Charen: Whos really burning things down? – Brownwood Bulletin

My friend David French, one of the most admirable voices in America today, argues that conservatives need not vote against Republican senate candidates in order to send a message about Trumpism. I disagree. He writes, "A rage, fury, and a 'burn it all down' mentality is one of the maladies that brought us to the present moment."

This assumes that the reason some plan to evict Republican senators is simply a matter of anger. But voting against a candidate or even a whole party is not nihilism. It's the legal, Constitutional way to express approval or disapproval. The current Republican Party has chosen to become the burn-it-all-down party. The most demoralizing aspect of the past four years has not been that a boob conman was elected president but that one of the two great political parties surrendered to him utterly.

It's certainly true that Republicans perceived their options to be limited. If they speak up, they say, they will flush their careers down the drain. Look at what happened to Jeff Flake, Mark Sanford and Bob Corker!

But this overstates things. A number of Republicans have stood up to Trump and maintained their electoral viability -- especially when they challenged him on matters in which he has shown little interest, namely public policy. Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., for example, voted against the president's USMCA trade agreement and (gasp) wrote an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal explaining his reasoning.

When the president abruptly announced, following a phone call with Turkish leader Recep Erdogan, that he was withdrawing American troops forthwith from Syria, a number of Republicans voiced horror. Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., said it would lead to a "slaughter." Sen. Ted Cruz said it would be "DISGRACEFUL." Rep. Liz Cheney called it a "catastrophic mistake that puts our gains against ISIS at risk and threatens America's national security." Senators Lindsay Graham, R-S.C., Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., Mitt Romney, R-Utah, Marco Rubio, R-Fla., former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley and others weighed in as well.

When the president suggested lifting sanctions on Russia, Senator Rob Portman, R-Ohio, said it would be "horrible" for the United States.

So, it is possible to speak up about this president and survive. I use that word advisedly, because these Republican officeholders often use words like "kill" or "destroy" or "annihilate" when contemplating what Trump would do to them if they raise their heads too far above the parapet. In fact, all that actually threatened them was the possibility of nasty tweets and the chance that they might lose their seats.

David is right that very few people in any walk of life display courage on anything, though craven Republicans holding House and Senate posts might want to pause from time to time to contemplate the extraordinary valor of protesters in Hong Kong, Iran and Egypt who continue to put their freedom and sometimes their lives at risk by taking to the streets. And should being an elected official really be one's "life work"?

Republicans have criticized the president on policy matters, sometimes even harshly. Where they have shrunk into their shells was on matters that are even more critical to the health of our republic. They have, by their silence, given assent to his cruelty, his assaults on truth, his dangerous flirtations with political violence and his consistent demolition of institutions.

Institutions are like scaffolding. When a society's institutions are weakened, the whole edifice can come crashing down.

Donald Trump undermined the institution of the free press, urging his followers to disbelieve everything except what came from the leader. He weakened respect for law enforcement and the courts, suggesting that he was the victim of a "deep state" and that "so-called judges" need not be respected. He scorned allies and toadied to dictators. He has cast doubt on the integrity of elections. He ran the executive branch like a gangster, demanding personal loyalty and abusing officials such as the hapless Jeff Sessions, who merely followed ethics rules. He ignored the law to get his way on the border wall. He violated the most sacred norms of a multiethnic society by encouraging racial hatred. He made the U.S. guilty of separating babies from their mothers.

Elected officials, terrified of their own constituents, have cowered and temporized in the face of a truly unprecedented assault on democratic values. They believed that they were powerless and acted accordingly. Since they were powerless when it counted, perhaps we should make it official?

Charen is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

Read this article:

Charen: Whos really burning things down? - Brownwood Bulletin

The Blind Oracle of Noonan – The Bulwark

Good news! All of us who are worried about President Trump and the future of the Republican party can pack it up. Peggy Noonan, our cherished Reaganic oracle, has spoken and has the answer to align the Always Trump, Sometimes Trump, and Never Trump factions of the GOP.

In her latest Wall Street Journal column, Noonan enters the Burn It Down debate and argues against voting out all the Trump enablers and sycophants becauseare you ready for this?persuasion will be key to saving the Republic. Ah! We can all rest easy, pour ourselves a cool beverage, and retire early. Our work is done! Praise be to Peggy!

Thats the kind of wistful, head-in-the-clouds analysis Noonan is known for, though. Like, wouldnt everything be better if everyone just played along more nicely? Why all this anger toward a president who lets Russia put bounties on the heads of our soldiers, tear-gases peaceful protesters, and lies and obstructs justice as a way of life? Why on earth should Susan Collins, Martha McSally, and Cory Gardner be sacrificed on the altar of Trump just to prove a point about accountability? Because follow-the-leader Republicans like Collins will surely be the ones to save us from another trillion in deficit spending and finally stop funding for Planned Parenthood! Because Collins, of all people, must have learned lessons from Trump. We should all be so, so very concerned about the future of the GOP without Republicans like Collins.

Noonan concedes that Donald Trump is burning himself down. Yet she thinks we ought to keep voting for the people who handed him a lighter and kerosene.

No thank you. Noonan, however, is free to throw herself on the Trump dumpster pyre. She says Never Trumpers are bloody-minded and encouraging nihilism, but what she proposes is politically suicidal.

Noonan says Never Trumpers should not engage in pyromaniac fantasies but constructive modesty, even humility. More nave, high-minded divinity from the Temple Noonan. Constructive modesty sounds not like a political path to the future but like shapewear for the prudish soul. Maybe she has clothing on the brain. In May, Noonan was busy worrying how the pandemic would influence our outfit choices. (How is that for a priority?) God save me from her sermons because there are no yoga pants comfortable enough to get me to find my humility and prostrate myself before our grab em by the pussy president. Lets pray for those who do.

Noonan sees fashion as a leading indicator of a nations mood. Well, if thats the case, tell me what kind of fashion statement face masks on children make. Because, thanks to our incompetent president, my kids will be wearing one for eight hours a day if they are lucky enough to leave the house and attend school this fall.

Not that going to school will actually happen, or socializing normally will return anytime soon. Trump promised if he was president wed all be able to say Merry Christmas again! Probably not in person to friends and family this year, though. All because too few Republicans could bring themselves to tell Trump last spring that no, coronavirus is nothing like the flu.

Still, Peggy wants me to be more docile and polite while my family shelters in place for the next however many months as President Trump golfs his time away and the GOP lets him do it.

Noonan says that part of Trumps momentary genius in 2016 was that he uniquely spoke to the anxieties of Americans about illegal immigration. Is that what the great Reagan speechwriter thinks about Trumps announcement speech that said Mexico is bringing rapists to America? Genius?

Never Trumpers cant find the pity in their hearts Noonan has for Trump, who came up against his own perfect storm with the pandemic, the lousy economy, and violence in the streets. As if he were a passive observer in his presidency. Oh, what to do!

When the Trump experience is over, the Republican Party will have to be rebuilt, Noonan prophesies. (Duh.) A lot is going to have to be rethought. Simple human persuasion will be key. And then she tries to persuade her readers that we Never Trumpers are really the problem. Never Trumpers never seem to judge themselves, she complains, never once pausing to consider why its okay for her write things like Trump is weak, unserious and avoidant of the big issues while she remains weak, unserious and avoidant of the big issue of how to go about restoring the kind of strong Republican leadership she pines for.

Noonan is too timid to admit that the dismal Trump experience will not end unless some Republicans screw up the nerve to forcefully close the curtains on it. Otherwise, Donald Trump Jr. and a QAnon Congress will carry forth the freak flag of conservatism. Is that what she wants? Because Trump is never going to go gently into the night as a good loser president should. The Trump experience doesnt end unless Never Trumpers finish him Mortal Kombat style.

With all evidence against her, Noonan thinks Trumpism will disappear if Never Trumpers just shut up. Mr. Trump has been very publicly doing himself in, mismanaging his crisessetting himself on fire, she writes. As long as thats clear, his supporters wont be able to say, if he loses, that he was a champion of the people who was betrayed by the party elites, the Never Trumpers and the deep state: He didnt lose, he was the victim of treachery.

As if Trump depicting himself as a victim would be any different than any other day of his presidency. Nobody likes me, he whined last week. Who are the Never Trumpers to disagree?

Noonan tries her best to avoid overtly positioning herself as yet another MAGA enabler, but thats what her column implicitly amounts to.

She squints at Trump through a self-imposed gauzy blindfold instead of looking at him head-on. Noonan imagines another time when Republicans had civil intra-party debates about policy and not the possible psychopathy of the commander-in-chief and those who seek to make his manic authoritarian dreams come true.

She doesnt want Never Trumpers making noise because their critiques will be unhelpful for Republicans, and bad for the country, if thats the background music of the party the next 10 years.

As if Noonan hasnt been dancing to her own outdated tune for decades. Yet, she sings on and on about her unrealistic, nostalgic views on politics from deep inside her walk-in closet of memories from the 1980s.

Enough already.

I, for one, am pressing the mute button on her. While Im at it, someone pass me a match.

See the original post here:

The Blind Oracle of Noonan - The Bulwark

CREATION OF INVESTMENT COURT IN UKRAINE WILL HELP DOING BUSINESS – Ukraine open for business

The creation of an investment court, an idea promulgated by Ukraines Justice Minister Denys Maliuska, could facilitate doing business in Ukraine, Omerta Organized Law Group head Yevhen Fedoseyev has said.The declared creation of an investment court will greatly facilitate doing business in Ukraine, because if investors have a virtually unconditional guarantee that in any case, their property rights and interests are practically not threatened, they will start investing more in our country, he told Interfax-Ukraine.The lawyer noted that this initiative is not new, and similar courts already exist in a number of countries.Investors from all over the world are increasingly turning to investment arbitration as a way of resolving a dispute with the state every year. This mechanism for protecting the rights of an investor has proved to be effective, which is confirmed by both the number of international bilateral and multilateral agreements containing clauses on investment arbitration, and the number of initiated cases, he said.Fedoseyev recalled that a permanent arbitration institute, the International Commercial Arbitration Court at the Ukrainian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, has been operating in Ukraine for more than 25 years, however, appeals to him are not too popular, since none of the Ukraine agreements concluded on mutual assistance and protection of foreign investment provides for the ICAC at the Ukrainian Chamber of Commerce and Industry as an institution for resolving investment disputes, as well as because of general legal nihilism. Of course, the new court in Ukraine will need to develop a practice that has been built in the courts of Western Europe for decades, however, the transparency of the creation of such a body, its competence, objectivity can create a positive image not only for the body itself, but also for the state as a whole, which will ensure inflow of new investors into the country, the lawyer emphasized.As reported, in early July at a meeting with European business representatives, Maliuska announced an initiative to create a concept for creating a separate court that would deal with investors cases arbitration or a separate court that would consider cases with the participation of business.

Related

BUSINESS, INVESTMENT COURT

Read more from the original source:

CREATION OF INVESTMENT COURT IN UKRAINE WILL HELP DOING BUSINESS - Ukraine open for business

Pussycat and the Dirty Johnsons: Beast Album Review – Louder Than War

Pussycat and the Dirty Johnsons

Beast (Hound Gawd! Records) LP/CD/DL

Released: August 28th, 2020

8/10

Trash punk assault on the senses to unleash the beast

The feline limbed but powerfully voiced Puss Johnson, backed by the quiff heavy guitarist Dirty Jake and the more hirsute drummer Filfy Antz, have been pounding audiences into submission across the nation with their own brand of trash punk rawk n roll since around 2002. When a bands live shows are so volatile and full of power, the recorded output can often be a let down, but the grooves on the bands first three albums have shown they are more than capable of reproducing that raw energy in the studio.

