and the majority of the court said, this provision is clear. It uses universal language. It's intended to apply to children of all immigrants. One of the things that's interesting about [00:22:00] what the, well I'll let Chris actually talk about what the Trump administration, is trying to do, but let me just say that in the Wong Kim Ark decision, the Supreme Court makes very clear there only three narrow exceptions to who is covered by the 14th Amendment. They're children of diplomats. So for example, if the Ambassador of Germany is in the United States, and, she has a daughter, like her daughter should not become a birthright citizen, right? This is why there's diplomatic immunity. Why, for example, in New York City, there are millions of dollars apparently owed to the city, in parking tickets by ambassadors who don't bother to pay them because they're not actually subject to the jurisdiction in the United States. Okay? Second category, children of Native Americans who are seen as having a sovereign relationship of their own, where it's like a nation within a nation, kind of dynamic, a country within a country. And there were detailed conversations in the congressional debate about the [00:23:00] 14th Amendment, about both of these categories of people. The third category, were children born to a hostile invading army. Okay? So one argument you may have heard people talk about is oh, I think of undocumented immigrants as an invading army. Okay? If you look at the Wong Kim Ark decision, it is very clear that what was intended, by this category of people were a context where the hostile invading army is actually in control of that jurisdiction, right? So that the United States government is not actually governing that space so that the people living in it don't have to be obedient, to the United States. They're obedient to this foreign power. Okay? So the thread between all three of these exceptions is about are you having to be obedient to the laws of the United States? So for example, if you're an undocumented immigrant, you are subject to being criminally prosecuted if you commit a crime, right? Or [00:24:00] you are potentially subjected to deportation, right? You have to obey the law of the United States, right? You are still subject to the jurisdiction thereof. Okay? But the Trump administration, as we're about to hear, is making different arguments. Annie Lee: Thank you so much, Leti for that historical context, which I think is so important because, so many different communities of color have contributed to the rights that we have today. And so what Leti is saying here is that birthright citizenship is a direct result of black liberation and fighting for freedom in the Civil War and making sure that they were then recognized as full citizens. And then reinforced, expanded, by Wong Kim Ark. And now we are all beneficiaries and the vast majority of Americans get our citizenship through birth. Okay? That is true for white people, black people. If you're born here, you get your ci. You don't have to do anything. You don't have to go to court. You don't have to say anything. You are a US citizen. And now as Leti referenced, there's this fringe legal theory that, thankfully we've got lawyers like [00:25:00] Chris who are fighting this. So Chris, you're on the ALC team, one of many lawsuits against the Trump administration regarding this unlawful executive order. Can you tell us a little bit about the litigation and the arguments, but I actually really want you to focus on what are the harms of this executive order? Sometimes I think particularly if you are a citizen, and I am one, sometimes we take what we have for granted and you don't even realize what citizenship means or confers. So Chris, can you talk about the harms if this executive order were to go through? Christopher Lapinig: Yeah. As Professor Volpp sort of explained this executive order really is an assault on a fundamental constitutional right that has existed for more than a hundred years at this point, or, well, about 125 years. And if it is allowed to be implemented, the harms would really be devastating and far reach. So first, you know, children born in the us, the [00:26:00] parents without permanent status, as permissible said, would be rendered effectively stateless, in many cases. And these are of course, children, babies who have never known any other home, yet they would be denied the basic rights of citizen. And so the order targets a vast range of families, and not just undocument immigrants, but also those with work visas, student visas, humanitarian productions like TPS, asylum seekers, fleeing persecution, DACA recipients as well. And a lot of these communities have deep ties to Asian American community. To our history, and of course are, essential part, of our social fabric. In practical terms, children born without birthright citizenship would be denied access to healthcare through Medicaid, through denied access to snap nutritional assistance, even basic IDs like social security numbers, passports. And then as they grow older, they'd be barred from voting, serving on juries and even [00:27:00] working. And then later on in life, they might be, if they, are convicted of a crime and make them deportable, they could face deportation to countries that they never stepped, foot off basically. And so this basically is this executive order threatened at risk, creating exactly what the drafters of the 14th Amendment wanted to prevent the creation of a permanent underclass of people in the United States. It'll just get amplified over time. If you can imagine if there's one generation of people born without citizenship, there will be a second generation born and a third and fourth, and it'll just get amplified over time. And so it truly is just, hard to get your mind around exactly what the impact of this EO would be. Annie Lee: Thanks, Chris. And where are we in the litigation right now? Harvey referenced, a hearing at the Supreme Court on May 15th, but, tell us a little bit about the injunction and the arguments on the merits and when that can, when we can expect [00:28:00] that. Christopher Lapinig: Yeah, so there were a number of lawsuits filed immediately after, the administration issued its exec order on January 20th. Asian Law Caucus we filed with the ACLU Immigrant Rights Project. Literally we were the first lawsuit, literally hours after the executive order was issued. By early February, federal judges across the country had issued nationwide preliminary injunctions blocking implementation of the order. Our case is actually not a nationwide injunction. And so there're basically, I believe three cases that are going up to the Supreme Court. And, the Trump administration appealed to various circuit courts to try to undo these injunctions. But all circuit courts upheld the injunctive relief and and so now the Supreme Court is going to be hearing arguments on May 15th. And so it has not actually ruled on whether or not the executive order is constitutional, but it's going to. I mean, it remains to be seen exactly what they're going to decide but may [00:29:00] 15th is the next date is the big date on our calendar. Annie Lee: Yeah. So the Trump administration is arguing that these judges in a particular district, it's not fair if they get to say that the entire country, is barred from receiving this executive order. Is that procedurally correct. Judges, in order to consider whether to grants an injunction, they have a whole battery of factors that they look at, including one, which is like likelihood of winning on the merits. Because if something is unconstitutional, it's not really great to say, yeah, you can let this executive order go through. And then like later when the court cases finally worked their way, like a year later, pull back from that. And so that's, it's very frustrating to see this argument. And it's also unfair and would be very messy if the states that had republican Attorneys General who did not litigate, why would you allow the executive order to go forward in those red states and not in these blue state? It really, I would say federalism run terribly amuck. Swati Rayasam: [00:30:00] You are tuned in to APEX Express on 94.1 KPFA, 89.3 KPFB in Berkeley,. 88.1. KFCF in Fresno and online@kpfa.org. Annie Lee: But anyway, let's see back off from the actual case because I think what we're really talking about and what Chris has alluded to is, these cases about birthright citizenship, all the immigration policy is essentially determining who belongs here. Who belongs here. That's what immigration policy is at its heart. And we see that the right wing is weaponizing that question, who belongs here? And they are going after very vulnerable populations, undocumented people, people who are formerly incarcerated. So Bun if you can talk about how, is the formerly incarcerated community, like targeted immigrants, targeted for deportation? What is going on with this community that I feel like most people might not know about? Thank [00:31:00] you. Bun: Yes. For our folks that are incarcerated and former incarcerated, we are the easiest target for deportation because we are in custody and in California, CDCR colludes with ICE and on the day that we are to be paroled they're at the door, cuffing us up and taking us to detention. I'm glad to hear Harvey say, this is a time of fear for us and also opportunity. Right now, our whole community, the Southeast Asian community, mainly are very effective with immigration. In the past 25 years, mostly it was the Cambodian community that was being targeted and deported. At this moment, they are targeting, all of the Southeast Asian community, which historically was never deported because of the politics and agreements, of the Vietnamese community. And now the Laos community thats more concerning, that are being targeted for deportation. Trump have opened a new opportunity for us as a community to join [00:32:00] together and understand each other's story, and understand each other's fear. Understand where we're going about immigration. From birthright to crimmagration. A lot of times folks that are under crimmigration are often not spoken about because of our cultural shame, within our own family and also some of our community member felt safe because the political agreements. Now that everybody's in danger, we could stand together and understand each other's issue and support each other because now we could see that history has repeated itself. Again, we are the scapegoat. We are here together fighting the same issue in different circumstances, but the same issue. Annie Lee: But let me follow up. What are these, historical agreements that you're talking about that used to feel like used to at least shield the community that now aren't in place anymore? Bun: Yeah. After the Clinton administration, uh, passed the IRA [immigration reform act] a lot of Southeast Asian nations were asked to [00:33:00] take their nationals back. Even though we as 1.5 generation, which are the one that's mostly impacted by this, had never even stepped into the country. Most of us were born in a refugee camp or we're too young to even remember where they came from. Countries like Cambodian folded right away because they needed the financial aid and whatever, was offering them and immediately a three with a MOU that they will take their citizens since the early two thousands. Vietnam had a stronger agreement, which, they would agree to only take folks that immigrated here after 1995 and anybody before 1995, they would not take, and Laos have just said no until just a few months ago. Laos has said no from when the, uh, the act was passed in 1995, the IRRIRA. Mm-hmm. So the big change we have now is Vietnam had signed a new MOU saying that they will take folks after 1995 [00:34:00] in the first administration and more recently, something that we never thought, happened so fast, was Laos agreeing to take their citizen back. And then the bigger issue about our Laos community is, it's not just Laos folks. It's the Hmong folks, the Myan folks, folks, folks that are still in danger of being returned back 'cause in the Vietnam War, they colluded and supported the Americans in the Vietnam War and were exiled out and kicked out, and were hunted down because of that. So, at this moment, our folks are very in fear, especially our loud folks, not knowing what's gonna happen to 'em. Ke Lam: So for folks that don't know what IRR means it means, illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act. It actually happened after the Oklahoma bombing, which was caused by a US citizen, a white US citizen. Yeah. But immigration law came out of it. That's what's crazy about it. Annie Lee: Can you tell us, how is APSC advocating to protect the community right now because you [00:35:00] are vulnerable? Ke Lam: So we had to censor a lot of our strategies. At first we used to use social media as a platform to show our work and then to support our community. But the government use that as a target to capture our people. So we stopped using social media. So we've been doing a lot of on the ground movement, such as trying to get local officials to do resolutions to push Governor Newsom to party more of our community members. The other thing is we hold pardon workshops, so try and get folks to get, either get a pardon or vacate their sentence. So commute their sentence to where it become misdemeanor is not deportable anymore. Support letters for our folks writing support letters to send to the governor and also to city official, to say, Hey, please help pardon our community. I think the other thing we are actually doing is solidarity work with other organizations, African American community as well as Latin communities because we've been siloed for so long and we've been banned against each other, where people kept saying like, they've taken all our job when I grew up. That's what they told us, right? [00:36:00] But we, reality that's not even true. It was just a wedge against our community. And then so it became the good versus bad narrative. So our advocacy is trying to change it it's called re-storying you know, so retelling our story from people that are impacted, not from people, not from the one percenters in our own community. Let's say like we're all good, do you, are there's parts of our community that like that's the bad people, right? But in reality, it affects us all. And so advocacy work is a lot of different, it comes in a lot of different shapes and forms, but definitely it comes from the community. Annie Lee: Thanks, Ke. You teed me up perfectly because there is such a good versus bad immigrant narrative that takes root and is really hard to fight against. And that's why this administration is targeting incarcerated and formerly incarcerated folks and another group that, are being targeted as people who are accused of crimes, including Venezuelan immigrants who are allegedly part of a gang. So, Leti how is the government deporting [00:37:00] people by simply accusing them of being a part of a gang? Like how is that even possible? Leti Volpp: Yeah, so one thing to think about is there is this thing called due process, right? It's guaranteed under the constitution to all persons. It's not just guaranteed to citizens. What does it mean? Procedural due process means there should be notice, there should be a hearing, there should be an impartial judge. You should have the opportunity to present evidence. You should have the opportunity to cross examinee. You should have the opportunity to provide witnesses. Right? And basically Trump and his advisors are in real time actively trying to completely eviscerate due process for everybody, right? So Trump recently said, I'm doing what I was elected to do, remove criminals from our country. But the courts don't seem to want me to do that. We cannot give everyone a trial because to do so would take without exaggeration, 200 years. And then Stephen Miller said the judicial process is for Americans. [00:38:00] Immediate deportation is for illegal aliens. Okay. Quote unquote. Right. So I think one thing to notice is, as we're hearing from all of our speakers are like the boxes, the categories into which people are put. And what's really disturbing is to witness how once somebody's put in the box of being quote unquote criminal gang banger terrorists, like the American public seems to be like, oh, okay you can do what you want to this person. There's a whole history of due process, which exists in the laws which was created. And all of these early cases actually involved Asian immigrants, right? And so first they were saying there's no due process. And then in a case called Yata versus Fisher, they said actually there is due process in deportation cases, there's regular immigration court proceedings, which accord with all of these measures of due process. There's also a procedure called expedited removal, [00:39:00] which Congress invented in the nineties where they wanted to come up with some kind of very quick way to summarily exclude people. It was motivated by a 60 Minutes episode where they showed people coming to Kennedy Airport, who didn't have any ID or visa or they had what seemed to be fake visas and they were let into the United States. And then they disappeared, right? According to the 60 Minutes episode. So basically