Zohran Mamdani

Dear Commons Community,

I was alerted to this story by my colleague, David Bloomfield.

Zohran Mamdani has not sketched out a plan to manage the nation’s largest school system yet. But the Queens assemblyman, who won a decisive victory for the Democratic mayoral nomination, has one big idea: giving himself less power.

Since 2002, the state has granted the mayor of New York City almost complete authority over the public school system. The mayor unilaterally selects the schools chancellor and appoints the majority of the Panel for Educational Policy, a board that votes on school closures, contracts, and other major changes to Education Department regulations.

Most mayoral candidates this year said they support mayoral control, though some suggested tweaks. Every mayor has lobbied state lawmakers in Albany for extensions to mayoral control since it was enacted more than two decades ago. Mamdani, a 33-year-old Democratic socialist, has vowed to be an exception to that rule.  As reported by Chalkbeat/New York.

“Zohran supports an end to mayoral control and envisions a system instead in which parents, students, educators and administrators work together,” his campaign website states. In its place, he calls for a “co-governance” model that empowers existing organizations, such as elected parent councils and local school teams that include administrators, teachers, and caregivers.

Mamdani’s plan would represent a fundamental shift in school governance at a time when the system faces many pressing issues, including elevated rates of chronic absenteeism, declining enrollment, and persistent gaps in student achievement.

“That’s a signal that he’s thinking about this in a very different way than the typical mayoral hopeful,” said Jonathan Collins, a professor of political science and education at Columbia University Teachers College. “Not too many politicians have been in the business of giving power away.”

Mamdani could also be forced to confront local decisions he may disagree with; Manhattan’s District 2, for instance, passed a controversial resolution in 2024 calling for a review of the city’s policy of allowing transgender girls to join girls’ sports teams.

“Is Mamdani really willing to go down roads like that?” said David Bloomfield, a professor of education, law, and public policy at Brooklyn College and the CUNY Graduate Center.

Bloomfield, who previously served as the general counsel for the city’s Board of Education before mayoral control, added that Mamdani’s pitch for “co-governance” may be a winning campaign message because it has a populist appeal to make the system more democratic.

“It is a signal of a mindset more than an operational plan,” he said.

Good comment from Bloomfield.

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

I have just finished reading Lost for Words:  The Hidden History of the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) by Lynda Mugglestone..  This is the third book I have read about the OED this year. See: https://apicciano.commons.gc.cuny.edu/2025/05/27/book-the-meaning-of-everything-by-simon-winchester/ and https://apicciano.commons.gc.cuny.edu/2025/04/23/new-book-the-dictionary-of-lost-words-by-pip-williams/

Lost for Words…was published in  2005 and is meant as a scholarly treatment of the topic.  It took me a while to read its 200-plus pages.  Ms. Mugglestone does a fine job of explaining its history with many details that require very careful reading and rereading.  Regardless, I found it interesting and am glad that I stuck with it. Because it was published twenty years ago finding a review was difficult.  Below  are three brief comments about the book courtesy of Goodreads.

Tony

————————————

Goodreads

The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) holds a cherished position in English literary culture. The story behind the creation of what is indisputably the greatest dictionary in the language has become a popular fascination. This book looks at the history of the great first edition of 1928, and at the men (and occasionally women) who distilled words and usages from centuries of English writing and “through an act of intellectual alchemy captured the spirit of a civilization.”

The task of the dictionary was to bear full and impartial witness to the language it recorded. But behind the immaculate typography of the finished text, the proofs tell a very different story. This vast archive, unexamined until now, reveals the arguments and controversies over meanings, definitions, and pronunciation, and which words and senses were acceptable—and which were not.

Lost for Words examines the hidden history by which the great dictionary came into being, tracing—through letters and archives—the personal battles involved in charting a constantly changing language. Then as now, lexicographers reveal themselves vulnerable to the prejudices of their own linguistic preferences and to the influence of contemporary social history.

A pleasant, thoroughly researched and very dense book on the O.E.D., which I would solely recommend to specialists, wordsmiths and people with a fervent, not passing, interest in the development of the dictionary as we know it today.

Intense and written with authority and passion by a woman who knows her subject. The research is mind boggling. I absolutely recommend this for anyone who truly loves books and language studies. It’s not an easy read, for sure, but well worth the effort if you are a lover of libraries as I am.

Courtesy of USA Today.