Beast, a twelve track journey through scuzzy blues riffs and garage punk delivers another high octane example of in yer face hard rockin punk blues. Opening track, Lying In My Bed, sets the tone with its deep down heavy blues riff and the battering beat of the drums making up for anything that a missing bass could offer. Theres a manic, paranoid tension to the song, and a Klaus Fluoride guitar like lick, whilst Puss Johnson intones the vocals like a deranged locked up inmate about to explode. Doin It is heavy duty blues with a fuck you Im gonna do it whatever you say punk attitude. Abuser is a song about an abusive ex and those friends who still dont get the #metoo generation, and a demand that abuse should not be diminished. Its got a great drum beat dragging back the rhythm behind the urgent guitar, creating an off-kilter sound with the vocals smoothly moving over the top.

Not Your Baby is driven by a cool driving blues beat with a chorus of screaming anger backed by a drum beat that sounds like a head pounding off the floor. Stale is a song about being stuck in a small town and how it can suck your soul into oblivion. It has a slower groove with a doom-laden feel of wandering through a stultified town, a place festering under grey skies. The guitar is like a ticking time bomb waiting to explode. Knee Jerk is an attack on keyboard reactionaries (Caps lock on Im feeling strong!) and starts like a Dr Feelgood song before morphing into The Cramps, and if that aint a great mix I dont know what is. Meat is restrained, holding back with an air of suspense, with a repetition of the descending guitar line, grinding away, with a roll of drums in the background. It sounds like early Banshees. Shes An Orgasm is the imperfect search for the perfect woman; at least the perfect woman that is shoved down our throats by the media. Shit is an all-out punk attack on phonies and fakes. Its a healthy dose of punk nihilism with clashing, fuzzed up guitars overlaying each other and spitting vocals and great beat and fills from the drums. Do Ya Feel Me? is sleazy Mississippi blues guitar, like a sultry bayou. It drips sweat, soaked with heavy blues and desire.

Beast Will Out is full of tension and paranoia, building up like a horror movie soundtrack, as the beast within fights to escape, a modern werewolf tale. The drums create the feeling of tension rising up. The middle section then slows down as the lycanthropic transformation of the beast gradually emerges and the music begins to pound, pound, before the explosion of excess. Album closer Hey Honey has a 50s rock sound, pop punk with a Transvision Vamp sound. Its a closing attack on those people who think they know whats best for you, when really they want to mould you into the person they want you to be.

Beast is an all out assault that shows that this band is still full of creativity and hunger, succeeding in transferring their incendiary live power to the grooves of records.

~

You can find Pussycat and the Dirty Johnsons online here, Instagram, YouTube, Twitter and on Facebook.

All words by Mark Ray. More writing by Mark Ray can be found at his author archive. And he can be found on Twitter, Instagram and WordPress

See original here:

Pussycat and the Dirty Johnsons: Beast Album Review - Louder Than War

Why Netflixs The Rain Season 3 Should Be Your Next Dystopian Binge!!! – World Top Trend

It is likely to be an odd suggestion to spend your treasured downtime throughout a world pandemic watching individuals take care of the fallout of a illness thats seemingly succeeding in wiping out most of humanity. However whereas there are actually components of The Rain that may hit a little bit near home right now, it sits simply far sufficient in the world of fantasy that its twists and turns present a pleasant distraction from the very actual risks outdoors of your personal door.

This isnt a tween model of The Walking Dead. In different phrases, it prioritises hope for a possible future over nihilism and the fear of everybody and every thing that isnt a part of your present group that so many of those narratives sink into. Usually the characters are literally too fast to belief others (apart from the token dissenting voice), leaving the viewers screaming at them to be extra suspicious, but it surely lends the series a human high quality lacking from plenty of equally dystopian fiction.

Followers of character-driven exhibits may also discover so much to love in The Rain, because the thriller of how the illness was unleashed and the customarily grim realities of surviving in a world that has given up on humanity most of the time take a again seat to the relationships between the characters. We start with Simone and Rasmus, who spend six years alone earlier than deciding to enterprise out, and its this sibling bond that drives the remainder of the series.

And, after all, there are many romances to go round too. A few of them you may see coming a mile away however others take some time to develop and are genuinely price rooting for. And refreshingly, friendships are given equal significance as {couples} and familial relationships, maintaining all of the characters emotionally related all through.

Characters are developed through Lost-style flashbacks, however these are more like distorted slideshows than narratives in and of themselves. Were provided only a glimpse of their lives earlier than, and the way they particularly acquired to the place the place we meet them.

Continued here:

Why Netflixs The Rain Season 3 Should Be Your Next Dystopian Binge!!! - World Top Trend

We’re staring into the face of America’s worst political crisis since the civil war – NationofChange

Trump Floats Delaying The Election. It Would Require A Change in Law

~NPR, Thursday, July 30, 2020

A sitting president floats delaying a fast-approachingelection which the polls indicate he will lose and lose decisively. It might not be safe to open the polls in the midst of a pandemic, dont you see? POTUS is only doing his job and protecting us is Job One. Of course, if you believe that youd have to believe that facts are not facts. That there are alternatives. Alternative facts.

What you see when you go to one of the official White House websites is the smiling face of Donald Trump. Its the photo of a congenial mana nice guyand, as such, it is a fake. A fable. A lie. A testament to the alternative reality this White House serves up on a daily basis.

A more realistic photo would be to feature the grimacing orange face of a reckless man intent upon engineering a political crisis. A president determined to win at all costs. To remain in office and do whatever it takes to guarantee that outcome.

The president who is suggesting it might be necessary to postpone the elections for reasons of public safety is the same president who did nothing when the pandemic hit and refused to set an example by social distancing and wearing a mask.

The same president who has demonstrated no inclination to deal with what is clearly the worst public-health crisis in a century.

The same one who has obstructed efforts by governors of blue states and mayors of blue cities to enforce rules and behaviors to flatten the curve.

Who has sought to discredit doctors he appointed and scientists working to find a cure.

Who has pushed to reopen public schools with little regard for local infection rates or adequate testing of teachers, staff, and students.

***************

We have entered into a new phase in the crisis that started with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in March of this year. The public health crisis was and is real. Its not a conspiracy. Not alternative reality. It is real.

That it happened when it did is not the fault of Donald Trump or, heaven forbid, Dr. Anthony Fauci. Nor is it Chinas fault. The contention that a mad scientist or evil empire has deliberately let a killer pathogen loose in the world is daft and devoid of any factual basis.

One of my favorite writers on the contemporary scene is Masha Gessen, a brilliant observer of life in Russia and America.* The one-line teaser for her latest column in The New Yorker, Why America Feels Like a Post-Soviet State, asserts: The callous nihilism of Russian society is everywhere in the Trump Administrations response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Gessen holds both Russian and American citizenship. No journalist on either side of the Atlanta is better qualified to make this harsh judgment.

***************

Trump doesnt give a damn about COVID-19. Or about the death rate. Or the millions of people who have lost their jobs or homes or health insurance.

He only cares about the election. About his money. His power. About staying in the Oval Office. And out of court. Trumps face is baggy and orange. He just needs a matching jumpsuit. Then and only then can we begin the arduous task of making American great again.

*Masha Gessen was born in Russia in 1967 and first came to the U.S. with her parents under the U.S. Refugee Resettlement Program in 1981. The family moved back to Moscow in 1991 but she eventually returned to the U.S. in 2013 when the Putin government considered taking children away from gay parents.

FALL FUNDRAISER

If you liked this article, please donate $5 to keep NationofChange online through November.

Link:

We're staring into the face of America's worst political crisis since the civil war - NationofChange

The First Reaction To Marilyn Manson’s New Single, We Are Chaos – Kerrang!

Marilyn Manson has often talked of his love for The Beatles. Hes covered The Fab Fours Helter Skelter, talked about the importance of their game-changing White Album, referenced their song Revolution on Disposable Teens, and even wished band members happy birthday by doing a snippet ofBirthday.

Here, we find The God Of Fuck firing the starting pistol on his 11th album We Are Chaos by seemingly doing his own version of Across The Universe, from 1970s Let It Be. After the full-frontal thrust of 2017s Heaven Upside Down, where the naked threat of songs like We Know Where You Fucking Live provided a ballsy energy, its a change of pace. And one Manson does verywell.

Read this: 6 things we want from the new Marilyn Mansonalbum

In the end we all end up in a garbage dump but Ill still be here holding your hand, he croons, before intoning, We are chaos, we cant becured.

But its that anthemic, celebratory, New Years Eve feeling, dancing at the end of the world, that provides the energy on We Are Chaos. The nihilism is pared back in favour of something more romantic? Its sort of like the end of Fight Club with eyeliner and bulging leathertrousers.

As a signpost for the new album, its hard to get a total grip on. Heaven Upside Down was so striking, so definite, that divining Mazzas next move was always going to be to presume a lot about him. And thats always been a foolserrand.

For now, its enough of a clue to know that what Marilyn Manson has in store is going to be something on a grand scale, and with a sense of class only he canunlock.

Continue reading here:

The First Reaction To Marilyn Manson's New Single, We Are Chaos - Kerrang!

The GOP Needs to Hit Rock Bottom – The Bulwark

The last thing I want to do is offend my friend David French, who is one of the most admirable voices in America today. Nor, finding myself in the highly unusual position of disagreeing with him, do I want to pile on, since my colleague Charlie Sykes has already penned a response that is characteristically robust. But the question of how conservatives should vote in Novemberwhether to punish the entire Republican party by voting straight-ticket Democrat, or merely vote against Trumpis important and needs further airing.

David argues that conservatives need not vote against Republican Senate candidates in order to send a message:

A rage, fury, and a burn it all down mentality is one of the maladies that brought us to the present moment. Repeating that same impulse, but with an entire party in the crosshairs, will only compound our political dysfunction.

This assumes that the reason some plan to evict Republican senators is simply a matter of anger. French uses the word vengeance. But voting against a candidate or even a whole party is not nihilism. Its not burning it all down. Its the legal, constitutional way to express approval or disapproval. The current Republican party has itself chosen to become the arsonist party. It has decided to go along with undermining faith in institutions, shredding norms, elevating conspiracy theories, disregarding laws, and tossing aside truth whenever the leader dictates. The most demoralizing aspect of the past four years has not been that a boob conman was elected president but that one of the two great political parties surrendered to him utterly.

David suggests that voting against Republican senators is completely devoid of grace. It ignores the monumental pressures that Donald Trump has placed on the entire GOP and the lack of good options that so many GOP officeholders faced.

Its certainly true that Republicans perceived their options to be limited. How many times have they confided, behind closed doors, that they deplore Trumps conduct, but explain that their hands are tied? If they speak up, they say, they will flush their careers down the drain. Look at what happened to Jeff Flake, Mark Sanford, and Bob Corker!

But this overstates things. A number of Republicans have stood up to Trump and maintained their electoral viabilityespecially when they challenged him on matters that he has shown little interest in, namely public policy. Sen. Pat Toomey for example, voted against the presidents USMCA trade agreement and (gasp) wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal explaining his reasoning.

