Showing posts with label anti-racism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label anti-racism. Show all posts

Friday, February 24, 2023

Tulsi Gabbard was On Fox and Said a Thing

 

I get that the Fox Mushroom Farm infotainment network has no respect whatsoever for the clickers that they mutant cordycep-pilled over the years, but having mule-faced Jesse nod while obvious op Tulsi lays the line on his viewers that the eliminationism of Hitler and the inclusivity of the Biden Administration are the exact same thing should insult the fuck out of even someone whose brain is 75% taken over by fungal rot.

But even if the fan club don't feel like what's left of their basic intelligence has been insulted, those of us who can still appreciate what's in front of us know that's straight-up Orwellian doublethink. Inclusivity and elimination are opposite things. Gathering in people so they can contribute and prosper and cutting people out in the hopes they are destroyed are obviously not the same thing. To say that--to say what she said, isn't a mistake. It's seeding the ground for resentment. What she's doing is telling straight white cis males that the inclusion of other people is their exclusion. That if people who deviate from their default humanity are featured, it's the exact same thing as one of them being annihilated. 

Competition for roles in a society is not annihilation but regular order: may the best person win. If the assumption is some people are by identity simply better suited--what are the deets on their CV? What is the real-life contribution they are making? Saying something that stupid out loud and so obviously biased would have been seen for exactly what it is if Watters said it by himself. Why Tulsi Gabbard is so willing to say it is justified by her getting to be on Fox. 

This is why exactly nothing she ever says has any value to me. Nor should it to anyone else. 

Sunday, July 31, 2022

Per Aspera Ad Astra

 

A life well lived is one that will be long-remembered, and Nichelle Nichols truly lived that meaningful life, where the example of talent and heart, interest and intellect, will long outlast the mortal journey. Her portrayal of Starfleet officer Lt. Nyota Uhura, an African woman who was a key crew member of the Enterprise 's bridge on the influential original Star Trek series, did not only entertain but inspired by representing to young people what could and should be. 

That her work on that sf tv program, so influential some of us want to see it as our aspirational future world, was seen as vital by Dr. Martin Luther King, and lead to her own considerable influence in the careers of actors and NASA figures--scientists and astronauts alike, is a story about her commitment to the idea of the future and human advancement. 

We humans are a messy folk, but there are people among us who remind us to look to the stars. Nichelle Nichols did that so uniquely. Set course for home--among the stars. 


Tuesday, January 18, 2022

The Content of Their Character Is Showing

Yesterday, a lot of politicians were "busted" quoted MLK, Jr.'s words while doing nothing to support the goals of equality, even some who actively work against them. In order to participate in the day, it would appear that a sanitized and color-blind version of King gives them comfort, but they misconstrue the body of his work. Were he alive today, their criticisms would be similar to those made of today's Black Lives Matter activists--and we know this because we can read the criticisms from that time and compare them.

(There are also people in this country who seem to think "sanitizing" bookshelves will somehow improve upon race relations--a version of "not seeing color" that means not seeing the work of or knowing about the lives of people of color.)

But to put it simply, it's very duplicitous to praise someone for articulating a dream and then working against what would make it a reality--such as equal access to the ballot. In actuality, I would consider it very revealing of the character of those that would do so.


Sunday, November 7, 2021

They've Got To Be Carefully Taught

 

When I was a kid, we got taught about the Golden Rule, and it was a pretty good rule as they go: Do unto Others as you would have them do unto You. You don't hit other kids or call them names or pick on them for being different or any of that, because if that happened to you, you would feel bad. You had to stop and think--is this how I would want to be treated? Would I want to be picked on for being different? Would I want to be teased if I was clumsy, or talked slow, or was fat or didn't have nice clothes? 

It was simple, and direct. It was about respecting others and the basis for good citizenship in the classroom and anywhere else. It wasn't new-fangled jargon, but time-tested and ancient religion-approved. 

Did I learn this concept found in scripture in a church--no. Your blogger never wandered into a formal religious setting before the age of ten or eleven. I learned it in public school, in kindergarten. Was I indoctrinated at the tender age of five to some startling multicultural program (I mean, my school was desegregated and I understood after this simple precept how racism was wrong because obviously--how would I want to be treated?) I still absorbed a lot of my culture's dumbfuck attitudes and I'm going to be sorting out the headtrip that whiteness is for a while, yet. I wouldn't say I was indoctrinated. 

Surely, not everyone who was in the same kindergarten class as me has come to my POV. We are individuals, not blank slates. We're not human Silly Putty pulling up cartoons from the Sunday funnies.

Friday, October 15, 2021

Die Fahne Hoch

 

History might not repeat itself, but it rhymes, isn't that how the saying goes? Anyway, the opening line to the Horst Wessel Lied is "The flag is high and our ranks are closed...". Consider the flag that of the blutfahne. A flag from a failed coup attempt, raised high? Ranks closed around a certain big lie? So Trump offers birthday sentiments to his own Horst Wessel to rally, one shouldn't wonder, his shock troops. (Yes, shock troops: SA. Stormabteilung. Paramilitary street fighters and shit stirrers. They aren't even being fucking subtle with it.)

But I mean, people have pledged their support to Trump in this sort of abjectly personality cult way, before, right? 


