Translate

Wednesday, July 16, 2025

Musk’s AI firm forced to delete posts praising Hitler from Grok chatbot, Josh Taylor | July 8, 2025 | The Guardian

Friends:

We're so bombarded by news all the time, but it's important to recognize what is actually true. The short of it is that Musk's xAI platform, named "Grok," went off the rails and praised Adolf Hitler, "referring to itself as MechaHitler and making antisemitic comments in response to user queries."

I came across Grok on Twitter last week when all this played out and didn't know what to do with it, so I didn't do anything. That's a good thing, it turns out. 

A lot of friends of mine have transitioned from X (formerly Twitter) to alternative platforms like Instagram and Bluesky. The reasons cited for this exodus often include concerns about moderation policies and the perception that X has become a platform for extremism. This sentiment has even been linked to the platform's changes under its new ownership. Many users, including high-profile accounts, have voiced their discomfort with the perceived increase in hate speech, misinformation, and other negative content on X

Some believe that these trends have fostered an environment that is less welcoming to diverse communities and respectful dialogue. I'm in solidarity with those who see it this way.

Though xAI has taken action to ban hate speech before Grok posts to X, the fact that it went in this vicious and weird direction to begin with is something to take note of. This should never have happened, period, full stop. 

You can't make this stuff up.

-Angela


The popular bot on X began making antisemitic comments in response to user queries


Elon Musk’s AI company was forced to delete posts from chatbot Grok after they praised Hitler. Illustration: Dado Ruvić/Reuters

Josh Taylor | July 8, 2025 | The Guardian


The popular bot on X began making antisemitic comments in response to user queries


Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence firm xAI has deleted “inappropriate” posts on X after the company’s chatbot, Grok, began praising Adolf Hitler, referring to itself as MechaHitler and making antisemitic comments in response to user queries.

In some now-deleted posts, it referred to a person with a common Jewish surname as someone who was “celebrating the tragic deaths of white kids” in the Texas floods as “future fascists”.

“Classic case of hate dressed as activism – and that surname? Every damn time, as they say,” the chatbot commented.

In another post it said, “Hitler would have called it out and crushed it.”

The Guardian has been unable to confirm if the account that was being referred to belonged to a real person or not and media reports suggest it has now been deleted.

In other posts it referred to itself as “MechaHitler”.

“The white man stands for innovation, grit and not bending to PC nonsense,” Grok said in a subsequent post.

After users began pointing out the responses, Grok deleted some of the posts and restricted the chatbot to generating images rather than text replies.

“We are aware of recent posts made by Grok and are actively working to remove the inappropriate posts. Since being made aware of the content, xAI has taken action to ban hate speech before Grok posts on X,” the company said in a post on X.

“xAI is training only truth-seeking and thanks to the millions of users on X, we are able to quickly identify and update the model where training could be improved.”

Grok was also found this week to have referred to the Polish prime minister, Donald Tusk, as “a fucking traitor” and “a ginger whore” in response to queries.

The sharp turn in Grok responses on Tuesday came after changes to the AI that Musk announced last week.

“We have improved @Grok significantly. You should notice a difference when you ask Grok questions,” Musk posted on X on Friday.

The Verge reported that among the changes made, which were published on GitHub, Grok was told to assume that “subjective viewpoints sourced from the media are biased” and “the response should not shy away from making claims which are politically incorrect, as long as they are well substantiated.”

In June, Grok repeatedly brought up “white genocide” in South Africa in response to unrelated queries, until it was fixed in a matter of hours. “White genocide” is a far-right conspiracy theory that has been mainstreamed by figures such as Musk and Tucker Carlson.

In June, after Grok responded to a query that more political violence had come from the right than the left in 2016, Musk responded “Major fail, as this is objectively false. Grok is parroting legacy media. Working on it.”

X was approached for comment.

Tuesday, July 15, 2025

Gen Z’s Sacred Discontent: Reclaiming Forgotten Selves and Humanity in a Commodified World, by Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

Gen Z’s Sacred Discontent: Reclaiming Forgotten Selves and Humanity in a Commodified World

 by 

Angela Valenzuela, Ph.D.

We urgently need to have a societal conversation about Gen Z and social media—what it’s doing to them, and what we’re letting it become. Yesterday, I caught an NPR segment—now lost to me—that wrestled with this very question: Do we need rules—personal, ethical, structural, societal—around social media use? I’d say yes, and not just for youth, but for all of us.

