BFI London Review: ‘White Riot’ is a Thrilling, Incendiary Look at Punk’s Influence on Politics – The Film Stage

BFI London 2019 ReviewIndependent; 80 minutes

Director: Rubika Shah

There was a time when it seemed music might have the power to change the worldor at the very least, move the needle. The knee-jerk reaction to such a statement is to think of the protest songs of the 1960s. While that music certainly impacted the zeitgeist, the real sonic boom was caused by a group of artists, activists, and musicians in mid-1970s England. Their efforts led to the birth of Rock Against Racism (RAR), a cultural movement founded to fight back against the brutal, ugly, violent, and pervasive racism of the neo-Nazi organizations like the National Front.

However, as filmmaker Rubika Shahs thrilling, incendiary documentary White Riot shows, prejudice was not limited to members of the NF. It was ingrained in British society, abetted by law enforcement, and cheerfully brought to TV screens on BBC minstrel shows. Our job, explains RAR founder Red Saunders, was to peel away the Union Jack to reveal the swastika. The methods were more cultural than political think concerts and fanzines and eventually paid off.

The RAR story is well-known to many, and that familiarity will be a negative for those viewers. But for those who may not be steeped in 70s punk history, the effect of seeing this spirit in action is downright inspiring. Making its world premiere at the 2019 BFI London Film Festival and based on her own short film, Shahs White Riot is a stunning film. The archival footage is often terrifying; seeing legitimately large crowds of NF supporters marching through London is shocking. (It is hard not to wonder where all of these folks are today.) The interviews, with the passionate Saunders and other RAR figureheads, are ever-compelling.

And the music, of course, is gloriousshrapnel-filled punk from the Clash, x-Ray Spex, Tom Robinson, and a fascinating, short-lived Asian punk band called Alien Kulture. Shahs film opens with violent footage from a Sham 69 gig, and this air of intense provocation exists all through White Riot. Much of this, of course, was due to the existence of the National Front. Graffiti (ITS OUR COUNTRY LETS WIN IT BACK) was backed by attacks in the street. Even major musicians backed the words of politicians like Enoch Powell; you may never look at Eric Clapton the same way again. It was against this backdrop that Rock Against Racism began. Guerilla-style, hands-on activities were the order of the day, but it was not easy. Saunders and others face death threats as they battled the lingering stench of colonialism.

Those expecting a deep focus on the Clash (based on the films title) may be disappointed; Joe Strummer and company are mainly represented near end of White Riot. An RAR concert featuring the band, dubbed the Carnival Against the Nazis, provides Shahs film with a suitable ending. It began with a thousands-strong march starting at Trafalgar Square, and closed with a concert at Victoria Park. The march, and the cacophony of noise that accompanied it, makes for a joyous conclusion. Its a reminder of the power of positive energy in the face of racial division, and a suitable middle-finger to the politicians and everyday racists who still haunt the land.

Whats most unsettling and provocative about White Riot is how current it feels. Because of this, perhaps White Riots greatest achievement is that it takes something that can cause sneers and eye-rollingcommitted cultural and political actionand make it feel both necessary and triumphant. As Saunders states at films end, one of the messages of Rock Against Racism was its lesson for ordinary people. It showed that we can do things, Saunders says. We can change the world. Its a wondrous thought. And Rubika Shahs White Riot shows that it is, indeed, possible.

White Riot premiered at the BFI London Film Festival.

See the article here:

BFI London Review: 'White Riot' is a Thrilling, Incendiary Look at Punk's Influence on Politics - The Film Stage

Former Dance Theatre of Harlem star Chyrstyn Fentroy is leaping up the ranks at Boston Ballet – The Boston Globe

She has been tremendous, said Mikko Nissinen, artistic director of Boston Ballet. Shes moving forward like a tornado.

Fentroys interest in dance began with her parents, who were also her teachers. Her father coached a dance team in hip-hop and jazz, and her mother, who performed with regional companies in California and at the Cairo Opera House, trained her in classical ballet. Fentroy can describe the studio where her parents taught, the Peninsula School of Performing Arts in Palos Verdes, Calif., in vivid detail she practically grew up there.

My parents would be teaching, and I would be stuck there, especially Saturdays. Id be there all day, Fentroy recalled. When she wasnt in class, she passed the time by riding her scooter around the parking lot and sneaking into a utility closet to watch movies. I would eventually wander off, but I never went far.

Fentroys parents divorced when she was about 7. Her father remained her teacher for a few years, but the budding dancer was primarily raised by her mother. Ruth Fentroy said she ate, slept, and breathed ballet through Chyrstyns childhood, though she declined several contracts so as not to interfere with her daughters schooling.

But Fentroy wasnt certain dance was her passion until she left home. As the teachers daughter, it was easier for me to slip through the cracks and get away with not pointing my toes, goofing around at the back of the room, she said.

Still, Fentroy was stung by the remarks she overheard in the studio some peers suggested she got desirable parts and solos only because the teachers were her parents.

Leaving California after high school for the Joffrey Ballet School in New York marked a shift for Fentroy: She was beginning to define herself as an artist on her own terms. Her craft, she realized, could be about more than just flashy tricks.

Fentroys time at the Joffrey, while formative, was challenging. She was rattled by insecurities had she fallen behind her peers by goofing off in her mothers classes? I was so angry all the time, she recalled. I had to learn how to love myself through my flaws.

After two years at the Joffrey, Fentroy joined Dance Theatre of Harlem, and a different realization unfolded: She started to recognize herself as an artist of color.

At the time, the Harlem company founded for black dancers during the civil rights movement was rebuilding after an eight-year hiatus. In a 2017 interview with Kinfolk magazine, artistic director Virginia Johnson said the closure had meant there was a generation of little girls who didnt see brown ballerinas.

Fentroy had grown up hearing about the Dance Theatre of Harlem from her mother, who is white. The family owned one of the companys signature shows, Creole Giselle, on VHS. But Ruth Fentroy, who said she doesnt see color, didnt raise her daughter to think of race as a major part of her identity.

In the studio, Ruth Fentroy said, I never felt that there was a problem with that or that she was overlooked for anything.

As a dance student in New York, though, Fentroy had begun to hear a new kind of snide remark: She only got the part because shes the black girl.

Still, she didnt seriously reckon with the lack of diversity in ballet and her own position as a black ballerina until she was at Dance Theatre of Harlem, surrounded by other dancers who werent white.

Its kind of funny, Fentroy said. I didnt focus on being a dancer of color until I joined that company. It didnt become such a big thing in my head until it was the thing. And even then, it felt foreign for a while.

She said she owes much of her personal and artistic growth to her time at the Dance Theatre of Harlem. I started to learn how to put me into dancing instead of just doing exactly what I was told.

A choreographers dancer, in the words of Darrell Grand Moultrie, one of the companys choreographers, Fentroy was one of the most prominent performers at Dance Theatre of Harlem.

She knows how to remove herself from the real world and put herself in the world of choreography, Moultrie said. To watch the dancer get lost in your movement, its the most exciting moment for a choreographer because you know the dancer is free.

Virginia Johnson considered Fentroy an important collaborator in reviving the company. When I was thinking about ballets Id want to bring to the company, Id think, Chyrstyn would be great in that, Johnson recalled.

