Paul Krugman at The New York Times writes—Ending Greece’s Bleeding:
But the campaign of bullying — the attempt to terrify Greeks by cutting off bank financing and threatening general chaos, all with the almost open goal of pushing the current leftist government out of office — was a shameful moment in a Europe that claims to believe in democratic principles. It would have set a terrible precedent if that campaign had succeeded, even if the creditors were making sense.
What’s more, they weren’t. The truth is that Europe’s self-styled technocrats are like medieval doctors who insisted on bleeding their patients — and when their treatment made the patients sicker, demanded even more bleeding. A “yes” vote in Greece would have condemned the country to years more of suffering under policies that haven’t worked and in fact, given the arithmetic, can’t work: austerity probably shrinks the economy faster than it reduces debt, so that all the suffering serves no purpose. The landslide victory of the “no” side offers at least a chance for an escape from this trap.
But how can such an escape be managed? Is there any way for Greece to remain in the euro? And is this desirable in any case?
There's more pundits on the Greek referendum and other topics below the fold.
And because you're no doubt eager to know what The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board had to say about the Greek referendum, here it is—The Greeks Say No:
It’s true the Greeks were given two bad choices, but they still chose the worst. Europe was offering more money to forestall a crisis in return for pension cuts and other reforms. Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras claimed a “no” vote would help him extract better terms—by which he means even higher growth-killing taxes in return for fewer pension cuts. The Greeks chose the Tsipras ultimatum strategy, so they can’t blame the Germans for what comes next.
The big question now is whether German Chancellor Angela Merkel and other Europeans will flinch. Mrs. Merkel has not wanted to be seen as driving Greece from the eurozone, and the referendum means that the Greeks will have driven themselves out, if that’s what happens in the coming weeks. Mr. Tsipras will claim he has a mandate to demand more European concessions, but that mandate ends at the Greek border. He has no open-ended claim on the other taxpayers of Europe.
Robert Naiman at
Common Dreams writes—
Bernie Sanders Will End the IMF's Economic Violence in Greece and Africa:
I'm all for pushing Bernie to talk more about downsizing the Pentagon to be an institution focused on actually defending the United States, as opposed to running around the world overthrowing other people's governments - a Pentagon that "goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy," as President John Quincy Adams put it.
But we should also take advantage of the new opportunity that now presents itself; it's not only with bombs that U.S. foreign policy kills and injures innocent civilians.
We should recognize and publicize the fact that Bernie Sanders is the only presidential candidate who is talking about what the IMF is doing to Greece, the only presidential candidate who has a track record of opposing the IMF, the only presidential candidate who, if elected, is likely to do anything to end the economic violence of the IMF.
E.J. Dionne Jr. at
The Washington Post writes—
Liberated by grace:
For those who see religion as primarily an opiate, African American Christianity offers a riposte. For those who see Christianity itself as a faith that encourages quiescence and conservatism, the tradition of the black church is a sign of contradiction.
Over the last few weeks, white Americans who never paid much attention to the religious convictions of their brothers and sisters of color have received an education. As has happened before in our history, much of this learning is prompted by tragedy, beginning with the murder of nine people at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, S.C., and also a series of church burnings, not all of which have been explained.
The African American Christian tradition has been vital in our history for reasons of the spirit but also as a political seedbed of freedom and a reminder that the Bible is a subversive book. In the days of slavery, masters emphasized the parts of Scripture that called for obedience to legitimate authority. But the slaves took another lesson: that the authority they were under was not legitimate, that the Old Testament prophets and Exodus preached liberation from bondage, and that Jesus himself took up the cry to “set the oppressed free” with passion and conviction unto death.
Dana Milbank at
The Washngton Post writes—
Clinton and Obama are on the wrong side of history:
Scenes from an insurrection:
In Madison, Wis., on Wednesday, 10,000 people show up to rally for long-shot presidential candidate Bernie Sanders — giving the self-declared “democratic socialist” the largest crowd any candidate has had in this election cycle. Sanders, running on a shoestring and a prayer, has closed to within single digits of Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire and is surging in Iowa.
In New York on Tuesday, populist Mayor Bill de Blasio lashes out in vitriolic terms at New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a a fellow Democrat, accusing him of “games” and politically motivated “revenge.” De Blasio and other Democrats blast Cuomo’s handling of housing, immigration, the minimum wage and education. [...]