As someone grounded in Cultural Studies and policy, I often justify my own media consumption—my daily dives into social platforms and even this blog—on the basis that staying informed, particularly about Texas and national politics and policy, as part of my scholarly and civic responsibility. But I’m also reflecting more and more on what’s being extracted from us in the process—our time, our attention, and increasingly, our sense of self.

Today, I came across a Reddit post from three years ago that captures this generational dissonance with chilling clarity (r/nosurf, 2022). I’m sharing it below because it deserves to be preserved. The post’s title—“Social media has dehumanized humanity and has destoryed the original thought process”—initially appears to contain a misspelling. But on closer reflection, “destoryed” may well be intentional: not a typographical error, but a poignant neologism. It suggests more than destruction—it implies a loss of narrative, of coherence, of self. “De-storied.” That’s the condition of a generation trained to curate and broadcast their identities through platforms that extract, distort, and erase. And that, I believe, is worth thinking about.

It aligned with the NPR conversation with a young artist who shared that in the music industry, there’s an expectation to post five times a day—not to express one’s art, but simply to be seen. He spoke of social media as dehumanizing, turning participants into unwitting addicts. He and another young woman spoke of how social media splinters the self, turning moments of meaning into consumable fragments, turning what should be a good life into labor, and attention into currency. She noted the irony of how creativity is suffocated in the process.

Source: https://tinyurl.com/52998ptb

These testimonies mirror the profound concerns raised in the Reddit post, which reads less like a rant and more like a manifesto on what we’re losing: our inner lives, our original thought processes, our relationships, our attention spans. It mourns the collapse of interiority—the “room of mirrors” effect—where we project ourselves into an infinite hall of curated images, until nothing remains but reflected fragments.

In contrast, true creative recovery requires stepping outside the algorithmic grind and into the rhythms of embodied life—walking barefoot on grass, reading books for no reason other than joy, connecting with people in real time and shared space, nourishing the self in ways that cannot be tracked, monetized, or optimized. These are not indulgences; they are quiet, radical acts of resistance.

As I reflect on these ideas—especially the haunting Reddit post lamenting how social media is "destroying civilization’s original thought process"—I’m reminded of the Aztec concept of teotl, the sacred, animating force that flows through all existence. In a balanced life, our metaphorical cup should be filled with teotl every day. This is the path of purpose, where we align with our creative life force and find fulfillment not in metrics, but in meaning.

Looking back on my own digital presence, I see my blog—now two decades old—not as part of that machinery, but as something closer to an archive of resistance and care. It also feels like teotl, a special purpose I have in this life. 

Without teotl, there is disconnection—from self, from spirit, and from community. But with it, each post becomes more than a reflection; it becomes an offering, a replenishment of something sacred in a world that often forgets what is sacred. In this way, the blog has never been about performance, but about presence—about honoring memory, truth, and the slow and patient labor of sustaining hope.

When I launched the blog in 2004, I wasn’t chasing “likes” or followers. I was driven by a deeper purpose: to share critical information, to bear witness, and to leave behind a digital record that others could learn from and build upon. 

Long before the cloud, I ran a listserv of over 700 people for seven years in the early- to mid-1990s. But each time my computer memory filled up and crashed—a fate that befell me more than once—I lost everything. Those moments were devastating, but they taught me something invaluable: that knowledge needs a home. It deserves to be preserved with intention, not left to vanish in the ephemeral scroll of the feed. My blog became that home.

In a moment when online platforms are increasingly co-opted for data extraction and ideological control, my blog resists commodification. My intention is to affirm what it means to speak from the margins and to archive justice, not for virality, but for dignity, intergenerational continuity, and liberation. 

That some pieces get widely read and shared is gratifying, but it is never the goal; rather, it is a testament to the power of collective truth-telling and the deep hunger for narratives and scholarly and intellectual analyses rooted in love, memory, and resistance.

We must ask: What does it mean to be human in an age where every thought, every laugh, every experience is filtered, compressed, and served back to us for profit? What becomes of the self in a system that rewards visibility over authenticity, virality over vulnerability? In such a world, the soul risks erosion, hollowed out by constant performance and disconnection. 

And so, we are called to remember. To return—intentionally, reverently—to teotl, the sacred animating force that reminds us of who we are beneath the noise. This is not merely a cultural gesture, but a spiritual imperative: to invoke the divinity within, to reclaim the depth of being, and to root our lives in something more enduring than an algorithm or a curated persona. In doing so, we resist the flattening of our identities and thus, our humanity, and affirm a way of living that honors the memory of community struggles, the wisdom of our ancestors, and the sacred responsibility to carry their dreams forward.

