

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Lesley Gill, 615-343-6120;
Joanne Rappaport, (202) 537-1382;
Monica Gonzalez (Georgetown student), (914) 661-2643
Students are
delivering an open letter to Georgetown University President John J.
DeGioia today, signed by over 150 scholars, urging the university to
reconsider its appointment of former president of Colombia Alvaro Uribe
as a visiting scholar.
Students are
delivering an open letter to Georgetown University President John J.
DeGioia today, signed by over 150 scholars, urging the university to
reconsider its appointment of former president of Colombia Alvaro Uribe
as a visiting scholar. Signed by a number of Georgetown professors,
leading scholars on Colombia, and many others, the letter objects to
Uribe's ties to paramilitary groups, the "false positives" scandal (in
which members of the Colombian military killed civilians and dressed
the bodies in the uniforms of guerrillas), corruption and human rights
violations in his administration, manipulation of the judiciary, and a
notorious wiretapping scandal, among other concerns.
"Given the human rights scandals associated with Alvaro Uribe's
administration, and the ties between his administration and illegal
paramilitary groups, it is disturbing that Georgetown University has
chosen to host him this year," said Lesley Gill, Professor and Chair of
Anthropology at Vanderbilt University.
Signers of the letter include Joanne Rappaport, a Colombia expert and
Professor of Anthropology and Spanish and Portuguese at Georgetown
University; Greg Grandin, Professor of History at New York University
and author of the Pulitzer Prize Finalist book Fordlandia; Yale
University professor Gilbert M. Joseph; and Father Ray Kemp, Senior
Fellow at the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown, among many
others.
The full text of the letter follows:
_______________________________________________________________________
John J. DeGioia
President
Georgetown University
September 27, 2010
Dear Sir,
Concerning former Colombian President Alvaro Uribe's appointment at
Georgetown's Walsh School of Foreign Service as "Distinguished Scholar
in the Practice of Global Leadership," we would like to signal our
agreement with the basic thrust of the open letter Father Javier
Giraldo Moreno, S.J., wrote to peace activist Father John Dear, S.J.,
on September 6, 2010, and add our support for Father Dear's efforts to
have Mr. Uribe removed from his post.
We reproduce the text of the letter from Father Giraldo to Father Dear:
Dear John,
I send you fraternal, loving greetings.
I write to you with great concern regarding the fact that our Jesuit
university, Georgetown, has hired former president of Colombia Alvaro
Uribe Velez, as a professor. I am constantly receiving messages from
individuals and groups who have suffered enormously during his term as
president. They are protesting and questioning the mindset of our
Company, or its lack of ethical judgment in making a decision of this
kind.
It is possible that decision makers at Georgetown have received
positive appraisals from Colombians in high political or economic
positions, but it is difficult to ignore the intense moral
disagreements aroused by his government and the investigations and
sanctions imposed by international organizations that try to protect
human dignity. The mere fact that, during Uribe's political career,
while he was governor of Antioquia Department (1995-1997), he founded
and protected so many paramilitary groups, known euphemistically as
"Convivir" ("To Live Together"), who murdered and "disappeared"
thousands of people and displaced multitudes, committing many other
atrocities, would imply a need for moral censure before entrusting him
with any future responsibility.
But not only did he continue to sponsor those paramilitary groups, but
he defended them and he perfected them into a new pattern of legalized
paramilitarism, including networks of informants, networks of
collaborators, and the new class of private security companies that
involve millions of civilians in military activities related to the
internal armed conflict, while at the same time lying to the
international community with a phony demobilization of the
paramilitaries.
In addition, the scandalous practice of "false positives" took place
during Uribe's administration. The practice consists in murdering
civilians, usually peasants, and after killing them, dressing them as
combatants in order to justify their deaths. That is the way he tried
to demonstrate bogus military victories over the rebels and eliminate
the activists in social movements that work for justice.
The corruption during his administration was more than scandalous, not
just because of the presence of drug traffickers in public positions,
but also because the Congress and many government offices were occupied
by criminals. Today more than a hundred members of Congress are
involved in criminal proceedings, all of them President Uribe's closest
supporters.
The purchase of consciences in order to manipulate the judicial
apparatus was disgraceful. It ended up destroying, at the deepest
level, the moral fabric of the country. Another disgrace was the
corrupt manner in which the ministers closest to him manipulated
agricultural policy in order to favor the very rich with public money,
meanwhile impeding and stigmatizing social projects. The corruption of
his sons, who enriched themselves by using the advantages of power,
scandalized the whole country.
In addition, Uribe used the security agency directly under his control
(the Department of Administrative Security) to spy on the courts,
opposition politicians, and social and human rights movements, by means
of clandestine telephone tapping. The corrupt machinations he used to
obtain his re-election as President in 2006 were sordid in the extreme,
with the result that ministers and close collaborators have almost been
jailed.
He manipulated the coordination between the Army and the paramilitary
groups that resulted in 14,000 extrajudicial executions during his term
of office. His strategies of impunity for those who, through the
government or the "para-government," committed crimes against humanity
will go down in history for their brazenness.
The decision by the Jesuits at Georgetown to offer a professorship to
Alvaro Uribe, is not only deeply offensive to those Colombians who
still maintain moral principles, but also places at high risk the
ethical development of the young people who attend our university in
Washington. Where are the ethics of the Company of Jesus?
I am writing these lines to you because I am sure that you will share
our concerns and perhaps you can forward them to the Jesuits at
Georgetown and to other circles of thoughtful persons you know and to
those who are in sympathy with justice.
With a fond embrace,
Javier Giraldo Moreno, S.J.
We hope you will reconsider your decision to appoint Alvaro Uribe at
Georgetown in light of the concerns noted above. His presence there is
an affront to scholars and their educational mission.
Sincerely,
Osama Abi-Mershed, Assistant Professor of History, Georgetown University
Rodolfo Acuna, Professor of Chicano/a Studies, California State
University, Northridge
Sonia E. Alvarez, Leonard J. Horwitz Professor of Latin American
Politics and Society, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Mark Anderson, Associate Professor of Anthropology, University of
California, Santa Cruz
Tim Anderson, Senior Lecturer in Political Economy, University of Sydney
Juan Manuel Arbona, Associate Professor and Chair, Growth and Structure
of Cities Department, Bryn Mawr College
Benjamin Arditi, Professor, Centro de Estudios Politicos, Facultad de
Ciencias Politicas y Sociales, UNAM, Mexico
Arturo Arias, Professor of Spanish and Portuguese, University of Texas,
Austin
Robert Austin, Ph.D, Fellow, School of Historical Studies, University
of Melbourne
Beth Baker-Cristales, Associate Professor of Anthropology, Acting
Director, Latin American Studies Program, California State University,
Los Angeles
Teo Ballve, Former Editor, NACLA Report on the Americas, Ph.D.