Fentroy caught the attention of New York Times dance critic Brian Seibert, who praised her as the most consistent performer in Moultries dance, Vessels, in 2015. As the company rushes forward, Seibert wrote, Ms. Fentroy was a reminder of qualities it should not leave behind.

After a few seasons with the Dance Theatre of Harlem, Fentroy began to feel restless. The company didnt usually run the full-length story ballets she dreamed of performing. The touring schedule was onerous, and as a principal dancer at a small company, Fentroy was onstage more than most: I was always doing three or four ballets.

She also felt that her growth had plateaued. Where I was, I was sort of at the top, and I had no one to look up to, she said.

So she and Jorge Villarini a dance partner at the company who had also become her boyfriend started looking elsewhere, auditioning at several companies as a couple. Then Fentroy got an offer from Boston Ballet.

The moment she got this contract, I said, you go there, Villarini said. Ill be right behind you.

For Fentroy, the decision to leave the Dance Theatre of Harlem was fraught. The company had given her so much, and she felt committed to its mission, but she was hungry for something more.

They did not hesitate to express that they didnt want me to go, she said.

It was very difficult to lose my best dancer, Johnson said. And it was difficult to feel like I was building something with someone who was no longer there.

At Boston Ballet, Fentroy would be one of just a few black dancers. The experience could be frustrating, she said, especially during her first year with the company.

In the dressing room, Fentroy recalled, some peers laughed at the way her hair the thing that makes me look most ethnic sprang out when she loosened it from her ballet bun.

That was hurtful for a while, she said, but it allowed me to teach people that its not OK to make comments [even if] they dont mean any harm by it.

Being able to withstand the feeling of isolation makes me stronger, Fentroy said. So far, she said, her colleagues at Boston Ballet have been receptive to teaching moments like those in the dressing room.

I dont think Ive ever encountered a person here who isnt open to hearing what I have to say.

Since she started at Boston Ballet in 2017, Fentroy has performed as the Snow Queen in the Nutcracker and worked with formidable choreographers like William Forsythe. She has wowed audiences, critics, and choreographers with her musicality and precision. Her performance in Forsythes Playlist (EP), a ballet set to contemporary pop music, earned her more praise in the New York Times: Seibert described her as relaxed, charming, infectiously joyful.

Ruth Fentroy is ecstatic beyond words that her daughter is dancing at a prestigious company with a bigger focus on classical ballet. Though she didnt pursue performance in the same way her daughter has, shes thrilled and blessed that [Chyrstyn] has attained the level I always wanted.

Chyrstyn has delivered and delivered and delivered, said Nissinen. The cream rises to the top.

Hours before the Friday evening performance at Jacobs Pillow, Fentroy managed to get some alone time at the Southfield Pub, reading a weathered copy of Wally Lambs I Know This Much Is True, which she picked up in New York years ago.

I find my zen when Im alone, Fentroy said. She was sharing a hotel room with another dancer, and the dressing room at Jacobs Pillow a rustic campus in the Berkshires wasnt especially spacious.

Fentroys one-bedroom apartment in Medford had been crowded lately, too. After a brief hiatus from dance, Villarini was hired at Boston Ballet in July, and moved in with Fentroy. At around the same time, Ruth Fentroy relocated to Massachusetts to be closer to her daughter, and stayed in the apartment with her two cats before moving into her own new home in Swampscott.

With Fentroys dog, Rupert, in the mix, it was like a zoo at my house for two weeks, Fentroy said.

Though Fentroy and Villarini were partners at the Dance Theatre of Harlem, the two are now in different ranks at Boston Ballet: Shes a soloist, and hes a corps member.

She has a lot more on her plate than I do, said Villarini. While he tends to take a patient approach to dance, Fentroy is such a go-getter. He added, She cant leave the studio unless she gets it right.

Does he ever feel competitive with her? Our hopes and aspirations are not the same, Villarini said. We have to give each other room to fulfill that.

Villarini and Fentroy have matching tattoos. (The ink has to be covered for performances, of course.) The design is a line drawing originally sketched by John Lennon a minimalist portrait of himself and Yoko Ono.

Have you heard the music they created together? Its weird, Fentroy said with a laugh. He definitely brought out something for me that I didnt know was there, which is a parallel to them.

At the Friday evening show at Jacobs Pillow, Fentroy performed a playful duet with Desean Taber to Khalids Location an excerpt from Forsythes Playlist (EP). Her movements were crisp and energetic, embodying the digital zeitgeist of the song. She grinned earnestly through the brief performance, and let out a tiny giggle or two.

During an after-show talk, she said she likes to show the audience her joy: I love to make myself laugh.

Ruth Fentroy, who was moving into her new home in Swampscott at the time, wasnt in the Berkshires to watch the Jacobs Pillow performances. But seeing her daughter dance is usually a priority: Even when she lived in California, she frequently flew across the country for shows.

The proud mother often watches from backstage, though she gets a special thrill out of sitting in the audience and hearing strangers react to her daughters dancing.

From the neighboring seats, she can hear them saying, Oh my gosh, that girl, that girl, that girl.

Marella Gayla can be reached at marella.gayla@gmail.com. Follow her on Twitter@marellagayla.

Read this article:

Former Dance Theatre of Harlem star Chyrstyn Fentroy is leaping up the ranks at Boston Ballet - The Boston Globe

Review: Robyn Doolittle’s new book Had It Coming is an unflinching look at the #MeToo era – The Globe and Mail

Every year new zeitgeist-y words are added to the dictionary recently it was the Bechdel Test but in 2019, I wish we could take some words out, specifically nuance, a word that seems to have lost its meaning from sheer overuse. When used in marketing copy for book promotion, the word nuanced is meant to soothe the average reader and signal that the book is not a polemic. Its no surprise that its overuse is happening during an epidemic of journalistic both-sides-ism, and a time when books about the whirlwind #MeToo era are proliferating.

So when I read it on the jacket copy of Had It Coming: Whats Fair in the Age of #MeToo, the excellent new book by reporter Robyn Doolittle, my heart sank a little. Was it going to suffer from a watering-down of the issues, or build on the groundbreaking work she accomplished with the Unfounded investigative series, one of the most read stories in The Globe and Mails history, which created real administrative change in police departments across Canada? Luckily, the jacket also promises it will be informed and thats exactly what it is how is it that Canada has the most progressive sexual-assault laws on the books, but so few people with power understand it or use it properly?

Doolittle writes in the introduction that it would be cathartic to write a book about why women are feeling such fury in the wake of #MeToo, but its been done. Its true that literary treatises by Rebecca Solnit or Rebecca Traister and others have that ground well covered. And its also true that perhaps readers want fewer confessions or emotions, and more solutions or in-depth explorations. Doolittle explains that she wont shy away from the tough questions and offers us a glimpse of what women really say when theyre talking to their friends.

Story continues below advertisement

Looming over the introduction is the spectre of woke Twitter and cancel-culture, which is a false set-up, given that there are few actual consequences for strangers being momentarily mad at you on social media Ive lived it; its humbling, but hardly the end of the world. The systems of power are still very much the same no matter how uncomfortable you might feel for a social-media misstep. What Doolittles book does do is take a good hard look at the systems we do have and offer us the undisputed facts about them, and, for that, its a valuable addition to the canon of #MeToo texts coming out this year. Thats just not what the introduction sets us up for.