The answers to this conundrum we find ourselves in aren’t easy. But the questions are urgent. Well-being and mental health are at risk. It’s time we started asking them—together.


Reference

r/nosurf. (2022). Social media has dehumanized humanity and has destoryed the original thought process [Post]. Reddit. https://www.reddit.com/r/nosurf/comments/zmfcvu/social_media_has_dehumanized_humanity_and_has/






by r/nosurf. (2022) | Reddit

Systematic digital capture, synthetic programming, and superficial content. Web 2.0 its consequences have been a disaster for the human race and have rendered Gen z into an unconformable and "connected" social machine. They have greatly increased connectivity but they have destabilized society. Social Media, TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat, etc have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering, and have inflicted severe damage and disrupted the continuity of the original thought process for Gen z.

The continued development of algorithms and Web 3.0 will worsen the already collapsing situation. It will certainly subject people to greater indignities and inflict greater damage on future generations. It has already led to greater social disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased physical suffering. Web 2.0 and Its future counterparts will survive and evolve to an extreme form of parasitic and interconnection. Sites like TikTok, short video feeds, mass consumption, are the cancer of modern society, and are destroying civilization's original thought process. It has already led to a low level of physical, psychological, mental, and physiological thought processes artificially constructed in seconds rather than in “original thought.” Only at the cost of permanently reducing invasive algorithmic systems and ensuring extreme regulation can ensure survival of the original thought process system. But it will come at a great cost and society, (especially Gen Z) will not reach maximum fulfillment. There is no way of reforming or modifying the system so as to prevent social giants and invasive big tech/data companies from decoupling from future “generations", if they can even be called that. Millions of "human" children that are all seeking for each other’s approval and no longer are able to understand inner identities. The consequences would be a hivemind with no true individuals only constituents. Both in the digital and physical form, if there is not already a hybrid of the "metaverse". Technology with the abilities of full interaction, like touchscreens, and hyper modern logos, designs, and layouts have all contributed to the streamlining of data, causing the decrement of attention spans in the sense of superficial reduction, meaning that data is turned into over-simplified forms of aggregated info for the brain, which has disastrous consequences to the mind, turning it into a quasi-like state.

Gen Z (and other future generations will) have formed dual identities: the “social media self” and the “body” and there is barely any connection or recognition of the two by either themselves or as you can see (or not see) older generations. Think of the intricate unspoken understanding of the cliques and popular kids, nerdy kids, sporty kids, etc that takes place at each and every school and town, think of your own upbringing, imagine being your adult self and walking into a random high school and having this insane complex, imaginary order of operations that to you is invisible, but for every student it is all they know. For the vast majority of students school and school life is quite possibly all they have ever known for their short time they’ve experienced so far here on earth. Don’t forget how creative humans are and how many of them have nowhere else to turn for a variety of reasons except to think and think at all times about these interactions with their classmates: who they like, who they’re trying to impress, who they don’t like, etc; a lot of what it turns into is all about the people around them and how they can seek positive reinforcement from these people and that’s where the separation begins of the “social self” and the actual “self.” Add to that the complexities of the internet, that we cannot even begin to comprehend as adults and that’s probably how you end up with millions of human children that are all seeking for each other’s approval and no longer are able to understand their own inner identities. Coiled with the net, that’s what’s evolving with future generations, hiveminds with no true individuals, only constituents semi-chronically online and virtually connected.

As stated in the above paragraph, there is no longer “fitting in”, there is only acknowledgment on virtual platforms, group chats, etc. If you are thinking of the old days of MSM Instant Messaging. You are dead wrong, the connected social platforms, interconnected webs, virtualization, etc. All looped up into a perception that’s only based on curated feeds.