Candidate in Geography, University of California, Berkeley
David Barkin, Profesor de Economia, Universidad Autonoma
Metropolitana-Xochimilco
Anthony Bebbington, Professor and ESRC Professorial Research Fellow,
University of Manchester, UK
Marc Becker, Professor of Latin American History, Truman State
University
Ericka Beckman, Assistant Professor of Spanish, Italian and Portuguese
and Program in Comparative and World Literatures, University of
Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Susan Besse, Associate Professor of History, City College and The
Graduate Center, Director, City College Fellowships Program, City
University of New York
John Beverley, Distinguished Professor of Hispanic Languages and
Literatures, University of Pittsburgh
Larry Birns, Director, Council on Hemispheric Affairs
John D. Blanco, Professor of Literature, University of California, San
Diego
Anthony Bogues, Professor of Africana Studies and Political Science,
Brown University
Paola Bohorquez, Ph.D., York University, Toronto
Paul A. Bove, Distinguished Professor of English, University of
Pittsburgh
Donald W. Bray, Professor of Political Science Emeritus, California
State University, Los Angeles
Marjorie W. Bray, Director of Latin American Studies, retired,
California State University, Los Angeles
Renate Bridenthal, Professor Emerita of History, Brooklyn College
Bob Buzzanco, Professor of History, University of Houston
Marisol de la Cadena, Associate Profesor of Anthropology, University of
California, Davis
Laura Carlsen, Director, Americas Program/Programa de las Americas
Marc Chernick, Visiting Associate Professor of Government, Georgetown
University
Ron Chilcote, Professor of Economics, University of California,
Riverside
Amy Chazkel, Assistant Professor of History, Queens College, City
University of New York (CUNY)
Noam Chomsky, Institute Professor and Professor of Linguistics,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
George Ciccariello-Maher, Assistant Professor of Political Science,
Drexel University
Christopher Clement, Visiting Professor of Politics, Pomona College
James D. Cockcroft, Ph.D., SUNY online professor
Peter Cole, Assoc. Professor of History, Western Illinois University
and Ph.D., Georgetown, 1997
Jaime Concha, Professor of Literature, University of California, San
Diego
Christopher Connery, Professor of Literature, University of California,
Santa Cruz
Antonia Darder, Distinguished Professor of Education, University of
Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Pablo Delano, Professor of Fine Arts, Trinity College
Guillermo Delgado-P., Ph.D., Anthropology Department, Field Studies
Director, University of California, Santa Cruz
Robin Maria DeLugan, Assistant Professor of Anthropology, University of
California, Merced
Monica Dias Martins, Professor of Political Science, Universidade
Estadual do Ceara, Brazil
Arif Dirlik, Liang Qichao Memorial Visiting Professor, Tsinghua
University, Beijing, Knight Professor of Social Science, University of
Oregon
Francisco Dominguez, Ph.D., Program Leader for Spanish and Latin
American Studies, Head of Centre For Brazilian and Latin American
Studies, Department of English, Languages and Philosophy, Middlesex
University, UK
Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz, Professor Emerita of Ethnic Studies, California
State University
Luis Duno, Associate Professor of Caribbean Studies and Film, Rice
University
Marc Edelman, Professor and Chair of Anthropology, Hunter College, CUNY
Steve Ellner, Profesor of Political Science, Universidad de Oriente,
Venezuela
Arturo Escobar, Kenan Distinguished Professor of Anthropology,
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Daniel Faber, Professor of Sociology, Northeastern University
Sujatha Fernandes, Assistant Professor of Sociology, Queens College,
CUNY
Raul Fernandez, Professor, School of Social Sciences, University of
California, Irvine
Bill Fletcher, Jr., BlackCommentator.com editorial board member
Alcira Forero-Pena, Adjunct Assistant Professor, Lehman College, CUNY
Dana Frank, Professor of History, University of California, Santa Cruz
Gavin Fridell, Associate Professor and Chair, Department of Politics,
Trent University, Ontario, Canada
Lesley Gill, Professor and Chair of Anthropology, Vanderbilt University
Stephen R. Gliessman, Ruth and Alfred Heller Professor Emeritus of
Agroecology, University of California, Santa Cruz
Gabriel Ignacio Gomez, Professor, Universidad de Antioquia Law School
(Colombia)
Greg Grandin, Professor of History, New York University
Gilbert Gonzalez, Professor Emeritus of Chicano and Latino Studies,
University of California, Irvine
Todd Gordon, Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, York
University, Toronto
Bruce Grant, Associate Professor of Anthropology, New York University
Jean Max Guieu, Professor of French, Georgetown University
Bret Gustafson, Associate Professor of Anthropology, Washington
University
Edgar Ivan Gutierrez, Associate Professor of History and Ethnic
Studies, Riverside City College
Peter Hallward, Professor of Modern European Philosophy, Kingston
University, London
John L. Hammond, Professor of Sociology, CUNY
Jim Handy, Professor of History, University of Saskatchewan, Canada
Mark Healy, Assistant Professor of History, University of California,
Berkeley
Judith Adler Hellman, Professor of Political and Social Science, York
University
Doug Hertzler, Associate Professor of Anthropology, Eastern Mennonite
University
Rene Harder Horst, Associate Professor of History, Appalachian State
University
Peter James Hudson, Assistant Professor of History, Vanderbilt
University
Jean Jackson, Professor of Anthropology, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology
Maurice Jackson, Associate Professor of History and African American
Studies, Georgetown University
Dale Johnson, Professor of Sociology (Retired), Rutgers University
Gilbert M. Joseph, Farnam Professor of History and International
Studies, Yale University
Alejandro Kaufman, Profesor Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de Buenos
Aires/Universidad Nacional de Quilmas
Susana Kaiser, Associate Professor of Media Studies, Chair, Latin
American Studies, University of San Francisco
Father Ray Kemp, Senior Fellow, Woodstock Theological Center,
Georgetown University
Robert M. Irwin, Professor of Spanish and Portuguese, University of
California, Davis
Maria Lagos, Assistant Professor Emerita of Anthropology, CUNY
Mark Lance, Professor of Philosophy, Georgetown University
Sidney Lemelle, Professor of History, Pomona College
Marcia Landy, Distinguished Professor of English and Film Studies,
University of Pittsburgh
Catherine LeGrand, Associate Professor of History, McGill University,
Montreal
Deborah Levenson, Associate Professor of History, Boston College