It is the only trade pact ever meant to diminish trade. Since Naftas implementation, American exports to Mexico have grown more than fivefold. But imports grew even more, widening the trade deficit. The Trump administration finds this unacceptable, even though the trade deficit is mostly meaningless. Hence USMCA has a myriad of provisions to warm the hearts of protectionists.

When the president abruptly announced, following a phone call with Turkish leader Recep Erdoan, that he was withdrawing American troops forthwith from Syria, a number of Republicans voiced horror. Sen. Ben Sasse said it would lead to a slaughter. Sen. Ted Cruz said it would be DISGRACEFUL if we sat idly by while Turkey slaughters the Kurds, as public reports suggest that Turkish leader Erdogan explicitly told President Trump he intends to do. Rep. Liz Cheney called it a catastrophic mistake that puts our gains against ISIS at risk and threatens Americas national security. Sens. Lindsey Graham, Mitch McConnell, Mitt Romney, and Marco Rubio, former U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley, and others weighed in as well.

When the president suggested lifting sanctions on Russia, Sen. Rob Portman said it would be horrible for the United States. And after Gen. James Mattis wrote an op-ed saying that Donald Trump was making a mockery of the U.S. Constitution, Sen. Lisa Murkowski said, I was really thankful. I thought General Mattiss words were true, and honest and necessary and overdue.

So, it is possible to speak up about this president and survive. I use that word advisedly, because these Republican office holders often use words like kill or destroy or annihilate when contemplating what Trump would do to them if they raise their heads too far above the parapet. In fact, all that actually threatened them was the possibility of nasty tweets and the chance that they might lose their seats.

David French writes:

If you think its obvious what they should have done, how many readers have faced such a choice: take a tough stand and likely lose your lifes work or muddle through and hope to emerge on the other side with your dignity and conscience intact? If you faced such a choice, did you take the stand and bear the cost?

David is right that very few people in any walk of life display courage on anything, though craven Republicans holding House and Senate posts might want to pause from time to time to contemplate the extraordinary valor of protesters in Hong Kong, Iran, and Egypt who continue to put their freedom and sometimes their lives at risk by taking to the streets. And before we extend too much grace to Republican office holders, we need to ask: Should being an elected official really be ones life work? And must one cling to it even when it requires delegitimizing the very ideas that brought you into politics?

As noted above, Republicans have criticized the president on policy matters, sometimes even harshly. Where they have shrunk into their shells was on matters that are even more critical to the health of our republic. They have, by their silence, given assent to his cruelty, his assaults on truth, his dangerous flirtations with political violence, and his consistent demolition of institutions.

Institutions are like scaffolding. When a societys institutions are weakened, the whole edifice can come crashing down. This often happens to countries as a consequence of war or natural disasters. In our case, it was self-inflicted before the natural disaster (coronavirus) struck, and now, as masonry hits the pavement and floors sag, we are seeing the results.

Donald Trump undermined the institution of the free press, urging his followers to disbelieve everything except what came from the leader. And Republicans were silent. He weakened respect for law enforcement and the courts, suggesting that he was the victim of a deep state and that so-called judges need not be respected. And Republicans were silent. He enriched himself and his family. And Republicans were silent. He introduced doubt about accepting the results of elections. He scorned allies and toadied to dictators. And Republicans were silent. He ran the executive branch like a gangster, demanding personal loyalty and abusing officials, like the hapless Jeff Sessions, who merely followed ethics rules. He ignored the law to get his way on the border wall. Silence again. He violated the most sacred norms of a multi-ethnic society by encouraging racial hatred. Crickets. He made the United States guilty of separating babies from their mothers. And Republicans were silent. He undercut the credibility and honor of the Republican party by failing to dissociate it from kooks and criminals. And Republicans were silent.

Elected officials, terrified of their own constituents, have cowered and temporized in the face of a truly unprecedented assault on democratic values. They believed that they were powerless and acted accordingly. Since they were powerless when it counted, what difference would it make if voters were to make it official?

Consider something else that Sen. Murkowski said in response to Gen. Mattis. When I saw General Mattis comments yesterday I felt like perhaps we are getting to a point where we can be more honest with the concerns that we might hold internally and have the courage of our own convictions to speak up.

When one person shows courage, others are emboldened. If more Republicans had shown a willingness to stand for basic political hygiene, for elemental human decency earlier in this awful era, it might have become contagious.

But since that did not happen, the only thing that will send a message to the Republican party commensurate with its moral abdication over the past four years is to lose in a landslide. Not just Trump, but his silent enablers too.

Read more:

The GOP Needs to Hit Rock Bottom - The Bulwark

Remembering the 10 best movies of 2010 | Culture | breezejmu.org – The Breeze

As Christopher Nolans Tenet is reportedly planning to open overseas on Aug. 26 while postponing a wide American release, American filmgoing remains in upheaval. While COVID-19 cases spike around the country and recent high quality releases like Netflixs The Old Guard, Amazons The Vast of Night and Hulus Palm Springs and The Assistant continue to premiere, the theatrical experience in the U.S. hovers at a standstill, with no likely ending in sight.

The box office for the 10 best picture Oscar-nominated movies.

With this in mind, its interesting to reflect on a year like 2010 and see how Americans relationship with the movies has changed. While only 10 years ago, the films of 2010 feel both bizarrely prescient and like remnants of a distant past. Here are the top 10 films of 2010:

From director Noah Baumbach, Greenberg is a beautiful, semi-autobiographical exploration of neurosis, anxiety and companionship, which brings together Baumbachs acidic approach to screenwriting and star Greta Gerwigs empathetic idealism. Starring Ben Stiller as an antisocial former musician who begins dating his brothers assistant (Gerwig) while struggling through a midlife crisis, Greenberg marks a turning point in Baumbachs career as an auteur, as Gerwig adds a youthful, lighthearted energy that had been missing from Baumbachs work since his directorial debut, 1995s Kicking and Screaming.

A conscious homage to Michael Manns 1995 film Heat, The Town marks Ben Afflecks arrival as a highly important director in modern Hollywood. Exploring the seedy criminal underground of Afflecks hometown, Boston, The Town succeeds behind a collection of scene-stealing supporting performances from Jeremy Renner, Jon Hamm and Blake Lively. A big-budget blockbuster geared toward adult audiences, The Town is a wonderful relic of a different era in commercial filmmaking.

One of the best animated films of the 2010s, Toy Story 3 serves as a perfect encapsulation of Pixars attempts to embed childrens movies with deeply meaningful and resonant morals. Following Buzz Lightyear, Woody and the rest of the gang of troublemaking toys, Toy Story 3 also acts as a meditation on the inevitable passage of time and impermanence of relationships. While most modern childrens movies feed off nostalgia, Toy Story 3 actively interrogates it, making it both a crowd-pleasing animated feature and a critique of the system that allows the movie to succeed.

A modern update of John Waynes Oscar-winning western, True Grit tells the story of teenager Mattie Ross (Hailee Steinfeld), who enlists the help of an aging U.S. Marshal (Jeff Bridges) to avenge the death of her father. From directors Joel and Ethan Coen, True Grit may be the Coen brothers most underrated film, serving as a romantic, old west counterpart to the outright nihilism of No Country For Old Men. While keeping with the filmmakers sense of removal and cynical tendencies, True Grit shows their capacity to tell a different kind of story about morality.

Easily one of the most important movies of the last decade, Inception continues to this day to captivate fans with its potent mixture of big-top action sequences and dream-logic mythology. While the films dream pseudoscience may not always hold together, Inception thrives on spectacle, giving each scene a sense of remarkable grandeur and finite precision. While Nolan is once again in the news because of Tenet, Inception remains a brilliant advertisement for both his talent as a filmmaker and the added value of the theatrical experience.

As director Darren Aronofskys story of obsession and art, Black Swan is far from the most pleasurable movie of 2010, but its certainly one of the most rewarding. Featuring an incredible lead performance from Natalie Portman, Black Swan is Aronofskys best effort yet to explore the ideas of an addictive personality, which hed been making films about since his directorial debut, Pi. At times off-putting, Black Swan'' relentlessly seeks to innovate and surprise, making it one of the best films of Aronofskys career.

A box office failure in its time, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World has emerged as easily one of the most beloved objects of cult movie obsession in the past decade. Featuring a jaw-dropping collection of stars whod dominate Hollywood in the years to come, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World may prove to be director Edgar Wrights crowning achievement. A veteran cinematic genius, Wright uses every element of pop culture iconography at his disposal, creating a profound text for fans of comic books, rock music, superheroes, martial arts movies and video games. While misunderstood in its time, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World will likely remain unparalleled in its audacity and adventurousness for years to come.

From director Kelly Reichardt, Meeks Cutoff is a masterful deconstruction of American Western mythology, throwing traditional iconography to the side in order to concentrate on elements of process and hardship. Using Reichardts technical mastery, Meeks Cutoff follows a group of settlers on the Oregon trail in 1845 who begin to believe that their eccentric guide may not know where they are. Taking an active look at the brutal realities of the old west and meditating on womens role in the settling of America, Meeks Cutoff is a brilliant work of stillness, subtlety and detail.

One of the most underrated movies in Martin Scorseses filmography, Shutter Island is a brilliant homage to the 1950s B-movies like Samuel Fullers Shock Corridor, which served as a basis for Scorseses film obsession. Starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Shutter Island unsettles a viewer with a sense of psychological unease, cinematic excess and convoluted, well-earned empathy that grants the film a feeling of invincibility. Much like DiCaprios other 2010 film, Inception, Shutter Island is a worthwhile exploration of dreams, nightmares and the lies characters tell themselves, making the movie a masterpiece of paranoia.

The best movie of the 2010s, The Social Network maintains its unassailable status as a thrilling exploration of greed, social acceptance and success. Charting Facebooks rise to a Silicon Valley behemoth, The Social Network continues to awe viewers with its shocking sense of prescience and innovation. As divisions abound through modern American society and social media envelopes the cultural landscape, The Social Network remains a reminder of the idealism, narcissism and inevitable moral corruption surrounding what people consume, making it one of the most important pop cultural artifacts of its time.

What stands out the most in reflecting on the 2010s is how much the industry has changed over the course of a decade. Superhero films, while existent, hadn't come to dominate the box office the way they would after the release of Avengers in 2012. Netflix and other streaming services were up and running, but Netflixs stranglehold of pop culture wouldnt begin until House of Cards and Orange Is The New Black were added in 2013.

While 2010 remains an exemplary year for movies, it is both a time prior to blockbuster over-saturation and the independent boom fueled by production companies A24, Neon and Blumhouse. The result is a year filled with extraordinarily successful highs, but a lack of diverse thought and art on the whole, making 2010 a relic of film history for better and worse.

Contact Chris Carr at carrtc@dukes.jmu.edu. For more on the culture, arts and lifestyle of the JMU and Harrisonburg communities, follow the culture desk on Instagram and Twitter @Breeze_Culture.

See the original post here:

Remembering the 10 best movies of 2010 | Culture | breezejmu.org - The Breeze

Turf Wars and Tight Lips fuelling violent crime in TCI, says Governor in Year One report – Magnetic Media

Facebook Twitter Google+LinkedInPinterestWhatsAppEmail

#Providenciales, Turks and Caicos July 28, 2020 Turks and Caicos young men are killing each other and the majority of serious crime is linked to turf or gang wars according to Nigel Dakin, TCI Governor who on Monday (July 26) addressed the nation in a message capturing the highlights of his first year in the post.