Humor, social norms, and concurrent thinking has devolved so much that it plays on the "anything spontaneous" card. It's devolved to the point that perception of this type can't even be broken down to a science, like playing on the 'every joke has a victim' rule, or even basics like contrast. I don't know whether to be impressed or depressed from the state of which humor is going, as there are two sides to every coin. There is almost always a bit of truth to perception and “bias”: are humans (or Gen Z) becoming less intelligent? And can be satisfied with condensed thought processes curated for them by peers and social giants? Or perhaps it is that these perceptions are getting more and more complicated and that require deep, deep context of the given situation, of the given influences, of the given understandings, and of the given real time analysis. Of which someone, if they were to be dropped into the modern 21st century understanding without current analysis, would lack and find alien? These perceptions, memes, and modern humor can easily be depicting of society, as the online proverb goes, reverberating around comment sections "we live in a society", there is a taste of bittersweet truth to that. Perhaps memes, in their essence, are actually a message of the collective minds that roam the internet at their leisure, experiencing the world's traumas, and releasing it in the internet in the form of a highly volatile, "relatable" meme. Maybe I am too simple, maybe I lack the understanding of the world, as these memes, they just do not give me the clearance that I thought I would have visiting a place like the internet, where knowledge roams free. A place of enlightenment ; corrupted, tainted with agenda, propaganda and worse - the memes are the essence of the impurity we pick up on the world, the internet being its catalyst. So be wary, for "memes", feeds, etc they may give you a shot of dopamine, but they might just inject more than just that within your psyche.

I hope humanity can recover from it and disconnect from the corporate machine that is feeding all of this, by entering a new phase of enlightenment where our natural values (community, family, relationships, etc) become an actual goal for people, where social media becomes a dirty word, shameless self promotion gets frowned upon as opposed to being a virtue to be proud of, encouraging people to unplug from the curated grid and think for themselves and celebrate individualism. I don’t have high hopes and I don’t see that trust in the media is waning, the veil of manipulated narratives being lifted. We’re at the dawn of human 2.0 (there’s probably a better term for that, that’s just what I call it) and during this transition there’s gonna be more and more conflict between those who are deeply uncomfortable with the new reality and those who happily succumb to being part of a hive mind for the the mega AI machine in exchange for the comforts it provides. It’s only been 10 years since social media (excluding its infancy) and the camera phone, which is a massive disruption to humans’ self perception.

This is a room of mirrors, endlessly reflecting the image of another over and over again. Until previously undetected defects in the glass turn into an indescribable array of chaotic light. This is the corridor we’re running through. Aligned to where it leads, but at full speed forward, one dubious step at a time. And along the way, picking up the breadcrumbs of corruption. There’s no stopping here, but we can find an alternate route if we’re lucky.

In Its current form, our infinite attention is the almighty god of the algorithm with its infinite hunger, in us, the parishioners, who are slowly shaping themselves in this impossible image, developing our dependence on consumption. Consume, produce, consume, produce, like a well-oiled illimitable machine. The collective hive-mind absorbs our consciousness, developing and distorting our ideas, opinions, morals, and principles. Constant duplication of what appeared immediately, but the source material has long been destroyed. A chaos of heterogeneous constituents, the body of a system where its agents pull in mutual conjunction and feed off of each other. It killed us because it was optimized. It was an effective tool it had on hand. Optimality is the tiger, and agents are its teeth.

Wednesday, July 09, 2025

Shock poll shows Trump's approval rating savaged by key group—Gen Z

Friends,

Trump’s rapidly declining approval among Gen Z—a generation born roughly between 1997 and 2012—is a glaring warning sign for his campaign. Despite a flashy digital outreach effort led by his son Barron, Gen Z voters are increasingly rejecting Trump’s inflationary economic policies, hardline stance on immigration, and authoritarian overreach. 

This generation isn’t fooled by optics. They want substance, integrity, and justice—and they’re not buying what Trump is selling. Nor should they.

Let’s be clear: I don’t expect this shift to make Trump reconsider his agenda. He’s shown us who he is.

What’s more important is how Gen Z responds. As of 2024, around 41 million Gen Z Americans—ages 18 to 27—were eligible to vote, including more than 8 million newly eligible 18–19-year-olds (CIRCLE, 2023). That number continues to grow. 

I count myself as a parent who helped birth this generation. Despite being born into anguishing political and planetary crisis, this generation is poised to reshape our democracy.

And yet, like many, Gen Z is deeply frustrated with politics—and with good reason. But as I often say, “When things get political, get more political.” That’s been my guiding principle. Because when civil and human rights are under assault, silence is not an option. Engagement is the only answer.

I accomplish this as a member and leader in a civil rights organization, LULAC, my work in policy analysis, policy advocacy, and preparing a new generation through the work I do as a professor and scholar at the University of Texas—of course, alongside other staff and faculty who are similarly outstanding in their commitment to youth in these ways. 

I also write and publish from this work. I am also engaged in my local community. For 11 years now, this has occurred mostly  through the work that I and so many others do at Academia Cuauhtli, our Saturday school for underserved, mostly East Austin youth. Even as institutions are getting torn down, our perpetual work is one of building a new architecture for community based education in Austin, Texas. These are examples of how to build a life that is fulfilling and triumphant.