Kathryne V. Lindberg, Professor of English and Africana Studies, Wayne
State University
Peter Linebaugh, Professor of History, University of Toledo
Dr. Gilberto Lopez y Rivas, Profesor Investigador, Instituto Nacional
de Antropologia e Historia, Centro Regional Morelos, Mexico
Flora Lu, Assistant Professor, Latin American and Latino Studies,
University of California, Santa Cruz
Sheryl Lutjens, Women's Studies Department, California State
University, San Marcos
Catherine Lutz, Thomas J. Watson, Jr. Family Professor of Anthropology
and International Studies, Chair of Anthropology, Brown University
Florencia E. Mallon, Julieta Kirkwood Professor and Chair of History,
University of Wisconsin, Madison
Patricia Martin, Professor in Human Geography, Universite de Montreal
Luis Martin-Cabrera. Assistant Professor, Literature, University of
California, San Diego
Peter McLaren, Ph.D., F.R.S.A, Graduate School of Education and
Information Studies, University of California, Los Angeles
Andres Medina Hernandez, Ph.D., Instituto de Investigaciones
Antropologicas, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico
Breny Mendoza, Professor, California State University, Northridge
Jim Merod, Professor American Literature, Soka University of
America/Aliso Viejo, California
Minoo Moallem, Professor of Gender and Women's Studies, University of
California, Berkeley
Elizabeth Monasterios, Associate Professor of Hispanic Languages and
Literatures, University of Pittsburgh
Isidoro Moreno-Navarro, Ph.D., Catedratico (Senior Professor) de
Antropologia, Universidad de Sevilla, Andalucia, Espana
Frederick B. Mills, Professor of Philosophy, Bowie State University
Liisa L. North, Professor Emerita of Political Science, York
University, Toronto
Fellow, Center for Research on Latin America and the Caribbean
(CERLAC), York
University
Enrique C. Ochoa, Professor of History and Latin American Studies,
California State University, Los Angeles
Daniel T. O'Hara, Professor of English and First Mellon Term Professor
of Humanities, Temple University
Andrew Orta, Associate Professor of Anthropology, Director, Center for
Latin American and Caribbean Studies, University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign
Mark Overmyer-Velazquez, Associate Professor of History, Director,
Center for Latin American and Caribbean Studies, University of
Connecticut
Rev. Dr. Joseph Palacios, Adjunct Professor, Center for Latin American
Studies, Georgetown University
Donald A. Pease, Professor of English, Ted and Helen Geisel Third
Century Professor in the Humanities, Dartmouth College
Ivette Perfecto, George W. Pack Professor of Natural Resources and
Environment, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Hector Perla Jr., Assistant Professor, Latin American and Latino
Studies, University of California, Santa Cruz
John Pilger, Journalist, UK
Deborah Poole, Professor of Anthropology, Johns Hopkins University
Margaret Power, Professor of History, Illinois Institute of Technology,
and Georgetown University alumni, College, 1975
Pablo Alejandro Pozzi, History Department, University of Buenos Aires
Vijay Prashad, George and Martha Kellner Chair of South Asian History,
Director and Professor of International Studies, Trinity College
Richard Purcell, Assistant Professor of English, Carnegie Mellon
University
Peter Ranis, Professor Emeritus of Political Science, CUNY
Joanne Rappaport, Professor of Anthropology and Spanish and Portuguese,
Georgetown University
Marcus Rediker, Distinguished Professor of Atlantic History, University
of Pittsburgh
Darryl Reed, Associate Professor, Business & Society, Chair,
Department of Social Science, York University, Toronto, President,
Canadian Association for Studies in Cooperation
Gerardo Renique, Associate Professor of History, City College, CUNY
William I. Robinson, Professor of Sociology and Global and
International Studies, University of California-Santa Barbara
Clemencia Rodriguez, Professor of Communication, University of Oklahoma
Victor M. Rodriguez, Professor, Department of Chicano and Latino
Studies, California State University, Long Beach
Cristina Rojas, Professor, Norman Paterson School of International
Affairs, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada
Nancy Romer, Ph.D., Professor of Psychology, Brooklyn College
Jan Rus, Latin American Perspectives
Eduardo Saenz Rovner, Professor, School of Economic Sciences,
Universidad Nacional de Colombia
Rosaura Sanchez, Professor of Literature, University of California, San
Diego
Olga Sanmiguel, Professor of Women's Studies, University of Cincinnati
T.M. Scruggs, Professor Emeritus of Music, University of Iowa
Ellen Schrecker, Professor of History, Yeshiva University
Barbara Schroder, Ph.D., Senior Research Associate, Center for Advanced
Study in Education, CUNY
Sheila M Shannon, Associate Professor of Education and Human
Development, University of Colorado-Denver
Victor Silverman, Associate Professor of History, Pomona College
Brad Simpson, Assistant Professor of History and International Affairs,
Princeton University, Director, Indonesia and East Timor Documentation
Project
Julie Skurski, Distinguished Lecture in Anthropology, CUNY Graduate
Center
Carol A. Smith, Professor Emerita of Anthropology, University of
California, Davis
William A. Spanos, Distinguished Professor of English, State University
of New York, Binghamton
Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, University Professor in the Humanities,
Columbia University
Richard Stahler-Sholk, Professor of Political Science, Eastern Michigan
University
Anita Starosta, Rhode Island School of Design
Marcia Stephenson, Associate Professor of Spanish, Purdue University
Pamela Stricker, Associate Professor of Political Science, California
State University, San Marcos
Steve Striffler, Professor of Anthropology and Geography, Doris
Zemurray Stone Chair in Latin American Studies, University of New
Orleans
Silvia Tandeciarz, Professor and Chair of Modern Languages and
Literatures, College of William and Mary
Margo Tamez, Assistant Professor of Gender and Women's
Studies/Indigenous Studies, University of British Columbia
Sinclair Thomson, Associate Professor of History, New York University
Miguel Tinker-Salas, Miguel R. Arango Professor in Latin American
History, Pomona College
Mayo C. Toruno, Professor of Economics, California State University,
San Bernardino
Stefano Varese, Professor of Anthropology Emeritus, University of
California, Davis
Max Viatori, Assistant Professor of Anthropology, Iowa State University
Steven S. Volk, Professor of History and Chair, Latin American Studies,
Oberlin College
Marilyn Young, Professor of History, New York University
William Walker, Professor of History, University Toronto (ret.)