Beyond the sadness when a memberof our society is a victim of crime who has no association whatsoever with theworld Ive just described indeed has lived their life standing against thissort of nihilism the horrible truth is that our young men are killing eachother; increasingly the victim knows the perpetrator and visa-versa, explainedGovernor Dakin.

Crime statistics for 2019 remain unpublished, but in the Governors presentation there is strong indication that upward trends in violence remain vexing. His Excellency said 70 percent of serious crime victims were under the age of 30; that 95 percent of those victims were men and 90 percent of the violent crime involved a firearm.

Retaliatory crime is driving these disturbing trends and the Governor, who heads National Security shared, We increasingly observe that even those seriously injured in attacks, often as collateral to a murder victim who they are associated with, choose not to provide the Police with a statement.

Governor Dakin is an avid Instagram user with over 4,350 followers. During his remarks, a peppered perspective on what could alleviate the seeming surge in crime was shared.

A regularcontributor to my Instagram account therefore quite reasonably asked yesterdayfor timelines as to when she could expect changes. This was my response: Almost immediately if public outrage about crimeconverted to the public providing information about crime in equal measure

Nearly 30 new members added to the Royal Turks and Caicos Islands Police was touted to bring concrete changes in public trust of the Force and investigative capabilities.

serious financial investments made in Policing bythe Premier, at the recommendation of the Commissioner, should start to be feltthis year that includes community policing which helps provide the confidencethe public need if they are to support the Police. In the last 12 months 27 locally recruitedofficers have been trained for six months overseas and they are now back withus and ready to serve.

Investigative specialists have also been identified, and with funding support from the United Kingdom, two Superintendents will embark on a two year stint in the Turks and Caicos as part of the Tactical Unit.

Both are tough and knowledgeable in detecting homicide they will jointhe Force, mentor and support their TCI colleagues who will replace them in twoyears, and report to the local Police Executive Leadership.

Appointed tothe newly created post in January, the Permanent Secretary of National Securityis fixed on crafting a long term remedy, which is expected to do in the Turks andCaicos, what it has done for other overseas territories including Bermuda.

Bermudamanaged, through intervention, to reduce its murder count in 2019 to zero.

Those that have properly got to grips with crime(Bermuda and Glasgow are great examples) have brought crime down in a sustainedway. They however have found that is a 10-year programme. The National SecurityPermanent Secretary is pulling together, for the Premier, the programmatic disciplinesthis approach needs, said the Governor on Monday.

Ninety percent of murders are recorded in Providenciales, which is the economic hub of the country; yet the Governor was resolute that for tourists, the islands are safe.

As we unpack and understand the figures, this therefore remains an incredibly safe tourist destination; but thats certainly not the case if you are a young man living in Providenciales who is running with the wrong people.

According to Magnetic Media records, there were 13 homicides in 2019 and 12 people murdered so far, in 2020.

See original here:

Turf Wars and Tight Lips fuelling violent crime in TCI, says Governor in Year One report - Magnetic Media

Creation of investment court will help conducting business in Ukraine opinion – Interfax Ukraine

The creation of an investment court, an idea promulgated by Ukraine's Justice Minister Denys Maliuska, could facilitate doing business in Ukraine, Head of the Omerta Organized Law Group Yevhen Fedoseyev has said.

"The declared creation of an investment court will greatly facilitate doing business in Ukraine, because if investors have a virtually unconditional guarantee that in any case, their property rights and interests are practically not threatened, they will start investing more in our country," he told Interfax-Ukraine.

The lawyer noted that this initiative is not new, and similar courts already exist in a number of countries.

"Investors from all over the world are increasingly turning to investment arbitration as a way of resolving a dispute with the state every year. This mechanism for protecting the rights of an investor has proved to be effective, which is confirmed by both the number of international bilateral and multilateral agreements containing clauses on investment arbitration, and the number of initiated cases," he said.

Fedoseyev recalled that a permanent arbitration institute, the International Commercial Arbitration Court at the Ukrainian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, has been operating in Ukraine for more than 25 years, however, appeals to him are not too popular, since none of the agreements Ukraine concluded on mutual assistance and protection of foreign investment provides for the International Commercial Arbitration Court at the Ukrainian Chamber of Commerce and Industry as an institution for resolving investment disputes, as well as because of general legal nihilism.

"Of course, the new court in Ukraine will need to develop a practice that has been built in the courts of Western Europe for decades, however, the transparency of the creation of such a body, its competence, objectivity can create a positive image not only for the body itself, but also for the state as a whole, which will ensure inflow of new investors into the country," the lawyer emphasized.

As reported, in early July at a meeting with European business representatives, Maliuska announced an initiative to create a concept for creating a separate court that would deal with investors' cases - arbitration or a separate court that would consider cases with the participation of business.

See more here:

Creation of investment court will help conducting business in Ukraine opinion - Interfax Ukraine

She Could Be Made Into a Leather Jacket – 25YearsLaterSite.com

There is a moment in She Dies Tomorrow where the primary character, Amy (Kate Lyn Sheil), is on her laptop looking at a leather jacket for sale. Our first guess is shes impulse-buying the jacket shes looking at, the one that was always just too expensive to justify when she wasnt going to die tomorrow. Its an impulse to therapy-buy many of us understand in the middle of a pandemic. The surprise and pleasure of She Dies Tomorrow comes when Amy explains to her concerned friend, Jane (Jane Adams): I was thinking I could be made into a leather jacket. It becomes clear that by the end of the film that this isnt an idle question. The wandering journey we follow her on through the film leads to a leather shop in the desert, where the proprietor walks her through the necessary steps for preserving and treating skin to allow him to work with it. It is dark and tangential, motivated not so much by character development or backstory as by a sense of comic-nihilism.

Coming from a mumblecore background (reflected in the acting presence of Adam Wingard, Director of the recent horror classic Youre Next), Amy Seimetz has crafted an indy film equal parts Gaspar Noe, Robert Altman, and Brett Easton Ellis. She Dies Tomorrow doesnt move forward, it wanders outward in a web, like a pataphysical virus spreading through populations. We start with Amy alone in her house, fallen off the wagon, broken up with her partner, and caressing her living room floor, fascinated with the idea that the wood used to be alive. Just as she is expecting her own used to be alive very soon. She passes her fear to Jane, who then passes her fear to her brother, his wife, and the guests at her birthday party. We never learn what this sickness is, the script is intentionally short on exposition, but we learn a lot about its symptoms.

The journey of each character into their infection provides the most visually memorable moments in the film. As each of the afflicted realizes with dawning horror that they too are going to die tomorrow, they stare into the space in front of them as lights begin to flash turning the screen blue, red, purple, greentheyre different for each character, and its surely an interesting question whether the particular colors and combinations have any narrative significance in regards to a characters personality or circumstances. I couldnt identify one, but that certainly doesnt mean its not there.

Seimetz is extremely clever in her ability to walk the line between film genres and tropes. This isnt a romantic drama but we get all the elements of one in the scenes between party guests, Brian (Tunde Adebimpe) and Tilly (Jennifer Kim). After they are infected by Jane, they leave the party on a soul-searching night of discussing their feelings for each other, breaking up, pulling the plug on Brians dad without a doctor presentnormal couple things. This isnt a plague movie like the Stand or Outbreak, but Jane is an artist that takes pictures of microscopic organisms and germs, which are used as the backdrop for the opening credits, and who has several scenes crouched over a microscope muttering scientist-hero lines like Gotcha when she finds the shot she is looking for. This isnt a zombie movie but each of the characters devolves into semi-catatonic states shuffling around the screen under-reacting to the bizarre scenes they wander across. We even get the classic walk down the darkened stairs to stumble on a bloody and destroyed basement as a character comes looking for Jane.

Long before Jane wades into a strangers pool and crawls onto a flamingo float, turning the water red with blood from a wound she suffered earlier off-screen, we know that She Dies is a funny movie. Humor is used at every turn as a counterpoint to the bleakness of the situation, from characters discussing dolphin sex, to the soundtrack. Mozarts Requiem in D is used in the opening credits and several scenes throughout the film, including an extended one in Amys house after she puts a vinyl copy on her turntable (side quest: if anyone can identify the album cover leaning next to the player, I would be in your debt, I have reached out to all the audiophiles I know and have come up empty). At first glance it makes sense, its funerary, its dramatic, we all know it, but as we watch, it dawns that the song is a bit of an esoteric joke. So ponderously grand as a work of art that, in contrast to the events on the screen, it becomes comically inappropriate, the soundtrack for an explosion when the world is instead going out with a whimper.

You never really know whats happening. Were dropped into the middle of the situation with Amy already infected. I keep calling it infected throughout this review but only for want of a more precise word. We have no idea if this is a sickness. No idea if Amy started the chain. A flashback shows her on vacation with her ex-boyfriend (Kentucky Audley) who answers the doorbell for the pizza man. After a long pause at the open door, he returns with the pizza as well as the depressed aspect of all the others who believe theyre going to die.

Nothing much beyond this is explained. Its certainly suggested that this was the starting point for the affliction, at least for Amy, but the timeline is muddled. Its not certain how long before the movie begins that her relationship ended. In one flashback we see the boyfriend being shown around the house that she is currently living in, even though in the present it appears she just moved in and the relationship seems firmly in the past. Theres a possibility this confusion is intentional.

Is it a suggestion that the virus is simply a post-breakup depression? Was her boyfriend possibly manic-depressive, whose unstable mood swings combined with Amys alcoholism lead to the fracture? If that were the case, then why does it spread to others? Again, Seimetz is great at walking the high-wire between allegory and literalism. There are problems between Jane and her sister-in-law. Problems between her brother and his wife. Problems between Brian and Tilly. Is the film a dramatized surrender to the fear of intimacy? Who can say?

Towards the end of the movie, one starts to suspect that the whole thing is one big hipster parable about ennui in modern life, at least until we see Michelle Rodriguez stretched out on her floor lamenting her imminent death. She and her friend, Erin (Olivia Taylor Dudley), come out of nowhere. We havent met them prior to Jane wandering into their trendy home in the bloody pajamas she has worn the entire film. The two women have no reaction to this stranger in their home, nor to being bled on by her, and are more than happy to let her use their pool. Theyre obviously infected and presumably havent met any of the characters weve seen previously in the movie. The scene expands the scope of the story beyond what weve seen. Whatever this sickness is, its not just affecting Amy, Jane, and their circlethis is everywhere.

The irony of She Dies Tomorrow is that the nature of its illness, its virus, itswhatever it is, leaves us wanting to know more, the mysteriousness of the whole thing is both its great strength and the main criticism. The strangeness of the movie and the uniqueness of the events we witness make us want to know more, a lot more about where it all started and how. Is it supernatural or alien? Physical or spiritual?

Its hard to end not having those answers, its not even clear whether she dies tomorrow. Because of those idiosyncrasies, were left wanting a little bit more, just some clue about what exactly we just watched. But well have to be ok with it because this is Amy Seimetzs passion project through and through, funded by money she made from her role in the Pet Sematary remake. Because it is uniquely hers, its uniquely unexpected in its contours, funny in the right spots, scary in others, and it forces the viewer to ask a whole lot of questions that never get any answers. But Seimetz is a gifted director and even through the uncertainty, She Dies Tomorrow is well worth the watch.

