“The migrant detention center known as Alligator Alcatraz is closed, but much about it remains unresolved. There are lawsuits over detainees’ treatment, environmental claims over damage to protected wetlands and uncertainty about the future of the airstrip it was built on. One aspect of the facility has drawn far less attention, though ― the name itself, and the long history of associating alligators with racist ideas about people of color. … As early as the 18th century, French explorers and naturalists began claiming that alligators and crocodiles showed a preference for attacking and consuming people of African descent. Plantation owners in the South eagerly repeated these stories because they discouraged enslaved people from escaping into marshes and swamps, where pursuing them proved difficult. The idea gained much wider traction after the Civil War.” (08/20/26)
Source: The Hill
by Phillip W Magness and Sara Albrecht
“When the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative unveiled its now-infamous ‘Liberation Day’ tariff formula in April 2025, economists quickly noticed that something was not right. At first glance, the formula looked impressive. It had Greek symbols, academic citations, and all the trappings of serious economic analysis. But once economists began examining it, the sophistication quickly fell away. Key terms, they noticed, effectively cancel one another out, leaving little more than a calculation driven by bilateral trade deficits. For one of us, an economist, that raised a simple question: How did this formula come to be? So he filed a Freedom of Information Act request seeking the records behind it. … When the agency finally responded, it said it had found 31 pages of responsive records. It would release none of them — not one email, calculation or even redacted paragraph.” (08/20/26)
“In recent years, Africa’s economies have felt a powerful impact from drought, debt, and violent discord. Yet, amid the turbulence, the southern nation of Zambia has charted a determined, if halting, course toward potential growth. Its latest election, on Aug. 13, set another example in its ability to achieve economic gains while (mostly) protecting its democratic system. The election ‘has far greater international significance than the country’s landlocked status and modest economic size might imply’, in the view of a senior researcher at Chatham House, a respected London-based think tank. President Hakainde Hichilema, who was elected to a second five-year term with 60% of the vote, will govern ‘a country at the centre of Africa’s critical minerals competition, debt diplomacy and shifting regional alliances’, wrote Christopher Vandome this month. And, he added, ‘Zambia’s prized democratic reputation will also be tested.'” (08/19/26)
Source: Ludwig von Mises Institute
by Ryan McMaken
“A common misconception about the French Revolution is that it was some sort of classical liberal or libertarian revolution. That is, some still claim that the revolution was, for all its flaws, in ‘the spirit’ of what is historically known as liberalism. The flawed interpretation of the revolution is kept alive for two reasons. One is used among the post-liberal conservatives who try to use the bloodshed of the French revolution as ‘evidence’ that liberalism leads to totalitarianism. A common mistake is to equate the liberal ideology with the theories of various ‘enlightenment’—and un-liberal—theorists such as Rousseau. Another mistake occurs when modern libertarians attempt to rehabilitate the French Revolution to portray is as pro-freedom phenomenon.” (08/20/26)
“UK nonprofit the Good Law Project is pushing an open letter, currently with over 122,000 signatures, calling for Prime Minister Andy Burnham ‘to commission an immediate public inquiry into how to ensure a responsible press given its contribution to Dr Arday’s tragic death.’ Several members of Parliament signed on. ‘Self-regulation of the press has comprehensively failed,’ the letter adds. So the government must then regulate it. Another petition calls for Arday’s Law, ‘legislative action to impose limitations on the number of news articles published about a single individual within a defined time frame’ to ‘work towards creating a framework that balances the public’s right to information with an individual’s right to privacy and mental well-being.'” (08/20/26)
“This week, the Fourth Circuit issued a major ruling striking down South Carolina’s limits on absentee ballots. The relatively novel basis of this opinion (by Judges Roger Gregory, Judge Pamela Harris, and Judge Julius Richardson) was that it violated the 26th Amendment as discrimination on the basis of age for voters. The opinion conflicts with rulings in other circuits and, in my view, is challengeable. … Under Section 7-15-320 of the South Carolina Code, four categories of ‘[q]ualified electors’ are allowed to vote absentee in an election: electors who are physically disabled; members of the Armed Forces and Merchant Marines of the United States, their spouses, and dependents; persons admitted to hospitals as emergency patients on the day of an election or within a four-day period before the election; and ‘persons sixty-five years of age or older’. S.C. Code § 7-15-320(B).” (08/20/26)
“Great Britain, where I live, once prided itself on eccentricity, irreverence, and the right to say unpopular things. Today, people living in my country have been arrested over social media posts and other digital communications. Some have been imprisoned. Online censorship has become more sophisticated, surveillance technology continues to advance, and cancel culture has taught millions of people that expressing the wrong opinion can carry severe consequences. As a result, people are self-censoring out of fear of reprisals. Books have a particular role to play here. They give people permission to explore ideas away from the noise and intimidation of social media. A reader can encounter something privately, consider it, question it, disagree with it, return to it, and perhaps find the confidence to openly express an opinion they had previously been afraid to voice. This is why my publishing house, Free Speech Press, is launching with a reprint of George Orwell’s 1984.” (08/20/26)
Source: Caitlin Johnstone, Rogue Journalist
by Caitlin Johnstone
“Today in dystopia they’re really going after books. A library in Sydney has removed the book How to Sell a Genocide by Adam Johnson from its shelves after Zionists complained about its criticisms of Israeli mass atrocities in Gaza. … ‘They seem to be objecting largely based on the title using the word ‘genocide’,’ Johnson commented. ‘But ‘genocide’ is not my word, or my finding. The fact of genocide in Gaza is the overwhelming consensus of the human rights world, and it is a wholly mainstream opinion among those tasked with studying and determining such matters.’ So in Australia they’re now banning books for Israel. I guess it was only a matter of time.” (08/20/26)