Dear Commons Community,

Elon Musk escalated his criticism of President Donald Trump’s tax and budget mega-bill as the Senate took up the legislation, warning that he would boost primary challenges to defeat Republican lawmakers who vote for the legislation.

Musk, the richest man in the world and former top White House adviser, unleashed a flurry of posts on June 30 on X attacking the bill, the centerpiece of Trump’s domestic agenda, over the tech entrepreneur’s well-documented concerns the bill will increase the national debt.  As reported by USA Today.

“Every member of Congress who campaigned on reducing government spending and then immediately voted for the biggest debt increase in history should hang their head in shame!” Musk wrote. “And they will lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this Earth.”

Musk’s new round of criticism, which started over the weekend, came after he had taken steps to repair his strained relationship with the president ‒ including personally apologizing for insults he made during his combative exit from the Trump administration last month. Musk led the government-slashing Department of Government Efficiency for the first four-plus months of Trump’s second term before leaving in late May.

In another X post, Musk renewed his call for a new political party. “It is obvious with the insane spending of this bill, which increases the debt ceiling by a record FIVE TRILLION DOLLARS that we live in a one-party country – the PORKY PIG PARTY!!” Musk said. “Time for a new political party that actually cares about the people.”

He also singled out two Republican members of the far-right House Freedom Caucus ‒ Reps. Andy Harris of Maryland and Chip Roy of Texas ‒ whose votes could be needed for House to give final approval of the bill.

“How can you call yourself the Freedom Caucus if you vote for a DEBT SLAVERY bill with the biggest debt ceiling increase in history? @RepAndyHarrisMD @chiproytx,” Musk said in another X post.

Republicans, who hold a 53-47 majority in the Senate, are set to vote on what Trump has dubbed his “big, beautiful bill,” after finishing a whirlwind of votes nicknamed a “vote-a-rama” on dozens of amendments. The process could take several hours.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projects Trump’s reconciliation bill would add $3.3 trillion to the national debt over the next decade by extending the president’s tax cuts that he first implemented in 2017. The bill would also cut 11.8 million people from Medicaid by 2034, according to the CBO, and cut funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, by nearly $300 billion.

Musk pumped nearly $290 million into the 2024 election to help Trump and other Republican candidates, making him the largest donor, by far, of the election cycle.

However, ahead of his departure from DOGE, Musk suggested he would cease his political spending as he shifts his attention back to his companies, Tesla and SpaceX.

“I think in terms of political spending, I’m going to do a lot less in the future,” Musk said on May 20 at the Bloomberg News at the Qatar Economic Forum. “I think I’ve done enough.”

Musk is trying to atone for all of the political damage he has already done.  

Tony

University of Virginia president, James Ryan.  (AP Photo/Steve Helber, File)

Dear Commons Community,

James Ryan, the president of the University of Virginia, facing heavy pressure from conservative critics and the Trump administration over the school’s diversity, equity and inclusion practices, announced last week that he was resigning rather than “fight the federal government.”

The departure of Ryan, who had led the school since 2018, represents a dramatic escalation in the Trump administration’s effort to reshape higher education. Doing it at a public university marks a new frontier in a campaign that has almost exclusively targeted Ivy League schools. It also widens the rationale behind the government’s aggressive tactics, focusing on DEI rather than alleged tolerance of antisemitism.   As reported by The Associated Press.

Ryan had faced conservative criticism that he failed to heed federal orders to eliminate DEI policies, and his removal was pushed for by the Justice Department as it investigated the school, according to a person who was not authorized to discuss the matter by name and spoke on condition of anonymity to The Associated Press.

Ryan referenced the Trump administration pressure in a statement to the university community Friday in which he said he had submitted his resignation with a “very heavy heart.”

“To make a long story short, I am inclined to fight for what I believe in, and I believe deeply in this University,” he said. “But I cannot make a unilateral decision to fight the federal government in order to save my job.”

Ryan had already decided that next year would be his last, he said, and remaining in his position until then would be “knowingly and willingly sacrificing this community.”

The New York Times first reported on the resignation and the Justice Department’s insistence on it.

In a CNN appearance Friday, the Justice Department’s assistant attorney general for civil rights denied that Ryan’s removal was an explicit demand but said the agency “significantly lacked confidence” in his leadership. “I don’t have any confidence that he was going to be willing and able to preside over the dismantling of DEI,” Harmeet Dhillon said.