Read the original post:

She Could Be Made Into a Leather Jacket - 25YearsLaterSite.com

Critic’s Notebook: The Profound Oddness of Televised Pandemic Baseball – Hollywood Reporter

On Saturday afternoon, Adam Duvall hit a screaming line drive into the right-field stands at Citi Field in Queens. The ball reached the second row before anybody could react, hitting a spectator in the head with a resounding "Thwack!" that could be heard through the stadium. The spectator in question was a jovial-looking dog, tongue lolling, wearing some sort of Mets bandana. The pup, named Willow, belongs to Jeff McNeil and was fortunately unharmed, because the dog was one of three canine cardboard cutouts occupying an otherwise empty bleacher.

Baseball in 2020 is extremely weird, kids.

It has been less than a week since Major League Baseball officially returned, following a delay of nearly three months due to the novel coronavirus pandemic. Already, there are serious questions regarding how long this experiment will be able to last. The Florida Marlins, who were never expected to be competitively relevant this season, have become extremely relevant to jeopardizing the season: At least 15 players have tested positive for COVID-19, causing the postponement of a string of games and ample concern about the rest of the Marlins organization and anybody who has come in contact with them.

Baseball officials profess not to be concerned, and games without Marlins involvement are continuing apace. That leaves franchises and TV networks still trying to figure out the best way to make baseball without fans feel less like kids playing sandlot ball next to an eerie haunted house "Don't hit in that direction, because the witch who lives there won't throw the ball back!" and more like America's pastime. And yes, it's extra ironic that the Marlins are currently a franchise on lockdown, because if anybody would find it natural to play baseball in front of an empty stadium, it's the Florida Marlins. [And yes, they're the "Miami" Marlins, technically. I still call Tampa Bay the "Devil Rays," too.]

If you've ever seen a Kevin Costner movie, you know that in a sporting world driven by adrenaline and brutality, baseball is poetic. It's a sensory experience. The crack of the bat. The impeccably manicured infield grass. The Doppler-effect undulations of a joyous crowd engaged in the Wave. The aroma of roasted peanuts. The melodic, escapist promise of "Take Me Out to the Ballgame." It's communal and it's immersive.

What baseball has become, in a world in which we're still not prepared to allow even partial crowds back to stadiums, is an experiment in minimalism, bordering on nihilism. In short, baseball has gone fromField of Dreamsto something more apocalyptic likeThe Postmanor any movie theater showingDraft Day.

Take, for example, the portrait of loneliness at Fenway Park the other night when Alex Verdugo, wearing a live mic, stood solitary in the outfield and lamented the lack of fans to gab with between innings. "At least I would have people to talk to. Now? I got nobody. I got Jackie," Verdugo said, looking balefully off into the distance at fellow outfielder Jackie Bradley. "But he's far. So I got nobody."

It's at least partially for the players' benefit that games have continued to include loud-speaker announcements as well as niceties carried over from a simpler time like how Fenway has maintained use of Neil Diamond's "Sweet Caroline" playing during a seventh inning stretch for nearly 37,000 empty seats. Baseball is a game of rituals, and the seventh inning stretch has also continued in stadiums loosely populated with cardboard cutouts. Cardboard cutouts don't need to stretch, nor do they chase after baseballs. Willow, while cute, was in no mood to play fetch.

Fans watching from home are in a similar situation, and the networks showing the games and the teams themselves have been trying desperately to compensate, with varying levels of success.

Although the sound levels are determined independently by each team, the ESPN games I've watched have utilized a steady hum of nearly ambient noise, a general rumble punctuated by a gentle roar to accompany a home team rally. It's better than pure silence, but it doesn't mask on-field noise. Me, I love the disorganized cacophony of five players converging around the mound calling each other off to catch a pop-up. There's something pleasantly unfiltered when a player is unable to resist swearing after a strikeout. I'm sure moments like that freak the networks out and heaven knows the announcers get instantly apologetic whenever it happens but baseball is already a sport that condenses its intensity and emotional outbursts into small pockets; it's sad watching a celebratory player consciously avoiding hugging or even high-fiving a teammate.

Announcers already have bigger problems than swearing players anyway. ESPN has been airing games called by remote crews. Sometimes it's commentators sitting in a studio watching the game on TV themselves. At least there's natural rapport there. Other games have been called with three announcers Skyping (or Zooming or whatever) together from their own homes. I can find amusement in 63-year-old Tim Kurkjian lamenting his lack of technical aptitude and struggling not to talk over his colleagues, and I can laugh at the prominently placed Baby Yoda doll in Eduardo Prez's recording space. But it's not the same.

ESPN is, if we're being honest, mostly just desperate to have baseball back. And there's something almost equally desperate about how readily the announcers are trumpeting innovations like the expanded postseason more games for ESPN! or starting extra-innings with a runner on-base. Or, strangest of all, the little-known regulation that if games last beyond 12 innings, both teams have to bat against Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Leave it to the good people at Fox, inventors of the glowing hockey puck, the glowing 10-yard-line and several other innovations that don't glow, to engage in total overkill. Perhaps coincidentally, the Fox action I've watched has been in stadiums using overbearing piped-in game audio. Not content with the occasional ersatz cheer, it has featured wolf-whistles, inopportune choruses of "Charge!" and situation-specific responses like disgruntled rumbling after too many pick-off throws to first. It's annoying because of how obviously it's just somebody at a Casio keyboard (or, more likely, on a laptop) pressing a button, making me wonder every time they miss a cue a lack of disappointment on a close two-strike pitch or the misjudged applause on a towering fly ball that looks like a home run for one second and ends up a lazy fly-out.

That's still better than Fox's erratic use of a digitally populated crowd. When you cut from a wide shot of an empty stadium to a medium shot of fuzzy-faced CG people wearing disproportionately large team logos (ordinary logos wouldn't pick up on-camera) to close-ups of fielders making plays in front of now-empty crowds, it isn't baseball that you're destroying; it's rudimentary cinematic grammar. It's disorienting and sloppy, and that's before you get to how creepy the dead-eyed crowds are. The technology at Fox's disposal is like something out of theStar Warsprequels when George Lucas was so anxious to show that he could insert a small group of ETs or "Asogians," for the nerd-sensitive that he didn't stop to think if it made any sense to have a small group of ETs represented in the Galactic Senate.

The virtual fans are robotic, nightmarish and, worst of all, none of them are wearing masks or practicing social distancing. It's bad enough that the Marlins are going to pass the coronavirus along to 29 other baseball franchises, but the virtual crowd at Wrigley Field is going to pass virtual coronavirus along to The Sims and all of your Animal Crossing characters. Buy me some peanuts and an expansion pack, indeed.

"We're not fooling you. This is just to make it a little bit more normal every once in a while," one of the announcers commented during a weekend Wrigley game.

But might I posit this controversial notion: Maybe there's nothing wrong with being able to accept that this isn't normal and that pretending anything is normal, even "every once in a while," borders on dangerous. Infection numbers are spiking in California, Texas and Florida (among other states) and yet we're pretending that it's a good idea to play baseball because we need the entertainment and billionaire baseball owners TV executives need the money. And that's fine. Trust me, I drafted an already-infuriating 60-game fantasy baseball team and I love the distraction of a baseball player beaning a cardboard canine with a fast-moving projectile.

But nothing about this is normal.

See the original post:

Critic's Notebook: The Profound Oddness of Televised Pandemic Baseball - Hollywood Reporter

From Boyhood to Dazed and Confused: The 10 best films of Richard Linklater – Far Out Magazine

American director Richard Linklater has established himself as one of the great contemporary directors with his distinctive narrative and cinematic styles, clearly observable in some of his fantastic films like Waking Life and Boyhood. Adopting a humanist perspective, his approach to filmmaking works in beautiful synchronicity with the themes that he chooses to explore, ranging from ordinary subjects like suburban culture to eternal mysteries like time.

Speaking about his artistic vision, Linklater once explained, Its like this big, difficult puzzle. And life just never felt that way to me. It kind of unfolds in a much more straightforward way that kind of makes sense later. Im always trying to depict how the mind works, or how time flows.

Born in Texas, Linklater stayed true to his roots and explored the spirit of the state in many of his films. His filmography is very much influenced by his early experiences. He dropped out of university to work on an offshore oil rig where he spent his time reading. He developed an interest in the world of cinema only when he returned to land. Investing his savings in a Super-8 camera and editing equipment, he moved to Austin, Texas to be a filmmaker.

On his 60th birthday, we revisit some of Richard Linklaters best films as a celebration of a life dedicated to filmmaking.

Often called the spiritual sequel to Dazed and Confused, Richard Linklaters 2016 film is set in the 1980s and follows the adventures of a successful college baseball team as they explore a special kind of adulthood, one that is free of responsibilities. The narrative structure is fluid as the film flows from one scene to the next and celebrates hedonistic freedom.

A magical coming-of-age film, Everybody Wants Some!! evokes a deep nostalgia for lost youth and gives its hilarious comedy an undertone of melancholia. Speaking about the film, Linklater said, Yeah, well its a continuation of Boyhood in a strange way but, time-wise and setting, its a sequel to Dazed. Spiritually, its as much a continuation of Boyhood its very different, though. Everybody Wants Some!! is like a different part of me; the carousing athlete that I was.

This 2011 black comedy is a rare example of an ironic work that is devoid of any semblance of cynicism. Bernie Tiede (played by Jack Black) is a local mortician of a rural town in Texas. He is a beloved resident who gets involved in a typically postmodern tale of homicide and ambiguity. The film is a philosophical investigation masquerading as a humorous character study.

Quirky and threatening at the same time, Jack Black delivers a memorable performance as a charmingly murderous mortician. Linklaters 2012 film is actually based on true events. Bernie Tiede is a real person who was released from prison. Linklater worked with him for the film, saying, My whole point in the movie was this: Can the nicest guy in the world actually be capable (of murder)?

He continued: The answer is yes. So anybody whos too sure of their own behaviour given the wrong relationship, who knows what anyones capable of?

Linklaters 2001 drama is a tense story, witty and sarcastic, that features two equally unlikeable guys, Vin (played by Ethan Hawke) and Jon (Robert Sean Leonard), in a motel room as they unravel past misdeeds. Richard Linklater manages to construct a beautifully unsettling microcosm of unparalleled claustrophobia and anxiety.

Shot on digital video in order to stay faithful to the intimacy of the script, Linklater has an unmistakable flair for mise-en-scene and editing. To add to the experience, the film unfolds in real-time, providing no relief to the viewer who cannot get out but that is how any dialectical determination should be. Like many of Linklaters other films, Tape is highly experimental and is a unique addition to his impressive filmography.

Based on celebrated sci-fi novelist Philip K. Dicks eponymous 1977 novel, Richard Linklaters 2006 effort uses rotoscoping techniques to create a truly special world that exists somewhere between euphoria and paranoia. The psychedelic visuals work perfectly to blur the distinctions between fantasy and reality, reducing everything to the status of phantoms and hallucinations.

Linklater presents a powerful examination of the meaning of identity, truth and any other epistemological prejudices one might have. The film, which explores issues like state surveillance and substance abuse, induces interminable anxiety that never overwhelms the audience but neither does it go away.

In a 2006 interview, Linklater commented, Technically, this is a science fiction movie but there is only one element in the whole movie that is science fiction and thats the scramble suitwhich is really more of a metaphor on identity.