Congress invented this procedure of, if you appear in the United States and you have no documents, or you have what an immigration inspector thinks are false documents, they can basically tell you, you can leave without this court hearing. And the only fail safe is what's called a credible fear screening. Where if you say, I want asylum, I fear persecution, I'm worried I might be tortured, then they're supposed to have the screening. And if you pass that screening, you get put in regular removal [00:40:00] proceedings. So before the Trump administration took office, these expedited removal proceedings were happening within a hundred miles of the border against people who could not show that they had been in the United States for more than two weeks. In one of his first executive orders. Trump extended this anywhere in the United States against people who cannot show they've been in the United States for more than two years. So people are recommending that people who potentially are in this situation to carry documentation, showing they've been physically in the United States for over two years. Trump is also using this Alien Enemies Act, which was basically a law Congress passed in 1798. It's only been used three times in US history it's a wartime law, right? So it was used in 1812, World War I, and World War II, and there's supposed to be a declared war between the United States and a foreign nation or government, or [00:41:00] there's an incursion threatened by a foreign nation or government, and the president makes public proclamation that all natives of this hostile nation, 14 and up shall be liable to be restrained and removed as alien enemies. Okay? So we're obviously not at war with the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, right? They have not engaged in some kind of invasion or predatory incursion into the United States, but the Trump administration is claiming that they have and saying things like, oh, they're secretly a paramilitary wing of the Venezuelan government, even as the Venezuelan government is like cracking down on them. It's not a quasi sovereign, entity. There's no diplomatic relationships between Tren de Aragua and any other government. So these are legally and factually baseless arguments. Nonetheless, the administration has been basically taking people from Venezuela on the basis of tattoos. A tattoo of a crown of a [00:42:00] rose, right? Even when experts have said there's no relationship between what Tren de Aragua does and tattoos, right? And basically just kidnapping people and shipping them to the torture prison in El Salvador. As I'm sure you know of the case of Kimber Abrego Garcia, I'm sure we'll hear more about this from Christopher. There's a very small fraction of the persons that have been sent to this prison in El Salvador who actually have any criminal history. And I will say, even if they had a criminal history, nobody should be treated in this manner and sent to this prison, right? I mean, it's unbelievable that they've been sent to this prison allegedly indefinitely. They're paying $6 million a year to hold people there. And then the United States government is saying, oh, we don't have any power to facilitate or effectuate their return. And I think there's a struggle as to what to call this. It's not just deportation. This is like kidnapping. It's rendition. And there are people, there's like a particular person like who's completely [00:43:00] disappeared. Nobody knows if they're alive or dead. There are many people in that prison. People don't know if they're alive or dead. And I'm sure you've heard the stories of people who are gay asylum seekers, right? Who are now in this situation. There are also people that have been sent to Guantanamo, people were sent to Panama, right? And so I think there questions for us to think about like, what is this administration doing? How are they trying to do this in a spectacular fashion to instill fear? As we know as well, Trump had said oh, like I think it would be great when he met with Bukele if you build four more or five more facilities. I wanna house homegrown people in El Salvador, right? So this is all the more importance that we stick together, fight together, don't, as key was saying, don't let ourselves be split apart. Like we need a big mass coalition right? Of people working together on this. Annie Lee: So thank you leti and I think you're absolutely right. These Venezuelans were kidnapped [00:44:00] in the middle of the night. I mean, 2:00 AM 3:00 AM pulled out of bed, forced to sign documents they did not understand because these documents were only available in English and they speak Spanish, put on planes sent to El Salvador, a country they've never been to. The government didn't even have to prove anything. They did not have to prove anything, and they just snatch these people and now they're disappeared. We do have, for now the rule of law. And so Chris, there are judges saying that, Kimber Abrego Garcia has to be returned. And despite these court orders, the administration is not complying. So where does that leave us, Chris, in terms of rule of law and law in general? Christopher Lapinig: Yeah. So, I'm gonna make a little personal. So I graduated from Yale Law School in 2013, and you might know some of my classmates. One of my classmates is actually now the Vice President of the United States. Oh man. [00:45:00] Bless you. As well as the second lady, Usha Vance. And a classmate of mine, a good friend Sophia Nelson, who's a trans and queer, was recently on, I believe CNN answering a question about, I believe JD Vice President Vance, was asked about the administration's sort of refusal to comply with usual orders. Yeah. As we're talking about here and JD had said something like, well, courts, judges can't tell the president what he can't do, and sophia, to their credit, said, you know, I took constitutional law with JD, and, we definitely read Marbury Versus Madison together, and that is the semial sort of Supreme Court case that established that the US Supreme Court is the ultimate decider, arbiter, interpreter, of the US Constitution. And so is basically saying, I know JD knows better. He's lying essentially, in all of his [00:46:00] communications about, judicial orders and whether or not a presidential administration has to comply , with these orders. So, to get to your question though, it is of course unprecedented. Really. It is essentially, you know, it's not, if we not already reached. The point of a constitutional crisis. It is a constitutional crisis. I think it's become clear to many of us that, democracy in the US has operated in large part, and has relied on, on, on the good faith in norms, that people are operating good faith and that presidents will comply when, a federal judge issues an injunction or a decision. It kind of leaves us in an interesting, unprecedented situation. And it means that, lawyers, we will continue to litigate and, go to court, but we can't, lawyers will not save the country or, immigrants or communities. We need to think extensively and creatively. [00:47:00] About how to ensure, that the rule of law is preserved because, this administration is not, abiding by the longstanding norms of compliance and so we have to think about, protests, advocacy, legislatively. I don't have the answers necessarily, but we can't rely on the courts to fix these problems really. Annie Lee: Oof. That was very real, Chris. Thank you. But I will say that when there is resistance, and we've seen it from students who are speaking up and advocating for what they believe is right and just including Palestinian Liberation, that there is swift retaliation. And I think that's partly because they are scared of student speech and movement and organizing. But this is a question to all of you. So if not the courts and if the administration is being incredibly retaliatory, and discriminatory in terms of viewpoint discrimination, in people and what people are saying and they're scouring our social [00:48:00] media like, Ke warns, like what can everyday people do to fight back? That's for all of you. So I don't know who, which of you wants to take it first? Ke Lam: Oh man. I say look at history, right? Even while this new president, I wanna say like, this dude is a convicted felon, right? Don't be surprised at why we country is in the way it is, because this dude's a convicted felon, a bad business person, right? And only care about the billionaires, you know? So I'm not surprised how this country's ending up the way it is 'cause it is all about money. One way that we can stand up is definitely band together, marched on the streets. It's been effective. You look at the civil right movement, that's the greatest example. Now you don't have to look too far. We can actually, when we come together, they can't fight us all. Right? It is, and this, it's like you look at even nature in the cell. When things band together, the predators cannot attack everyone. Right? They probably could hit a few of us, but in the [00:49:00] long run, we could change the law. I think another thing is we, we, as the people can march to the courts and push the courts to do the job right, despite what's going on., We had judges that been arrested for doing the right thing, right? And so, no matter what, we have to stand strong just despite the pressure and just push back. Annie Lee: Thanks, Ke. Chris? Christopher Lapinig: What this administration is doing is you know, straight out of the fascist playbook. They're working to, as we all know, shock and awe everyone, and make Americans feel powerless. Make them feel like they have no control, make them feel overwhelmed. And so I think first and foremost, take care of yourself , in terms of your health, in terms of your physical health, your mental health. Do what you can to keep yourself safe and healthy and happy. And do the same for your community, for your loved ones, your friends and family. And then once you've done that do what you can in terms of your time, treasure, [00:50:00] talent to, to fight back. Everyone has different talents, different levels of time that they can afford. But recognize that this is a marathon and not necessarily a sprint because we need everyone, in this resistance that we can get. Annie Lee: Thank you, Chris. Leti Volpp: There was a New Yorker article called, I think it was How to Be a Dissident which said, before recently many Americans, when you ask them about dissidents, they would think of far off countries. But they interviewed a lot of people who'd been dissidents in authoritarian regimes. And there were two, two things in that article that I'm taking with me among others. One of them said that in surveying like how authoritarian regimes are broken apart, like only 3.5% of the population has to oppose what's going on. The other thing was that you should find yourself a political home where you can return to frequently. It's almost like a religious or [00:51:00] spiritual practice where you go and you get refreshed and you're with like-minded people. And so I see this event, for example as doing that, and that we all need to find and nurture and foster spaces like this. Thank you. Annie Lee: Bun, do you have any parting words? Bun: Yeah. Like Ke said, to fight back, getting together, understanding issues and really uplifting, supporting, urging our own communities, to speak Up. You know, there's folks that can't speak out right now because of fear and danger, but there are folks here that can speak out and coming here learning all our situation really give the knowledge and the power to speak out for folks that can't speak down [unclear] right now. So I appreciate y'all Annie Lee: love that bun. I was gonna say the same thing. I feel like there is a special obligation for those of us who are citizens, citizens cannot be deported. Okay? Citizens have special rights based [00:52:00] on that status. And so there's a special responsibility on those of us who can speak, and not be afraid of retaliation from this government. I would also urge you all even though it's bleak at the federal level, we have state governments, we have local governments. You have a university here who is very powerful. And you have seen, we've seen that the uni that the administration backs down, sometimes when Harvard hit back, they back down and that means that there is a way to push the administration, but it does require you all putting pressure on your schools, on your local leaders, on your state leaders to fight back. My boss actually, Vin taught me this. You know, you think that politicians, lead, politicians do not lead politicians follow. Politicians follow and you all lead when you go out further, you give them cover to do the right thing. And so the farther you push and the more you speak out against this administration, the more you give them courage to do the right thing. And so you absolutely have to do that. A pardon [00:53:00] is critical. It is critical for people who are formerly incarcerated to avoid the immigration system and deportation. And so do that. Talk to your family, talk to your friends. My parents, despite being immigrants, they're kinda old school. Okay guys, they're like, you know, birthright citizenship does seem kind of like a loophole. Why should people like get like citizenship? I'm like, mom, we, I am a birthright citizen. Like, um, And I think for Asian Americans in particular, there is such a rich history of Asian American civil rights activism that we don't talk about enough, and maybe you do at Berkeley with ethnic studies and professors like Mike Chang. But, this is totally an interracial solidarity movement. We helped bring about Wong Kim Ark and there are beneficiaries of every shade of person. There's Yik wo, and I think about this all the time, which is another part of the 14th Amendment equal protection. Which black Americans fought for that in San Francisco. [00:54:00] Chinatown made real what? What does equal protection of the laws even mean? And that case was Seminole. You've got Lao versus Nichols. Another case coming out of San Francisco. Chinatown about English learner rights, the greatest beneficiary of Lao v Nichols, our Spanish speakers, they're Spanish speaking children in schools who get access to their education regardless of the language they speak. And so there are so many moments in Asian American history that we should be talking about, that we should educate our parents and our families about, because this is our moment. Now, this is another one of those times I wanna pass it to Mike and Harvey for questions, and I'm so excited to hear about them. Mike and Harvey: Wow, thank you so much. That's a amazing, panel and thank you for facilitating annie's wanna give it of a great value in terms of that spiritual home aspect. Norm how does your great grandfather's , experience in resistance, provide help for us [00:55:00] today? Norman Wong: Well, I think he was willing to do it. It only took one, if no one did it, this, we wouldn't be having the discussion because most of us would've never been here. And we need to come together on our common interests and put aside our differences because we all have differences. And if we tried, to have it our way for everything, we'll have it no way for us. We really need to, to bond and bind together and become strong as a people. And I don't mean as a racial or a national group. Mm-hmm. I mean, we're Americans now. We're Americans here think of us as joining with all Americans to make this country the way it's supposed to be. The way [00:56:00] we grew up, the one that we remember, this is not the America I grew up believing in. I'm glad he stood up. I'm proud that he did that. He did that. Him doing that gave me something that I've never had before. A validation of my own life. And so yes, I'm proud of him. Wong Kim Ark is for all of us. It's not for me to own. Yeah. Wow. Really not. Thank you so much. Wong Kim Ark is for all of us. And, and , talking about the good , that we have here and, the optimism that Harvey spoke about, the opportunity, even in a moment of substantial danger. Thank you so much everybody. Mike and Harvey: This was amazing and really appreciate sharing this space with you and, building community and solidarity. Ke Lam: But is there any, can I leave with a chant before we close off? Oh yeah. Oh yeah. Yeah. Thank you so much. So this is a chant that we use on the ground all the time. You guys probably heard it. When I said when we fight, you guys said we [00:57:00] win when we fight. We win when we fight, we win. When we fight, we win up. Swati Rayasam: Thanks so much for tuning into APEX Express. Please check out our website at kpfa.org/program/apexexpress to find out more about the show tonight and to find out how you can take direct action. We thank all of you listeners out there. Keep resisting, keep organizing, keep creating, and sharing your visions with the world. Your voices are important. APEX Express is produced by Miko Lee, along with Jalena Keene-Lee, Ayame Keene-Lee, Preeti Mangala Shekar, Anuj Vaida, Cheryl Truong, Isabel Li, Ravi Grover, and me Swati Rayasam. Thank you so much to the team at KPFA for their support, and have a good [00:58:00] night.   The post APEX Express – 6.26.25-Deport. Exclude. Revoke. Imprison – Wong Kim Ark is for All of Us appeared first on KPFA.