Ryan’s removal is another example of the Trump administration using “thuggery instead of rational discourse,” said Ted Mitchell, president of the American Council on Education, which represents university presidents.

“This is a dark day for the University of Virginia, a dark day for higher education, and it promises more of the same,” Mitchell said. “It’s clear the administration is not done and will use every tool that it can make or invent to exert its will over higher education.”

Virginia’s Democratic senators react

In a joint statement, Virginia’s Democratic senators said it was outrageous that the Trump administration would demand Ryan’s resignation over “‘culture war’ traps.” “This is a mistake that hurts Virginia’s future,” Sens. Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine said.

After campaigning on a promise to end “wokeness” in education, Trump signed a January action ordering the elimination of DEI programs nationwide. The Education Department has opened investigations into dozens of colleges, arguing that diversity initiatives discriminate against white and Asian American students.

The response from schools has been scattered. Some have closed DEI offices, ended diversity scholarships and no longer require diversity statements as part of the hiring process. Some others have rebranded DEI work under other names, while some have held firm on diversity policies.

The University of Virginia became a flashpoint after conservative critics accused it of simply renaming its DEI initiatives. The school’s governing body voted to shutter the DEI office in March and end diversity policies in admissions, hiring, financial aid and other areas. Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin celebrated the action, declaring that “DEI is done at the University of Virginia.”

Among those drawing attention to the Charlottesville campus was America First Legal, a conservative group founded by Trump aide Stephen Miller. In a May letter to the Justice Department, the group said the university failed to dismantle DEI programs and chose to “rename, repackage, and redeploy the same unlawful infrastructure under a lexicon of euphemisms.”

The group directly took aim at Ryan, noting that he joined hundreds of other college presidents in signing a public statement condemning the “overreach and political interference” of the Trump administration.

On Friday, the group said it will continue to use every available tool to root out what it has called discriminatory systems.

“This week’s developments make clear: public universities that accept federal funds do not have a license to violate the Constitution,” Megan Redshaw, an attorney at the group, said in a statement. “They do not get to impose ideological loyalty tests, enforce race and sex-based preferences, or defy lawful executive authority.”

Ryan has been leading the school since 2018.

Ryan was hired to lead the University of Virginia in 2018 and previously served as the dean of Harvard University’s Graduate School of Education. Earlier in his career he spent more than a decade as a law professor at the University of Virginia. A biography on Harvard’s website credits Ryan with increasing the “size, strength and diversity” of the faculty, adding that building a diverse community was a priority.

Robert D. Hardie, leader of the University of Virginia’s governing board, said he accepted Ryan’s resignation with “profound sadness,” adding that the university “has forever been changed for the better as a result of Jim’s exceptional leadership.”

Until now, the White House had directed most of its attention at Harvard University and other elite institutions that Trump sees as bastions of liberalism. Harvard has lost more than $2.6 billion in federal research grants amid its battle with the government, which has also attempted to block the school from hosting foreign students and threatened to revoke its tax-exempt status.

Harvard and its $53 billion endowment are uniquely positioned to weather the government’s financial pressure. Public universities, however, are far more dependent on taxpayer money and could be more vulnerable. The University of Virginia’s $10 billion endowment is among the largest for public universities, while the vast majority have far less.

Disgraceful that Ryan felt he had to resign!

Tony

Kirsten Gillibrand and Zohran Mamdani

Dear Commons Community,

New York Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand joined the chorus of attacks against Zohran Mamdani, the party’s recently elected Muslim mayoral candidate for New York City.

Last week, New Yorkers elected Mamdani as the Democratic nominee for November’s mayoral general election, beating out former Gov. Andrew Cuomo. Despite the young progressive skyrocketing in popularity, his campaign faced repeated attacks from the right on his identity as a Muslim American immigrant – attacks that only increased after his primary win.

Repeating that rhetoric is Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, a Democrat from New York who  made claims about Mamdani’s beliefs during a Thursday radio appearance on WNYC’s “The Brian Lehrer Show.” The senator had responded on-air to a caller’s unfounded claims that New York’s Jewish community is facing threats as a result of Mamdani’s win. As reported by The Huffington Post.