Clare Weber, Professor of Sociology, California State University,
Dominguez Hills
Jeffery R. Webber, Lecturer in Politics, Queen Mary, University of
London
Dr. Ingrid Wehr, Associate Professor, University of
Freiburg/Arnold-Bergstraesser-Institute, Freiburg (Germany)
Judith A. Weiss, Professor Emerita of Modern Languages and Literatures,
Mount Allison University, Canada.
Margaret Wiener, Associate Professor of Anthropology, University of
North Carolina, Chapel Hil
Diana Pei Wu, Ph.D., Antioch University, Los Angeles
Caroline Yezer, Assistant Professor of Anthropology, College of the
Holy Cross
George Yudice, Professor of Modern Languages and Literatures, Professor
of Latin American Studies, University of Miami
Marc Zimmerman, Professor of Modern and Classical Languages, University
of Houston
"It’s a stalled economy—and working families are stuck in it," said one economist.
A Friday report from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics showed that the American job market is running on fumes.
According to the BLS, the US economy added just 29,000 jobs in September, which was well below economists' forecasts of 90,000 jobs added on the month.
Additionally, employment numbers for previous months were revised downward by a total of 60,000 jobs, and BLS now estimates that the economy posted a net loss of 10,000 jobs in July and a net gain of 133,000 jobs in August.
In a Friday social media post, economist Bill McBride noted that the economy over the last year has only created 496,000 jobs, which averages to roughly 41,000 jobs per month. For comparison, the economy created an average of 186,000 jobs per month in the last year of former President Joe Biden's term.
Heather Long, chief economist at Navy Federal Credit Union, called the latest jobs numbers "mediocre," and pointed out that wage growth in September posted just a 3% yearly gain.
"That’s a new five-year low," Long remarked, "and it’s wiped out entirely by ~3.4% inflation."
Tahra Hoops, director of economic analysis at Chamber of Progress, also pointed to wage growth failing to keep up with inflation, which she said "gives credibility to the negative consumer sentiment" expressed in recent surveys.
Kyle Moore, chief economist at The Century Foundation, said that the weak wage growth on the month doesn't tell the full story of the stresses working-class Americans are facing because the numbers "leave out debt, all the bills families have to pay before they can spend any of their paycheck."
"A worker with debt often can’t afford to miss a paycheck, and therefore can’t afford to quit a bad job or push for a raise," Moore explained. "That is exactly what we see in today’s job market, with hiring stalled, the quit rate stuck at 1.9%, and wage growth falling as prices climb. Mounting debt, sluggish hiring and real wage growth, and weak social support all disempower workers."
Moore criticized President Donald Trump and his administration for trying to spin their economic policies as successes given the current numbers.
"Until the Trump administration confronts the reality that debt is eating into workers’ gains—wage gains that are now non-existent, in real terms, for the typical worker," said Moore, "the gulf between how this administration spins the economy and how working families actually experience it will continue to widen."
White House National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett didn't heed Moore's advice on this matter, and continued boasting about the state of the economy during a Friday interview.
"If you look at the data from this week, it's proving that Trumponomics is really working," said Hassett, "and this is one reason why markets are celebrating so much."
Kevin Hassett responds to a bad September jobs report: "If you look at the data from this week, it's proving that Trumponomics is really working ... we're very very happy"
The Fox News host responds by saying "you're bullish and I expected that" pic.twitter.com/bVdTFnteHc
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) October 2, 2026
Breyon Williams, chief economist at Groundwork Collaborative, called the weak jobs report emblematic of how the economy as a whole has performed during Trump's second term.
"There’s a clear pattern in the Trump economy," Williams explained. "One sector is creating most of the new jobs, unemployed workers can’t find new jobs, and Americans are seeing their paychecks eaten up by the president’s high prices. When businesses are barely hiring and raises aren’t keeping up with rising prices, it’s a stalled economy—and working families are stuck in it."
"AI-powered cameras are keeping track of our every move and weaponizing this data against working people to make record profits," said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez introduced legislation on Friday that would crack down on artificial intelligence-powered Flock cameras increasingly used—and abused—by law enforcement agencies across the United States to track and log vehicle data.
Sanders (I-Vt.) said in an interview with The Washington Post, which was first to report on the new legislation, that the US is "moving toward a surveillance state where a handful of giant companies make huge profits by giving the government, by selling to the government, the power to track our every move."
According to a summary released by Sanders' office the Ban Flock Act would bar the federal government from using automatic license plate readers (ALPR) or accessing the information that they gather. The legislation would also halt federal grant funding to state and local governments that use ALPRs and allow Americans to "sue the federal government for violation of their rights through the use of automatic license plate readers."
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), who joined Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) in sponsoring the legislation, said in a statement that the maker of Flock cameras, Flock Safety, is "selling its cameras nationwide, laying the groundwork for a surveillance state while enriching corporate executives."
"Your right to privacy includes the freedom to move around your community without every move being monitored,” said Merkley. "No one should have this unchecked surveillance power at their fingertips, which is why I’m teaming up with Sen. Sanders to rein in this dangerous technology."
Ocasio-Cortez warned that "across the country, Big Tech companies like Flock Safety have built a mass surveillance system to harvest Americans’ private and personal data without their consent."
"AI-powered cameras are keeping track of our every move and weaponizing this data against working people to make record profits. The widespread integration of this technology into American society is unconscionable," she added. "I am proud to introduce the Ban Flock Act with Sen. Sanders to enforce our constitutional right to privacy and protect Americans from both corporate and government surveillance."