Director: Gerard Bush, Christopher WenzWriters: Gerard Bush, Christopher WenzStars: Janelle Monae, Eric Lange, Jenna Malone, Jack Huston, Gabourey SidabeOur guest tonight is a writer, social media junkie, podcaster, publisher and aspiring novelist and writer for FabulizeMag.com, it's Erika Hardison.Recommendations:Erika - Killadelphia by Rodney BarnesEmily- Jordan PeeleBen - Eve's BayouJeremy - She Loves to Cook and she Loves to EatSign up to support Progressively Horrified on Patreon for as little as $5 a month and get bonus episodes! https://www.patreon.com/c/progressivelyhorrified Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Mel, De, & Tiffany! 01:50: Beverly Jenkins' Wild Rain is the Pitch War Winner! 16:30: Rebel by Beverly Jenkins 20:00: Everyone In Netflix's Piper Rockelle Doc 'Bad Influence' Should Feel Deeply Ashamed 23:08: Amongst Slavery: Free Blacks in Antebellum and Colonial America & The Talented 10th 26:42: The History of HBCUs 31:23: Our Beverly Jenkins Go-to's Topaz, Indigo, Le Veq Family Series,  39:20: Black Men Were Cowboys Before It Was Cool 44:07: What We Are Reading: Rifts and Refrains by Tiye, The Trees by Percival Everrett, Dom by S.J. Tilly 50:23: How to Sign Up for a Library Card From Home 53:57: Where to find your hosts!   Have you read the book? Tell us what you think about it on social media by checking out our carrd! (https://nerdgasmnoire.carrd.co)   Make sure you join our new discord channel and hang out with the community! https://discord.gg/7DqMZSy ENJOY!   Hosts: Melissa, Maria Producer: De, Jamie, JP, Maria, Melissa, Storm Writing Team: Melissa, Maria Editor: De Audio Production: De Theme Song: Dreamy  provided by Mike (Pound 4 Pound Podcast) & Marion Moore from ALBM Production Design: JP Fairfield Social Media: Melissa, Storm  