“The caller is exactly the New York constituents that I’ve spoken to that are alarmed. They are alarmed by past public statements. They are alarmed by past positions – particularly references to global jihad,” Gillibrand said. “This is a very serious issue, because people that glorify the slaughter of Jews create fear in our communities. ‘The global intifada’ is a statement that means, ‘Destroy Israel and kill all the Jews.’”

The Arabic word “intifada” is used to describe uprisings and rebellions, most commonly the decades-long Palestinian resistance to Israeli occupation. “Globalize the intifada” is a phrase used by some activists to express solidarity with the Palestinian liberation movement. The Arabic word “jihad” means to struggle, though over time many non-Muslims in the U.S. have come to believe the word is synonymous with religious violence.

Gillibrand’s comments likely referred to a prior interview where Mamdani was asked if he would denounce the phrase, “Globalize the intifada,” to which he has repeatedly answered that while he does not use the term himself, he will not use the office of the mayor to police speech in the way that President Donald Trump does.

Lehrer pushed back at least three separate times during the interview with Gillibrand, reminding the senator that Mamdani has spoken extensively about his commitment to protect all New Yorkers – including the Jewish community – and that there is no evidence of the Democrat ever having expressed support for the violence Gillibrand and the caller accuse him of.

Despite the fact-checks and admitting she does not “have all the data and information,” Gillibrand continued to push the lie that Mamdani endorses rhetoric that endangers Jewish New Yorkers, without mentioning the anti-Muslim hate rising alongside antisemitism. After facing protests and public backlash for her comments, the senator’s office told Rolling Stone on Friday that she “misspoke.”

“Why is Senator Gillibrand parroting divisive Republican fear-mongering about Zohran? He has pledged from day 1 to combat anti-semitism & protect Jewish New Yorkers like me,” New York City councilman Lincoln Restler posted on X in response to her comments.

“Voters are clamoring for a vision to make life in our city more affordable – not politicians who just try to make us scared of each other,” he continued. “I wish the Senator took the time to do her homework and get her facts straight before attacking the Democratic nominee for mayor.”

Gillibrand’s comments were followed by fellow New York Democratic Rep. Laura Gillen, who this weekend pushed the lie that Mamdani has called for violence against Jewish people. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) on Sunday joined in elevating the false claims about Mamdani, demanding on ABC’s “This Week” that he clarify his position on Palestinian-related slogans.

“We should all be disgusted by the flood of anti-Muslim remarks spewed in the aftermath of Zohran Mamdani’s victory in the NYC mayoral primary – some blatant, others latent,” Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said on Sunday. “Shame on the members of Congress who have engaged in such bigotry and anyone who doesn’t challenge it.”

Mamdani has not directly commented on the senator’s rhetoric, but was asked Sunday by NBC’s Kristen Welker about whether he condemns the same phrases Gillibrand accused him of supporting. The progressive made it clear that he would not take the bait, maintaining that the public should focus less on slogans and more on his words and actions supporting all people in historically diverse New York City.

“That’s not language that I use. The language that I use and the language that I will continue to use to lead this city is that which speaks clearly to my intent, which is an intent grounded in a belief in universal human rights,” he told “Meet the Press.” “And ultimately, that’s what is the foundation of so much of my politics, the belief that freedom and justice and safety are things that, to have meaning, have to be applied to all people, and that includes Israelis and Palestinians as well.”

The Democrats have to get their act TOGETHER!

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

At Pride parades from New York City to Budapest over the weekend, communities around the world celebrated and also demonstrated for LGBTQ+ rights and inclusion during the last days of Pride Month. In addition to waving rainbow flags, many held protest signs, amid increasing political attacks in the U.S. by Republicans and President Trump’s administration.

“Our joy is our resistance,” read one sign held by a reveler wearing samba feathers at New York City’s Pride parade, the oldest and largest such event in the U.S. This year, the New York event’s theme was “Rise Up: Pride in Protest.”

Large throngs of New Yorkers celebrated as the parade traveled down Fifth Avenue to downtown. Many of them also demonstrated against President Trump’s recent executive orders and policies targeting transgender people and recognizing only two unchangeable sexes, male and female. Trump’s orders have also banned “gender ideology” and dismantled diversity, equity and inclusion programs.

“At a time when trans youth are under attack, queer art is being erased, and the clock is being rolled back on LGBTQIA+ rights across the country … NYC Pride remains focused on advocating for our community as we face an onslaught of attacks,” NYC Pride media director Chris Piedmont wrote in a statement posted on social media.

