Why the Turkish Lifting of Head Scarf Ban and New Student Dress Code Has Secularists Shuddering

by Nomad

Turkey's long-standing headscarf ban has been the bane of conservative religious groups for years. The ruling party has just issued a new dress code for public school students which will finally see the end of the ban.
Here's why a lot of people aren't very happy about the new dress policy. 

To understand the news about Turkey's headscarf controversy, it is helpful to realize how important symbolism can be. Especially the religious kind.

Back in the 1920s, when Mustafa Kemal established the modern Turkish Republic from the ruins of the Ottoman Empire, he was determined to break with the theocratic tendencies of the past. 

The so-called "Father of the Turks" believed the excessive influence of religion in all aspects of life, but especially in politics and in state affairs had led only to backwardness. Secularism, Kemal believed, was the solution.

In his effort to set up a secular forward-thinking republic, he banned most of the articles of religious symbolism, like the wearing of the fez and beards for men and the Islam-mandated covering for the women. In all public buildings and government schools, fezzes and headscarves were formally banned. 

(If that sounds incredible or high-handed, remember this is a man who changed the Turkish alphabet from Arabic script to Latin letters practically overnight.) Until the religious-based AKP party took the reins of government, that ban had gone unchallenged.

The Headscarf Cultural War

Like all government workers, public school teachers and students were forbidden to wear headscarves in school. In the private sector had for the most part followed suit with its employees.

For religious conservatives this headscarf ban has long been a thorn in the side. They have successfully defeated the ban. And they couldn't have done it without the help of Europe.

The Price of Apathy

by Nomad

The mid-term elections that put the Tea Party in Congress was real-life demonstration of Plato's observation. The question is whether American voters are still as apathetic as they were then. 

Food Caravans: Why Birmingham Alabama is Putting Produce Markets on Wheels

by Nomad

The city of Birmingham, Alabama is trying out an urban project to bring healthy food to neighborhoods in need. 

In past blog posts we have taken a look at the problem of "food deserts." Where deserts are places with limited water or limited access to whatever water is there, food deserts are  areas where residents may not have access to affordable and healthy food options. 

That's particularly true when it comes to the healthy alternatives (fresh fruit and vegetables).   

According to a report prepared for Congress by the Economic Research Service of the US Department of Agriculture, about 2.3 million people (or 2.2 percent of all US households) live more than one mile away from a supermarket and do not own a car.

There's no mistaking it. The problem cuts down racial and class lines. Food deserts can be most generally found in communities of color and low-income areas (where many people don't have cars). 

In contrast, wealthier parts of town, studies tell us, have three times as many supermarkets as poor areas. And white neighborhoods have on average up to four times as many supermarkets as black neighborhoods. To make matters worse, grocery stores in African-American communities are usually smaller with less selection. 

It's only a slight exaggeration to say that in some poorer sections of urban America,  it could be easier to buy illegal drugs than to find a healthy meal for a family.

So, that's the problem, but what are the solutions?  

Birmingham's Bright Idea

Well, the city of Birmingham, Alabama has approved of a innovative plan to bring the food to those who most need it. 

The board of supervisors for the Birmingham-Jefferson County Transit Authority (BJCTA) has approved of the city's plan to create so-called "mobile food markets." 

The Politics of Donald Trump: Where Ignorance and Arrogance Collide

by Nomad

The other day, Donald Trump accidentally revealed his shocking ignorance of the US political system. It shouldn't have surprised anybody.

Despite all of Trump's self-aggrandizing boasts, the real question is why anybody in their right mind would take his advice about anything.

Whom Trump Really Loves

When mogul Donald Trump endorses his favorite politician it must be a very a mixed blessing and a dubious honor to be the object of his affection. If Mr.Trump loves anybody in this world (and that's iffy) it is only Donald Trump. A Trump endorsement serves only one purpose: to attract much more attention to Trump. 

In the case of Senator Mitch McConnell, Trump managed to turn the benefit of a high profile endorsement into just another case of Trump making a jackass of himself before the whole dang world. 

Trump's obvious attempt to slag McConnell's challenger, Democrat Alison Lundergan Grimes, spectacularly backfired the other day. Trump tweeted:

Unfortunately, for Trump (and the rest of the nation) McConnell is a Senator, not a Congressman, as Trump seems to think. Somebody should have told Trump that Congress is composed of two houses of Congress and .. oh, never mind, Trump would have probably nodded his frizzy uncooperative head, blinked back and fired an unpaid intern.

The problem is that it's so much harder to blame your underlings when you have tweeted something awfully dumb like this. (Rick Perry just said his stupid tweet was "unauthorized" and left it to our imaginations.)

What kind of excuse can he make for his obvious ignorance about the fundamentals of US politics? On the other hand, Trump has never let stupid mistakes or dumb remarks (or bad hair days) stop him plowing on towards the next dumb thing.   

Trump loves to dole out sage advice. It makes him seem important. He thinks. Mr. Trump spends all day thinking up precious gems like this:

Part of being a winner is knowing when enough is enough. Sometimes you have to give up the fight and walk away, and move on to something that's more productive.

In fact, this could be perfect advice to give Senator McConnell. 

Being a winner is something that Trump pretends to know all about but in fact, his record isn't particularly impressive.

The Romney Connection: Why Marriott Fired a Candidate Worker

by Nomad

A Florida case poses the question: What happens when the First Amendment rights of an employee comes into conflict with the corporate free speech guaranteed by the Citizens United decision?

Is it legal for an employer to fire  workers who campaign against their corporate-supported candidate?

Raw Story has a story about a Democratic candidate running for Osceola County Commission who was fired for attempting to unseat the candidate her company supports. Viviana Janer's employer, Marriott Vacations Worldwide reportedly gave her the choice of either quitting her campaign or losing her job of 11 years.

Janer told reporters:

“After a decade of accolades and promotions, I was told my job would be abruptly terminated if I did not drop out of the race. Despite my wish to continue working, I felt I could not turn my back on the many citizens of Osceola County who worked so hard to get me elected. I refused to drop out of the race, and on Friday I was fired from a job I loved.”

According to the termination letter from Senior Vice President and Chief Audit Executive Julie Meyer, Janer was fired because she had not received permission to run for office. 

However, as Janer pointed out, company policy actually encourages political involvement in general.  

Here's how the employee guidelines read:

Marriott Vacations Worldwide encourages your personal participation in elections and government processes. However, you must conduct your personal political activities on your own time and without use of the company’s resources (e.g., stationery, copying machines, or office supplies).