Doolittle is an excellent reporter. She goes to the experts and then uses the expansive nature of a book to go deeper into the factual material they offer her, and then evaluates how things have and havent changed post-Weinstein, with a few, carefully-selected and only-when-necessary personal anecdotes peppered in.

The book begins with an admission one familiar to anyone who was a teenager 15-20 years ago recounting how after hearing about the Kobe Bryant case, she did not believe the complainant. Its sometimes difficult to remember that when we were the age of the young women spearheading consent culture in 2019, many of us, myself included, were making Monica Lewinsky jokes.

She realizes as an adult how misguided she was and also why this was a common way for women to react what did Bryants complainant expect, going to his hotel room? This sections placement at the start of the book is a generational framing that helps us understand where the author comes from, and how her views shifted before and during the writing of the Unfounded report. The rest of the book contains fewer personal anecdotes and relies more on factual accounts, which is where Doolittles natural strengths are as a writer.

She asks the important questions and looks at each essay topic from a variety of angles. Some chapters start off looking a bit controversial, like the one on the Aziz Ansari debacle, a case that seems cleanly split along generational lines; or why the popular Tea and Consent PSA (developed by the Thames Valley Police, it explains the concept of consent using the metaphor of offering others a cup of tea) isnt useful or realistic for teens; and the redemption of Justice Robin "couldnt you keep your knees shut Camp, a federal judge who was removed from the bench for his mishandling of a sexual-assault case. But each section is carefully considered, and offers balanced takes that still use basic feminist principles as their starting point and a given. You may not agree with everything she says, but Id be surprised if any reader will end a chapter feeling as though she didnt consider and take seriously their point of view.

The Camp chapter, for example, is a stand-out, in part because it is a rare example of someone in power who was willing to look at his own biases and shift his point of view, and a reporter who was willing to push him in the right directions to tell those uncomfortable truths. It makes an interesting companion text to books like Sarah Schulmans Conflict is Not Abuse, or Kai-Cheng Thoms I Hope We Choose Love, books that ask us to look beyond systems of punishment for answers to how society should deal with abuse.

Story continues below advertisement

Story continues below advertisement

The chapters I appreciated the most were the ones near the end where Doolittle examined the feminist generational divide and interviewed both Germaine Greer and Susan Brownmiller, once iconic feminists whose texts are now considered problematic by many on issues of race, sexuality and gender identity. She goes to great lengths to humanize them, despite disagreeing with them on several key points. Whats missing, though, are interviews with 2019s Greers and Brownmillers. She does interview teenagers, but the absence of interviews with say, Jessica Valenti, Lindy West, Roxane Gay, remains a glaring omission, when giving so much space to two leaders in the second-wave feminist movement.

The chapter on the neurobiology of trauma is particularly strong, dealing with how police often discredit complainants who react in ways that dont seem logical. She examines what critics of the neurobiology of trauma say and comes to her own conclusions. Again and again, she takes thorny, divisive issues and lays them plain on the examining table.

The book is emerging in the middle of what the Guardian calls an unprecedented wave of books on the #MeToo era. Some wont feel relevant in even two years time, but Had It Coming will because its a decisive snapshot of this moment in history that considers where we were, and sets the stage for where we might go, and will no doubt be used to describe this moment long after weve moved on to a new normal.

Expand your mind and build your reading list with the Books newsletter. Sign up today.

More:

Review: Robyn Doolittle's new book Had It Coming is an unflinching look at the #MeToo era - The Globe and Mail

Alan Dershowitz and the wheel of pain – Columbia Journalism Review

Attorney Alan Dershowitz speaks during a news interview outside of Manhattan Federal Court on March 6, 2019, in New York. AP Photo/Frank Franklin II 1: A Man Accused

Alan Dershowitz wont hang up the phone. Hes breathing heavily into the receiver. Its August 10, the morning Jeffrey Epstein was found dead in his jail cell. At first Dershowitz wants to go off the record, and I agree. He doesnt say anything interesting, just the same protestations that hes made on Twitter and television for years. But when I start asking questions, he begins to berate me. Were on the record now, I tell him. You dont get to insult me off the record.

So he begins breathing into the phone. He will not hang up. He does not know what to say.

If you dont want to talk, you can hang up, I say. But I am not going off the record if you are just going to call me fifth rate.

Silence. Breathing. I wont have it written that I hung up on a reporter! Hes shouting. We do this a couple more times. I take notes. Hes livid that I wont go off the record. He threatens to sue me. Tells me I am a nobody. My tape recorder is somewhere at the bottom of my purse.

I am talking to Dershowitz because Michael Sitrick, a crisis PR guy who has worked with Harvey Weinstein and R. Kelly, thought I should. Sitrick is a fixer who has made a name for himself cleaning up the messes of rich and powerful men (and some women, too).

Dershowitz is the high-profile lawyer who worked for Epstein. He has also been accused of having sex with an underage girl at Epsteins mansion. Dershowitz is outraged by that allegation and has been asserting his innocence for more than five years, to anyone who will listen. Two days before Sitrick reached out to me, New York magazine ran a story about Dershowitz, Alan Dershowitz Cannot Stop Talking.

But its worse now, because Sitrick and Dershowitz are convinced that the New Yorker, which published a damning profile of Dershowitz in late July, is targeting him because of his pro-Israel views. He says the reporter on the story, Connie Bruck, is after him.

Mike, am I the lead steer? Id asked Sitrick when he called. The lead steer is Sitricks idea that all it takes to change the direction of a media stampede is for one journalist to take a contrarian view of the story. Its a theory that holds well for ranchers trying to redirect a stampede. And its worked for Sitrick, who has orchestrated positive press for some odious clients.

When I asked Sitrick if I am the lead steer a laugh was his only answer.

ICYMI:The #MeToo story BuzzFeed, NYT and more didnt want to publish

One of the reasons Dershowitz is so scared is that the New Yorker has come to dominate the #MeToo story. Investigations by Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer about Harvey Weinstein marked a turning point. Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey at the New York Times were first, technically, but the New Yorker helped catch the zeitgeist. After Weinstein went down, it felt like man after man followed. There were stories about Matt Lauer, Kevin Spacey, and Louis CK, among dozens of others. The New Yorker shared a Pulitzer with the Times for its work.

No walk of life was untouched. There was the Shitty Media Men list, where Moira Donegan codified the whisper network and sparked a lawsuit that continues to drag on. (The lawsuit was filed by Stephen Elliott, someone I used to work with and for at The Rumpus. I tweeted about his horrible treatment of me and I felt like I had shown the whole world the throbbing mangled mess of my insides.)

It was a black hole of pain that sucked us all in. Either we were complicit or we were victims. Either we had been groped by bosses or furtively worried wed done the groping. Or maybe worse, that we had seen it and done nothing. Or maybe we had, as Farrow reported in his piece on Joi Ito at the MIT Media Lab, willfully ignored the facts in pursuit of money. In group text messages and in private groups on Facebook, women shared repressed memories of childhood, college, abusive partners. A media man I dated once told me he and his friends had plans if they were ever #MeTooed.

Why would you need a plan? Just dont harass people, I said.

He shrugged. You never can tell what will happen.