The celebrations occurred even as some corporations canceled or cut back donations to Pride events around the country this year.

For the fifth year in a row, New York Police Department and corrections officers were officially barred from marching in the parade while wearing their full dress uniforms, which include firearms. On the sidelines of the parade, New York City Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch joined members of the Gay Officers Action League New York to protest the exclusion.

The New York event also commemorated the legacy of the 1969 Stonewall Riots, when a violent police raid at a gay bar in Greenwich Village sparked the beginning of a national movement for LGBTQ+ rights. The parade marched past the Stonewall Inn, now a national monument.

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

 Elon Musk, President Donald Trump’s former adviser on cutting government spending, fired off a set of attacks against the president’s legislative package for potentially killing millions of jobs.

Musk, the former head of the advisory Department of Government Efficiency, had quieted his harsh criticism of Trump and the legislation the week after his departure from government May 30.

But he blasted the bill again yesterday as the Senate was preparing to hold a critical vote to begin debate.  As reported b USA TODAY.

“The latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country!” Musk said on social media. “Utterly insane and destructive. It gives handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future.”

Musk added in a later post that “Polls show that this bill is political suicide for the Republican Party.”

Musk is the owner of the social-media platform X, where he posted his messages to 220 million followers. He is also the CEO of Tesla, which manufactures electric vehicles, and SpaceX, which makes rockets to ferry people and supplies to the International Space Station.

Musk trashed the legislation as a “disgusting abomination” for not cutting government spending enough. He also alleged Trump appeared in confidential Justice Department files about the late sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, which the White House has denied. But Musk later apologized.

Trump has blamed Musk’s criticism on the president ending government subsidies for electric vehicles and rejecting the corporate executive’s choice to head NASA.

“Elon was ‘wearing thin,’ I asked him to leave, I took away his EV Mandate that forced everyone to buy Electric Cars that nobody else wanted (that he knew for months I was going to do!), and he just went CRAZY!” Trump said in a Truth Social post.

These two deserve to be in the same hole together.

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

Earlier this month German Chancellor Friedrich Merz gifted President Trump a gilded framed copy of his grandfather’s birth certificate.  The gold-encased present, a reflection of the president’s signature Oval Office décor, paid tribute to Friedrich Trump, who was born in Kallstadt, Germany, in 1869 and later immigrated to the United States.

“That’s serious German,” Trump said in response to the gesture.

“I want to thank you for that. That’s beautiful. Thank you very much. Fantastic. We’ll put it up in a place of honor.”

The meeting between the world leaders, which was held before a group of reporters and officials, took an awkward turn when Trump told Merz that D-Day — when Allied forces invaded Normandy to liberate Europe from Nazi control on June 6, 1944 — was “not a pleasant day” for his nation. 

The unusual remark was made while the pair were discussing the three-year conflict between Russia and Ukraine – with the German leader forced to set the historical record straight. 

“May I remind you that we are having June 6 tomorrow,” Merz said of the 81st anniversary of the landings during World War II. 

“This is D-Day anniversary, when Americans once ended a war in Europe.”

Trump then interrupted his counterpart twice to unleash his bizarre comment. 

“In the long run, Mr. President, this was the liberation of my country from Nazi dictatorship,” Merz corrected. 

“And we know that we owe you, but this is the reason why I’m saying that America is again in a very strong position to do something on this war and ending this war. So let’s talk about what we can do jointly, and we are ready to do what we can.”

Trump later likened Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky to children fighting on a playground and that more time may be needed before “pulling them apart.”

What would Friedrich Trump think of Trump’s current war on immigrants.

Tony

“I hope I will be able to confide everything to you, as I have never been able to confide in anyone, and I hope you will be a great source of comfort and support.”  This is Anne Frank’s first entry in her diary (above) which her father gave her for her thirteenth birthday.

Dear Commons Community,

In April of this year, my wife, Elaine and I visited the Anne Frank House and Museum in Amsterdam.  It was a sad and unsettling experience climbing the steps to the “Secret Annex” where Anne and her family hid from 1942 to 1944.  Her story is well-known and her diary, which has sold tens of millions of copies documents her time in hiding. However, I had never read her diary and made it a point to do so.  I have just finished reading Anne Frank, The Diary of a Young Girl, a revision  published in 2020, which I purchased at the Museum.  It is an intimate story of the hardship that confinement has on a thirteen-year-old girl who is growing up and yearning for the experiences and joy of an adolescent. It is a slow read because every entry requires reflection on the time and place. Also, there is the knowledge that her story will not have a happy ending. If you are at all interested in the period, I would encourage you to read Anne’s words. If you are not familiar with her story, below is a brief biography courtesy of Anne Frank House.