The new bill comes after President Donald Trump and his FBI director, Kash Patel, defended Flock cameras as useful tools for law enforcement, even as investigations showed significant abuses. One such investigation, published by the libertarian Institute for Justice in August, "identified well over 100 incidents of ALPR abuse, including romantic stalking, wrongful stops and detentions, non-law enforcement use, and other types of misconduct."
Trump nevertheless told reporters in September that "I sort of like them... because of law enforcement, but some people don’t."
"They think it’s an infringement," said of the cameras' critics. "I like them."
According to the ACLU, Flock operates more than 120,000 ALPRs nationwide.
"Flock's ALPR cameras aren't like your normal traffic cameras," the group noted. "This surveillance technology records and tracks every car that comes into view, and then an AI algorithm catalogs the make, model, color, license plate number, bumper stickers, and even scratches. This personal information is then uploaded into a nationwide database that any law enforcement agency with a Flock contract can search—with few regulations or oversight on how they use what they find."
Sanders said in a statement Friday that "at a time of growing concern about the unchecked power of artificial intelligence, Flock is eviscerating the very notion of privacy by installing tens of thousands of cameras in communities across America without their consent."
"Going to the doctor? Flock knows. Dropping your kid off at school? Flock is tracking you. Flock is always watching," the senator said. "We cannot allow America to become a surveillance state where a handful of AI oligarchs profit by giving the government the power to track our every movement."
"The most exclusive dinner in the world with the most corrupt president in American history," said one congressional Democrat.
The company behind US President Donald Trump's meme coin has launched a competition giving participants an opportunity to attend "the most exclusive dinner in the world"—all they have to do is buy a digital token with no inherent value that has lost investors billions of dollars while further enriching the president.
The Washington Sun reported Thursday that winners of the competition, held by CIC Digital and Fight Fight Fight LLC, "will be chosen based on a formula that seems designed in part to increase sales of $TRUMP in the next two months." The event invite promises the top 185 holders of the meme coin an evening with three unidentified "legends" and Trump, "plus a private meet and greet with a legend yet to be announced," at the president's golf club in Virginia.
The November 22 dinner will mark the second exclusive event for holders of Trump's meme coin, which has netted the president at least $635 million, according to recent financial disclosures.
Investors in the digital token haven't fared nearly as well: The cryptocurrency analytics firm Nansen has estimated that nearly a million people who purchased the meme coin through the end of June 2026 had combined losses of around $4 billion.
NEWS: Trump to host "most EXCLUSIVE DINNER IN THE WORLD" for top 185 purchasers of his meme crypto
Buying $1M (or less!) worth of $TRUMP coin should get you in Nov 22
Trump has pocketed $635 million
Investors down +$4 billion on Trump crypto
Invite ⬇️https://t.co/u8ck5DDR8v pic.twitter.com/ZUnBRCnN9g
— Jeff Stein (@jstein_sun) October 1, 2026
Last May, the top buyers of Trump's meme coin—including Chinese billionaire Justin Sun, who has poured tens of millions of dollars into the president's crypto ventures—attended an exclusive dinner at Trump's Virginia golf club and received a VIP tour of the White House. Ethics experts and other critics described the event as "corruption embodied."
News of the second dinner sparked similar outcry. "This is the most brazenly corrupt shit I have ever seen in politics and it's not even close," wrote Tommy Vietor, a podcast host and former spokesperson for Barack Obama.
Rep. Greg Landsman (D-Ohio) characterized the event as "the most exclusive dinner in the world with the most corrupt president in American history."
"Either they'll do something very proper and smart, or they won't be around very long," Trump said of Iran's government.
The Pentagon is preparing to dramatically expand the American military presence in the Middle East as President Donald Trump weighs renewed attacks on Iran, with thousands of additional troops and a third aircraft carrier being readied for deployment, even as the conflict he has repeatedly declared "over" or "won" threatens to erupt into a new and potentially broader phase.
The Washington Post reported Thursday that the Pentagon is preparing options that could put as many as three US aircraft carriers and their accompanying warships in the Middle East.
According to The Associated Press, around 9,000 additional sailors and Marines are being dispatched aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt carrier strike group and the USS Makin Island amphibious readiness group. The buildup could push the number of US personnel in the region above 20,000 by late October.
The Roosevelt is being sent to relieve the USS George Washington, while a third carrier, the USS George HW Bush, is also already in the region.
The new deployment plans come as diplomacy between Washington and Tehran remains stalled, and as Trump has repeatedly threatened to resume large-scale military action—including the total annihilation of the nation of over 90 million people—after the November midterm elections.
"Either they'll do something very proper and smart, or they won't be around very long," Trump said of the Iranian government Thursday in Denton, Texas. "Frankly, I hate to see that, but they won't be around very long."
Iran, meanwhile, has reportedly begun preparing for a more expansive retaliation should the United States launch another major attack in the illegal US-Israeli war of choice against the Middle East nation.
Hamidreza Azizi, a senior Iran analyst at the International Crisis Group, told Reuters Thursday that the Iranian government seems "determined not to respond symbolically to a symbolic move and instead to escalate in the hope of reestablishing deterrence."
Republican National Committee Co-Chair Lara Trump—the president's daughter-in-law—warned during a Wednesday interview with British journalist Harry Cole that the increasingly protracted Iran War could not only tarnish Trump's legacy, but could also cost Republicans next month's midterm elections.
"Well, it's possible," Trump—who campaigned as the "peace president" on a promise of no new wars—said of the midterm risks Thursday on his way to Texas, before adding that “it should help because Iran will not have a nuclear weapon."
The intelligence consensus of every US administration since former President George W. Bush—including during both of Trump's terms—has been that Iran has not been trying to develop nuclear weapons.
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk also argued that "the death penalty has no place in any society."
United Nations human rights experts on Thursday joined the growing chorus of people around the world outraged by Tennessee's two botched attempts to execute Christa Pike and called on the state to refrain from trying again to kill the 50-year-old woman.
After a last-minute legal battle, the US Supreme Court allowed Tennessee to execute Pike for the 1995 murder of Colleen Slemmer. The state tried to do so at Riverbend Maximum Security Institution in Nashville on Wednesday night—with two injections of pentobarbital, each of which was supposed to be lethal—but she survived and was transported by ambulance to a hospital.
