Do you have any recommendations for political autobiographies, especially from women?
the ones i have read are: living history by HRC (a given that i think everyone should read) pretty ladylike by claire mccaskill my beloved world by sonia sotamayor off the sidelines by kirsten gillibrand lean in by sheryl sandberg (not super political but i suggest every young woman read it at some point) a fighting chance by elizabeth warren (i actually just started it, and it’s pretty good)
these three aren’t autobiographies but i enjoyed them: broad influence by jay newton-small notes from the cracked ceiling by anne kornblut when women win by ellen malcolm (the woman who founded EMILY’s list)
and the two i really want to get around to reading (eventually) are forgetting to be afraid by wendy davis and madam secretary by madeleine albright
The greatest terrorist threat to our country right now is Steve Bannon. And he’s controlling Trump. He wrote his inauguration speech and filled it with white nationalist rhetoric and slogans. He’s behind a lot of these poorly vetted executive orders. Read that quote on the right. He’s doing it knowingly to create chaos and unrest so he can literally break our government and install a totalitarian regime that puts white men solely in control of everything. He loves Andrew Jackson, i.e. the turd who created the Trail of tears and forced almost 17k Native Americans to leave their homes in the south in 1830 and march a thousand miles. 30-40% of them died en route. That is genocide. Bannon thinks that’s great. This man was just promoted to the National Security Council. Trump demoted the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the head of the CIA, and his National Security Advisor and promoted Bannon above them. This is unheard of. This is not okay. This guy now has control of our president and a huge say in National Security and he believes in breaking our democracy and genocide.
I see people expecting things to go farther south very quickly, expecting national guard troops to be sent in to break up protests and for Trump to institute martial law. Trump’s advisers like Conway and Bannon want the media to stop criticizing Trump and to be quiet. That is a blatant violation of the First Amendment and freedom of speech. This is a large part of why that amendment exists–to guarantee freedom of the press. Media outlets are not slandering the president when they quote him and then analyze what he says and does. That is their job.
On the one hand the number of people turning out to protest and fight and file lawsuits and show up at airports is heartening. ACLU donations in the past 24 hours have been what they normally raise over 5 years. I’ve read quotes from police chiefs and border control agents who do not want any part of this. And Madeleine Albright, former Secretary of State, has vowed register as a muslim if Trump tries to start a muslim registry. (corrected. thank you. @bobthemole)
Can you recommend any good books written by female politicians? I've already read Living History (thanks to you!) but am definitely looking for more! Thanks!
hmm these are the ones that i’ve read that i really liked:
off the sidelines by kirsten gillibrand
plenty ladylike by claire mccaskill
my beloved world by sonia sotomayor
a fighting chance by elizabeth warren
lean in by sheryl sandberg (not really political considering sandberg isn’t a politician but as much as i disliked this book upon first reading it 3 years ago i read it again recently and actually really really liked it the second time around)
i have yet to read madam secretary by madeleine albright, my own words by RBG or forgetting to be afraid by wendy davis, but i’ve heard great things about all of them.
On Wednesday, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright tweeted that she was “ready to register as Muslim.”
While she and other prominent allies might have good intentions, such pledges will be ineffective in resisting or duping the federal government.
In response to 9/11, George W. Bush created the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS), often referred to as “Special Registration.”
Under NSEERS, the federal government required visa holders from a list of 25 countries to register and provide their own biodata.
The federal government would also register immigrants or tourists from the list of countries before they entered the United States.
This was required for people whose country of origin was Iran, Iraq, Libya, Sudan or Syria — including those who also held dual U.S. or European citizenship.
NSEERS had a devastating impact on Arab and Muslim communities.
According to the ADC, 14,000 Arab and Muslim visa holders who registered with NSEERS were deported. Not a single registrant was charged with terrorism. Many faced detainment before deportation.
If Trump’s proposed Muslim database is similar to NSEERS, it would be impossible for Albright to voluntarily register as Muslim.
But for those who do want to show solidarity and resist the concept of a Muslim database in a real way, Hilal has some advice.
“One of the biggest ways is to put pressure on local city council members to affirm their city will be a sanctuary city to protect refugees, immigrants and Muslims,” Hilal said. “What happens at [the] local level is what will impact the daily lives of all of them.” Read more
An open letter to Gloria Steinem and Madeleine Albright.