That the Sanders campaign has caught fire is a surprise to just about everybody, not least the candidate himself, who had his doubts. The Brooklyn-born Vermonter with a didactic style lacks the fire and charisma of Elizabeth Warren, who chose not to run. But his call for huge infrastructure spending and taxing the rich has caught the moment just right, even if Sanders himself is an imperfect vessel.
David Goodner at
In These Times In Front of 10,000 in Madison, Bernie Sanders Calls for Wealth Redistribution:
Anybody who has spent more than five minutes in a room with Bernie Sanders knows he truly is a movement man; he is popular precisely because he can talk to everyday Americans about their lives in a way that makes sense to them, free of jargon and bullshit.
Bernie invoked the civil rights, gay marriage and women’s suffrage movements as powerful accomplishments for everyday people and grassroots organizing during his Madison speech. But he also argued to bring class struggle back to the forefront of American politics.
“There is one struggle where we have not gained ground, but lost it, and that is the fundamental struggle for economic justice,” Sanders said. “A hundred years have come and gone and we have lost ground. … What I would like to ask of you is, please, think big, not small. Our job is to bring people together around the progressive agenda. Our job is to redistribute wealth back into the hands of working families.”
The Editorial Board at the
Los Angeles Times urges the government to go further in
Jailing fewer at the border:
The Department of Homeland Security announced recently that it would release hundreds of mothers and children who are seeking political asylum, so that they can await their hearings in freedom rather than in detention facilities. That was a welcome move, but the government should go further and undertake a top-to-bottom review of the entire immigration detention system with an eye toward jailing as few people as possible.
The government, of course, has the right and duty to determine who is allowed into the country and under what circumstances, as well as who may work here and eventually seek naturalized citizenship. Under current laws, if would-be immigrants arrive at the border and ask for asylum because they fear persecution in their home countries, or if they seek entry on other grounds, the government must give them a chance to make their case.
But must they be incarcerated? The public interest is not in detaining as many people as possible; it is in ensuring that those facing the possibility of deportation show up for their hearings, that those ordered out of the country are removed and that public safety is protected.
Erwin Chemerinsky at
The New Republic writes—
Ted Cruz Is Right: The Supreme Court Needs Term Limits—But judicial elections are not the answer:
Senator Ted Cruz has proposed a constitutional amendment that would require the justices to face retention elections, providing a stronger check on the justices’ power.
Although Senator Cruz has the right intention, his proposed solution would endanger the independence of the Court, rather than bolster it. Judicial elections at the state and local level have consistently led to justices inappropriately considering electoral pressures in making decisions, often to the detriment of individual rights—so imagine the reverberations of judicial elections on a national scale.
However, there is a reform that truly deserves thoughtful consideration: term limits for Supreme Court justices.
Jeet Heer at
The New Republic writes—
The KKK Understands Exactly What the Confederate Flag Symbolizes: White Power:
A Ku Klux Klan group's decision to schedule a rally in support of the flag flying at the state capitol has the merit of clarifying the debate.
The endorsement of the Klan not only underscores the long affiliation of the flag with racist terrorism; it also makes plain why debates about symbols have real-world consequences. Whatever else you want to say about the Ku Klux Klan, it has always been an organization that appreciates the uses of rituals and symbols in politics. Moreover, the Klan has been adept at using the public display of symbols to assert its will on those it has sought to cow. As historian Nancy MacLean noted in her 1994 book Behind the Mask of Chivalry, that Klan has been "conscious of the power of symbol and the allure of ritual.” To support this point, MacLean quoted a Klan document from the 1920s which argued that “the people want and need faith and symbolism.”
Alex Kirby at
Climate News Network writes—
Coal investment is the most urgent climate threat:
Angel Gurría, secretary-general of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), said the scale of new investments in “unabated” coal-fired electricity generation − where greenhouse gases are emitted directly to the atmosphere − posed the most urgent threat to the Earth’s climate.
Speaking in London, he said governments should be sceptical about the benefits of coal for their citizens. They should rethink the role of coal in energy supply, and conduct a more rigorous evaluation of its true costs. [...]
But Gurría, in a passage that will hearten many developing countries in the approach to the UN climate change negotiations in Paris in November/December this year, said that if poorer nations could not afford low-carbon alternatives, then richer countries should find the money to close the cost gap.