And it supposed to be ridiculous. Don't be ridiculous, why would people be doing Nazi stuff in plain sight, right?  It's liberals being paranoid, obviously. Of course the kind of Kulturkampf spoken about by conservatives like Pat Buchanan is just a blind for disdain for jazz music, wild women, effeminates,  wacky tobaccy and pro-religion to appeal to the real working class values, and not a challenge to people of various ethnic and religious and sexual minorities

And yet in Texas, a school district thinks maybe being anti-CRT (which is stupid on its face) should mean giving equal time to Nazis if you are teaching the Holocaust. Because teach the controversy, right?  (Except, you don't get far into Nazi literature before you get to their admiration for the US racial science--eugenics, and the exact kinds of lawmaking CRT is exactly the study of.) It's like they want to direct you to "Mein Kampf", but downplay the struggle for Civil Rights. They don't want you to know Letter from a Birmingham Jail.  They want people to see BLM as Communists because that's who they want to blame for unrest, not the lawless lawmen who fail their communities by not upholding the peace. And I don't feel charitable enough to think it's unwitting on the part of the astroturfers who spawned the movement against our school systems.

They already tipped their hand by demonizing antifa. I mean--canary in the coalmine, much? (They wanted to blame antifa for a capitol attack, but cell phones and social media fucked that up.) But as to the curriculum: Children must be carefully taught, after all. The future belongs to them, etc. 

It's the obviousness and the preposterousness and more that makes people fail to say it aloud. But the GOP has decided to lean in on evil. Actual, palpable, destructive evil.  They don't care if people experience passive eugenicide by Covid-19. They think weird things about their purity of the body. They are beset with superstitions (Q--which is exceptionally anti-Semitic and centers blood libel.). 

This trajectory sucks. I'm no pedagogue, but how did so many people fail to know any of these signposts of upcoming extremist fuckshittery as we were sailing right through them to the "between coup attempts" stage of US history? 

I also know the answer to that--they didn't want to know, or didn't want to believe.  But we can talk about it now and fight better and harder, right? Because for so many of us, the outcomes of the Trumpists winning are fatal. Just literally, not figuratively, not hyperbolically, fatal. 

Thursday, June 24, 2021

Die Lösung

 

The thing the folks at Fox won't tell you about Critical Race Theory (and despite their mentioning of it for hours on end, anymore) is that it's generally a college elective course (although activists don't want it taught in college, either), that their "concerned parents" are Republican potted ficuses, and that their concern about it is an okey-doke. Because Republicans have decided that a racial backlash to the idea of "wokism" is going to be a wave they can ride back into the majority. And because complaining about being called racists distracts from the actual racist voter laws they want to enact and have actually succeeded in enacting.

I guess because nothing will refute the notion that people in power will try to codify their grip on power like, um, very obviously doing that thing. So they are applying the simple argument of being hardened latex and calling their critics a tactile adhesive. (A basic schoolyard "tu cuck" argument grounded in "pwnership is 9/10ths of yer maw".)

It has the white parents very concerned I tell you. This is what desegregating schools has led to, I guess. Being dead afraid that kids will talk about racism in an open, respectful classroom setting instead of learning at it home and on the street as one ordinarily does. Having one's precious wee kid's home truths broken by the inclusion of differing perspectives seems so, so---

Democratic?

I snark, because the Republican war on history is something I've covered before. The historical revisionism, the censorship  and narrowing of the discussion, is a part of fascism. And Trump and his progeny are soaking in it. 

Take Florida Governor DeSantis, if you please. He's no more post-Trump than if he were the politically-viable son Trump never had. It's pea-brained McCarthyism at its most shameless. Whatever is this intrusion on the beliefs and ideas of students in colleges but an attempt to chill conversation--to create a Kalt KulturKampf? Where politics (stale ideologies) are considered identities, static, not ideas to be argued in genuine intellectual contest but trenches to be dug?

It looks to me like the Republican party has determined they offer so little to the people that might vote in future elections, that they have decided that some of the people (whose votes they tried very much to throw out in the 2020 election, regarding Trump's very decisive loss) need to be "dissolved", because there is no way, using their current rhetoric, they can ever be democratically won. 

I am only being a trifle snarky by likening them to the Soviets criticized by Berthold Brecht owing to their hyperventilation over socialism and Marxism (Oh noes! Muh Red Scares!). But they are most decidedly not "for the people." 

Monday, August 31, 2020

Steve Scalise Stole A Disabled Man's Voice



One of the sickest things about this is that Ady Barkan is a very capable speaker on the behalf of people who like himself, really need access to healthcare, so the idea that some political figure would take advantage of the reality that ALS stole Ady's voice and left him with an electrically assisted vocalization to use that substitution to put words in his mouth is appalling. It is not weakness to need an electric voice. It is weakness to need to lie about others to create a false narrative. It isn't enough that Scalise takes down his poorly-orchestrated lie (as if a dedicated activist could not or would not refute this lie on his own behalf, or that many others would not recognize that this was an utter lie). Scalise needs to retire himself. He should altogether resign, because he prefers to do harm than correct it, and doesn't understand the issues at hand.

The harm done to Ady Barkan by putting words in his mouth is something you might think Scalise would give some reasonable consideration to.

And you would be entirely overestimating him. He is not that guy.