He added, As the movie takes place in the post-9/11 world, you know, where we had John Ashcroft and guys like that kind of clamping down security, it was amazing how quick it took on that tone of government control.

More than anything, Linklaters 2003 subversive effort is worth watching for Jack Blacks memorable performance as Dewey Finn, a masterful musician with an undying passion for rock and roll music. He is also extremely unemployable due to his irreverent attitude. A wannabe Rockstar with an attitude problem? Go figure!

Due to an unexpected turn of events, he finds himself as a substitute teacher at one of New Yorks finest schools. School of Rock challenges institutional dogmatism and attacks that inherent elitism by turning future doctors and lawyers into tiny rock and roll legends.

Although it wasnt a critical success, Linklater considered it a learning experience that he had fun with, School of Rock was a movie the industry brought to me, and I saw something in it and risked that failure.

I enjoyed it and grew from the experience. If that had been my second or third film I would have been doomed. Some people have a hit and want to do something like that and its their destiny.

Slacker, Linklaters second film, is a fascinating observation of an assortment of weird characters, ranging from aspiring artists and philosophers to incompetent criminals and crazy conspiracy theorists. Richard Linklater presents us with a surreal world that is saturated with ideas but is crippled by inaction.

Linklater conducts an objective analysis of the consequences of unabashed nihilism, something that only results in disillusionment and malaise. Slacker is fiercely original and funny and the absence of a linear narrative only strengthens the concepts that Linklater appears to be exploring.

The idea of Slacker came to me at about 2 in the morning, on a long drive, Linklater explained. The narrative structure hit me in one shot why cant you tell a story moving from one character to the next? I was 23, in love with cinema, and its possibilities.

Far more experimental than A Scanner Darkly, Waking Life jumps from one meaningful question to the other without letting the gravity of its words take effect. Structured like a dream and featuring a similar rotoscoping animation, this is Linklaters misunderstood masterpiece. It starts all sorts of conversations but never really concludes any.

By the end of this psychedelic experience, we cannot help but appreciate the mesmerising environment of confusion that Linklater constructs. Deeply philosophical in nature, Waking Life will always be proof of Richard Linklaters unwavering originality.

Like everything I do, it came from real life. Believe it or not, a movie thats so unreal takes all its cues from personal experience, Linklater commented. That really happened to me, it was a really formative lucid dream, like in the movie, that series of false awakenings. It seemed to go on for weeks and weeks, and got creepy near the end.

One of the most memorable films of the 1990s, Dazed and Confused is set in 1976 and is a far superior exploration of the hedonistic irreverence of youth than his 2016 film, Everybody Wants Some!!. It is an art house film that pretends to be a drug-addled comedy in order to slip into mainstream consciousness.

Watching Dazed and Confused is a liberating experience because it does not tremble in the apprehension of the responsibilities of the future. Rather, it is a spectacular altar on which the worries of the future are sacrificed for the pleasure of the present.

Linklater elaborated on what the film was supposed to be, I thought the 1970s sucked. Dazed was supposed to be an anti-nostalgic movie. But its like trying to make an anti-war movie just by depicting it, you make it look fun.

He added, I wanted to do a realistic teen movie most of them had too much drama and plot but teenage life is more like youre looking for the party, looking for something cool, the endless pursuit of something you never find, and even if you do, you never quite appreciate it.

Boyhood is Linklaters very own epic, there is no doubt about it. The fact that it was filmed over a period of 12 years with the same cast only contributes to the monumental ethos of the mundane that Linklater captures so brilliantly. Boyhood is a literal coming-of-age film but it is so much more than that. We are presented with the human experience of growing up in an honest and engaging way.

Films often indulge in imparting platitudes and sermonize their audience with ideological affinities but Boyhood is truly unique because it makes us feel like the film itself is trying to figure things out along the way, learning and growing. Richard Linklaters 2014 masterpiece was critically acclaimed as well as a commercial success, winning multiple BAFTA Awards and Critics Choice Awards. Patricia Arquette even won an Academy Award for Best Actress in a Supporting Role.

Linklater reflected, [Boyhood] goes beyond that. With every film, youre excising a story that youve been obsessed with. This is still revealing itself to me. I dont have any answers now.

Adding: But I did have a wonderful deepening of everything about life: growing up, parenting. Every movie, youre getting a degree in whatever that subject is. This couldnt be more life-affirming. It was a great way to spend 12 years.

His most celebrated work(s), Linklaters critically acclaimed trilogy is the culmination of his career-long experiments with the concept of cinematic time. The three films, Before Sunrise (1995), Before Sunset (2004) and Before Midnight (2013), chronicle the evolution of Celine (played by Julie Delpy) and Jesses (played by Ethan Hawke) relationship.

Jesse and Celine are constructs, Linklater said while speaking about the main characters of the trilogy. Theyre not Ethan (Hawke) and Julie (Delpy), and theyre not me. Theyre these written parallel worlds, saying something about different phases of life, or the times were living in, or just what its like to be a person, how you physically change, how you mentally change, how youre still the same person but kind of not.

Extremely intimate in nature, the films put together a realistic portrayal of a relationship, from the magical first encounter to the disillusionment of middle-aged romance. Linklater masterfully uses the passage of time to shine a light on the manifestation of entropic forces which slowly dismantle grand ideas like love and replace them with the heartbreak of ordinary life.

See original here:

From Boyhood to Dazed and Confused: The 10 best films of Richard Linklater - Far Out Magazine

Everybody Is Somebody – Trinidad and Tobago News

By Dr Selwyn R. CudjoeJuly 28, 2020

Thirty years ago, the Jamaat-al-Muslinmeen, under the leadership of Imam Yaskim Abu Bakr, attempted to overthrow T&Ts elected government. They failed. Yesterday, President Paula-Mae Weeks called upon the group to make an unequivocal apology to the people of the country for its actions (Express).

The President noted that the assault shook the country to its core and robbed many people of their livelihoods, dignity and peace of mind.A commission of enquiry appointed in 2010 provided some chronology of the events but, without the testimony of the principal, did not offer the full understanding that the nation and, in particular, the victims rightly deserved.Eleven years ago PNM brought a measure to parliament to relieve the sufferings of the impoverished youths of Laventille. UNC objected. PNM left the project alone. Today, it has appointed a committee to come up with solutions to deal with this persistent challenge. It took a disturbance/an insurrection to remind the country that the poverty of Black people, particularly Black youths, still remains a problem.

The youths who followed Abu Bakr in 1990 and those who took to the streets a few weeks ago tried to tell us about their abject conditions and something about ourselves. It was not simply an attempt to loot and to shoot but a need to remind the world that they exist.

In 1957 Albert Camus, the existentialist philosopher, examined the important role rebellion plays in our lives. He said: In order to exist, man must rebel, but rebellion must respect the limit it discovers in itselfa limit where minds meet and, in meeting, begins to exist.

In our daily trials rebellion plays the same role as does the cogito in the realm of thought: it is the first piece of evidence. But this evidence lures the individual from his solitude. It founds its first value on the human race. I rebel&mdaqsh;therefore we exist (The Rebel).

Twenty-two years later, Bob Marley, our Caribbean philosopher, spoke of the value of rebellion and how it undermines and challenges the systems of inequity and inequality. He sang:

We refuse to be/what they wanted us to be/We are who we are/Thats the way its goin to be./

You cant educate I/for no equal opportunity (talkin bout my freedom/ people freedom and liberty.

We have been trodding on the winepress much too long/Rebel, rebel!

Me say de Babylon system is the vampire, falling empire,/Sucking the blood of the sufferers.

Tell the children the truth. (Babylon System).

In 2004 the Mighty Shadow, our home-grown philosopher, reminded us that Everybody is somebody. He rhapsodizes: If a man is born in luxury,/They prove to me in history,/He is somebody./But if a man is born in poverty, starvation and misery/He is nobody.

He summarizes: Everybody is somebody/Nobody is nobody/The pauper, the wealthy/Everybody is somebody.

This need for recognition and liberationthat is, the need to be somebodyis at the heart of the human experience; rebellion is one of its principal ways of expressing that truth. It has nothing to do with good or evil or even the need to apologize for simply being. Its a humanizing activity. No one can dictate how these acts of rebellion take place.

This is why one should object strongly to the nihilism that Fitzgerald Hinds and his PNM colleagues offer when they seek to explain the behavior of Black youths. Says Hinds: A growing army of idle young men in East Port of Spain poses a danger to TT.

And I urge them to root out of their spirits the spirit of evil and the spirit of idleness and the spirit of jealousy, and imbibe [in them] instead a spirit of hard work and a spirit of prayer and a spirit of love for yourself, for your family, for your community, for your country.

One may ask, Why did God make them so evil?

Hinds continues: They spend their day looking at the ground, looking at the sky, or watching other people and the world go about its business and doing preciously little on their own and for themselves (Newsday, July 5).

These are things a slave master would have said about the enslaved two hundred years ago. But the enslaved or even an alienated being was never inert and unthinking. They may be idle, doing nothing seemingly, but they were observing the injustices practiced against them. This is why Camus noted that the history of mankind also demonstratedthat the first movement of rebellion was the rebellion of the slave.

In 1955 Eric E. Williams, one of the preeminent scholars of his time, made two important observations. He wrote: The recognition of racial equality is a part of the larger world struggle for freedom in general and The Negro will not achieve moral status until he achieves economic and political status (The Historical Background of Race Relations in the Caribbean).

No one can deny that over the past fifty years the overall economic conditions of all Trinbagonians have improved. While Black people have achieved a certain degree of political power, they have yet to achieve economic power commensurate to their numbers in the society. Nor, for that matter, has their relative condition vis a vis other groups changed very much.

The measure of any group in a society cannot be reduced exclusively to its economic position but it helps to understand that its economic status is essential to its well-being and how it feels about itself. That is the challenge our society faces if it wishes to keep its faith with Black people.

A people dies when it fails to rebel against the injustices that are practiced against them. Thats just the way it has to be.

More:

Everybody Is Somebody - Trinidad and Tobago News

Letters: Democrats’ goal must be more ambitious than reclaiming political power – The Advocate

The goal of Democrats ought to be not to merely win the 2020 presidency, to retake the Senate and hold the House, and to do so with such an overwhelming majority that any resistance to a peaceful transition of power is doomed to failure. These goals kick the recurring can down the road.

I worry our aim is dangerously low and wide of the target. Even if the 2020 election successfully ameliorates the current administrations disdain for traditional norms, soundly rejects its open contempt for guardrails separating the powers of government, injects respect to replace indifference toward our fundamental constitutional principles and carries coattails long enough to alter the balance of partisan power in down-ballot federal and state races, we will pat ourselves and President-elect Joe Biden heartily on the back. Is it a win if the root problem still survives to haunt our progeny?

Laudable achievement of even such monumentally ambitious political goals must not reprise the unprecedented division of Americans. We cannot stoop to retaliate against the loyal 30% base that supported Trump. Are Trumpian neo-Republicans not Americans as well?

While Trump tactical hallmarks of grievance, racism, cruelty and inequality are discarded in the dustbin of history, the voters with whom such Trumpian tactics resonated cannot simply be dismissed as if rendered impotent for all time. We must learn the lessons that George Wallace in 1968 was no fluke; that racism is institutionalized; that the soul unearthed in aspirational ideals of our Founding Fathers is yet a work-in-progress as Pogo said, we have met the enemy and he is us.