Charleston's cobblestone streets fascinate residents and visitors alike, inspiring visions of pirates and horse-drawn carriages rattling through ye olde colonial capital. Imported from Europe as ship ballast since the 1670s, these roundish stones provided the city's earliest street covering, but the campaign to pave local thoroughfares with cobbles didn't commence until the early 1800s. To better understand the traveling conditions endured by early Charlestonians, let's take a stroll through paving history from colonial times to the American Civil War.

“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”―George Orwell,1984It isn't that one crazy, alleged animal-abusing Democrat who just introduced articles of impeachment against Trump who will define Resistance 2.0.It's the more serious threat that looms ahead should the Democrats take the House next year.Steve Bannon has become the harbinger. He predicted it in 2018, and he's predicting it now.He's right. They have no other plan for America, not in the four years Trump was in power the first time, not for Biden's four years, and not now. They have one directive: to purge Trump and MAGA from utopia.It's beginning to look a lot like 2016, only this time I'm watching from the other side of the door. I escaped, but only just barely. I sometimes look back at who I was then and scratch my head. How could I have been that easily manipulated? How could I have believed them?I believed it all. I read every book on Putin. I hung on every word that came out of Rachel Maddow's mouth. I believed the New York Times had our best interests at heart. I could not believe or even imagine that the people I trusted would eventually expose themselves as weaponized, partisan propaganda machines.I try to connect with the Democratic centrist I used to be because that is still where most of my friends and family are, not to mention all of American culture and most institutions. They live in a completely separate reality, and I live in this one.The only comparison I can make takes us back to just before the last Civil War. One reality not only justified slavery but also existed inside a utopian Antebellum paradise of Southern Belles and wealthy plantations, but also believed ending slavery was an existential crisis they could not survive. How else to convince so many to go fight and die for a cause?The pre-war propaganda whipped both sides into a frenzy that would eventually take them to war. From War History Online:In the decade prior to the Civil War, the American press began flourishing and evolved rapidly in terms of technology, output, and distribution. Meanwhile, the number of newspapers expanded and a new style of weekly pictorial publications filled with comics and illustrations became popular and widespread in northern and southern states.This mass distribution of picture-based media was eagerly and voraciously consumed by the American public. It also proved ideal for distributing and disseminating propaganda and successfully pushed divisive ideologies from both sides of the divide.Sound familiar?When the Union Army won the war, however, their utopian paradise in the South was upended, which kicked off episodes of mass hysteria that would eventually lead to Jim Crow laws, the KKK, segregation, and worse.It's easy, especially for the modern-day Left, to see those crimes against humanity as a disease that lives inside of white people, the sin of racism, a war they believe they're still fighting today.The side that suddenly had all of the wealth and power after the rise of Silicon Valley and the marriage between the Obama coalition and culture was lacking only one thing: spiritual reliefI was part of it. I was a “woke” blogger, though we did not use that word then, and many don't dare use it now. What mattered to me was elevating non-whites and other marginalized groups in the film industry. That gave me, a white woman, a sense of purpose, a deeper meaning for my work and my life, something I'd never felt before.But to be “woke” as translated for white people means believing you share your country and your culture with racists afflicted with “white fragility.” At first, it was an idea that spread, but by 2020, it was mandated.It makes sense when you consider our country expanding onto the new frontier of the internet, where the free market, cities, towns, and demographic groups mattered less than this giant swirling soup of humanity we suddenly had to make sense of. What better way than to divide us up into easily recognizable categories?2016 was, to all of us, a sign that the Confederacy had returned, especially since Trump was now a prominent figure on Twitter, just like Obama had been. We saw his win as an act of war. We were to obstruct, block, shun, attack, or resist. He was not to be allowed to govern, which would ensure his destruction, or so we thought.What we didn't do, however, was listen to the voters. They were invisible to us because we wrote them off as angry white deplorables clinging to their guns and religion. They don't deserve representation. No, it wasn't we who failed. It was Trump who invaded us and is now oppressing us.We couldn't see things any other way. Because we were the “good” side and those people over there had to be the “bad side.” The nation's first Black president, we believed, was hated by white Americans, and now, they were coming to dismantle his legacy, our utopia, and Make America White Again. They still believe that. It is existential to them, which explains the ongoing need to purge their utopia of threatening people.Those same realities that decided who got to stay and who had to go also existed in George Orwell's 1984. What is “cancel culture” anyway, but virtual gulags?Anyone who didn't agree with the reversed hierarchy was out. You couldn't just go along with it; you had to believe it. You had to love Big Brother.Orwell had it so right when he wrote in that last paragraph, “He was in the public dock, confessing everything, implicating everybody.”I could feel it, the mass dehumanization. It didn't sit right with me. I was disgusted by how my side was behaving, but it wasn't until I walked in the shoes of Trump supporters that I knew for sure that this really was a Civil War.No, Trump supporters were not getting lynched or put in concentration camps or a gulag. But the mechanisms at play are the same. I've never seen people in America feel emboldened to attack another group this way, but no doubt it has happened many times throughout our history.To justify that they are the “good” side, they must continue to find victims of oppression based on skin color or gender identity. They don't seem to care that much about the hollowed-out, torn-down neighborhoods in the middle of the country, where people of all skin colors are suffering. No, it has to be those who come from other countries, helpless and faceless, defined only by one thing: the color of their skin. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit sashastone.substack.com/subscribe