Sunday, August 30, 2020

Don't Sleep On Lovecraft Country

I originally thought this blog would be a hell of a lot more book, movie and tv reviews than it ended up being, but when something is just amazing, I will still let you know--and HBO's Lovecraft Country series, produced by Jordan Peele (which let me know this was going to be astounding quality) is actually better than I even hoped it would be and at episode three is hitting its pace.

I liked the book (it was one of those finds I have talked about when you go into a brick and mortar bookstore with a real bookstore smell and maybe even a bookstore cat in it--like Farley's in New Hope, PA, which was where I picked up Matt Ruff's inspired novel, where the kind of book you want to read finds you) but converted to television, in the hands of a great storyteller like Misha Green and with talent like Jurnee Smollett I have been blown away.

As with the remarkable HBO serial Watchmen, Lovecraft Country incorporates seldom-reviewed episodes of American history (like the Greenwood Massacre or the Turnbull Park Homes Race Riots) into outstanding genre entertainment. It is beautifully layered. In the most recent episode, which inspired this post, the ghosts of a tortured past are made whole by their names being spoken, and their supernatural horror is pitched against the very physical danger of white supremacy. The Black protagonists are terrorized by the local constabulary (in a wagon ride reminiscent of Freddie Gray's last "rough ride", Leticia Lewis is told about how her complaints to the law are lost, while they know very well about complaints made by her neighbors) and in a "are you for real?" kids being kids in an very obvious to 1950s kids Addams Family/Munsters haunted house-ass-looking haunted house, one of the kids playing with a Ouija board seems to be Emmett Till.


And here I was wondering if the tenant named Baldwin meant anything since the show quoted James Baldwin at length in episode 1 (and here we are at only episode 3, and it's already felt like a journey!)

This is good damn tv, and I recommend it highly. But maybe don't sleep on it--put a little something lighter between your viewing it and bedtime. Because here there be ghosts and magicians and bad things that burn crosses in the night. It can be a lot.

But it's really good.






Friday, August 21, 2020

An Ally of the Light



No generation ever knows what history will ask of it. All we can ever know is whether we'll be ready when that moment arrives.

And now history has delivered us to one of the most difficult moments America has ever faced.

Four historic crises. All at the same time. A perfect storm.

The worst pandemic in over 100 years. The worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.

The most compelling call for racial justice since the 60's. And the undeniable realities and accelerating threats of climate change.
So, the question for us is simple: Are we ready?

I believe we are.

We must be.

All elections are important. But we know in our bones this one is more consequential.

America is at an inflection point. A time of real peril, but of extraordinary possibilities.

There is something about a speech delivered to, not a mostly empty room, but in its lack of a massive live audience, anyone of us, directly, that is personal and affecting. This speech was Joe Biden at his best, and revealed why he is here and better by far than Trump ever could be:

History is tragic. The story of humanity is written in blood and tears. Biden has experienced tragedy close at hand and pulled himself through by deriving from that a sense of purpose and empathy for others. Trump might see opportunities in tragedy, but only for himself, and I've yet to see him ever be empathetic. Biden acknowledges the people who have changed and affected his path, and gave thanks to his friend Barack Obama for the chance to be his Vice-president on a day when Trump also blamed Obama for his own path to the White House--because he was looking for someone to blame for his difficulties and failures.

Biden recognizes the ghastly bigotry and the autocratic threat Trump represents, and presents himself as the antidote to a virus every bit as dangerous as the one the Trump also, through ignorance and perhaps bigotry, allowed to kill 170K-plus Americans. And he is. Because he means to be. Bcause his intentions are right, and he will with all fidelity try to do what's right.

And I can't ask for anything more, but someone to just try to do the right thing. And with all our help, fate willing, he'll do good and well. Biden will at least try, and has the right intent. He will be an ally of the light.


Sunday, December 29, 2019

Stephens' Paradox



The point of Brett Stephen's controversial (on Twitter, at any rate, which is where I live, more or less) opinion piece seems to be that it is the cultural rigor of Ashkenazi Jews with respects to argumentation, defending one's opinions, and double-checking one's assumptions that accounts for the intellectual success of the group--it doesn't really rest on any pure race theory nonsense that Stephens has actually linked to. Which kind of makes it hard to fathom, then, why he linked to it. The inclusion of the race theory nonsense actually weakens his thesis which is that there is a learned cultural skill that certain Jews have that has enabled them to be survivors and deep thinkers.

But what he's saying makes sense if you consider his representation of the argumentative intellectual as an exemplar--he's decrying the closing of the American mind, I think. He's taking in the occasion of anti-Semitism to warn us that people of minority intellectual viewpoints are also marginalized, too.

I don't know what this para is for:

At its best, the American university can still be a place of relentless intellectual challenge rather than ideological conformity and social groupthink. At its best, the United States can still be the country that respects, and sometimes rewards, all manner of heresies that outrage polite society and contradict established belief. At its best, the West can honor the principle of racial, religious and ethnic pluralism not as a grudging accommodation to strangers but as an affirmation of its own diverse identity. In that sense, what makes Jews special is that they aren’t. They are representational.