Persuading hearts and minds of tens of millions to abandon their Trumpian cult of nihilism in favor of American ideals is the challenging target from which our unwavering aim cannot stray.

JUSTIN ZITLER

lawyer

New Orleans

Read more:

Letters: Democrats' goal must be more ambitious than reclaiming political power - The Advocate

Afterland review: A thought-provoking tale of life without men – New Scientist News

Lauren Beukes's new speculative novel imagines a world stripped overnight of men. Do women do a better job of running things?

By Sally Adee

Getty Images

Afterland

Lauren Beukes

Michael Joseph (UK) and Mullholland Books (US)

Advertisement

IF ALL the human cells in your body were to suddenly dematerialise, your outline would briefly persist, in all its exquisite detail, in the form of the billions of bacteria and viruses that colonise your every nook and cranny, still suspended in the shape of the frame your body provided.

Something analogous happens in Lauren Beukess novel Afterland, available in July worldwide and in September in the UK. Over about two years, a pandemic kills nearly every man in the world, leaving its patriarchal systems staffed exclusively by women. Cole, the mother of one of the precious few surviving boys, needs to get him out of the US and back to their home in South Africa. Her sister, meanwhile, wants to sell him. This gives the novel its structure and speed: it is a deceptively simple heist caper, with Cole on the run across the US from both her sister and the Department for the Protection of Males.

The organisation is charged with imprisoning the few males that remain, probing them to find whatever biological quirk has spared them from the plague and using that knowledge to find a vaccine for the virus. Its aim of jump-starting society back to normal will be uncomfortably familiar as we too languish in a pandemic limbo between the Before and the After, hoping for our own vaccine. The misguided waiting game in the novel results in a few temporary accommodations to reality: straight women negotiate awkward first dates with one another, while fake baby bumps become the hottest fashion accessory.

So who gets to maintain civilisation now, and do women run a better society than men? This is where the book shines as one of the best thought experiments of its kind, in which Beukes has stitched together the surprise matriarchy of The Power, the millenarian despair of Children of Men and the deeply intelligent questions of Ursula Le Guins The Left Hand of Darkness.

The Power in which women develop the ability to give electric shocks, ending their status as the weaker sex once and for all concludes that women are just as bad as men when in ultimate control.

Beukess take is more ambiguous. Like Le Guin, she seems to conclude that it doesnt much matter if it is women or men in charge of society, as it is the structures themselves that turn us into monsters. You have to be bigger and meaner as a woman to claim your turf, Coles sister tells herself, negotiating her nephews kidnapping on behalf of the widow of the kingpin she used to work for. The widow has slid into his place, just as easily as the thugs around her have shifted from being vicious beauty queens to vicious enforcers. The Sisters of Sorrow, the religious community in which Cole and her son take refuge, somehow figures out how to make Christianity even more violently misogynistic in a world without men.

There is no guarantee that the once-oppressed will wield power any more judiciously than their oppressors

Yet it isnt all nihilism. Beukes seeds the book with hopeful rumours of matriarchal societies that have sprung up in other countries. There are never many details beyond the promise, like mirages just over the horizon. They say the matriarchal societies have been a lot better about getting rid of the homosexuality laws, promises an email from a friend trying to help them escape across the Atlantic. It is a promise of a better body politic.

Afterland is that rare creature, a ripping tale that neither shies away from big questions nor interesting answers. What happens when the powerless get power? There is no guarantee that the previously oppressed will wield it any more judiciously than those who oppressed them. It isnt about the individuals. It is about the society they need to maintain.

More on these topics:

Read more:

Afterland review: A thought-provoking tale of life without men - New Scientist News

Of Clint Eastwood and imperfect priests – Angelus News

The world wags on, despite everything it has decided to throw at us, and will surely continue to hurl in our direction. But babies are still being born, and people are still getting to Mass either in person or virtually, and confessions are still available, as long as the supply of plexiglass holds up.

We either count our blessings or wallow in misery. As I sit here fighting the urge to wallow away, there really are more than enough blessings to keep us all counting on.

Popular culture is probably not one of those blessings, and its current manifestation is more curse than blessing anyway, yet it can still be a source of inspiration, even though the vast majority of the entertainment it creates that involves the Church or her ministers usually ends badly. The heady days when Hollywood sent love notes to the Church in films like the 1940s Going My Way are not coming back.

The 1950s saw more edgy depictions of the priestly life, like Hitchcocks I Confess and On The Waterfront, with the latter still being what I think is the greatest portrait of what a good priest is all about. But in the past 50 years, give or take a decade, priests dont generally fare well within the confines of popular culture. Sadly, most depictions of the Church and its clergy aim to demean, defile, or deflate.

A lot of the pain is self-inflicted. If we have a bulls-eye painted on our backs, it was put there by sin and scandal. It is only natural to expect the secular culture to take its swings.

But just as God permits calamity, he also shows his light in the darkness, whether it comes from the flickering candlelight inside the depths of a catacomb with early Christians reading Scripture in Rome circa A.D. 273, or from the bright fluorescent lighting in an intensive care COVID-19 unit in an LA hospital circa now, where a nurse treating a patient says a silent Hail Mary.

Priesthood ordination at the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels on June 1, 2019. (Victor Alemn)

I found the flickering light of a profound and positive portrayal of a young priest in, of all places, Clint Eastwoods movie Gran Torino. Eastwood has had a huge career. He has made a lot of good movies, several great movies, but all of them seem to share a modernist nihilism that in the end leaves an empty feeling.

Not so Gran Torino. On the surface it certainly feels, and sounds, like a typical Clint Eastwood movie. And when we see his cranky, retired auto worker character encounter his fresh-out-of-the-seminary priest, things go poorly, especially for the young priest.

In the hands of a lesser director, and maybe in the hands of a younger Eastwood, the newly minted priests first scene would have been his last. He would have served the purpose of being a fumbling, ill-equipped foil to Eastwoods character and his grizzled and dour point of view of life, the Church, and priests.

But as the movie unfolds, the young priest shows up at critical times, and at the end, he has grown in some wisdom. We get the sense that he is on his way to finding his voice, which is going to serve his vocation. He has also had some role in moving Eastwoods character toward the light, rather than continually cursing darkness.

Either intentionally or by divine intervention, popular culture in the 21st century served up the character of a Catholic priest who is imperfect, yet moving, real, and something of an inspiration.

Imagine other energetic young people with masters degrees. When they get that first job with a Fortune 500 company, they are not immediately escorted to the boardroom to begin giving advice to the CEO. They start a lot smaller; some of them, even with advanced degrees, start in the mailroom.

Not so with new priests, like the fictional Father Janovich in Gran Torino. All priests are expected to be experts at the first Mass they say, the first confession they hear, or their first encounter with an embittered widower.

And once ordained, all priests serve the exact same function at the Mass and within (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention mandated protocols, of course) confessionals, as any bishop, cardinal, or pope. They are hurled headfirst into the deep end of the baptismal font.

Not many new priests will have the advantage of being inspired and mentored by Clint Eastwood, but with Gods grace and with the prayers and support of parish communities, they, too, will find their voice that will serve their vocations and become sources of light to those they may encounter who are stumbling in the darkness.

Go here to see the original:

Of Clint Eastwood and imperfect priests - Angelus News

Nihilism or Enlightenment? My Journey to Understanding the Point of Critical Thinking – The Octant

Story by| Jan Bronauer, Contributing Writer

Illustration by| Xie Yihui, Staff Editor

*note* : This article contains citations which can be accessed at the end.

Sometimes I wish you and your brother werent so smart because then you wouldnt break your head over all these problems, my mother once said to me. This was during a conversation when I had just returned home from my semester abroad, and when I was overflowing with new questions about the world. During that semester, I had learnt about the structural causes of issues such as racism, underdevelopment, or corruption, and I couldnt help but wonder what I was to make of this newly gained awareness. The structural nature of these issues seemed to defy any feasible solution, and one way to cope with what I learned was to question the role which wealth, education and convenience play in our lives. But this was difficult in a society where convenience is worshipped and luxury is an essential good. At the time, many things in my life seemed in flux. It seemed as if critical thinking had turned on itself and debilitated me in the process.

Conversations with my peers confirmed that I am not the only one who has experienced such debilitation during their time at Yale-NUS College. In fact, the very purpose of the Common Curriculum is to promote critical, creative and active thinking [1], thereby inherently exposing students to the risk of feeling debilitated by what they study. But we cannot say that we have not been warned.

In Philosophy and Political Thought 2, Hannah Arendt cautions us that nihilism is a danger inherent in the thinking activity itself [2]. She defines nihilism as the inversion, and not just the questioning, of the values in our society. As such, nihilism is a possible, but not inevitable, outcome of the thinking process [3]. More dangerous than nihilism, therefore, is non-thinkingthat is, the absence of questioning our preconceived values [4]. If we fail to question the content of the values and rules in our society, we risk committing actions in the name of obedience which we did not mean to commit. Therefore, Hannah Arendt warns us that nihilism is a possibility of critical thinking, but that the more dangerous prospect is not to think critically at all.

Friedrich Nietzsche, by contrast, famously declared that God is dead and announced the hour of the great contempt, when our long-held values and beliefs are dissolved. This hour seemed near as I was talking to my mother about the beliefs and values I had come to question [5]. It seemed as if I started to lose the fabric that connected me with everyone around me. I was Lu Xuns Madman; the pathological and the normal at the same time. I had shattered the true world which I had lived in throughout my childhood, and I was glaring into an abyss altogether devoid of truth. In his declaration, Nietzsche was not talking about the death of God Himself, of course, but about the realization that any true world is inherently an illusion. This realisation is the hour of the great contemptthe emergence of nihilism. But, unlike Arendt, Nietzsche tells us that nihilism is a normal condition [6] and even a necessary step towards enlightenment. It seems, then, that nihilism may be a desirable component of a liberal arts education after all.

Before jumping to this conclusion, we must understand that Nietzsche only refers to active nihilism as desirable, and explicitly rejects a passive, submissive and resigned kind of nihilism. In short, he condemns defeatism and praises vitality in embracing the uprooting of our values and beliefs. Ironically, this process of uprooting norms is the very ideal of the typical liberal arts student, but it seems to offer little purpose in the real worlda world where there is no truth to be found. This gives rise to the ultimate liberal arts contradiction: We are meant to work hard towards worldly success, yet we learn to undermine this very notion of success we are meant to work hard for.

After we become aware of this contradiction, we face a choice: Either we hold on to an illusion and achieve worldly success, or we live our life without any such success. Since I like to believe that a liberal arts education cannot possibly leave us at such an unfavorable crossroads, I propose that there is a third option: we embrace the illusion while remaining aware of its illusory nature. In other words, we maintain a subjective real world while accepting that there is no true world.

At this point, let me answer why we should concern ourselves with this talk about truth in the first place? First, the earlier we experience the hour of the great contempt, the sooner we can reconcile the abolition of the true world with our own personal lives. This entails, for instance, realizing that our dream of becoming a politician, a banker, or a musician is our own original notion of success. In this way, we tailor our own life to ourselves. Yes, this tailor-made notion of success is an illusion, but it exists in our subjective real world and is therefore inherently meaningful (insofar as our life itself is inherently meaningful).