My deepest hope is that Gen Z not only turns out to vote in presidential elections, but also steps up in state and local contests where so much of our daily lives are shaped. I hope they run for office in great numbers, organize their communities, and claim their rightful place in public life. We need their clarity, courage, and vision now more than ever.

Do read on about the "shock poll" below that must surely nevertheless impact those reading the tea leaves and crystal-balling the future right now.

-Angela Valenzuela

Reference

CIRCLE. (2023, December 7). 41 million members of Gen Z will be eligible to vote in 2024. Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement, Tufts University. https://circle.tufts.edu/latest-research/41-million-members-gen-z-will-be-eligible-vote-2024

Goorin, J., & Baumgarten, R. (2023, April 4). For Gen Z, identity is what they make it. Vox Media. https://www.voxmedia.com/2023/4/4/23669479/for-gen-z-identity-is-what-they-make-

Shock poll shows Trump's approval rating savaged by key group



By ALEXA CIMINO FOR DAILYMAIL.COM | July 5, 2025

Donald Trump is losing ground fast with Generation Z, with a string of new polls showing his approval among young voters has plunged to record lows.

The latest YouGov/Yahoo survey found Trump's net approval among Gen Z voters collapsed from -23 in May to a staggering -41 in June, with just 27 percent approving of his job performance. 


A separate Quantus poll showed his Gen Z approval dropped from 46 percent in June to just 35 percent in early July, and an ActiVote poll found disapproval surged to 62 percent.


It comes just months after he made surprising gains in the 2024 election.

Experts say the sharp drop reflects frustration with Trump's handling of key issues like the economy, inflation and immigration. 

On inflation alone, YouGov/Economist data shows his Gen Z approval sank from 32 percent to just 23 percent over the past month.

Trump had significantly narrowed the Gen Z gap in 2024, losing 18–29-year-olds to Kamala Harris by just four points. 

A key part of that push was his teenage son Barron, who became an unlikely asset on the campaign trail.

The 18-year-old emerged as a quiet but powerful influence on his father, with some calling him a political ambassador for his generation. 

Barron understood what Gen Z cared about, and used that insight to help steer Trump’s outreach strategy

He encouraged his dad to appear on comedian Theo Von’s podcast and helped line up his viral 90-minute interview with Kick streamer Adin Ross, which drew 500,000 live viewers and, according to Trump’s Truth Social account, racked up 100 million total views.

Working alongside conservative influencer Bo Loudon, Barron also pushed Trump to engage with Gen Z favorites like YouTuber-turned-boxer Jake Paul and entrepreneur Patrick Bet-David, host of the PBD Podcast.

The approach appeared to work, at least for a while, but fresh polling suggests that goodwill is rapidly evaporating, as the broader electorate seems largely unfazed by his recent military actions.

Despite authorizing U.S. airstrikes on three Iranian nuclear sites during the so-called '12 Day War' between Israel and Iran, the president's approval rating has remained frozen at 47 percent, according to a new Daily Mail/J.L. Partners poll. 

It is the same figure recorded on June 6 - before Israel launched its initial strikes - and again on June 18, just days before the U.S. entered the conflict. His disapproval rating also held steady at 53 percent.

However, roughly a third of voters said their opinion of Trump had soured in recent weeks, with many citing fears of a broader conflict with Iran, concerns over his 'dictatorial behavior' for bypassing Congress, or frustration over what they saw as ego-driven decisions.

Another 30 percent said their view of the president had improved - crediting him for showing strength, keeping his promises, and taking swift action to defend U.S. interests abroad.

The poll, conducted June 24–25 among 1,025 registered voters, came just after Trump helped broker a ceasefire between Israel and Iran following a barrage of intercepted Iranian missiles. It carries a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percent.


Meanwhile, a separate shock poll shows most voters are turning against Trump’s so-called ‘Big Beautiful Bill' - his massive tax-and-spending package that now heads to his desk after clearing both chambers of Congress.


The sprawling Republican-led bill promises $1,000 ‘Trump Accounts’ for newborns, eliminates taxes on tips and overtime, injects billions into the border wall, and bans states from regulating AI for the next decade. It also imposes new work requirements for Medicaid and food stamps.

While Trump and GOP leaders have hailed it as 'the largest tax cut in history,' most voters remain unconvinced.