I think rewarding heresies is how we got the birther Trump, a climate science denier and all-around stooge. "Outraging polite society" isn't a kind of breaking down of a paradigm, a kind of busting of self satisfied gatekeeping. It is just asking for the right to offend regardless of the rightness of one's reasons. And I don't even think that right is what the argumentation and intellectual rigor of Stephen's mishpocha had been about. It's the right to offend that makes atrocities eventually spoken out loud slip into action.

The time was not ripe for this particular opinion because the time never is. There is a good argument for scientific paradigmatic explosion, but this seems to be about creating space for what is, sadly, old news, paradigms already exploded. But I don't even think this is the argument he's trying on, here. It really seems just like he's saying "let a certain kind of conservatism be what it is because some people are threatened anywhere".

Well, actually, all arguments are subject to rigorous criticism as a part of a healthy intellectual tradition, right? So I think I will continue to find it correct to brook argument with conservative ideas that are beat and broke regardless of whether the person delivering them is from whatever tradition at all. It's the least I can do to honor the best of that culture. And I also deplore the monsters that attack people of any faith or ethnicity for that artifact of their existence. Wrong is wrong.

Tuesday, July 30, 2019

Speaking of McCarthyism

Just to follow on from the preceding post, where I noted that Sen. McConnell is a bit off with respects to what McCarthyism is, I regret to inform that Sen. Ted Cruz probably knows exactly what it is, because he's basically practicing it with his proposition that Antifa be treated as a domestic terrorist organization. And for what it's worth, President Trump also seems to be onboard with the notion (even if people who understand these things somewhat better than Trump find it ridiculous at best, chilling at worst). 

Demonization of anti-fascists (remember, folks, the "fa" in Antifa stands for "fascism" and fascism is bad!) is happening at a very awkward time--it has been reported that white supremacist violence is on the rise, but Antifa, as a response to white supremacy, which takes several forms including nonviolent action, is the movement being singled out. What grips me about this is that there are numerous loose groups that protest fascism and racism (not a single, centralized organization) but there is a good probability that language that simply calls this activity "left wing activists" or "affiliated with Antifa" will be used to target any "fellow traveler". (One might recall that HUAC looked into civil rights groups, but kept their paws off the Klan.)

I don't like the implications of it--and with McConnell crying about McCarthyism, I guess I'm just saying it seems to me to be a case of one side accusing the other of the very thing they'd like to do.  And I guess I could just be misreading red meat for a red scare. Except there's also this denunciation of socialism proposed by Sen. Steve Daines.  For some reason, he associates socialism with lack of freedom as opposed to being an alternative to unregulated free market capitalism, but again, this is a denunciation specifically of "the left". 

Friday, March 15, 2019

Cheeto Benito Issues Calls For Veto, Dings Beto, Encourages Hate-Oh?

It was a busy day in TrumpWorld, what with the vote in the House to resolve that the Mueller report should be made public (Which is blocked in the Senate by Lindsey Graham for some reason--will someone tell this dramatic SOB we do not have time to mourn the fucking reputation of Carter Page? We could just go back to not knowing who this guy even is. Also Whitewater was bullshit and Libyan terrorists were responsible for what happened at Benghazi, so sit your Chick-Fil-A eating selectively pearl-clutching ass down ) and with the Senate forcing Trump to issue a VETO! regarding the resolution against his emergency declaration at the border, which was a mockery unto some pretend real ones who wanted to be constitutional conservatives until someone threatened their seats/ asses. If you add the drama that was the Manafort sentencing of yesterday, and the Stone hearing that was about a minute of not much, maybe there's a reason Trump felt pressed to do a semi-fascism about whether his stans would go wilding in the event of liberal viciousness. (Knowing this could very well be the week he had ahead, the datestamp being Monday--and who doesn't hate Mondays?)

He felt sad, you guys. Who doesn't think their own personal brownshirts who almost certainly do have some kinds of skills would freak out if their main dude had a professional setback when they are sad? (I mostly just drink brandy and eat junk food when I am sad because I do not have such stans.) Bikers and police and the military--oh my! I don't know why Trump is so certain that he has these great friends in these groups that will make a civil war over his ass specifically, but, okay. He thinks Oath Keepers and 3 percenters are his gang. 

So, seriously, is Trump saying he wants half ass Nazi police-trained fuck-ups to act as his personal militia in case Democracy or the DOJ decides to fail his ass because he is hopelessly incompetent or hopelessly criminal? (Or both--both is also accurate.) This seems like a thing a person who gave an actual oath to uphold the Constitution would not want, but is definitely in line with Trump's rhetoric, because he has warned Hillary Clinton about the "second amendment people" who could be charged with stopping her, and has used this trope of a combo of state/private actors being his militia previously while actually being president.  Which is really very abusive, wrong, and fascist.  

Now, to snark on the Bikers for Trump, I might not be able to afford a Harley, but I am a young enough Gen X-er to be entirely grossed out by sell-out rebels without a clue who decided their cause was racist, anti LGBT, anti-feminism, and pro-corporate tax cuts and giveaways. These comfortable-assed MF-ers ain't going to war for Trump. They have bone spurs! 

Also, I just want to give a minute to Trump having to have his minion, John Hogan Gidley, respond to the entrance of Beto O'Rourke to the 2020 Goat Rodeo, with a bit of silliness.: Yes, this is Robert Francis O'Rourke--Robert Francis! Just like Robert Francis Kennedy! Thanks for reminding us of who Beto reminds us of, a little! You are so good at this, John Hogan!  Clearly responding to a person using the first and middle names of a person is the entirely normal thing! Please tell Donald John we think you are doing a job of some kind while looking like a badly-aging small boy!