A doctor interviewed by WSMV 4 Nashville's Steve Mehling suggested that an IV could have been placed incorrectly—and, as the journalist summarized: "Pike may suffer from a flurry of long-term effects. This includes skin necrosis, permanent scarring, functional impairment, compartment syndrome, chronic neuropathic pain, and pigmentation change at the injection site."
As of Thursday afternoon, Pike's attorneys said that she was still alive, but in critical condition, "and receiving lifesaving medical care," according to The Washington Post. Republican Gov. Bill Lee, who had previously declined to grant clemency in this case, has since halted executions in Tennessee and ordered an investigation into the state's second botched killing of an inmate this year.
Several UN special rapporteurs and members of the Working Group on Discrimination Against Women and Girls had urged US authorities to commute Pike's sentence last month, saying that her "execution would mark the culmination of a trajectory of severe physical and psychological suffering marked by childhood abuse and nearly three decades of solitary confinement on death row."
After Wednesday's botched attempts, some of the same experts weighed in again: "Christa Pike was denied clemency. One hour before her execution, a court halted it. The Supreme Court then lifted the stay. She was injected twice with lethal drugs and survived. Forcing a person to face death, have it suspended, and then face it again within hours amounts to barbaric and torturous punishment, compounded in this case by decades of psychological torture on death row."
"The state of Tennessee must immediately and irrevocably end this cruelty by commuting Christa Pike's death sentence," said Morris Tidball-Binz, special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions; Margaret Satterthwaite, special rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers; Pau Pérez-Sales, special rapporteur on torture; Mariângela Batista Galvão Simão, special rapporteur on the right to health; Reem Alsalem, special rapporteur on violence against women and girls; and working group members Claudia Flores, Ivana Krstić, Dorothy Estrada-Tanck, and Haina Lu.
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk went even further, arguing against capital punishment.
"The case of Christa Pike lays bare multiple reasons why the death penalty should be abolished," said a statement from his office. "The prolonged suffering—physical and mental—arising from multiple failed execution attempts is abhorrent, and cruel. And there are key fair trial questions still unresolved."
Türk is calling on "state authorities not to pursue any further attempt to execute Pike," his office said. "We are also troubled by the increase in the number of executions in the United States. The death penalty has no place in any society."
"Sam Altman says we need to slow down development to ensure the safety of humanity," one campaigner said of OpenAI's CEO. "Yet he is allegedly firing the very people hired to keep us safe."
San Francisco-based artificial intelligence firm OpenAI has "parted ways" with three safety researchers who allegedly shared "confidential company information," The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday, prompting fresh alarm among critics who accuse the ChatGPT maker of sidelining internal warnings about the risks posed by its increasingly powerful AI.
People reportedly familiar with the matter told the Journal that OpenAI recently informed employees it had terminated the three researchers, who it accused of sharing the information with "a third-party AI safety organization."
OpenAI did not identify the researchers, the outside organization, or the information allegedly shared. A company spokesperson told the newspaper that "our investigation confirmed that these individuals mishandled sensitive information outside established company procedures, violating our policies and breaking the trust essential to our work.”
The Journal's Maxwell Zeff—who authored the report with Keach Hagey and Berber Jin—subsequently identified the three safety team members as Jasmine Wang, Tomek Korbak, and Mikita Balesni.
"Looks like they're firing whistleblowers," Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) said in response to the report. "What are they hiding?"
"I'll be sending OpenAI a demand for transparency," he added.
Shaunna Thomas is the executive director of Guardrails Alliance, a super political action committee made up of "workers, organizers, policy experts, and everyday people who believe the most powerful technology ever built shouldn’t be controlled by a handful of unaccountable billionaires."
Thomas called the Journal report "the latest example of OpenAI advocating for safety measures in the public eye, but actively making decisions and lobbying against those efforts behind closed doors."
"Sam Altman says we need to slow down development to ensure the safety of humanity," Thomas said, referring to OpenAI's CEO. "Yet he is allegedly firing the very people hired to keep us safe. When deep insiders are sounding the alarm, history tells us to listen. OpenAI is not only ignoring their warnings, it’s punishing them."
"In the absence of clear regulations, insiders are a crucial factor in keeping the rest of us safe as these models continue to do unpredictable things," she added. "We must stand with rank-and- file employees and fight for their protection."
The new allegations come amid an intensifying debate over whether OpenAI and other frontier AI companies can adequately police themselves.
As Common Dreams recently reported, OpenAI and other AI firms are investigating tens of thousands of security incidents, including episodes involving attempts to bypass guardrails, escape sandboxes, hijack websites, and even access government systems.
In July, an OpenAI model autonomously breached the systems of the open-source platform Hugging Face during an internal cybersecurity test. Experts warned that the incident demonstrated the dangers of relying on voluntary corporate safeguards.
It's not just OpenAI; in 2026 alone, companies including Google, Meta, and Anthropic have reported incidents of AI autonomously escaping supposedly isolated testing environments and targeting real-world systems.
AI safety campaigners and some Democratic lawmakers this week lambasted President Donald Trump, who, after meeting with Big Tech executives including OpenAI president Greg Brockman, dismissed the lack of legally binding commitments regarding AI regulation by saying he trusted the corporate leaders' "morally binding" self-policing pledge.
Elon Musk, CEO of the artificial intelligence company xAI, has said that such incidents “will happen frequently as AI becomes smarter and more agentic,” a reference to systems’ ability to independently act toward accomplishing specific goals without meaningful human control.
Experts say such autonomous hacks underscore the problem of AI alignment. As AI progresses toward artificial general intelligence—a still-hypothetical point at which it matches or surpasses human cognitive ability at virtually any intellectual, creative, or physical task—the challenge of ensuring that advanced systems reliably pursue goals that match what humans actually want becomes increasingly difficult and, many insiders believe, dangerous to the point of posing an existential risk to humanity.
Last month, Casar and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) unveiled legislation that would pause development of advanced AI.
Congressman Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) also said this week that he is seeking to introduce legislation to at least temporarily ban recursive self-improvement, or AI that is capable of improving itself and modifying its objectives without meaningful human input.
And on Thursday, Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) put forth a bill that would compel every AI company operating in the US to obtain a public charter.
“This issue is of monumental consequence,” said Sanders. “I’d rather be called an alarmist than a father or grandfather who is asleep at the wheel."