It didnt take long for people to say, Weve gone too far. In fact, I heard the phrase, #MeToo has gone too far from a powerful person in publishing at a party in Washington, DC in October 2017, the same month that the Weinstein stories broke. Thats how long it didnt take. The cry of cancelled men was that they supported #MeToo, its just that the movement got things wrong in their case.

ICYMI:Meet the 26-year-old who has been laid off three times

The first time I talked to Alan Dershowitz was July 29, the day the New Yorker published its piece. The story was damning. It outlined darker points of Dershowitzs career: rhetorically advocating sex with minors, his relationship with and vigorous defense of Epstein against allegations of rape and sex trafficking. The story also noted that Virginia Roberts Giuffre accused Dershowitz of participating in Epsteins sexual cabal. Dershowitz responded by attacking Giuffre in the press. In April, Giuffre had filed a defamation suit against Dershowitz.

Giuffre told the New Yorker, Jeffrey got away with it, basically. And Dershowitz was one of the people who enabled that to happen Dershowitz thinks hes a tyrant and can get away with anything. And I wanted to say, I might be as meek as a mouse, but Im going to hold you accountable.

On that day in July, Dershowitz seems subdued over the phone. He just wants a fair chance. What he really wants is vindication. But he wont get that, he suspects, because hes bold, hes a liberal who supports Donald Trump. He supports Israel. Hes a victim here. The real victim.

He accuses Bruck of using a conspiracy website, Rense.com, as her source for some of the allegations in her piece. (The New Yorker declined to make Bruck available to speak on the record, but the magazine did say she had a more authoritative source than Rense.com.)

Dershowitz then tries to poke holes in Giuffres motivations. He says that she wants money. Dershowitz brings up the fact that he believes he is being targeted by David Boies, a lawyer who himself has been accused in the New Yorker of contracting a private investigative firm called Black Cube in an effort to block the magazines reporting on Weinstein.

Dershowitz lobs a series of details. Did I know that another woman who claims that she was forced to have sex with Dershowitz at Epsteins command, Sarah Ransome, lied and said she had a sex tape with the Clintons?

I did know that, because its in the New Yorker profile. In fact, so are the details about Dershowitz filing a complaint with the New York bar against Boies and the fact that the complaint was dismissed. Its an old tactic, lobbing detail after detail after detail at the media until they are overwhelmed. Sitrick does this, too. He calls it the wheel of pain.

In the world according to Dershowitz, he is a victim. But how can he be a victim when he has the power and the money and the platform. Media outlets cover his every tweet. He has a book which will be out on November 19, proclaiming his innocence and blaming instead the #MeToo movement for his trials. And I am covering this story now because a powerful man called me about his powerful friend. How many stories are made like this? A cycle of media and power, we listen because he yells. He yells because we listen. And whoever gets to shout the loudest is the winner.

You have power and money, I point out to him. You have media coverage, how are you the victim?

If a powerful woman were raped and she had powerful friends, would they say its hard to conceive of you as a victim? I mean, this is an attempt to destroy my life and my career and my family. Of course Im a victim. Of course Im a victim. Im a victim with resources, and thats exactly the kind of victim who should fight back.

Are you comparing yourself to a rape victim?

Im not making that comparison.

You just said that if a powerful woman was raped

Im saying that anybody whos a victim of a crime should be speaking out. Let me tell you, if you havent experienced four and a half years of being falsely accused of the most heinous crimes imaginable, then its very, very hard to be sympathetic, and I understand. But whats happened to me over the past four and a half years, Im not comparing it to rape, Im not comparing it to murder. Im not comparing it to any other crime. Im saying it is an extraordinarily serious crime, and a crime that victims should speak out about.

Dershowitz later threatens to sue me if I use information he insists is off the record. He will have a lawyer email my editor. They will have a phone call.The lawyer will argue that I am a liar. It doesnt workthis time.

In 2011, Michael Sitrick sued Jeffrey Epstein, over an unpaid bill for PR services. In that lawsuit is a detailed outline of services rendered.

Its a plan that shows a comprehensive outline of reporters who were contacted about stories and who reached out for interviews. The idea was this: connect with reporters, offer access, overwhelm them with data, threaten their access if things go sideways, go over their heads. That is how men like Epstein went unchallenged for years. How a journalist can know something, but never be able to say it. On August 22, NPRs David Folkenflick detailed how Epstein allegations went unreported by Vanity Fair. The story alleges that Epstein pressured the magazines editor, Graydon Carter, and that Carter caved.

If #MeToo is a conspiracy, as Dershowitz and so many other cancelled men suggest, the question is, who is conspiring? Carter was once quoted as saying,You think youve arrived I hate to break it to you, but youre only in the first room. Its not nothingdont get me wrongbut its not that great, either. Believe me, there are plenty of people in this townhe means New Yorkwho got to the first room and then didnt get any further.

So who is in the room? In my first call with Dershowitz, he denies knowing Sitrick, even though Sitrick set up the call. I point out that theyd worked on two cases together that I knew of: Sholom Rubashkin, a jailed meat packing executive, and Harvey Weinstein. Later, Dershowitz says in an email that he and Sitrick were work acquaintances, nothing else. When I ask Sitrick about that, he mentions that maybe theyd hung out socially once or twice, but Dershowitz was just a friend.

I find most conspiracies to be intellectually lazy. My father likes to say, when faced with a conspiracy theory, I have a hard time believing all those idiots could agree on something so complicated.

But the more I read about Dershowitz, and talk to him, the more I begin to think about how power is exercised. How would someone feel if they were suddenly kicked out of one of those special rooms, after being inside for so long?

F. Lee Bailey is one of the names that recurs in my research. He and Dershowitz worked together on the O.J. Simpson defense team. Bailey is now disbarred. I call him and ask him what he thinks about Dershowitz. Is there a conspiracy? He doesnt talk long and wont commit to a full-conspiracy theory for either side, but he notes that sexual assault allegations are one of the arrows they shoot at you to bring you down. Who is they?

He has to go and cant answer.

One week after I talk to Bailey, Epstein commits suicide in jail. A whole new host of conspiracy theories emerge. There doesnt seem to be an end.

Fact-checking a story is reporting in reverse. Its the checkers job not only to follow up with sources, but also to help find new ones. Its a crucial step. The New Yorker explains that a lot of reporting happens in the process of checking. That process with Dershowitz was off the record.

At first, Dershowitz says, he will show me emails that prove the fact-checking process on Brucks piece was faulty. None of the documents arrive. But there is more, he tells me, tiny little details that he questions, elements of the story that he says werent given enough time. What about his work for charity? Hes throwing everything at me and, eventually, a call with my editor.

Its all sound and fury. Of course, reporting is not infallible. Trial by media is a chaotic scramble of piecing facts together. All you need is one person influential enough to believe you. One steer.

In our first conversation, I ask Dershowitz why he wants to talk. What is he going to tell me that hasnt already been said before over and over? What is the point? I will keep talking, he says, until I die, and then my children will do it for me!

Thats the point.

Its a Trumpian ethos. A constant cry of victimhood from the highest echelons of power. The never ceasing voice, shouting and shouting. If you listen youll forget the point. If you listen and always react, its hard to hear anything at all.