Tuesday, January 22, 2019

A Matter Of Perspective



Sometimes, there are stories that you want to sit on as a blogger, even if it seems like the thing to do is "post while the iron is hot". But I didn't have any interest in hurrying where the Covington Catholic kids' videos were concerned because there were multiple sides of the story, and I wasn't counting on anyone necessarily getting the full picture because the story sometimes gets lost in the symbolism. These white kids and their MAGA hats. The elder and his dignified drumming. We can unpack these things slowly if we want to, and do the work of understanding, and watching the many different perspectives, or we can work from our own corners. We can find the version that fits our own perspective, or understand there are different perspectives at work. I still don't like writing about this on the grounds that I don't understand fully except from my own attempt at getting a fuller perspective, but understand how my blogging "muses" set me up--sometimes I have to write about a thing whether I like it or not to have that topic out, and I can't move on until I just get the story out of my system.

The way I see it with the Covington Catholic kids is pretty similar to what Steve M. wrote, although my perspective is from Philadelphia, twenty years later. The thing you learn in a city with diversity or various viewpoints is that not everything is about you, concerns you, or needs you to confront it. You can be called a blue-eyed devil whore, and that's just some shit someone has to say about you because they are working out their demons in public, where about a hundred other people can also see them being ugly, and you not listening. There is no reason to call out or call back. The Covington Catholic kids were confronted by the Black Hebrew Israelites, and had no reference for how to not confront them. They weren't ever told this kind of provocation existed. These kids never took a downtown subway somewhere, I guess. They were going to be unnecessarily confrontational, and it looked like there were no adults who would tell them not to do this.(Not to turn the other cheek? Even if there was a pretty solid Christian basis for not starting shit, the chaperones weren't trying to be about it.) Nathan Phillips thought he was peacefully intervening because from his point of view, these young people needed their attention turned away from the negative energy the BHI were bringing and hoped they would be respectful of his prayerful positive energy.

But they didn't know how to confront that, either. These were, to them, just other people of color acting weird at them, and they could not determine if this was a threat or on their side, and not knowing how to just not react, they behaved with ignorance, because that was what they had.

I'm not going to say they were necessarily behaving hatefully right there, because I don't think they knew how they would be seen. They didn't react as if they would be seen, even though many phone-camera angles captured them. I think they behaved ignorantly, because this is what they had. A lot of crappy white behavior (me just speaking as a white person) probably boils down to ignorance. This is sometimes called "Hanlon's razor": Never ascribe to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity. Because I work for the government, I have had to make myself very much aware of how this variation on Occam's Razor really works.

But there is ignorant, and there is ignorant. These kids are mostly white (except for the one unfortunate who the BHI called a slur), and so are all of the faculty at their school, from what I understand. They are surrounded by whiteness to the exclusion of knowing how to deal with diversity, and with Catholic teaching such that they were there, all teenage boys, to protest against adult women having options for their own reproductive health. And possibly even being ignorant to passing women because of that idea. And wearing explicitly political gear to demonstrate their unity as if not understanding how Trump paraphernalia is received, not as just a political statement, but a racial and misogynistic statement.

The very nicest thing I can say about these kids is that they were in a situation where they did not know what to do, and did not know how their MAGA hats made them look worse, and that many extremely online people have ascribed to them a maturity and situational awareness about how racist they were being that they did not actually possess. They are kids, and I think they should be aware of more than their background has given them, and should be able to learn and grow from this experience, not be shunned and screwed up and have their learning curve cut off because the people around them have circled the wagons. That seems really dumb, and I want all people to just experience life to the fullest, by being properly prepared to experience diversity and learn how to be respectful when the moment happens. Like these kids didn't learn, but still could.

Sunday, January 28, 2018

The Necessity Of?

I could read Ross Douthat's argument in favor of a hardcore anti-immigration asshole who has  regularly bagged on, for some reason, janitors, in his life, and try to fit it into the kind of teleology where one doesn't grasp health except as an absence of sickness, or peace except as an absence of war, but I actually did not click that link and read things that posit why we need to listen to people who are shamelessly unsympathetic and possibly incapable of sympathy to others because I feel that policy should actually be negotiated by people who are not guaranteed to be operating in bad faith because of their ideology but people who acknowledge that people who are different from themselves are, first last and always, actually people. 

I do not find people who are openly dismissive of others because of bigotry necessary to a conversation, and in fact see where they are the source of intractable harm. I also see the irony in writing off assorted people as intractable racists or intolerant alt-rightists as being a form of exclusion--and I do not give a shit. They have, having already come to the table with an agenda of other-exclusion, started it, writing themselves off. 

Writing Stephen Miller in as "necessary" seems to admit that intolerance and fear and justifications of hatred for others has an importance. They are important to the conversation, but as things to counter, not to embrace. Hard pass.