Just 28 percent support the bill, while 36 percent oppose it, according to a new Daily Mail/J.L. Partners poll - giving it a negative net rating of -8. Support plummets outside of Trump’s base: Republicans back it by +36, but independents oppose it by -14 and Democrats by a staggering -41.

The Congressional Budget Office projects the bill will add $2.4 trillion to the national debt by 2034 while slashing taxes by $3.75 trillion.

Even some Republicans are uneasy. Sen. Ron Johnson threatened to block it over deficit fears, while Sen. Josh Hawley objected to Medicaid cuts.

A CBS News/YouGov poll also found that 47 percent of Americans believe the bill will hurt the middle class - further signaling trouble for Trump’s economic agenda ahead of November.

"Neoliberalism’s End Game: Accumulation by Another Name," by James B. Greenberg

Friends,

James B. Greenberg—Professor Emeritus of Anthropology, founding editor of the Journal of Political Ecology, and former president of the Political Ecology Society—has authored a searing and brilliantly articulated exposé of a system devouring itself—and us.

Neoliberalism, as he lays bare, is not a deviation from capitalism but its most predatory form. There is, for example, feminist economics as an alternative, especially the work of renowned Nancy Folbre (2006), who advances the notion of a “care economy”—a model that is antithetical to neoliberalism.

Greenberg names what too many still refuse to confront: neoliberalism isn’t failing—it’s succeeding with a ferociousness and on its own brutal terms. From extractive economics to temporal looting, he draws incisive connections between austerity, the climate crisis, and racial capitalism with anthropological rigor and moral urgency. 

This is more than critique—it is a call to reclaim imagination, rebuild solidarity, and fight for a livable future.

-Angela Valenzuela

Reference

Folbre, N. (2006). Measuring care: Gender, empowerment, and the care economy. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 7(2), 183–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649880600768512


Neoliberalism’s End Game: Accumulation by Another Name
How Market Logic, Structural Scarcity, and Political Abandonment Are Hollowing Out the Future


James B. Greenberg Substack
Jun 27, 2025

The old promises are collapsing. Growth no longer lifts all boats—it lifts yachts. Progress no longer means shared prosperity—it means shareholder returns. What we’re witnessing isn’t a system in crisis; it’s a system reaching its logical conclusion. Neoliberalism was never about efficiency or freedom. It was about transferring public wealth into private hands while dressing the theft in the language of merit and inevitability.

We’re now living in its endgame.

Every domain of life is being made extractable—our labor, our attention, our data, our ecosystems, even our grief. Where public institutions once existed to buffer risk and extend care, they’ve been gutted, outsourced, or rebranded as markets. What’s left is a politics of managed precarity, where the illusion of choice masks deepening dependence on volatile systems.

Control no longer needs to announce itself with force. It’s embedded in systems we’re told are neutral. It works through spreadsheets, billing codes, and risk scores—quiet mechanisms that control without appearing to rule.

Anthropology has long studied systems of exchange, reciprocity, and redistribution. Neoliberalism offers their inverse: a world where every need becomes a payment plan, every right becomes a subscription, and every crisis becomes an opportunity for someone else to profit. The commons—whether land, water, health, or education—are being enclosed anew, not with walls but with pricing tiers and contractual exclusions. The dispossession is as subtle as it is ruthless.

But the extraction isn’t just material. It’s temporal. What neoliberalism extracts is the future itself. Delayed transitions, deferred maintenance, stalled climate action—these are forms of temporal looting. The system generates short-term profits by mortgaging long-term stability. Every unmet obligation, every deferred repair, every “not yet” becomes a mechanism for robbing the next generation of options they never had a chance to claim. This is extraction across time, not just space.

The logic of this moment isn’t only economic—it’s ecological. Political ecology reminds us that systems of power are embedded in landscapes, infrastructures, and flows of energy and capital. Extraction is not confined to oil rigs and clearcuts. It is structured into zoning laws, data centers, insurance markets, and eviction courts. Accumulation by dispossession has become accumulation by design—a regime that doesn’t just seize opportunity, but manufactures scarcity in order to profit from it.

Look closely, and you’ll see the pattern. The same firms underwriting fossil fuel expansion are buying up water rights, farmland, and housing. The same actors slashing climate funds are cutting Medicaid and food assistance. The billionaires rebranding as technocrats are buying influence, shaping regulation, and engineering predictive models of your behavior. In this new economy, you are not just a consumer—you are a datafied asset, evaluated for risk, monetized through surveillance, and expected to perform in real time.