ICYMI:Why the left cant stand The New York Times

Read the original here:

Alan Dershowitz and the wheel of pain - Columbia Journalism Review

Good Money Week: Will ethical investing ever go mainstream? – The Independent

Next week is Good Money Week, an annual campaign designed to raise awareness of sustainable and ethical options for our finances from bank accounts to pensions.

The movement wants Britons to wake up to the relationship between that benign little bank account or fledgling pension pot and the funding behind fossil fuel exploration and forest destruction, and to take charge of where their money ends up.It can be one of the most effective ways to force big shifts

None of this is a new idea though. Ethical funds, for example, have been available for 30 years. And yet such funds under management still account for only 1.6 per cent of the UK industry total, according to data from Schroders.

From 15p 0.18 $0.18 USD 0.27 a day, more exclusives, analysis and extras.

It would be easy to roll out the same old argument that we worry investing ethically means sacrificing performance. But thats not whats going on any more.

A global research report from BofA Merrill Lynch last week, which called for investors to care more about ethical, social and governance (ESG) criteria, showed that a strategy of buying stocks that rank well on ESG metrics would have outperformed the S&P 500 every year for the last five years, for example.

In fact, the reasons behind the (ironically) glacier-slow uptake so far could be the reasons ethical investing could be about to explode, according to research out this week that challenged some of the UKs wealthiest investors on the stark contrast between their personal and portfolio ethics.

Among those with more than 250,000 in investable assets those who could really put pressure on the worlds biggest businesses to make real and lasting change there is, seemingly, a huge appetite for ethical investing.

More than 80 per cent of the UKsHigh Net Worth Individuals (HNWIs) are interested in investing their money ethically, according to a survey by Rathbone Greenbank Investments.

And yet three-quarters of these investors are knowingly investing in stocks and shares that conflict with their values.

They claim to care most about climate change and plastic waste reduction and yet more than a third continue to invest in fossil fuels and/or mining companies.

Why? Mostly because of a lack of choice, they say. And that is changing fast.

In a short space of time, ethical concerns from the environment to social injustice have gone from the fringe to part of the zeitgeist, says John David, head of Rathbone Greenbank Investments.

It has become normal for people to make conscious decisions about their impact on the planet, with awareness growing every day. The fact that 81 per cent of HNWIs care about their money being invested for good, aligned to their ethical beliefs, suggests we are on the right track. However, there is still work to be done.

Even some of the shrewdest investors still believe the myths about ethical investing, thinking they have no alternative other than stocks and funds that go against their values. The truth is there is a huge choice of ethical stocks and funds offering good diversity to spread risk across a portfolio, even in an uncertain economic environment. And most importantly, this money makes a huge difference to companies attitudes, and the way companies conduct their business.

For Juliet Schooling Latter, research director at FundCalibre, theres little doubt that ethical investing is about to go mainstream.

From David Attenboroughs Blue Planet II to Greta Thunbergs school climate strikes and speech at the UN Climate Action Summit, there is no denying that public awareness of climate change and pollution are increasing, she says. Not only this, but public tolerance of bad corporate practice, maltreatment of employees and communities, and many other environmental, social and governance issues is lower today than it has arguably ever been in the past. As the public and the consumer start to demand more from companies and governments, practice is starting to change.

This isnt driven solely by millennials either. Schroders found Generation X investors typically in their 40s are equally if not more motivated to invest sustainably than their younger counterparts.

A growing body of evidence points to demand across a range of demographics, including those HNWIs.

While 1.6 per cent of all UK funds under management may not seem much, net retail inflows into ethical funds are on the up, says Schooling Latter.

In July, they were 248m a 50 per cent increase on this time last year and beating all other assets, bar fixed income and mixed assets.

Looking more widely at the institutional market, more and more pension funds, in particular, are integrating ESG into their strategies. According to EdenTree, ESG funds under management in the UK now total over 1.2 trillion.

All of these factors mean that more and more fund management companies are offering sustainable investment choices and are starting to incorporate ESG factors into their core investment processes. Professional investors are seeing that good practices generally result in good long-term investments.

Yes, theres the danger of succumbing to the me tooofferings out there, but for investors hunting out returns for their own portfolio, as well as the planet, there is a growing number of real choices.

Schooling Latter points to the ASI UK Ethical Equity fund, which she says operates a no compromisesapproach to ethical screening, and the BMO Responsible Global Equity fund, which invests in growth companies around the world with a focus on sustainability.

Elsewhere, the Pictet Global Environment Opportunities fund invests in companies that actively contribute to solving environmental challenges and that operate within a safe operating spaceacross nine environmental areas, such as ocean acidification, climate change and biodiversity.

Or theres Rathbones Ethical Bond fund, she suggests, which has a high-income target and its ethical rules are very simple: no mining, arms, gambling, pornography, animal testing, nuclear power, alcohol or tobacco. All investments must also have at least one positive environmental, social or corporate governance quality.

Read more:

Good Money Week: Will ethical investing ever go mainstream? - The Independent

All Good Things – The Collage Art of Greg Lamarche – whitehotmagazine.com

Greg Lamarche, Life of the Party 2, 2018

By PAUL LASTER, October 2019

A native New Yorker, Greg Lamarche expresses the vitality of urban living in everything he creates. One of the citys legendary graffiti artists, Lamarche is now best known for his cut paper collages, which regularly appear in gallery exhibitions, news editorials and brand campaigns.

Blurring the boundary between fine art and graphic design,his collagesemploy some of the same inventive techniques as his graffiti once did. Through the use of bold color, movement, fragmentation, layering, rhythmic repetition and negative space, he creates crisp, clean artworks that speak to multiple audiences.

Greg Lamarche, Summer in the City, 2014

Born in 1969 to parents who had a serious interest in art, Lamarche started writing graffiti and making collages at age 11. Inspired by the tags he saw on the graf-covered walls behind his elementary school and the flyers his mother made for neighborhood events, he began developing the dual artistic interests that he continues to pursue in different ways today.

One of Lamarches earliest memories of experiencing contemporary art was a viewing of Red Grooms popularRuckus Manhattanexhibition in 1975. A public art project, it recreated such famous landmarks as the Staten Island Ferry, Brooklyn Bridge and the 14thStreet Subway Station with painted and sculpted models that comically captured the daily hustle-and-bustle of the city.

By the time Lamarche started making his own urban art in 1981, his parents were taking him to museums and galleries like Graffiti Above Ground for inspiration and soon carving out a studio space for him to make art at home. Before long he was visiting the East Villages radical Fun Gallery and the edgy SoHo gallery spaces of Tony Shafrazi and Gabrielle Bryers to meet graffiti writers on his own.

Greg Lamarche, Bushwick, 2014

His first graffiti tag was Spankey, which he later reduced to Spy. But he soon settled on Sp.One, which he continuously drew toperfecthis style and started tagging in the subways and streets while attending the High School of Music & Arts. After graduating, he studied fine art and graphic design at Franklin Pierce College in New Hampshire, traveled across the States with spray paint in hand and then moved to Boston in 1992, where he founded the graffiti magazineSkills, which he published for the next three years.

Produced in a completely analog manner,Skillswas a visual montage of contributed snapshots of graffiti-bombed trains, trucks and vans and was peppered with interviews of up-and-coming graf artists of the day. It was the golden age of graffiti art, and while Lamarche was honing his skills on the streetmoving from just bombing his tag to building a brand with the production of complex wall pieceshe was also sharpening his style of cut-and-paste collage, which paralleled the energy and motion of the street.