Friday, October 20, 2017

The Pitch That Defiles

President Donald Trump's Chief of Staff spoke at length about the process in returning a US soldier home and the nature of how Gold Star families are informed of their loss. General Kelly has an intimate and experienced knowledge of that process, and I don't care to take away from that--except to call out that this was a very moving wrap, a sort of turgid tortilla, for a bullshit burrito. Because while he spoke movingly about the process, he also slammed into his address some actual indefensible nonsense. 



Well, let me tell you what I told him. Let me tell you what my best friend, Joe Dunford, told me — because he was my casualty officer. He said, Kel, he was doing exactly what he wanted to do when he was killed. He knew what he was getting into by joining that 1 percent. He knew what the possibilities were because we’re at war. And when he died, in the four cases we’re talking about, Niger, and my son’s case in Afghanistan — when he died, he was surrounded by the best men on this Earth: his friends.

That’s what the President tried to say to four families the other day. I was stunned when I came to work yesterday morning, and brokenhearted at what I saw a member of Congress doing. A member of Congress who listened in on a phone call from the President of the United States to a young wife, and in his way tried to express that opinion — that he’s a brave man, a fallen hero, he knew what he was getting himself into because he enlisted. There’s no reason to enlist; he enlisted. And he was where he wanted to be, exactly where he wanted to be, with exactly the people he wanted to be with when his life was taken.

For one thing, this only corroborates the statement that was made by Congresswoman Wilson that Trump stated that her husband knew what he was getting into when he signed up for service. This particular bit only reinforces the statements of the people who heard the call. Also, talking about Rep. Wilson "listening in" was inaccurate, because it sounds like she was eavesdropping, and wasn't invited to share in that call by the widow because she, also, was a close friend of the deceased.

It stuns me that a member of Congress would have listened in on that conversation. Absolutely stuns me. And I thought at least that was sacred. You know, when I was a kid growing up, a lot of things were sacred in our country. Women were sacred, looked upon with great honor. That’s obviously not the case anymore as we see from recent cases. Life — the dignity of life — is sacred. That’s gone. Religion, that seems to be gone as well. 
Gold Star families, I think that left in the convention over the summer. But I just thought — the selfless devotion that brings a man or woman to die on the battlefield, I just thought that that might be sacred.

The member of Congress, once again, listened in by invitation of the family of the deceased. That choice has its own sanctity. The dignity of life? Don't make me laugh! We're talking about the dignity of death, and whether the dead also serve the CIC. For whatever use he has for them, for a kind of order they have no ability to refuse. Whether the currently serving POTUS gets to use General Kelly's son as a human shield.

And what about "Women were sacred, looked on with great honor" and "Religion, that seems to be gone as well"?

Are women uppity tarts now that we get to serve in congress and are without honor or sacredness? Are people just entirely falling down on the routine offering of "Merry Christmases"? Do either of those things have any fucking thing whatsoever to do with whether Trump tried to use the fallen soldiers to shield himself from criticism regarding the Niger mission, whatever that was, as if their blood expiated him from the basic sin of incompetence? Was the Gold Star  Khan family really to blame for the debasing of their conversation?  Why not Trump, who started it by demeaning immigrants, many of whom serve this country, and then lashed out at the Khans when he didn't like what they had to say?

It was a kind of dutiful clean-up where Kelly tried to mop up Trump's mess regarding what he had to say about fallen servicemembers, that became Kelly's mess about how he served a lying, stupid, unacceptably unprepared man.

That is still who Trump is, by the way. Nothing Kelly said changed that, either. It only made him a little more responsible for it.

Sunday, September 3, 2017

Antifa: It's Not Rocket Science.

Sometimes, antifascism takes the form of violence. The above middle-aged woman is swatting a neo-Nazi with her purse. Her mother had been in a concentration camp. Some people who adopt neo-Nazi or "fashy" or "alt-right" or "alt-lite" positions think they are just being some kind of anti-PC comedians. They can pretend they were being contrarian or incendiary and laugh that they "triggered" some "Snowflakes". 

(Although, what's white and cold and afraid of melting, really? Who is triggered by an idea of white genocide that doesn't seem to be happening--except in the minds of sad unfuckable white boys who worry they will never be father-material, and are therefore leaving all their father-material in tissues and gym socks?) 

But the language and posture they adopt however "jokingly" once resulted in the mass murder of millions of people. Full stop. 

The slap upside the head is a form of zen awareness teaching known as grandmotherly kindness. It is meant as a correction to a person who is on a path that leads to great destruction of both self and others through hate, fear and ignorance. 

The fascist side is about violence. The anti-fascist has learned this language and is performing an outreach. Sometimes that outreach connects in a bloody way. But the fascist way is always worse. It always is. Because it isn't confronting a dangerous ideology, but directing hate at marginalized people. The antifa resistance is defense.  Even if it takes a proactive course. Because we humans have been down this road historically, and know the results of it. 

I am ideologically antifascist. I don't think that people who automatically invoke MLK or nonviolence in general, understand why antifa needs to be understood on it's own terms. But if you believe that equality, representation, democracy, matter--you have to pick your side. Antifa is just "anti-fascism". Don't criticize the methods before you've defined where you stand.  Or you might be judged about where you stand by how you break it down. Then judge the methods. By what they intend. By what they always have. 




Wednesday, August 16, 2017

Which Side are You on? (Trump?)