Tony

 ———————————————————

Who Was Ane Frank

Courtesy of Anne Frank House

Anne’s first years

Anne Frank was born in the German city of Frankfurt am Main in 1929. Anne’s sister Margot was three years her senior. Unemployment was high and poverty was severe in Germany, and it was the period in which Adolf Hitler and his party were gaining more and more supporters. Hitler hated the Jews and blamed them for the problems in the country. He took advantage of the rampant antisemitic sentiments in Germany. The hatred of Jews and the poor economic situation made Anne’s parents, Otto and Edith Frank, decide to move to Amsterdam. There, Otto founded a company that traded in pectin, a gelling agent for making jam.

Nazi Germany invades the Netherlands

Before long, Anne felt right at home in the Netherlands. She learned the language, made new friends and went to a Dutch school near her home. Her father worked hard to get his business off the ground, but it was not easy.  Otto also tried to set up a company in England, but the plan fell through. Things looked up when he started selling herbs and spices in addition to the pectin.

On 1 September 1939, when Anne was 10 years old, Nazi Germany invaded Poland, and so the Second World War began. Not long after, on 10 May 1940, the Nazis also invaded the Netherlands. Five days later, the Dutch army surrendered. Slowly but surely, the Nazis introduced more and more laws and regulations that made the lives of Jews more difficult. For instance, Jews could no longer visit parks, cinemas, or non-Jewish shops. The rules meant that more and more places became off-limits to Anne. Her father lost his company, since Jews were no longer allowed to run their own businesses. All Jewish children, including Anne, had to go to separate Jewish schools.

Anne has to go into hiding in the Secret Annex

The Nazis took things further, one step at the time. Jews had to start wearing a Star of David on their clothes and there were rumours that all Jews would have to leave the Netherlands. When Margot received a call-up to report for a so-called ‘labour camp’ in Nazi Germany on 5 July 1942, her parents were suspicious. They did not believe the call-up was about work and decided to go into hiding the next day in order to escape persecution.

In the spring of 1942, Anne’s father had started furnishing a hiding place in the annex of his business premises at Prinsengracht 263. He received help from his former colleagues. Before long, they were joined by four more people. The hiding place was cramped. Anne had to keep very quiet and was often afraid.

Anne keeps a diary

On her thirteenth birthday, just before they went into hiding, Anne was presented with a diary. During the two years in hiding, Anne wrote about events in the Secret Annex, but also about her feelings and thoughts. In addition, she wrote short stories, started on a novel and copied passages from the books she read in her Book of Beautiful Sentences. Writing helped her pass the time.

When the Minister of Education of the Dutch government in England made an appeal on Radio Orange to hold on to war diaries and documents, Anne was inspired to rewrite her individual diaries into one running story, titled Het Achterhuis (The Secret Annex).

The hiding place is discovered 

Anne started rewriting her diary, but before she was done, she and the other people in hiding were discovered and arrested by police officers on 4 August 1944. The police also arrested two of the helpers. To this day, we do not know the reason for the police raid.

Despite the raid, part of Anne’s writing was preserved: two other helpers took the documents before the Secret Annex was emptied by order of the Nazis.

Anne is deported to Auschwitz 

Via the offices of the Sicherheitsdienst (the German security police), a prison in Amsterdam, and the Westerbork transit camp, the people from the Secret Annex were put on transport to the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration and extermination camp. The train journey took three days, during which Anne and over a thousand others were packed closely together in cattle wagons. There was little food and water and only a barrel for a toilet.

Upon arrival at Auschwitz, Nazi doctors checked to see who would and who would not be able to do heavy forced labour. Around 350 people from Anne’s transport were immediately taken to the gas chambers and murdered. Anne, Margot and their mother were sent to the labour camp for women. Otto ended up in a camp for men.

Anne dies from exhaustion in Bergen-Belsen

In early November 1944, Anne was put on transport again. She was deported to the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp with Margot. Their parents stayed behind in Auschwitz. The conditions in Bergen-Belsen were horrible too. There was a lack of food, it was cold, wet and there were contagious diseases. Anne and Margot contracted typhus. In February 1945 they both died owing to its effects, Margot first, Anne shortly afterwards.