What is the impact of historical research on our faith? Dr. Christopher Jones examines Brother James Covel's life and choices and how his life inspires belief in grace and a message of hope.SHOW NOTES/TRANSCRIPTSEnglish: https://tinyurl.com/podcastDC217ENFrench: https://tinyurl.com/podcastDC217FRGerman: https://tinyurl.com/podcastDC217DEPortuguese: https://tinyurl.com/podcastDC217PTSpanish: https://tinyurl.com/podcastDC217ESYOUTUBEhttps://youtu.be/ty4CrredNj0ALL EPISODES/SHOW NOTESfollowHIM website: https://www.followHIMpodcast.comFREE PDF DOWNLOADS OF followHIM QUOTE BOOKSNew Testament: https://tinyurl.com/PodcastNTBookOld Testament: https://tinyurl.com/PodcastOTBookWEEKLY NEWSLETTERhttps://tinyurl.com/followHIMnewsletterSOCIAL MEDIAInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/followHIMpodcastFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/followhimpodcastTIMECODE00:00 - Part 1 - Dr. Christopher Jones01:45 Dr. Jones previews this episode03:10 Dr. Jones's bio05:01 Becoming a Historian10:06 Four missionaries and an important conversion16:10 Three branches transplanted to Ohio18:43 D&C 38:32 The Lord alleviates fear21:15 Insights from the Apostles22:07 James Covill/Covel26:17 Changing our opinion of James Covel27:18 Backgrounds of D&C 37 and D&C 38 28:18 D&C 37:1-4 - Gather to the Ohio29:45 D&C 38:1-3, 32 God reassures and promises an endowment35:25 A conference at Fayette37:21 What we had wrong about James Covel46:35 What is Antebellum? And more Covel discoveries51:45 Why Methodist vs. Baptist matters for James Covel53:23 D&C 38:26 - A parable and baptism debates57:19 Methodism experiences changes1:00:37 Final words to James Covel1:04:51 Comfort for those that have left the fold1:06:56 The end of James Covel's earthly story1:09:04 Application of James Covel's story01:12:23  - End of Part I - Dr. Christopher JonesThanks to the followHIM team:Steve & Shannon Sorensen: Cofounder, Executive Producer, SponsorDavid & Verla Sorensen: SponsorsDr. Hank Smith: Co-hostJohn Bytheway: Co-hostDavid Perry: ProducerKyle Nelson: Marketing, SponsorLisa Spice: Client Relations, Editor, Show NotesJamie Neilson: Social Media, Graphic DesignWill Stoughton: Video EditorKrystal Roberts: Translation Team, English & French Transcripts, WebsiteAriel Cuadra: Spanish TranscriptsAmelia Kabwika: Portuguese TranscriptsHeather Barlow: Communications Director"Let Zion in Her Beauty Rise" by Marshall McDonaldhttps://www.marshallmcdonaldmusic.com

Stories we watch and read often only show it from one perspective, very often excluding those that truly made all the difference. In Big Jim and the White Boy, a graphic novel that reimagines the Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, we get to experience the journey from the perspective of Jim and centers on his experiences with his sidekick Huck. Author David F. Walker and artist Marcus Kwame Anderson join us to talk about all of the inspirations, ambitions, love and strength of Big Jim. LISTEN NOW!Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/for-all-nerds-show--5649266/support.