I could spend time breaking down President Trump's bizarre press nightmare, but I don't really fucking care what he said today. He was saying it all along, but some people just weren't paying attention. Hillary Clinton gave an entire speech about Trump and the so-called "alt-right" almost a year ago, and I thought the case she made was solid and apparent--my bad. It turns out, someone like Donald Trump can be a lifelong racist surrounding himself with other racists, and people will actually pretend they don't notice. That shocked me more than it should have, I will admit.

But then again, I am a funny old thing--I believe Americans should kill fascists. 

Look at the header of my blog--"This blog kills fascists. Eventually. It's a process I'm working on. Be patient with me." That header is a call-back to Woody Guthrie, who just forthrightly put "This machine kills fascists" on his guitar. My blogging isn't up to Woody Guthrie's songwriting, but I aspirationally hope I'm doing my bit. I'm not going to kick fascist ass all at once, but I will attempt it. Like I thought it was my job. 

And what do you know--Guthrie had his dealings and complaints about Old Man Trump (Donald's daddy).  Donald Trump started the hell off in this life Team Racist and fascist-associated. (No really, I'm not linking The Nation and I don't want to say Roy Cohn was such a fascist, but am I pretending Roy Cohn was not a fascist? Go--read Politico. McCarthyism is fascism. It doesn't matter that Cohn was a gay Jew. Demonizing and destroying and doubling-down and publically lying about everything? Shit's fascist. )

This blog is rooted in the mid-20th century ideas that Keynes rocked, that civil rights for all were a positive good, and that we all are supposed to stand against fascists. It's what the good people do. It's what Churchill and FDR did. (Stalin--I don't know him.)

It's what heroes are supposed to do. 

In the United States of America, where I thought I was living, Nazis are stupid and bad at best and are history's worst monsters because of course they are.  I mean, who demonizes and singles out ethnic minorities and gay and trans people and religious minorities  and disabled people and tries to codify into law ways to make the oppression of these people permanent? 

Oh, right. Trump. Because he is what he is. (And let's not actually "go there" and pretend his honesty is refreshing-it's shit. I don't expect people to eat shit and smile. You like this? You like eating shit, and there's something fundamentally wrong with you.) 

We are supposed to see Dictators as bad and even clowns in this society.

Hitler and those who are Hitler-adjacent are supposed to be targets of our scorn, not our admiration. People waving Swastika flags are not okay--ever.  You should expect better. The people who would easily accept standing right by them--are not okay either. And this Confederate thing--kind of fascist, also too, with the added problem of being treason against the US in the defense of bondage-slavery, because read the actual articles of secession of the states in question. Yes, it was always about slavery, not states' rights. Because it was about states' having the right to endorse slavery. Because the South was like, "Screw it" with respects to Northern States' feels about the Fugitive Slave Acts, which made catching free human (black) bodies and delivering them back into a pernicious bondage incumbent upon people who didn't want any part of it. Which was obviously fuckery. Northern states had to comply with making black people slaves, and the South at first simply didn't give a shit if the Federal law was about determining what states were free--but then when GOP President Lincoln happened, they had a total freak-out and got scared he'd take away their bondage humans. 

Wow. Fucking snowflakes. Makes you wonder why the Party of Lincoln is being all about Confederate statues now, doesn't it?

Tuesday, August 15, 2017

The Usual Warning Signs

This profile of James Fields, the 20-year old Nazi-fanboy who allegedly murdered Heather Heyer and injured at least 19 others, is chilling in that there were obvious warning signs that this young man was headed for violence--because he was already performing violence:

In a report sourced to police records, the newspaper said that wheelchair-bound Bloom called police in Florence, Kentucky, at least nine times starting in 2010 seeking help with her sometimes violent son.

Soon after graduating high school in 2015, Fields joined the U.S. Army but left by December after failing to meet training standards, the Army said in a statement.
What kind of person physically assaults his disabled mom? What kind of person seeks out a profession that involves firearms and violence but displays no aptitude for the actual working parts of the job description? A person with a fuse easily lit in a tiki-torch atmosphere.

I've covered this before--Elliot RogersIsmaayil Brinsley. James Hodgkinson.  (There are others, but these posts stand out in my mind.) Sometimes you know someone is liable to hurt masses of people because they already hurt people, often women, they already associate with.

This violence ideation was apparent with Dylan Klebold, who dwelt upon Nazis, and Eric Harris, who dwelt upon all kinds of things, but also a dehumanized image of female sexuality.

They all failed to see people as just...people. So they resorted to violence against people. There was no understanding what the humanity of their victims even was.

There are warning signs. They just look an awful lot like our culture. We separate people by race, creed, gender, religion. We objectify people based on what they can do or can't do for us. And we depersonalize them by creating narratives about them based on our ignorance, not based on our curiosity about the Other and how those who are not ourselves even live. And I include myself in that "we". Trying to break out of that othering, dehumanizing, and situational dealing with other people is a struggle everyone deals with. But we don't talk about it intelligently, if we talk about it at all. And those who don't sort it out within themselves, do violent shit, because they never learned that people were people. And none of us are fucking special. We just live, bleed, try to get by, and hopefully find other people who will love us for our difficult and unspecial selves.