Anne’s father Otto was the only one of the people from the Secret Annex to survive the war. He was liberated from Auschwitz by the Soviet troops and during his long journey back to the Netherlands he learned that his wife Edith had died. Once in the Netherlands, he heard that Anne and Margot were no longer alive either.

Anne’s diary becomes world famous

Anne’s writing made a deep impression on Otto. He read that Anne had wanted to become a writer or a journalist and that she had intended to publish her stories about life in the Secret Annex. Friends convinced Otto to publish the diary and in June 1947, 3,000 copies of Het Achterhuis (The Secret Annex) were printed.

And that was not all: the book was later translated into around 70 languages and adapted for stage and screen. People all over the world were introduced to Anne’s story and in 1960 the hiding place became a museum: the Anne Frank House. Until his death in 1980, Otto remained closely involved with the Anne Frank House and the museum: he hoped that readers of the diary would become aware of the dangers of discrimination, racism, and hatred of Jews.

Michelle Obama her late mother Marian Robinson

Dear Commons Community,

Michelle Obama gave an interview during which she discussed her mother, Marian Robinson.  She reveals what her mother told her that changed her perspective on the finality of life.  Here is a review of her interview courtesy of People Magazine.

The former first lady, 61, revealed on NPR’s Wild Card podcast with host Rachel Martin that she’s “not afraid” of death, as she explained how her late mother Marian Robinson — who died in May 2024 at age 86 — reminded her of the importance of “living a good life” during one of their last days together.

“The last year of my mom’s life, she was sick. Her body was just shutting down for a number of various reasons. And her last bout of illness, she was with me in Hawaii, in our home in Hawaii, which was a blessing, right,” Obama said. “‘Cause she was forced to let me take care of her…She didn’t want to be a burden.”

Around that time, Obama hired “doctors” and “nurses,” had her mother on a “diet” and joked that she was “bossing her around” until she “got better and went back to Chicago.” One day, the mother-daughter duo were sitting on a couch and watching one of Robinson’s favorite “court shows” when she shared a valuable lesson with Obama.

“She was realizing that she would not ever be the same old self that she was. She was starting to realize she’s coming to the end,” Obama said. “And this woman that prepared me for death and talked to me about all this stuff and was like, ‘I’m ready to die, who needs to be old people around too long’ and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. She leaned over to me and said, ‘Wow, this went fast.’ “

“I held her hand and said, ‘What are you talking about?’ And she said, ‘Life.’ She said, ‘This went fast.’ And this is the woman who was ready,” the former first lady added. “And what that told me is even when you tell yourself you’re ready, if you’re living a good life, you’re never really ready for it to end. So I hope I feel that way. Even though I’ve been ready for it, because it’s been good and purposeful. That I’ll feel like, ‘I wish I had more time.’ So I’m trying to live my life like that.”

Elsewhere during her appearance on Wild Card, Obama detailed her thoughts on death and why she tries to be “mindful” of the time she has left.

“As we get older, look — and my husband thinks this is morbid — but at 61, if I am lucky, if I am truly blessed, [I have] 25 more summers,” she said.

“We’ve been out of office for 10 years,” she added of herself and husband, Barack Obama. “What happened? What happened to those 10 years? I did a lot. Two, three books. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. There’s a lot that happened but it went by fast. And I’m at the stage of life where I want the next 10 years to go by slowly. Cause’ guess what? I love life.”

“But what I feel is that if I’m not mindful about it, the years slip away,” she continued. “And you wind up spending a year doing what? Did you do anything you wanted to? Did you spend time with the people you wanted to spend time with, doing the things that you wanted to do?”

Michelle announced on May 31, 2024 that her mother “passed away peacefully,” as the Obama family shared in a statement at the time that they “will spend the rest of ours trying to live up to her example.”

Days later, Michelle wrote in a message on X that she was grateful for “all the prayers, kind words, and love” from their supporters amid the news.

“Every text, comment on social media, and beautiful tribute has brought us some light,” she wrote. “It means so much to hear what a special woman she was to you all, as well. From the bottom of our hearts, thank you.”

We were so lucky to have Michelle and her mother’s presence in the White House for eight years.

Tony