Some of my earliest letter collages are based on my tag, but then they evolved to collages of related phrases, Lamarche toldJuxtapoz Magazinein 2007. We clearly see the artists tag in the 2005 collageUntitled (Sp.One Series)and can chart an evolution of his phrasing in such cut paper pieces asAh Yes(2005),Develop-Destroy(2005),Old Habits Die Hard(2008) andThe New Hustle(2008), as well as in the wooden letter assemblageW.T.F.I.G.O.(2012).

Greg Lamarche, Untitled (Sp_One series), 2005

Graffiti made me look at letters and think about them in a totally different way. Color, composition, movement, layering and repetition all play huge parts to developing letters and the creative possibilities are endless, Lamarche toldGhettoblaster Magazinein 2011.

Although he had started to show his collages in galleries in Boston, he decided to move back to New York in 1995. Getting a job as an art handler, he found himself looking at fine art as often as he was spending time in the graffiti and developing street art worlds. The collages of the German Dada artist Kurt Schwitters and American Surrealist Joseph Cornell, who spent most of his life making work in Queens, had long been an influence, but Lamarche was also drawn to the minimalist canvases of Ellsworth Kelly and maximalist hybrid paintings of Frank Stella.

Kellys command of color and simple geometric forms can be seen as inspiring Lamarches collages likeCorner Cluster(2005) andCut Corners(2010), while Stellas dynamic mix of bold paint and cut metal shapes in hisExotic Bird Seriescould be pegged as impacting LamarchesUntitled(2013) andSummer in the City(2014) works on paper.

Greg Lamarche, Hot and Heavy, 2011

Further exhibitions of the collages in galleries led to Lamarche getting commercial work. He established his art and design practice in 2000spending part of his time on graphic design work and as many studio hours as possible making letter and colored shape collages. The collages would often get scaled-up to make big paintings and murals, even as he additionally experimented with assemblage and other forms of torn paper collage.

Over the past two decades, he has produced cut paper designs for everything from t-shirts, posters and skateboard decks to book and album covers, wrapping paper and shopping bags for such companies as J. Crew, Shake Shack and Bloomingdales, while creating illustrations for major media outlets likeNew York MagazineandThe New York Times.

Greg Lamarche, Double O Joy 2, 2006

His mural projects have also been in demand. Since painting his iconic Coney Island mural for Creative TimesThe Dreamland Artists Clubin 2004, Lamarche has created colorful murals for Facebook, Nike, IBM and numerous galleries and art fairs. His clever use of the wordsThinkandOutThinkmade for playful wall paintings related to IBMs longstanding Think campaign, while his massive painting for the Mural Arts Philadelphia is a lively attraction in the citys burgeoning Brewerytown neighborhood.

Lamarches torn paper collages, includingHouston Street Station(2006),Hot and Heavy(2011) andCity to City(2013), are inspired by chipped paintand ripped postersin New Yorks decaying subway stations. He photographs and collects the crude chips, which he poetically sees as indicators of the passage of time from when he tagged the trains to his life as an artist now, and then studies them before making new works. Equally rich in art historical precedent, these painterly pieces recall the decollage works of the Nouveau Ralist artists Raymond Hains, Mimmo Rotella and Jacques Villegl.

Greg Lamarche, Develop-Destroy, 2005

Never standing still, Lamarche continues to capture the zeitgeist of New York in new puzzle-like pieces, such asLife of the Party(2018). An accumulation of letters that he hand-cut from colored papers with an X-acto knife, the composition moves across a field of white paper like a diverse crowd of people. Mixing existing fonts with newly invented ones, he uses color and form to encapsulate a sense of moving through the citys subways and streets while catching glimpses of fashions, cell phones and graffiti.

Graffiti is the foundation and I am very much into expanding on it and not trying to be only one-dimensional, Lamarche further shared withGhettoblaster. I know a lot of former graf writers will say, I was young and stupid; I dont do that anymore. I think that one should not deny or make excuses for the past but rather embrace your experience and build off of it. To me it is the spark that set you off and makes life exciting so even though I dont get down like I used to I still get down. WM

Greg Lamarche, Vestige 2, 2012

Greg Lamarche: All Good Things is on view at Trustman Art Gallery, Simmons University, Boston through November 1, 2019

See the rest here:

All Good Things - The Collage Art of Greg Lamarche - whitehotmagazine.com

ANALYSIS | Does the West want out? Not really, but the rallying cry needs to be heard – CBC.ca

There's been no end of headlines about western alienation and separation.

While the sentiment exists across the Prairies, Alberta is ground zero, and it's the Alberta premier who has been chief among those sounding the alarm.

Jason Kenney, who is quick to assure Canadians he's an avowed federalist, often uses the "unity crisis" rallying cry to pivot to partisan politics.

In this Aug.3 video posted to social media, Kenney's core message is clear: "Rather than focusing on Alberta separating from the Canadian federation, I'd like to focus on separating Justin Trudeau from the Prime Minister's Office".

Similar exhortations from Kenney, specifically citing a separatist surge, have dwindled after several months of a steady theme.

In fact, there has been a perceptible shift, with Kenney now talking more about Alberta's nation-building role and the province's integral place within Confederation.

There's no mystery as to why.

There is a danger that whatever frustration and anger is out there could be inflamed further and become politically explosive.

Kenney knows this.

Keep stirring it up and soon an ember is a fire.

However, Alberta-based pollster Janet Brown argues it's his job to reflect a sentiment that is deep and abiding in many Albertans.

"There is really a sense of frustration here," Brown says.

"When people talk about separation, mostly it's just an expression of frustration, rather than a clear desire to separate."

If anyone understands how that frustration can grow and fester, it's the man who turned "The West Wants In" into a movement that challenged political orthodoxy.

Preston Manning, the founding leader of the Reform Party, offers a warning.

"The challenge, I think, is to try to channel that energy and that anger and disillusionment into some constructive change, rather than just tearing things apart. And that's going to be a challenge for the next Parliament, no matter who ends up winning the next election," Manning says.

Brown thinks the winner does matter.

"Western separatism ebbs and flows depending on who is in government, and I think the fact there is a Liberal government federally is one of the things that's sort of driving that frustration," she says.

The Western Canada Concept Party managed to elect Gordon Kesler in a provincial byelection in 1982. It was the first and only electoral win by a separatist outside of Quebec.

Just months later, the party won close to 12 per cent of the vote in the provincial election, but that support didn't translate into seats including Kesler's.

This was the National Energy Program (NEP) era, so anger at Ottawa was visceral and profound in Alberta.

Former Reformand later CPC MP and cabinet minister Monte Solberg wrote about western alienation earlier this year.

He says, despite today's grievances over pipelines and equalization, "nothing, but nothing, approaches the damage done by the NEP."

So a separatist resurgence is possible, but not probable.

In fact, Brown says based on her scanning of the various polls on alienation and separation in recent months, while there is a clear sentiment favouring separation that garners substantial support, it should be viewed with caution.

"When you dive even deeper (into the polls)... those people are saying I'm going to answer this way on the poll because I want somebody to hear me and I want somebody to hear how frustrated I am," Brown says.

Solberg writes that "western separation is not many people's first choice, it's also not very realistic."