One campaigner warned that the administration's effort "to legalize most killings of endangered wildlife would essentially mean open season on species already on the brink of annihilation."
Conservation groups that sued this summer over President Donald Trump's administration rescinding the regulatory definition of "harm" in the Endangered Species Act updated their legal challenge on Thursday after yet another attack on the landmark law.
The coalition's supplemental complaint explains to a federal court in Seattle that since the lawsuit was first filed in July, administrative leaders have directed various agencies to interpret the ESA to mean that only intentionally killing or wounding a protected species is illegal—a shift that critics condemned as "an all-out war on America's wildlife."
As the "harm" rescission took effect on September 14, US Fish and Wildlife Service Director Brian Nesvik issued a related memorandum with that interpretation—effectively allowing "incidental" killing. John Luce, general counsel at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, sent the same directive to eight sections of NOAA.
These memos "violate the plain language and overarching purpose of the ESA; they also lack any reasoned basis, are arbitrary and capricious, and failed to comply with applicable notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements," the new filing argues, citing the Administrative Procedure Act. The coalition is asking the court to vacate the memos and bar the agencies from using their interpretations of the 1973 law.
"This despicable effort to legalize most killings of endangered wildlife would essentially mean open season on species already on the brink of annihilation," said Noah Greenwald, endangered species co-director at the Center for Biological Diversity, in a Thursday statement. "It's the most serious attack on imperiled animals since the Endangered Species Act was passed more than 50 years ago."
"Without protection against the daily assaults of our modern world, Florida manatees, spotted owls, snowy plovers, and so many other animals that bring color to our world won't stand a chance," he warned, noting that "habitat destruction is the single biggest cause of species endangerment and extinction" in the United States and beyond.
Greenwald added that "with this destruction, the perils faced by plants and animals have grown exponentially. Such peril doesn't come down the barrel of a gun, but it's still a deadly threat, and the Endangered Species Act can and must protect our imperiled wildlife from this kind of careless killing."
In addition to the center, the coalition behind the case includes Columbia Riverkeeper, Conservation Law Foundation, Conservation Northwest, Friends of the Wild Swan, Oregon Wild, Sierra Club, Swan View Coalition, and WildEarth Guardians, with legal representation by Earthjustice.
After the memos were exposed last month, Earthjustice attorney Ben Levitan declared that "the government's new legal position is a prescription for extinction."
"It says that as long as you claim you didn't mean to kill an endangered species, the law can't and won't stop you," he stressed. "That's ridiculous—and a totally illegal, active misreading of the Endangered Species Act. We'll see the Trump administration in court about this."
"For too long, we’ve allowed a few Big Tech companies to dominate the market."
Rep. Pramila Jayapal on Thursday unveiled a bill aimed at reining in the artificial intelligence industry that would force every AI company operating in the US to obtain a public charter.
According to Jayapal (D-Wash.), the charter system will be similar to the one long used in the US to regulate banks, which must submit to certain regulatory obligations before being allowed to operate.
"The crux of this bill is simple," said Jayapal. "If you want to be an AI company in this country, you have to obtain a public charter that has a broad set of terms and conditions to operate and ensure public benefit without the harms."
The Washington Democrat said the charter approach was needed given the broad reach large technology companies already have over every aspect of life in the US, and she argued it would be a more proactive alternative to the piecemeal approach US lawmakers have taken to regulating Big Tech.
"For too long, we’ve allowed a few Big Tech companies to dominate the market," she said. "They have used mass surveillance to steal private information, labor, and creative work, building trillion-dollar empires on our tracked personal lives. AI corporations and Big Tech are now following that same playbook."
Under the charter system, tech companies would be banned from practices such as surveillance pricing to charge individual consumers different prices based on their personal data and financial histories.
The system would also establish stronger liabilities for AI companies that commit harmful acts, and particularly egregious actions could be punished by removal of firms' charters, which would essentially be a corporate death penalty.
Jayapal's proposal would also put the government in charge of every step of the AI safety review process and would include "round-the-clock federal oversight, testing in government facilities and approval to release, adversarial stress tests, and a government-controlled kill switch," according to her office.
The proposed framework earned praise from former Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan, who argued that American voters have already "paid an extraordinary price for Big Tech's self-regulation."
"For generations we have required banks, drug makers, and nuclear operators to meet public terms before they do business," Khan added, "and AI companies should be no different."
Sacha Haworth, executive director of the Tech Oversight Project, also gave the Jayapal plan kudos, saying it would "establish desperately needed rules of the road, punish AI companies that release dangerous products, and create the clear public benefit that the American people are calling for."
"Companies have continually pulled the rug out from under families, workers, and small businesses to build powerful and unaccountable Big Tech monopolies that dictate to us how we should live our own lives," Haworth emphasized. "Enough is enough."
Although President Donald Trump and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) have publicly opposed legislative restrictions on the AI industry, the bill comes as Democrats are aiming to win congressional majorities in the November midterm elections.
A lawyer for 35-year-old Yehonatan Ovadia said his arrest by ICE demonstrates how "equating anti-Zionism with antisemitism produces absurd results."
The Trump administration has spent months targeting anti-Israel protesters for deportation as part of what it portrays as a fight against "antisemitism." One of its latest targets is a Hasidic Jewish rabbi.
Yehonatan Ovadia, a 35-year-old Israeli citizen, was arrested by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on August 28 after being summoned to immigration court in Manhattan. He now sits in Brooklyn's Metropolitan Detention Center, according to The New York Times, which broke news of his detention on Wednesday.
Ovadia, a father of five children, has lived in New York's Rockland County since coming to the United States on a religious worker visa in 2022. He is a member of the Satmar Hasidic sect, an ultra-Orthodox movement that opposes Zionism on religious grounds, holding that Jews should not establish a sovereign state in the land of Israel before the coming of the Messiah.
Some members of Satmar have vocally protested against US support for Israel's genocidal military assault in Gaza since it began in 2023.
“We demonstrated for Gaza, for the liberation of Gaza, for the rights of the Palestinians and to show to the world that the Jews, real Judaism, want to have peace,” Ovadia told the Times from detention.
As the death toll in Gaza has mounted, Ovadia has continued to attend anti-Israel marches across New York and New Jersey. Earlier this year, the government revoked his legal status after he appeared at one of these protests.