You don’t know me, but I of course know who you both are. I am, after all, a feminist and it is hard to avoid knowing both of your names.
Madeleine, can I call you Madeleine?, you were the first woman to become secretary of state. Even though I am not from the US I am aware of who you are and your accomplishments.
Gloria, I know you as a general figure of feminism, the unofficial spokeswoman for “feminism” in general for a long time, the founder of Ms. Magazine, alongside the somehow less well known Dorothy Pitman Hughes with whom you took an iconic photo of you and she standing side by side giving a black power salute.
I’m just a white girl in Australia who can’t even vote in the upcoming US election, but if I could I would be voting for Bernie Sanders. It is not because I don’t support women and it it not because I want boys to like me.
But this is what you both wanted to insinuate about me, and many other women, in your enthusiastic support of Hillary Clinton’s bid for Presidency and I really take issue with that on a number of different levels, so let me begin.
1. Feminism has never been, nor should it be, an unquestioning support for other women. You would tell us there is a special place in hell for women who don’t support other women, while Hillary laughs along happy for your support. But I can barely believe what this really means.
You don’t want women to engage with politics on a deep level, you don’t want them to examine policy, figure out how and who this policy would have an impact on and to make their decisions based off of critical analysis and wisdom. You want them to select Hillary as a leader simply due to her gender. You want them to switch off their brains for the sake of a gender “revolution” and I cannot understand how you could possibly ask a thing like that.
2. A revolution? I don’t think that word means what you think it means. What does Hillary plan to overthrow? Or do you assume to say that simply electing a women would be a revolution in and of itself? And I have to ask … how?
When Obama was elected I celebrated in the streets of Sydney with other happy people. I was witnessing change, but not a revolution. Racism didn’t disappear when Obama was elected, in fact in many ways it brought it more to the obvious surface. I have never seen a President more disrespected openly by those who hated him. Black people continue to face extreme violence and are the victims of systemic racism which the election of Obama did not cure.
I don’t imply that Obama didn’t matter, he does, but why are we acting like it will be a revolution for a woman to be elected. It would be the same deal. A rise in criticism, the kinds of criticism men in politics don’t face, a level of scrutiny they don’t face and declarations that she has “ruined the chances” of any other women in politics.
I would also like to gently remind you that Bernie Sanders is Jewish and, as far as I am aware, there has never been a Jewish President or Vice President. So if your goal is simply for there to be breaking down barriers via “first X President” why only focus on Hillary?
3. You say women need to support Hillary due to us needing to support based on gender, but I wonder are you really thinking that through? Because when it comes to identity, for a lot of women there is a lot more than gender politics, gender may not even be their primary concern.
Are Jewish women obligated to vote for Bernie? Or black women required to vote for Ben Carson? Or should we be engaging with politics on a deeper level all-together and people be encouraged to look deep into their vote, regardless of who they intend to vote for?
4. You say that we, women of today, think that the climbing of the ladder is done. I disagree, I think that maybe women of today realise that the ladder is much longer than either of you are conceiving. That are a certain subset of women are really represented in Hillary Clinton and there is likely very little she can do for any of us, let alone women who are not white, or cisgender.
Maybe we realise there isn’t just a single ladder with a single goal at the top, maybe we realise we are climbing a tree with many branches and to be at the top means that every branch has to be able to reach upwards.
What good is success for some women if the cost is leaving other women behind? I understand the value of systems to protect the vulnerable, I am not anti Liberal, but the feminist liberal notion that we simply need to add women and stir needs to go. The liberal feminist notion that electing extra white women and putting white women in charge is the solution needs to go.
Power means nothing if it is used exclusively to uphold the status quo and if it isn’t used to bring corrupt systems crashing down.
In summary, you can’t have a revolution without really having one. You can’t just put a woman at the top of a system of the patriarchy and call that success. My theoretical vote, and the votes of many women (both real and imagined) goes towards Bernie Sanders.
Not because we hate women, not because we can’t support women, not because we think sexism is over and not because we want to impress pseudo-political boys. But because we are thinking for ourselves, because the struggles that women have made in the past culminate now in our choices and our autonomy. If you don’t want to vote for Bernie that is ok, it’s not my business to tell you what is best for you and I would never be so condescending to think that using my influence as a somewhat known feminist to guilt and shame women into supporting the candidate of my choice is, in any way, feminist or revolutionary.