But he also argues that years of policies which have stymied Alberta's prime industry means "the only dignified response is righteous anger the West didn't pull away until it was pushed away."

A nascent group dubbed Wexit says its slogan is"The West Wants Out."

We brought together members of a focus group, assembled by Brown as part of a poll commissioned by CBC Calgary, to hear directly from voters about this. They largely echo Solberg's view.

Stephen Carlton spent a career in the resource sector. He says, "I'm not a separatist. I'm a Canadian first and foremost. But, you know, with the continued aspect that we feel powerless here, separation, is that a viable plan B if we can't work this out?"

That's the question being asked by many, including James Vy, who also makes his living in oil and gas.

"You know. I don't think it'd be a good idea. I don't know what it looks like after Alberta does separate," Vy says.

Carla Paradis, an entrepreneur with rural roots, says she wants "to get back on the same page as the rest of Canada."

Kenney's message has evolved from angry and stark warnings about a burgeoning unity crisis a few months ago, to a pitch arguing that the Constitution is on the side of Alberta.

This is directly linked to his stumping for Andrew Scheer and his challenges to the federal carbon tax and Bills C-48 and 69; one a B.C tanker ban, and the other a new assessment process he argues blocks future pipelines.

It's also true that there is an inherent danger in stirring up separatist sentiment.

This week, when asked about the re-election of a Trudeau government, he replied, "Honestly, I think that frustration will go off the charts." But he didn't characterize that frustration in the context of unity or separatist sentiment.

What is also very telling is his response to a question about equalization a formula he's railed against as being profoundly unfair.

When a reporter asked whether he'd raised the subject with any federal leaders and, further, if any of them had made any commitments to changes, the reply was a curt "no and no" and on to the next question.

No question, many Albertans are angry. They're also anxious, fearful, bewildered and, in some cases, feeling defeated.

Brown explains the zeitgeist Kenney is channelling is rooted in a perceived "hypocrisy in the way Alberta is dealt with."

She goes on to explain, "The rest of Canada is happy to take equalization from Alberta. They're happy to benefit from the prosperity that Alberta has. But then at the same time, they're going to turn around and try and block Alberta's key industry."

Of course that conclusion can be rebutted and rejected, but as Manning says, it needs also to be acknowledged. "The populist dimension of western alienation can't be ignored; it has to be addressed."

"I think the challenge for others is to recognize the validity of the concerns and don't dismiss them and don't tell people you've got no right to be angry or mad but to try to provide a constructive alternative," Manning says.

Whether that can be accomplished at the ballot box on Oct.21 is anyone's guess.

West of Centre is an election-focused pop-up bureau based out of CBC Calgary that features election news and analysis with a western voice and perspective.

Originally posted here:

ANALYSIS | Does the West want out? Not really, but the rallying cry needs to be heard - CBC.ca

Brook Andrew: The first artist and Indigenous man to lead the Biennale of Sydney – Sydney Morning Herald

Normal text sizeLarger text sizeVery large text size

Brook Andrew stands at the centre of a scrum of curators in the small, elegant vestibule of the Art Gallery of NSW. Its a funny little jewel box of a place, all carved sandstone, mosaic floors, bronzes on marble pedestals.

Among the latter are copies of two allegorical works by 18th-century French sculptor Antoine Coysevox. One, Fame, blows her trumpet on a rearing steed. The other, similarly mounted, is the Roman messenger god Mercury, whose portfolio spanned travellers, boundaries, divination, luck and trickery, in addition to bread-and-butter eloquence and communication.

More pedestals cluster in an alcove across the room, topped with busts this time. The work is Melbourne artist Andrew Hazewinkels 12 Figures after Niccol, part of the temporary multi-venue exhibition of new Australian art, The National, which describes it as antique heads that turn out to be masks failing to conceal underlying collective anxiety.

You couldnt invent a more appropriate chorus than Fame, Mercury or those failing masks as Andrew outlines his plans for something newer and more expansive still to the posse of AGNSW curators: his six-venue, city-wide 22nd Biennale of Sydney, which will run from March to June next year.

Titled NIRIN edge in Wiradjuri, the language of his mothers people it will showcase 98 artists, creatives and collectives from 47 countries. As the title underlines, NIRIN is about putting art from the edge at the centre, or showing how all those edges come together to make a centre, as Andrew puts it. Many of the artists are people of colour, gay, queer or non-binary. Nor are all artists.

Andrew is also charting where art collides with science, ceremony, food, with contributors ranging from environmental researchers Drift Labs to cook Kylie Kwong and South Africas Breaking Bread collective. In other words, its a show about travellers, thresholds and boundaries. Stories and who gets to tell them, how. First and foremost, its about the tenor of our times: anxiety in all its myriad forms. All that underlies it, and how that can be brought to light.

Brook Andrew on shaking up the Biennale: Whats not at stake? Everythings at stake. Things need to shift dramatically. And theyre going to shift anyway.Credit:Tim Bauer

With his impassive face, wide blue eyes and greying curls, Andrew, 49, is a game-changer for Australias oldest and largest biennale, which started in 1973. Not only is he the first Indigenous artistic director, hes also the first to be an artist. And the latter is at least as important as the former. His friend Marcia Langton calls him one of the definitive Aboriginal provocateurs in the Australian art world, known for reinterpreting colonial and modern history and offering alternative perspectives, as the National Gallery of Victoria said of the career survey it held of Andrews work in 2017, The Right to Offend is Sacred.

As the Biennale of Sydney enters adulthood and at an interesting time for big art shows and museology generally Andrew is very consciously positioning his on the faultlines of now, such as gender, sexuality and race, the environment and what art and biennales are and do, where old definitions are breaking down and being reformed. Or inside those faultlines, as he tells Good Weekend, where the real action is taking place and the partys happening. He is doing so, his NIRIN online statement of curatorial intent says, because, the urgent states of our contemporary lives are laden with unresolved past anxieties and hidden layers of the supernatural.

This meeting with the AGNSWs curatorial team eight months out, in mid-July, is to start to nail down how those anxieties and supernatural layers might surface at Sydneys oldest gallery. Andrew has earmarked the vestibule for Lismore artist Karla Dickens. Shes been making these wild cages with artworks in them, he says. I imagine she will be hanging things? one AGNSW curator asks. Are they light? Theyre not massive steel structures, are they? Someone else chimes in: Its a heritage building. We have to work with what we have.

Andrew looks thoughtful. Im going to talk to her about hanging some textiles, he says, surveying the rooms hard surfaces. This is a very special place. It can be a bit cold, the curator says. Well, its about transforming it, Andrew muses. So that it feels more womb-like, a bit like a cuddle. Its about creating new narratives and perspectives.

The old narrative and perspective are, of course, written across the other side of the vestibule wall. Along the left flank of the AGNSWs neoclassical facade, bronze relief panels begin to depict what were seen at the time as the major art periods: Assyrian, Egyptian, Grecian, Roman, Gothic and Renaissance. Two world wars and their associated metal shortages intervened, however, leaving the last two blank. Andrews Biennale will more than compensate.

Ghanaian artist Ibrahim Mahama has been commissioned to wrap the front of the gallery, a choice that underlines how close Andrew is to the art-world pulse. In April, Mahama, who is famous for what one reviewer called his monuments to the anonymous reflecting on trade, migration and globalisation, wrapped Milans historical Porta Venezia tollgates in a loosely sewn camouflage of jute sacks from home, as he had done to the historic watch gates in Kassel, central Germany, for the last Documenta exhibition in 2017.