Second, understanding the impossibility of truth makes us humbler and more resilient. For instance, if someone were to call us out for aspiring to be a banker, we can acknowledge their accusations because, in a way, they are right. There is no denying that chasing after anything in lifeeven living life itselfinevitably requires some degree of illusion. We cannot possibly defend our ambition as the right thing to do because there simply is no right thing to do. All we can say is that it is the right thing to do for us and at this particular point in time. This is clearly a subjective judgement, and so is the other persons accusation against us. But who am I to say that my notion of success is more right than theirs? Therefore, to be called out on our illusions must not surprise us; if it does, we have failed to identify the illusion as such.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, separating the true world from the real world creates conscious subjectivity; that is, subjectivity which we are aware of but choose to hold on to. Perhaps we can agree that it is oddly liberating to read a novel which we are not required to read. At last, we can let ourselves devour the pages without calculation or the fear that we missed something important. What matters most is the feeling we get from living through the plot. Life is similar. Even while knowing that things such as love, success, and joy are merely illusory pleasures, we can embrace the subjective impact they have on us. With the abolition of the true world, we have maintained a world of feelings that is untouchable, because it is subjective. Nobody can tell me whether or not I feel love for someone because this feeling is self-contained within me. The real world, then, is within each of us.

As disorienting as this time of debilitation was, I am ultimately grateful for it. I have grown more resilient and rooted in lifean illusory life, but a life nonetheless. Even if critical thinking turns on itself, who is it really that turns on our critical thinking? Correct, our critical thinking. The key is to overcome this endless process of mutual suspicion, to understand and accept the unknowability of truth, and to be satisfied with subjectivity instead. We came into this life wanting oranges, but life gave us lemons. This liberal arts education has taught me how to make lemonade.

Originally posted here:

Nihilism or Enlightenment? My Journey to Understanding the Point of Critical Thinking - The Octant

Review: Ronald Beiner’s Dangerous Minds: Nietzsche, Heidegger, and the Return of the Far Right – Merion West

During the past few years before, I had struggled withand then firmly said goodbye tothe Catholicism of my upbringing, and I was searching for a new philosophy of meaning that did not seem to depend on so many leaps of faith.

Introduction

When I was in the second year of my undergraduate degree, I was utterly enamored with the German philosopher Martin Heidegger. It would not be overstating it to say I thought he was the greatest philosopher in history (not that I had read that many then!). Perhaps the timing in my own life contributed. During the past few years before, I had struggled withand then firmly said goodbye tothe Catholicism of my upbringing, and I was searching for a new philosophy of meaning that did not seem to depend on so many leaps of faith. Heideggerand, to a lesser extent, Friedrich Nietzscheseemed to promise just that. In their philosophies was thinking that directly and consistently spoke about Being, existence, nihilism, and many of the other big spiritual questions that consumed me. At the same time, my formal studies were dedicated to human rights law and cosmopolitanism, much of it inspired by the horrors of the Holocaust, which had liquidated millions of Jews, LGBTQ persons, Roma, and others. So imagine my horror upon discovering that two of my intellectual heroes were so closely aligned with the Nazi movement; worse, Heidegger had actually joined the Nazi Party and had insisted others do the same. Needless to say, I took considerable comfort from authors such as Hannah Arendt and Jacques Derrida, who insisted that there was no need to let this association cloud ones appreciation for Heidegger as a philosopher. One simply needed to detach the treasure trove of philosophical riches from the nasty politics, which were not that important anyways.

Ronald Beiners excellent, recent book Dangerous Minds: Nietzsche, Heidegger, and the Return of the Far Right would no doubt have been a disappointment to my younger self, who was determined to insulate his intellectual heroes from reprisal. Beiner insists that we need to take the problems of Nietzsche and Heideggers politics far more seriously than we typically do. This is particularly true for progressive thinkers, who have been strangely willing to draw liberally from the two German firebrands, while ignoring the reactionary bent of their views. Troubling though this may be, Beiners case is very compelling. By the end, one is left with little doubt that Nietzsche and Heideggers politics needs to be seriously rethought.

Nietzsche, Heidegger, and the Far Right

The great majority of men have no right to life, and serve only to disconcert the elect among our race; I do not yet grant the unfit that right. There are even unfit peoples.

Friedrich Nietzsche, The Will to Power

For a long time, the standard approach of progressive admirers of Nietzsche and Heidegger has been something halfway between creative interpretation and acting as a public relations agent. Nietzsche and Heidegger were not political thinkers, the line goes. They were concerned with metaphysics, the history of philosophy, the problem of nihilism, and other issues far beyond the nitty gritty of the political realm. Yes, they do occasionally make problematic statements, and there is that little embarrassment of Heidegger joining the Nazi party and making anti-Semitic remarks. However, it is important to remember that they grew up as rural Germans in conservative households and simply held many of the unfortunate but predictable prejudices shared by most men and women of their time. When invoking their work, make the requisite apologias and then move on to discussing the real philosophical meat.

Beiner minces no words in insisting that we stop relying on these well-worn tropes. He points out that many of the more ambitious commentators on the far-right, including Richard Spencer, have long found a great deal of intellectual solace in Nietzsche and Heidegger. And Beiner suggests that it is time to accept that there are reasons for this attraction. As Beiner puts it:

Highly relevant to the contemporary neofascist revival is the fact that since the Enlightenment, a line of important thinkers has considered life in liberal modernity to be profoundly dehumanizing. Thinkers in this category include, but are not limited to, Maistre, Nietzsche, Carl Schmitt, and Heidegger. For such thinkers, liberal modernity is so humanly degrading that one ought to (if one could) undo the French Revolution and its egalitarian ideal and perhaps cancel out the whole moral legacy of Christianity. For all of them, hierarchy and rootedness are more morally compelling than equality and individual liberty; democracy diminishes our humanity rather than elevating it. We are unlikely to understand why fascism is still kicking around in the twenty-first century unless we are able to grasp why certain intellectuals of the early twentieth century gravitated towards fascism

From here, Beiner does a deep dive into Nietzsche and Heideggers work that spans several hundred pages. He points out that the conventional excuse that they were largely disinterested in politics does not bear out when examining their writings closely. Nietzsche wrote voluminously on history, morality, and civilizational traits, with plenty of commentary on contemporary 19th century politics peppered throughout. He was also infamously sexist, famously declaring in Thus Spoke Zarathustragoest thou to woman? Bring a whip. In his 1889 work Twilight of the Idols, Nietzsche even comes to mourn the decline of the patriarchal family, claiming that all rationality has clearly vanished from modern marriagethe rationalist of marriagethat lay in the husbands sole juridical responsibility, which gave marriage a center of gravity, while today it limps on both legs. He endlessly critiques the vulgar egalitarianism of liberal modernity, invoking a more ancient ideal of a noble aristocracy that rose above the mediocrity of the herd and its banal needs. Nietzsche was also unafraid to call for force to bring about an end to liberalism, constantly invoking martial rhetoric when describing the new philosophers who would bring about the future. By the end of Beiners long chapter on the formidable German, he has assembled a damning array of textual evidence showing that whatever else he was, Nietzsche was a reactionary figure. And he was a figure who condemned a huge array of modern political systems for their egalitarianism and soft concern for the well-being of the unworthy mediocrities. Nietzsche desired for these political systems to be replaced by harder, stratified hierarchies, where the strong would be uninhibited by obligations towards the weakwhether these weak be women, the sick, a wide variety of other cultures, etc.

Beiners case against Heidegger is less rhetorically provocativein part because one rarely sees Nietzsches flights of rhetorical excess in dense technical works such as Being and Time. Nevertheless, Heideggers work is, in many respects, even more disturbing. Nietzsche never lived to see his work bastardized by the Nazis in films such as Triumph of the Will, which featured Adolf Hitler descending from the clouds like a modern Zarathustra trucking down his mountain. Heidegger, though, not only joined the Nazi Party; he actively worked to further its ends for several years. Even after being sidelined and growing more conflicted in the late 1930s, Heidegger never left the Party until it ceased to exist following the Allied occupation of Germany. Heidegger never apologized for his involvement or offered much in the way of an explanation, beyond some tactless whataboutism-style arguments chiding the Allies for the damage wrought against the German people.

Beyond these now well-known biographical facts, Beiner delves into Heideggers philosophy for an explanation for his damning political decisions. Perhaps the most original analysis is his take on Heideggers 1946 Letter on Humanism, which was written and published shortly after the Second World War in response to Sartres existentialism. Beiner reads Heidegger as offering a rather strange history of Western civilization as read through the filter of its philosophers. Modern times are radically banal because we have been influenced by second-rate thinkers who have forgotten to think Being. This is, of course, a classic Heideggerian injunction, which is also legendarily obscure. As Beiner approaches it, Heidegger sees modernity as radically fallen since it places the human being at the center of Being itself. The consequence is that we no longer shudder at the mystery of existence but, instead, appropriate the world for our vulgar and selfish purposes. This explains why in his 1953 book Introduction to Metaphysics, Heidegger castigated liberal capitalism and communism as metaphysically the same. Despite all of the overstated differences between liberal defenders of capitalism and their opponents on the political left, both ultimately agree that the point of existence is to more efficiently design and distribute better refrigerators.

By contrast, to truly think Being we need to exist in strikingly unmodern environmentslike Heideggers beloved Black Forest; and we would need to engage in a more authentic way of living with the world as a whole, unmediated by the selfishness of humanistic reason. Beiner points out that Heidegger often tries to cast this in humble, pastoral termsinvoking images of German peasants and soldiers with a distinct capacity to commune with Being. But this humility concealed a deep-rooted arrogance and ethnocentrism. The converse of Heideggers noble and conservative German peasants, who are in touch with being, is the rest of the world, which is radically fallen and incapable of producing anything of great value. Only the German volk, for Heidegger, was capable of enacting the spiritual renewal of Europe, which is why Heidegger supported the Third Reich until its dying days.

Most disturbing in all of this is Heideggers lack of repentance for such a colossal error, which was excused or even justified by an appeal to philosophical pretension. In his posthumous works, one sees Heidegger musing that one must approach history in epochal termsand that the fullness of time will vindicate his decisions. We can only hope that, like many of Heideggers prophecies, this turns out to be untrue.

Conclusion

The one weakness of Beiners book is that he never spends much time connecting his analysis of reactionary philosophers to the contemporary era and to the return of the far-right. There are some scattered comments on how Nietzsche and Heideggers work has been picked up and interpreted by figures such as Spencer and former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon. However, for the most part, the reader is left to draw the connections independently, which is somewhat frustrating given the promise of the title and the initial chapter. But this fact does not detract from what is an exhilarating and crisp intellectual takedown of two major philosophers. Beiner stresses that his critiques should not be taken as a recommendation to ignore or not read Nietzsche and Heidegger. He points out his own deep fascination with their work, and he encourages the reader to learn from it what one may. But Beiner is all too correct that one ought not try to foist a politically correct version of these two German philosophers on the world, stripped of all the nasty and worrying politics. Nietzsche and Heidegger may have been brilliant men, but they were also aligned with some of the most sinister movements of their time. Wrestling honestly with that fact can help us better understand our own strange politics.

Matt McManus is a professor of politics at Whitman College and the author of The Rise of Post-Modern Conservatism, among other books. He can be added on Twitter via @mattpolprof

Read the original:

Review: Ronald Beiner's Dangerous Minds: Nietzsche, Heidegger, and the Return of the Far Right - Merion West