Early voting is underway in Louisiana with four constitutional amendments on the ballot. Amendment 2, which concerns the state income tax, is already causing confusion among voters. Capitol Access reporter Brooke Thorington joins us to break down the ballot and the intricacies behind the proposals. A new exhibit at the New Orleans Jazz Museum explores one of New Orleans' most influential institutions and its pivotal role in shaping the city's cultural and musical legacy. “Economy Hall: The Hidden History of a Free Black Brotherhood” shows how free men of color formed a thriving intellectual community in the Antebellum era.David Kunian, curator of the New Orleans Jazz Museum, tells us more.The City of Baton Rouge will host  the first Professional Pickleball Tournament in Louisiana. The series will be held from April 4 to April 6at the Stacks Pickleball sports complex. And with the growing popularity of the sport, the event promises to be a big draw and have a large economic impact. Jason Suitt, the director of sports development at Visit Baton Rouge's,, and Ethan Pippitone, a competitive pickleballer in New Orleans, tell us more about the sport and the upcoming event.—Today's episode of Louisiana Considered was hosted by Karen Henderson. Our managing producer is Alana Schreiber. We receive production and technical support from Garrett Pittman, Adam Vos and our assistant producer, Aubry Procell. You can listen to Louisiana Considered Monday through Friday at noon and 7 p.m. It's available on Spotify, Google Play and wherever you get your podcasts. Louisiana Considered wants to hear from you! Please fill out our pitch line to let us know what kinds of story ideas you have for our show. And while you're at it, fill out our listener survey! We want to keep bringing you the kinds of conversations you'd like to listen to.Louisiana Considered is made possible with support from our listeners. Thank you!

When we think of slavery in Early America, we often think about the plantations and economies of the South. But did you know that slavery was also deeply entrenched in New York City? Did you know that Africans and African Americans helped New York City confront slavery, freedom, and racism in the Early American Republic and Antebellum periods? Leslie M. Harris, a professor at Northwestern University and author of In the Shadow of Slavery: African Americans in New York City, 1626-1863, joins us to explore the history of Africans and African Americans in early New York City. Leslie's Website | Book  Show Notes: https://www.benfranklinsworld.com/405   RECOMMENDED NEXT EPISODES

When we think of slavery in Early America, we often think about the plantations and economies of the South. But did you know that slavery was also deeply entrenched in New York City? Did you know that Africans and African Americans helped New York City confront slavery, freedom, and racism in the Early American Republic and Antebellum periods? Leslie M. Harris, a professor at Northwestern University and author of In the Shadow of Slavery: African Americans in New York City, 1626-1863, joins us to explore the history of Africans and African Americans in early New York City. Leslie's Website | Book  Show Notes: https://www.benfranklinsworld.com/405   RECOMMENDED NEXT EPISODES

Al & Val are on Cloud 9 after this super sporty movie!Cloud 9 (January 17, 2014)IMDB WikipediaDirected by Paul Hoen (Luck of the Irish, Tru Confessions, You Wish!, Eddie's Million Dollar Cookoff, Read it and Weep, CGOW, Dadnapped, Camp Rock 2, Let it Shine, How to Build a Better Boy, ZOMBIES 1-3)Written by Justin Ware (The Pool Boys, Bloodsucking Bastards, Hell Den)Starring: Dove Cameron as Kayla Morgan (Descendants 1-3, Liv & Maddie, Dumplin, Schmigadoon, Big Nate, music videos)Luke Benward as Will Cloud (Minutemen, Girl Vs. Monster, We Were Soldiers, Because of Winn Dixie, Dear John, Good Luck Charlie, Girl Meets World, Criminal Minds)Mike C. Manning as Nick Swift (Youthful Daze, Money Heist, Days of Our Lives, The Bay)Kiersey Clemons as Skye Saylor (Austin & Ally, Dope, Extant, Transparent, Neighbors 2, Hearts Beat Loud, Angie Tribeca, Easy, Lady and the Tramp, Antebellum, Zach Snyder's Justice League, Fairfax, The Flash, Monarch: Legacy of Monsters)Amy Farrington as Andrea (Hatching Pete, SWAT, character actor)Patrick Fabian as Richard Morgan (Twitches, Twitches Too, Joan of Arcadia, Better Call Saul)Andrew Caldwell as Sam (Randy Cunningham: 9th Grade Ninja, iZombie, Henry Danger, The Matrix: Resurrections)Dillon Lane as Burke (Bucket and Skinner's Epic Adventures, I Think You Should Leave)Victoria Moroles as Pia (Teen Wolf, Liv & Maddie, Plan B, Never Have I Ever)Jeffrey Nordling as Sebastian Swift (Working Girl, Journey to the Center of the Earth, Quiz Show, D3: The Mighty Ducks, Melrose Place, Once and Again, Providence, Flight 93, Flicka, Dirt, 24, Desperate Housewives, Sully, Nashville, The Man in the High Castle, Big Little Lies, Walker, So Help Me Todd)Kenda Benward as Madeline Morgan (Dadnapped, stopped acting in 2018)Carlon Jeffery as Dink (A.N.T. Farm - stopped acting in 2020)Synopsis: A girl who frequently snowboards is forced to train with a guy, an ex-champion of the sport, after an unexpected event. However, she has to prove to him that she is a true professional.Fun Facts: Shaun White and Asheley Tisdale are executive producersNext Movie: Zapped ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

In this episode of the Valley Today, we feature on the Clarke County Historical Association (CCHA), where we delve into the engaging programs, ongoing projects, and pivotal historical preservation efforts shaping the heart of Berryville/Clarke County. Guided by the ever-enthusiastic Executive Director Nathan Stalvey, CCHA continues to bring history to life in exciting and educational ways. As part of our Tourism Tuesday series, we reconnect with Nathan to catch up on the latest from CCHA. Nathan excitedly announces an upcoming lecture titled 'A Story in Threads: The Clothing of Enslaved Women in the Antebellum South,' featuring Cheyney McKnight—a renowned speaker and historian. The lecture will focus on the daily lives and clothing of enslaved and free women during the Antebellum period. The event is scheduled for February 23rd at the The Barns of Rose Hill, with tickets available on CCHA's website. One of the cornerstones of CCHA's mission is to educate the public, particularly through unique and dynamic topics that spark curiosity, such as local history or the evolution of baseball in the 20th century. As Nathan succinctly puts it, 'one of our guiding ideas is let's have people take away something they didn't know before.' Click here to learn more about this talk. Nathan shares updates on the Mill Dam project, an essential preservation effort ensuring the continued operation of the Burwell Morgan Mill. This extensive restoration work, involving cooperation with the local Powhatan School, aims to solidify and preserve the historic mill dam, which is crucial for the mill's functionality. In an exciting development, CCHA has completed the extensive project of digitizing the Clarke Courier newspapers from the late 1860s to 2009. Now available online, these archives are keyword-searchable, offering invaluable resources for researchers and history enthusiasts alike. Aside from recognizing the Mill Dam efforts, Nathan looks forward to a busy spring filled with educational programs and community events, such as the popular trivia nights and specific talks on various historical topics, further fostering community engagement and education. Save the date for 'Art at the Mill,' opening on April 26th in conjunction with Garden Club Week. This event showcases art from over 250 local and regional artists, with a portion of the sales benefiting CCHA, further supporting their historical and educational efforts. Membership to CCHA offers significant benefits, including discounts on various events and exclusive talks. The funds raised through memberships and events like 'Art at the Mill' are critical for maintaining and preserving Clark County's rich history. For more information on upcoming events, programs, and to explore the newly digitized archives, visit clarkhistory.org. Stay connected with CCHA through their active social media channels to keep abreast of the latest updates, highlights from their collections, and more.