In November 2023, Ovadia joined a group of anti-Zionist Hasidic Jews to protest the display of a large Israeli flag at the Ramapo Town Hall. Some attendees were recorded cutting the flag down with scissors. Ovadia and another man were charged with hate crimes over the incident—charges that were later dropped.
Ovadia later pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor offense of disorderly conduct, for which he paid a $200 fine plus an additional $125 charge. He says he was not one of the men who took down the flag and that he did not know about the other attendees' plans to do so.
The formal reason for Ovadia's deportation, according to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), was that he “overstayed his welcome and refused to depart” the US after losing his status. But the reason he lost that status is more revealing.
Though it acknowledged that Ovadia was eligible to maintain his religious worker status, the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) ultimately revoked it “as a matter of discretion." It cited what it said were “adverse factors” stemming from the 2023 Israeli flag protest.
DHS stated even more explicitly that the content of Ovadia's speech was the real issue.
"The Trump administration acted well within its statutory and constitutional authority, as it does with any alien who advocates for violence, glorifies and supports terrorists, harasses Jews, and steals property," DHS said.
At the beginning of his second term, President Donald Trump issued an executive order directing DHS to target noncitizens who have participated in pro-Palestinian protests, which it has deemed antisemitic.
The order has led to nonviolent political organizers, like the Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil and many others, having their legal immigration statuses abruptly revoked and being whisked into ICE detention without warning. Federal courts have struck down this policy on First Amendment grounds.
Ovadia's attorneys have filed a lawsuit in federal court alleging that DHS had unlawfully retaliated against Ovadia for his protected speech. They argue that by targeting Ovadia over activism that stems from his religious beliefs, the government has taken “an official position” favoring “one religious position within Judaism” while penalizing "an adherent of another.”
Many Jewish protesters have been arrested during demonstrations in solidarity with Palestinians, including dozens who were arrested at a Jewish Voice for Peace event last week to protest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech at the United Nations General Assembly. But Ovadia's attorneys believe he may be the first Jewish protester to have his immigration status stripped.

Eric Lee, one of Ovadia's attorneys, has emphasized the case as an example of why "equating anti-Zionism with antisemitism produces absurd results."
"Trump's DHS says ICE detention of Yehonatan Ovadia is justified because he was 'harassing Jews,'" Lee wrote in a post on social media. "A rabbi detained for participating in a Hasidic demonstration against Israel three years ago was harassing... himself? What a joke!"
Ovadia, whom a judge has denied bond, appeared in immigration court on Wednesday, while dozens of supporters, many in traditional Hasidic dress, assembled outside.
And from detention, the man DHS has accused of "harassing Jews" continued to describe his activism not as hostility toward his own people, but as an expression of Jewish solidarity with Palestinians.
"From the Jewish people to our Palestinian brothers and sisters in Gaza and the West Bank and all over occupied Palestine: We didn't forget you!" Ovadia said in a statement shared by Lee. "We are following you, and we know that you are facing genocide! Please be strong and continue to believe! Because your struggle is our struggle and your liberation is our liberation!"
"We will SHOUT and DEMONSTRATE for you," he continued, "from New York, Washington, Canada, London, and from every place that we can in the free world."
"Your liberation is near," Ovadia concluded, "and it will bring peace and liberation to all of us."
The winners are "rewriting the rules that autocrats, patriarchs, and Silicon Valley’s most powerful men assumed were theirs to write alone.”
The winners of the annual Right Livelihood Award, announced on Wednesday, are two women and two women-led groups who "refused to wait for permission," said the executive director of the award committee.
“A system built to serve the few was never going to hold," said Ole von Uexkull, who added that the winners of the 2026 award are "rewriting the rules that autocrats, patriarchs, and Silicon Valley’s most powerful men assumed were theirs to write alone.”
The honorees include Jalila Haider, a Pakistani human rights lawyer who was the first female attorney from her Hazara community; Timnit Gebru, an American artificial intelligence researcher who has challenged the consolidation of power in Big Tech and exposed the potential harms of AI; the Rural Women's Assembly in South Africa, a movement of 78,000 small-scale farmers "united to defend land, seed, and bodily autonomy against corporate agribusiness and patriarchal dispossession"; and the Georgian Young Lawyers' Association (GYLA), the country's first human rights organization in Georgia, which has played a crucial role in its democratization.
The winners of the award, said Right Livelihood in a video about the 2026 laureates, "are making justice the center of the narrative."
Haider has combined legal work with on-the-ground activism, leading a seven-day hunger strike in 2018 against the targeted killing of Hazaras, a Shia Muslim minority, by the Pakistani army. The strike forced the army chief to negotiate directly with Hazara women, "resulting in a sustained decrease in attacks against the community."
Her law firm has also helped more than 600 political activists regain their freedom.
"Despite detention, cyberharassment, and death threats, she continues working toward a world where, in her words, 'no human being is illegal,'" said Right Livelihood.
Gebru was fired from Google after authoring an academic paper that warned of the risks posed by large language models; she had been co-leading the company's Ethics AI team. Now the founder and executive director of the Distributed Artificial Intelligence Research Institute (DAIR), the organization's distributed model "brings together researchers and collaborators across countries and continents, defying the centralized and corporate-driven concepts that mainstream AI entails."
"What keeps me going is belief in human agency," said Gebru in Right Livelihood's video.
The Rural Women's Assembly has "built one of the region’s largest autonomous platforms for rural women" with a volunteer structure, establishing 24 seed multiplication sites and "defending traditional seed systems from commercialization.
Its seed sovereignty efforts have challenged corporate control over South Africa's food systems and strengthened "communities’ resilience to climate shocks," according to Right Livelihood.
"We have the power, and we have the imagination that it will take to construct this new world, because another world is needed, and it's urgent," said the group's regional coordinator, Mercia Andrews.
GYLA is the first Right Livelihood winner from Georgia since the award was established in 1980. The group provides grassroots legal aid and has secured landmark legal victories, including ones that have protected rights for people with disabilities and guaranteed free education for every child in Georgia.
The group has opted to remain in the country with a scaled-down team, despite Georgia's repressive "foreign agents" law.
"With courage and determination, the organization presses on for a better future for all Georgians," said Right Livelihood.
The awards, which include support for the winners' work, are set to be presented on December 1 in Stockholm.