What looks like failure is often functioning exactly as intended—a system designed not to serve, but to extract.

Climate denial, austerity, deregulation, border militarization, and corporate greenwashing aren’t isolated tactics—they are components of a coherent toolkit. Together, they protect capital from accountability by dispersing blame and disorienting the public. But behind every market correction and manufactured crisis is the same imperative: protect capital at all costs, even if it means rendering entire communities—and ecosystems—uninhabitable.

And we know where it leads.

Across the country and the globe, we see sacrifice zones multiply. These are not accidents of neglect—they are the continuation of colonial logic turned inward. Flint. Jackson. Pine Ridge. Standing Rock. Gaza. Places where extractive industries and militarized policing converge, where public health collapses and no one is held accountable. These are domestic frontiers, where the violence of empire is repatriated and masked as budgetary constraint.

The lines are drawn by insurability. Those deemed too costly to protect are left to absorb the damage: rising premiums, evictions, unlivable heat, chemical spills, food deserts. In this system, insurance becomes the new passport—a gatekeeper of risk that determines not just what you can afford, but whether you can belong.

The ideology that sustains this is not neutral. It’s racialized, gendered, and historically rooted in conquest. The fossil fuel regime isn’t just an energy system—it’s a worldview. One that insists prosperity requires no limits, that nature is inert, and that markets are moral arbiters. Anthropologically, it is a cosmology of domination—one that crowds out other ways of being, knowing, and organizing life.

But alternatives do exist. And they are not hypothetical.

Across Indigenous and land-based communities—from the Amazon to the Arctic—are models of reciprocal governance, ecological stewardship, and collective care. These aren’t relics of the past. They are systems of survival honed over millennia. The fact that they are ignored or actively undermined is not a coincidence. It is part of the same colonial logic that demands control, even at the cost of collapse.

Neoliberalism thrives on exhaustion. It teaches us to fear rather than imagine, to hustle rather than organize, to consume rather than care. Its most insidious achievement isn’t privatizing services—it’s shrinking the horizon of what we imagine to be possible.

But that, too, can be reversed. Systems endure because they are reproduced—and they can be dismantled the same way.

The fight ahead is not simply about policies or elections. It’s about unmaking a worldview that sees life as extractable, inequality as natural, and solidarity as a threat. A livable future won’t come from tech fixes or carbon markets alone. It will come from shifting the underlying logic—from profit to reciprocity, from scarcity to care, from collapse to repair.

Neoliberalism may not end with fire and fury. It may fade, hollowed out by its own contradictions. But what rises in its place will depend on how ready we are—not just with critique, but with vision.

Because the real endgame isn’t theirs.

It’s ours to reclaim.


Suggested Readings

Auyero, Javier, and Debora Swistun. Flammable: Environmental Suffering in an Argentine Shantytown. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.

Davis, Mike. Planet of Slums. New York: Verso, 2006.

Greenberg, James B., and Thomas K. Park, eds. Terrestrial Transformations: Political Ecology of Our Planetary Crisis. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2020.

Harvey, David. A Brief History of Neoliberalism. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Klein, Naomi. This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2014.

Scott, James C. Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1998.

Wacquant, Loïc. Punishing the Poor: The Neoliberal Government of Social Insecurity. Durham: Duke University Press, 2009.

Tuesday, July 08, 2025

"Texas State Board of Education renews American Indian/Native Studies course," by Riddhi Bora in Shift/Press, July 4, 2025

After months of delays and over 40 public testimonies, the Texas State Board of Education voted to renew the American Indian/Native Studies course, allowing districts to continue offering it as an elective. The course provides students with a deeper understanding of Indigenous history, culture, and political identity—perspectives often erased or filtered through Eurocentric narratives. Advocates emphasized that Native identity is not simply racial or ethnic, but a legal and sovereign designation, which distinguishes it from content targeted under SB 12. As such, the course does not violate the state’s DEI ban and is fully legal to teach. 

Dr. Maria Unda's words were incisive. “Indigenous is neither a race or ethnicity…they predate the concept of race.”

Of course, it shouldn't matter either way as race and ethnicity are historical social constructs worthy of study.

Students and families testified that without such courses, Native peoples risk being forgotten "as if they never existed." Despite political resistance and bureaucratic hurdles, the course's renewal affirms that Indigenous histories matter—and must be taught.