Before the American Civil War, Black opera singer Elizabeth Taylor Greenfield reigned supreme on Northern stages—even performing at Buckingham Palace. Novelist Tiffany L. Warren joins us this week to talk about the Beyoncé of the Antebellum, who features as the star of Tiffany's new novel The Unexpected Diva. Buy a copy of The Unexpected Diva by Tiffany L. Warren. — Sign up for the Vulgar History mailing list! — Get 15% off all the gorgeous jewellery and accessories at common.era.com/vulgar or go to commonera.com and use code VULGAR at checkout — Get Vulgar History merch at vulgarhistory.com/store (best for US shipping) and vulgarhistory.redbubble.com (better for international shipping) — Support Vulgar History on Patreon  — Vulgar History is an affiliate of Bookshop.org, which means that a small percentage of any books you click through and purchase will come back to Vulgar History as a commission. Use this link to shop there and support Vulgar History. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Matt Atkinson, Gettysburg National Military Park R. E. Lee stands today as one of the most influential military leaders in world history. But what were his upbringing, education and experiences that molded the man? Join Ranger Matt Atkinson and explore Lee's life before the Civil War. This lecture was originally released on February 18, 2023 and is being re-released now as part of our "Classic Rewind" season.  Support the Show by: Becoming a Patron- https://www.patreon.com/addressinggettysburg Pepping-up with Little Ground Top- www.addressinggettysburg.com/cafe Grabbing some merch- https://www.addressinggettysburg.com/shop Getting a book- https://www.addressinggettysburg.com/books Joining our book club. Email addressinggettysburgbookclub@gmail.com Joining our Film Club- AGFilmClub1863@gmail.com Supporting Our Sponsors: Mike Scott Voice- https://www.mikescottvoice.com Seminary Ridge Museum- https://www.seminaryridgemuseum.org/ For the Historian- Mention us for 20% off retail sales (in store) plus free shipping (online)- https://www.forthehistorian.com Buy Billy Webster's Music- Billy Webster arranged and performed the rendition of "Garryowen" that you hear at the end of the show. https://billysongs.com "Garryowen" by Billy Webster  

In Missiology Reimagined: The Missions Theology of the Nineteenth-Century African American Missionary (Pickwick, 2024), Kent Michael Shaw I examines the lives and theology of early African American missionaries of the Antebellum and Reconstruction era. The enslaved and formerly enslaved constructed a hermeneutic and interpreted the sacred text through a lens that contradicted the enslaver's version of Christianity. They engaged Scripture on their own terms and embraced a theology of mission that compelled them to risk death and re-enslavement to pursue a global mandate from God. These pioneering missionaries were not only mission workers but missiologists. The reader will discover an applied missiology with relevance not only for the African American church of that day but for the church as a whole today. Dave Broucek is a retired cross-cultural missionary/coordinator of continuing education/international ministries director, having served on the staff of two faith-based nonprofits, The Evangelical Alliance Mission (TEAM) and South America Mission (SAM). He holds a PhD in Intercultural Studies from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Deerfield, Illinois. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/african-american-studies

In Missiology Reimagined: The Missions Theology of the Nineteenth-Century African American Missionary (Pickwick, 2024), Kent Michael Shaw I examines the lives and theology of early African American missionaries of the Antebellum and Reconstruction era. The enslaved and formerly enslaved constructed a hermeneutic and interpreted the sacred text through a lens that contradicted the enslaver's version of Christianity. They engaged Scripture on their own terms and embraced a theology of mission that compelled them to risk death and re-enslavement to pursue a global mandate from God. These pioneering missionaries were not only mission workers but missiologists. The reader will discover an applied missiology with relevance not only for the African American church of that day but for the church as a whole today. Dave Broucek is a retired cross-cultural missionary/coordinator of continuing education/international ministries director, having served on the staff of two faith-based nonprofits, The Evangelical Alliance Mission (TEAM) and South America Mission (SAM). He holds a PhD in Intercultural Studies from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Deerfield, Illinois. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

In Missiology Reimagined: The Missions Theology of the Nineteenth-Century African American Missionary (Pickwick, 2024), Kent Michael Shaw I examines the lives and theology of early African American missionaries of the Antebellum and Reconstruction era. The enslaved and formerly enslaved constructed a hermeneutic and interpreted the sacred text through a lens that contradicted the enslaver's version of Christianity. They engaged Scripture on their own terms and embraced a theology of mission that compelled them to risk death and re-enslavement to pursue a global mandate from God. These pioneering missionaries were not only mission workers but missiologists. The reader will discover an applied missiology with relevance not only for the African American church of that day but for the church as a whole today. Dave Broucek is a retired cross-cultural missionary/coordinator of continuing education/international ministries director, having served on the staff of two faith-based nonprofits, The Evangelical Alliance Mission (TEAM) and South America Mission (SAM). He holds a PhD in Intercultural Studies from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Deerfield, Illinois. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

In Missiology Reimagined: The Missions Theology of the Nineteenth-Century African American Missionary (Pickwick, 2024), Kent Michael Shaw I examines the lives and theology of early African American missionaries of the Antebellum and Reconstruction era. The enslaved and formerly enslaved constructed a hermeneutic and interpreted the sacred text through a lens that contradicted the enslaver's version of Christianity. They engaged Scripture on their own terms and embraced a theology of mission that compelled them to risk death and re-enslavement to pursue a global mandate from God. These pioneering missionaries were not only mission workers but missiologists. The reader will discover an applied missiology with relevance not only for the African American church of that day but for the church as a whole today. Dave Broucek is a retired cross-cultural missionary/coordinator of continuing education/international ministries director, having served on the staff of two faith-based nonprofits, The Evangelical Alliance Mission (TEAM) and South America Mission (SAM). He holds a PhD in Intercultural Studies from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Deerfield, Illinois. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

On July 22, 1847, a group of about forty refugees entered the Salt Lake Valley. Among them were three enslaved men, two of whom shared the religion, Mormonism, that had caused them to flee. The valley was also home to members of the Ute tribe, who would sometimes barter captive women and children to Spanish colonizers. Thus, the question of whether the Latter-day Saints would accept or reject slavery in their new Zion confronted them on the day they first arrived. Five years later, after Utah had become an American territory, its legislature was prodded to take up the question then roiling the nation: would they be slave or free? George D. Watt, the official reporter for the 1852 legislative session, reported debates and speeches in Pitman shorthand. They remained in their original format, virtually untouched, for more than one hundred and fifty years, until LaJean Purcell Carruth transcribed them. In this eye-opening volume This Abominable Slavery: Race, Religion, and the Battle over Human Bondage in Antebellum Utah (Oxford University Press, 2024), Carruth, Dr. Christopher Rich, and Dr. W. Paul Reeve draw extensively on these new sources to chronicle the session, during which the legislature passed two important statutes: one that legally transformed African American slaves into "servants" but did not pass the condition of servitude on to their children and another that authorized twenty-year indentures for enslaved Native Americans. This Abominable Slavery places these debates within the context of the nation's growing sectional divide and contextualizes the meaning of these laws in the lives of Black enslaved people and Native American indentured servants. In doing so, it sheds new light on race, religion, slavery, and unfree labor in the antebellum period. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose new book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/african-american-studies

