Let Roe Go: Winning Abortion Rights

 Let Roe Go: Winning Abortion Rights

Jim Kavanagh

With Roe v. Wade overturned, and multiple states rushing to institute draconian abortion bans, the abortion-rights movement faces the task of winning—anew, but effectively for the first time—a right many of us mistakenly thought was secured. To do that requires, I think, recognizing and abandoning the diversionary legal-constitutional and partisan-political paths in which confidence was misplaced, and sharpening the tools needed for a strong and irreversible victory in the wider political sense. 

Judge Not

Of course, the abortion-rights battle must be waged on all fronts. But legal and legislative victories will only be won securely as a result of winning broad and deep political support—persuading a majority of people of the justice and necessity of the cause. That is the kind of political work that created the conditions for Roe v. Wade—independent, risky personal and collective political action, including civil disobedience, that highlighted the plight and right of pregnant women, and the hypocrisy and cruelty of criminalizing abortion.

Though it was, at the time, a punctual victory that resulted from such work, Roe also turned out to be Pyrrhic. Roe has arguably weakened the abortion-rights movement, which centered itself on defending the decision, searching for Supreme Court nominees who would support it, and engaging in partisan battles about it—at the expense of building wider and deeper popular support for the substantive right throughout the country.

Roe pre-empted an offensive strategy of growing a mass political movement for abortion rights, and channeled it into defensive, system-reaffirming, judicial and partisan “politics.” The abortion rights movement complacently placed its trust in an alliance with sympathetic magistrates and Democratic politicians and forewent the task of non-partisan persuasion—continually making its case and strengthening its support among masses of people whose support cannot be taken for granted or written off. While “pro-choice” liberals were playing with their RBG dolls, 15-year-old girls (and their parents) throughout the country were being talked to, and shown pictures of dead fetuses, by conservative pastors. Who’s approach was more effective?

The Wrinkle: Abortion Rights, Vaccine Passports, and Bodily Autonomy

The Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade marks an enormous defeat for women’s rights in the United States. We must not underestimate its importance, and how difficult it will be to overcome. There is a slew of things to consider about how this defeat occurred, and about how supporters of women’s rights and abortion rights can best organize to win a decisive and irreversible victory for a right that so many of us, mistakenly, thought had already been secured.

I’ll go over a number of those considerations in another essay. But here I want quickly to break out and discuss one wrinkle that has developed during the past two years—one that is of serious consequence for the abortion-rights argument because it directly touches on its essential element, and one that has enmired many leftists and abortion-rights supporters in confusion and contradiction that have weakened their abortion-rights position in ways they do not want to acknowledge.

That wrinkle is the dominant leftist attitude toward the mandatory covid vaccination policies, an attitude that is based, I think, on a strange and increasingly common epistemological stance—an inability, or stubborn refusal, to think things through honestly and consistently, considering all the arguments without pre-ordained conclusion.

Failing to have a consistent position based on bodily autonomy in regard to the forced intrusions of vaccine mandates/passports and abortion criminalization is a mistake of grave consequence, politically and epistemologically. Those who don’t recognize that mistake are undermining their political position in support of abortion rights, fooling themselves, and confusing and harming the movement.

And here’s the proof:

Week in Review Discussion on The Critical Hour (5/24/19)

Federal Judge Writes “Here We Go Again” as He Blocks Mississippi Abortion Law

It’s Friday, so that means it's panel time. 

A federal judge today issued a preliminary injunction blocking Mississippi's fetal heartbeat anti-abortion law from going into effect, saying it infringes on women's health care rights. “Here we go again. Mississippi has passed another law banning abortions prior to viability,” Judge Carlton Reeves wrote in his order. "By banning abortions after the detection of a fetal heartbeat, SB 226 prevents a woman’s free choice, which is central to personal dignity and autonomy.” The Mississippi ban prohibited abortions after the detection of a fetal heartbeat, or around six weeks into pregnancy. Governor Phil Bryant signed the bill into law in March. The lawsuit leading to the injunction was filed by the Jackson Women's Health Organization against Thomas Dobbs, the state health officer of Mississippi.

After defying political gravity for three years, Theresa May brought her tortured tenure as UK prime minister to a close Friday. "I will shortly leave the job that it has been the honor of my life to hold," she said outside Downing Street, her voice quivering in the morning sunshine. And with that, she's off - or at least she will be later in the summer, once a new Conservative leader is elected. We knew it was imminent, but to me, it is still a surprise.
[My related article: For What It’s Worth: The Yellow Vests and the Left]

The US government is stressing that Julian Assange is no journalist after bringing an 18-count indictment against the co-founder of WikiLeaks. Federal prosecutors are accusing Assange of violating the Espionage Act in working with a former Army intelligence analyst to obtain and distribute classified information. That worries some professional journalists because it's close to what they do. Assange remains in jail in London after being evicted from the Ecuadorian Embassy there. 
[My related article: Avoiding Assange]

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo notified lawmakers Friday that US President Donald Trump is invoking his emergency authority to sidestep Congress and complete 22 arms deals that would benefit Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and other countries, despite lawmakers’ objections to the transactions. Both Republicans and Democrats urged the Trump administration this week not to take the rare step of exploiting a legal window to push through deals - worth about $8 billion, according to congressional aides - that lawmakers have blocked from being finalized. You know, it was Wall Street who was happy and well cared for during the Obama administration. Now it seems like the war machine, the military industrial complex and the arms manufacturers are being so well cared Saufor.

Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan on Thursday acknowledged that the growing tensions with Iran “may involve sending additional troops” to the region. Shanahan's comments marked the first public confirmation that the Trump administration is considering sending additional US forces to curtail what it claims are “troubling and escalatory indications and warnings” from Iran. The Pentagon has already deployed a carrier strike group and a bomber task force to the Middle East, and news reports emerged this week that Shanahan on Thursday was set to present the White House with a request to deploy 10,000 troops to the Middle East. An earlier report said that the US could send upwards of 120,000 additional troops.

GUESTS: 

Dr. Jack Rasmus — Professor of economics at Saint Mary's College of California and author of "Central Bankers at the End of Their Ropes: Monetary Policy and the Coming Depression."

Jim Kavanagh — Political analyst and commentator and editor of The Polemicist.

Caleb Maupin — Journalist and political analyst who focuses his coverage on US foreign policy and the global system of monopoly capitalism and imperialism.

Listen to "Federal Judge Writes “Here We Go Again” as He Blocks Mississippi Abortion Law" on Spreaker.

The Critical Hour is a daily 60-minute news analysis and talk radio program on Radio Sputnik hosted by Dr. Wilmer Leon. Introduction above is theirs, with related articles of mine referenced in brackets.