But we don't need to be special to have earned the right to live. We are all here. It's all we have. It is all we need to have. I don't understand how it eludes anyone that human beings not yourself have their hereness to justify their existence, and that life is not cheap, but a daily struggle for air and water and calories, and room to move and think and be, but it is the basic principle on which I think any kind of reality needs to be based--the other is not unlike you in uniqueness and rights. They like you are physically capable of suffering and can be injured, get sick, fear death, deserve love. And this is the best part of them, and you. Because it makes it incumbent upon us all to see one another for what we are.

Be fearless enough to love and be loved, be ready to hold back your worst until you've seen your fellow human for their best. And if their best is Nazi shit, well, I guess, bust them up until their asses get fixed. Because that way is a sunken place and nothing any good can come out of.

Sunday, August 13, 2017

Terrorism Happened Here--Call it That

When a car apparently intentionally plows into a group of people participating in a counter-protest to the Nazi shindig in Charlottesville, it should be pretty obvious that you should call it terrorism, and disavow it, and condemn that sort of thing. Many politicians recognized at once the enormity of the situation, and called for the event to be treated as the terror that it was intended to be.  This was the obvious response, the necessary response. Bigotry and violence are a bad and unnecessary combination in a diverse nation where we value free speech. The counter-protestors had all the same rights as the so-called "alt-right" protestors (although I prefer to just think of them as Nazis, because, well, what they do, say and think). 

Our president, though, decided to make a comment condemning violence "on many sides".  How utterly inadequate of the man.  As if there was a movement that somehow used violence against white supremacy on the regular. None such exists. And yet, look at what the Trump Administration has stood for--they choose to ignore right wing extremism in favor of Islamic terror, even though RW extremism is more of a threat.  Recently, Sebastian Gorka, a guy whose functional White House position is not entirely clear and who might not even have a security clearance, held forth on the idea that maybe we shouldn't be so hard on white supremacists and that the idea of "lone wolf" terror ops was mostly bullshit. Every bit of that couldn't actually be more wrong. 

Trump's weird use of the term "on many sides" makes it seem like anti-racist or anti-fascist groups also were indulging in violence. He attributes the counter-protestors' existence as provocation enough for what happened to them? He blames the people standing up to hate as being also biased? His flabby response heartened the so-called "alt-right" (Nazis) by letting them believe he loves them too much to attribute blame to them. 

President Obama was regularly accused of appeasement. I have always maintained that this was a word deployed by people who did not understand the nuances of power, and would not know "appeasement" for "détente". But I have no problem seeing Trump as appeasing the white racists who helped elect him, in much the same way as I see appeasement in his stance on Russian sanctions, and his supposedly sarcastic "thanking" of Putin for the supposed reduction in his State Department staff in Russia. 

Trump is a stupid weakling who supports bias and hate, domestic terrorism, and entertains delusions of us making nice with a foreign power who means to undermine us. And any person who ever used the "appeasement" line regarding Obama, but supports Trump right now, is shit. (This would also include people saying the exact right things about domestic terror and against the Nazis gathered in Charlottesville. Say the exact right things all you want--but what are you doing about the birther your party made happen to our country? What standard do you even hold him to?)

The rise of Trump, the so-called "Trump Effect", is definitely a factor in reinforcing racist bias and emboldening hate groups to believe they can operate without fear. We need to call it that. We need to see an end to Trumpism. And that means ending Trump. 


 

Friday, August 26, 2016

The Speech Where Clinton Did It All



This speech in Reno was a defining speech for Hillary Clinton, as a reaffirmation of her values, and defining for Donald Trump, in that she took the campaign he had been running so far and looped it around his neck like the stinking, rotting albatross it should be. The transcript reads just as well as her measured and presidential demeanor in the giving of the speech. And Donald Trump can cry at this late date, that she is manipulating the optics and using the tired tactic of labelling someone as racist--but really, is that the problem? Or is it the verbatim quotes of how Mexicans were supposedly racists and criminals, and the comments about black people that were right out of a Ron Paul newsletter, and an immigration policy that, despite whatever changes he has been polling his shrinking crowds about, would have to be absurdly cruel and desperately un-Constitutional. She defined him by wrapping him up in his words and deeds and spelling out the narrative and context of his associations with the former head of Breitbart.com, and conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones. She highlighted their fringe nonsense. And she connected homebrewed fringe nonsense, to the international problems of fringe nonsense people getting power.

It was damn effective, IMHO, because she used a kind of political akido to use his strength against him. I thought it was all rather well done on her part, and being followed by revelations that alt-right CEO new-hire Bannon was accused of wife-beating just hammers home how rotten Team Trump is.

What does Trump do? Madly try to disassociate from current connections and disavow all previous racialist statements? Or tell the establishment to screw off and cling tighter to the fringe than he ever clung to the cushion.

Both are likely vote-losers. There is no needle to thread, here. Clinton put the evil eye on, and it isn't ever coming off.

And he can yell that she's a bigot now, if he wants, and if he knows what that word means. But the "I'm rubber you're glue" shit doesn't play in this schoolyard. Nah, son. We saw you hugging the website that lynched ACORN for registering black people and tried to ruin Shirley Sherrod. WE know what birther Donald Trump was doing several summers ago.

She read his ass for dirt and dirt it will stay. Amen.

TWGB: It's Raining Shoes!

  It certainly has been a minute, hasn't it? So, what brings me out of self-imposed blogging exile, if not something very relevant to my...