On July 22, 1847, a group of about forty refugees entered the Salt Lake Valley. Among them were three enslaved men, two of whom shared the religion, Mormonism, that had caused them to flee. The valley was also home to members of the Ute tribe, who would sometimes barter captive women and children to Spanish colonizers. Thus, the question of whether the Latter-day Saints would accept or reject slavery in their new Zion confronted them on the day they first arrived. Five years later, after Utah had become an American territory, its legislature was prodded to take up the question then roiling the nation: would they be slave or free? George D. Watt, the official reporter for the 1852 legislative session, reported debates and speeches in Pitman shorthand. They remained in their original format, virtually untouched, for more than one hundred and fifty years, until LaJean Purcell Carruth transcribed them. In this eye-opening volume This Abominable Slavery: Race, Religion, and the Battle over Human Bondage in Antebellum Utah (Oxford University Press, 2024), Carruth, Dr. Christopher Rich, and Dr. W. Paul Reeve draw extensively on these new sources to chronicle the session, during which the legislature passed two important statutes: one that legally transformed African American slaves into "servants" but did not pass the condition of servitude on to their children and another that authorized twenty-year indentures for enslaved Native Americans. This Abominable Slavery places these debates within the context of the nation's growing sectional divide and contextualizes the meaning of these laws in the lives of Black enslaved people and Native American indentured servants. In doing so, it sheds new light on race, religion, slavery, and unfree labor in the antebellum period. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose new book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

On July 22, 1847, a group of about forty refugees entered the Salt Lake Valley. Among them were three enslaved men, two of whom shared the religion, Mormonism, that had caused them to flee. The valley was also home to members of the Ute tribe, who would sometimes barter captive women and children to Spanish colonizers. Thus, the question of whether the Latter-day Saints would accept or reject slavery in their new Zion confronted them on the day they first arrived. Five years later, after Utah had become an American territory, its legislature was prodded to take up the question then roiling the nation: would they be slave or free? George D. Watt, the official reporter for the 1852 legislative session, reported debates and speeches in Pitman shorthand. They remained in their original format, virtually untouched, for more than one hundred and fifty years, until LaJean Purcell Carruth transcribed them. In this eye-opening volume This Abominable Slavery: Race, Religion, and the Battle over Human Bondage in Antebellum Utah (Oxford University Press, 2024), Carruth, Dr. Christopher Rich, and Dr. W. Paul Reeve draw extensively on these new sources to chronicle the session, during which the legislature passed two important statutes: one that legally transformed African American slaves into "servants" but did not pass the condition of servitude on to their children and another that authorized twenty-year indentures for enslaved Native Americans. This Abominable Slavery places these debates within the context of the nation's growing sectional divide and contextualizes the meaning of these laws in the lives of Black enslaved people and Native American indentured servants. In doing so, it sheds new light on race, religion, slavery, and unfree labor in the antebellum period. This interview was conducted by Dr. Miranda Melcher whose new book focuses on post-conflict military integration, understanding treaty negotiation and implementation in civil war contexts, with qualitative analysis of the Angolan and Mozambican civil wars. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

 601. Part 1 of our conversation with Cherry Levin about her research into Antebellum weddings in Louisiana Creole plantations. She wrote a dissertation at LSU entitled, “Wedding Belles and Enslaved Brides: Louisiana Plantation Weddings in Fact, Fiction and Folklore.” “Along with rites of passage marking birth and death, wedding rituals played an important role in ordering social life on antebellum Louisiana plantations, not only for elite white families but also for the enslaved. Autobiographical accounts of plantation weddings written by Louisiana women yield considerable insights on the importance of weddings for Louisiana plantation women before and especially during the Civil War. Moreover, information contained within the Louisiana Writers' Project narratives reveal various types of wedding ritual used to unite the enslaved on Louisiana plantations despite laws and codes that prohibited slave unions. In contrast to these historical accounts, plantation weddings in the fictional imagination reveal that the figure of the bride reflects careful authorial negotiation of racialized and gendered ideologies.” (Levin).  “A distinguished graduate of the Association of Bridal Consultants' Professional Development Program, Cherry has planned and coordinated over two hundred weddings throughout the San Francisco Bay Area, the Wine Country and Lake Tahoe. She has also planned weddings in San Luis Obispo, Texas and locations throughout southeastern Louisiana from Baton Rouge to New Orleans” (Retrospect Images). Now available: Liberty in Louisiana: A Comedy. The oldest play about Louisiana, author James Workman wrote it as a celebration of the Louisiana Purchase. Now it is back in print for the first time in 220 years. Order your copy today! This week in Louisiana history. November 24, 1721. First census of New Orleans taken This week in New Orleans history. November 23, 1955. Mary Loretta Landrieu was born in Arlington, Virginia on November 23, 1955, the daughter of Moon Landrieu and the sister of Mitch Landrieu. She was raised in New Orleans and attended Ursuline Academy. She graduated from Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge in 1977. She eventually became a United States Senator. This week in Louisiana. Now Open For 2024 Season! Dark Woods Adventure Park 4343 University Pkwy Natchitoches, LA 71457 Website      Adventure awaits at Dark Woods Adventure Park in Natchitoches. This family-friendly outdoor park features a variety of activities and attractions to enjoy, including Lost Treasure Mining Company, Louisiana's only outdoor gem and fossil mining attraction, delicious food, and the new Bear Factory at Dark Woods. With a mini-golf course in development and scheduled opening soon, this park will surely be a hit with visitors of all ages!      Additionally, special seasonal events like Happy Easter Hop Along, Dark Woods Haunted Attraction, and Dark Woods Christmas, retail shops, an ice cream shop, and great food make Dark Woods Adventure Park a popular destination for a day of exploration and adventure from March to December.      Whether you're looking for a day of fun or a weekend getaway, Dark Woods Adventure Park is sure to have something for everyone! Postcards from Louisiana. Aislinn Kerchaert writes and reads the poem, “Thanksgiving in New Orleans.” Listen on Apple Podcasts. Listen on audible. Listen on Spotify. Listen on TuneIn. Listen on iHeartRadio. The Louisiana Anthology Home Page. Like us on Facebook. 

Rod and Karen banter about appreciating your people, Pizza Hut, professional athletes who have podcasts, spilling salsa on your shirt and the only celebrity who can have a plantation wedding. Then they discuss Stellantis laying off union workers, Walmart would raise prices if tariffs take effect, judge blocks Biden overtime pay, Dr. Oz named to Trump cabinet, Trump's sentencing may be delayed, Nancy Mace pushes for trans bathroom bill, Diddy News, Who News, White People News and Sword Ratchetness. Black Friday Sale Twitter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@rodimusprime⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@SayDatAgain⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@TBGWT⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@TheBlackGuyWhoTips⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Email: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠theblackguywhotips@gmail.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Blog: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.theblackguywhotips.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Teepublic Store⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Amazon Wishlist⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Crowdcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Voice Mail: 704-557-0186Go Premium: https://www.theblackguywhotips.com/premium/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Two days before the 2024 Presidential election, join Carlos today at GeekFest Rants as he recommends a number of films to prep you for the issues that dominate this historic election.  The films included are, Joe, The Zone of Interest, Nazi Town USA, Civil War, Good Night and Good Luck, and Antebellum.  Plus he recaps the films he suggested back in the 2016 and 2020 elections.  WARNING: This is a very heavily opinionated political themed episode and the views expressed are solely the ones of Carlos.  In other words, if you feel politics are a bad subject to discuss, you might want to skip this episode and return next time.