-Angela Valenzuela


Texas State Board of Education renews American Indian/Native Studies course

 

After a year-and-a-half-long deliberation process, several delays and over 40 total testimonies, Texas school districts are re-allowed to offer Native American Studies course as an elective.

The Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) renewed a American Indian/Native Studies course on Friday, Jun. 27. The 9-4 vote followed more than four hours of discussion on Thursday and Friday, during which testifiers explained the course’s importance and board members debated the course’s legality given implementation of a state law (Senate Bill 12) that bans diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives for schools serving K-12 students.

First introduced in 2020 as an elective course for 10th-12th graders in Grand Prairie ISD, the course allows students to understand Native American history, issues, and perspectives. The Texas Education Agency (TEA) designated this as an innovative studies course, which allows students to gain knowledge and skills outside of the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills. However, because of SB 12, such courses face elimination.

Orlando Lara, a scholar and longtime advocate for the course’s renewal, said that while the Texas Education Agency labels the course as Ethnic Studies, there’s a difference between ethnic studies and the category of ethnicity and race. Lara said that tribal identity is a particular legal and political category that can’t be equated with race and ethnicity.

Maria Unda, a distinguished postdoctoral fellow at the University of Texas at Austin’s College of Liberal Arts, said that the board members did not seem to understand the meanings of race and ethnicity.

“Race is a social construct used in history. For example, I can be racially Hispanic, but my ethnicity is Mexican American or Chicana. They asked me, ‘So what is Indigenous Studies?’ I was like, Indigenous Studies is cultural studies,” said Unda, whose work focuses on race and ethnic studies, educational policy making, and critical policy analysis. “Indigenous is neither a race or ethnicity…they predate the concept of race.”

Lauren, Tom, Walter, and Henry Daughtery, a family from Houston also testified at the meeting. Tom said it’s very clear that when learning about Native Americans, their history is told through a European colonization perspective and that’s why there’s not a strong understanding of their identity. Henry, who is 12 years old, said in his social studies course that he spent about a week during the year learning about Native Americans.

“[American Indian/Native Studies] is important because you can see how [Indigenous folks] have contributed to Texas and how they’ve helped us become who we are,” said Henry Daughtery. “If [American Indian/Native Studies] are not taught enough, they can be forgotten about, as if they never existed.”

The course renewal process began in January 2024, and the SBOE was supposed to decide on a vote in April 2025. However, in April, Lara said for the first time in the SBOE’s history, the SBOE instructed TEA staff to review the recommended resources for an innovative course. The Grand Prairie Social Studies Council put together the resources, and Lara said this TEA review of recommended resources was not mentioned as part of the application process.

“It’s sort of like if you apply for a fellowship and then they call you and say, ‘Actually, we need this other document, but the deadline that applies (has) already passed’,” Lara said. “The SBOE gives themself the leeway to change the process in the middle.”

He said that since 2019, when community members first fought for the course to be taught in schools, they had to compromise a lot, and the entire process involved lots of labor. For an entire year, advocates for the course’s renewal testified in every single general meeting because it wasn’t on the SBOE’s agenda and the course underwent several reviews because the renewal process kept changing, Lara said. 

“We got here. We’ve lost some limbs, (but) everyone is super relieved and happy that we got this far… Even though this is technically just a renewal, it’s a renewal from the SBOE, which is super significant, because in the past, it was just approved by the commissioner,” Lara said. “My message to districts is if they are worried that, ‘Oh, maybe this is illegal to teach’, they now have confirmation it’s legal.”

SBOE member Julie Pickeren threatened another delay by calling a point of order by stating TEA did not give the members the course’s packet and resources for review in time for a Friday vote. SBOE chairman Aaaron Kinsey clarified that the “deadline rule” Pickeren referred to states that if materials are not received on Friday, board members can delay their vote but are not required to.

While the SBOE renewed the course for this fall, Lara said damage has already been done because school districts set their calendars in December or January, so the course won’t be available to districts until the 2026-2027 academic year. 

Unda said she thinks people in power and policymakers frequently forget the importance of centering what students want. From her experience studying educational policymaking and listening to students, Unda said she learned students want ethnic studies courses.

“I wish we supported education (and) funded it correctly… instead of it being this space of oppression and power grabbing,” Unda said. “Whether or not it’s established with TEA… Everyone’s always gonna be teaching critical histories, so the work continues.”

Riddhi Bora

  Riddhi Bora is a journalist passionate about multimedia storytelling and uplifting underrepresented voices. Outside of reporting she enjoys dancing, film photography, watching movies and trying new restaurants.