A month later, his bunker-like, mesh installation of found objects became one of the star turns at Mays Venice Biennale. As Andrew tells the curators: Its about the strength of that facade, which is the sort of statement of colonial strength and legacy you see in cities like this around the world. What I love about Ibrahim is the way he makes things disappear and reappear differently. Its about what comes forward and what falls back and then what you walk into all kinds of thresholds.

From the front, visitors will cop that cuddle from Karla before proceeding to the gallerys central hall, which connects the Grand Courts, designed like the facade by turn-of-last-century government architect, Walter Liberty Vernon, to both the Captain Cook Wing, commissioned to commemorate the explorers bicentenary in 1970, and the 1988 extension opened for the national bicentenary, both by then NSW Government Architect Andrew Andersons.

As that underlines, the entry court is a collision of eras and intents. Entering it, you realise just how rich this territory is for a man like Brook Andrew. A man who in addition to his sprawling Biennale is completing both a PhD at Oxford University on the power of objects to transform inherited histories, and an Australian Research Council project on Australias frontier wars. A man whose CV states his home base as Melbourne, Oxford and Berlin; who has for years now been in perpetual motion, forging the international connections and reputation he is leveraging for this Biennale. A man, too, for whom the reference to layers of the supernatural is anything but casual. I believe in ghosts, because I see them, he tells Good Weekend. I believe in spirits, because I talk to them. It helps me. It just helps guide me through life.

Andrew plans to fill the entry court with screen-printed texts from the work of the man he describes as one of the grandfathers of the land rights movement, the late Pitjantjatjara artist Kunmanara Williams. And glimpsed through his eyes, every inch of this place does indeed become almost radioactive with meaning. Not only are we standing in the seam between eras of the gallery, usually commissioned as statements of statehood, but were doing so in the moment before it all changes again, with work about to begin on the AGNSWs $344 million Sydney Modern expansion, staking its claim in the competitive global game that contemporary art has become since the opening of Londons Tate Modern in 2000.

As AGNSW director Michael Brand tells a group of Biennale donors the next day, the gallery has always reflected the eras of its city, from our links to London in the late 19th century to being the first museum to buy and exhibit Aboriginal works as art and then turning to Asia in the late 70s and 80s. As it will again with NIRIN. Its one of those global moments, Brand says. I dont think anyone else from Australia has made it to some of the places Brook has, so his insertions really make sense when you think of [the AGNSW] as a place that represents a particular society and a particular world view.

"A man like Brook Andrew isnt just a turn of phrase. For the purposes of this Biennale, the man himself matters more than usual. By definition, such shows are about capturing the zeitgeist. But Andrew seems to be capturing a very particular moment of fluidity and flux in his butterfly net. And to many, its a job he was born for.

Everyone on the panel that selected him for the job with whom Good Weekend speaks including Michael Brand, Powerhouse Museum CEO Lisa Havilah, Museum of Contemporary Art director Elizabeth Macgregor and M+ Hong Kong art museum head Suhanya Raffel is clear: Andrew was the only possible choice. That is in part because it was high time for an Indigenous curator. But in larger part its because it was time for Brook Andrew, says Havilah, who met him more than 20 years ago when she was working at Casula Powerhouse in Sydneys west and he was an art student at the University of Western Sydney (now Western Sydney University).

Brook is perfectly placed to push forward this historical model of the Biennale, which has been operating for more than 40 years, she says. He comes out of this incredibly suburban context, but he has this ability to think in multiple dimensions. And to bring forward histories and stories and represent them in very contemporary ways, but at the same time challenge those narratives.

Andrews international reputation not only as an artist but as a curator also shifts the relevance and importance of the Biennale internationally, Havilah says. And as a gay man, of mixed Wiradjuri (on his mothers side) and Scottish (on his fathers) descent, and also the father of an 11-year-old son, he brings various other identities in addition to his Indigeneity, says Raffel.

The faultlines are intensifying and polarising on so many issues around the globe, regardless of which position you take. The world is facing all kinds of big questions: existential questions, environmental questions, sustainability issues, issues of identity and belonging. And Brook captures that complexity. As Macgregor puts it: We wanted a Biennale that projected some critical ideas, a Biennale that investigated what art means in a time of globalisation, refugees, Trump, populism, and that engaged meaningfully with First Nations.

The man of the moment, then. But hardly a household name, despite a distinguished 25-year career. Certainly not a safe choice in a town dedicated to safety, from its lockout laws to its hardly edgy annual light show, Vivid. The panel members may be unanimous the institutions they represent bending over backwards to help Andrew realise his vision, if the AGNSW is any indication but word is there were rumblings in the clouds above their heads, though none of them will be drawn on the subject. Would the international art world come to a Biennale with an Indigenous artistic director? Would Andrew be able to pull it off?

The latter is a live question, given the scale of both Andrews ambitions and the expectations riding on his shoulders. But those who have worked with him for years have no doubt. Hell knock it out of the park, says MCA curator Anne Loxley, who compares his appointment to the announcement in March that the Indonesian collective Ruangrupa would be the first Asian curators of Documenta, the worlds most prestigious contemporary art show, in 2022. Its deeply important, Loxley says. They are going to change the rules and I think that is what Brook is going to do, too.

It comes back to what a biennale is meant to be, Andrew says. For me, its still [redolent of] the great expositions of the 18th and 19th centuryshowing off exotic colonial wealthTo me, this is an opportunity to help redress all thator allow for new things to happen. NIRIN is about shining a light on parts of the world that arent so European or North American. And its the first time the Biennale has had such a high number of people of colour, non-binary and queer artists. I think those stories are so urgent, and to have them all together is just so powerful.

Andrew has been building to NIRIN for years. Even if you just take the tranche of work he has done for the MCA in the past 15 years, from Blakatak, the ground-breaking talk and performance series he curated in 2005, to the exhibition and talks program TABOO seven years later. Then theres Warrang, his installation on the facade of the MCAs 2012 extension. It features a giant LED arrow, filled with the black-and-white zigzag a reworking of traditional Wiradjuri dendroglyph or tree-carving patterns that is a constant motif in his work. The arrow points to the remains of the colonial naval docks below, the heritage purpose for which it was commissioned. But its more than that. Those docks also mark where the First Fleet landed in Sydney Harbour. His arrow is a giant piece of wayfinding to all that has gone before or is just gone.

Andrews career, too, has always combined curation, collaboration and ranged across disciplines and media. His practice is a research practice but its also a printmaking practice, a painting practice, a photography practice, says Havilah. What really drives him is the storytelling and the disruption of history the engagement with ideas from multiple perspectives. Making work is just part of that practice.

TABOO was an interesting lesson for him in how you negotiate your practice as an artist with your practice as a curator, adds Macgregor. Brook wanted it to be like an artistic installation, with colour and shape and painted walls and no labels. He brought his over-arching aesthetic to bear on the material. Fortunately, those artists were happy with that but you could have had artists who disagreed. As Loxley says: Give an artist a curatorial job and hell give you an artwork.

Andrew asks, Whats not at stake? Everythings at stake. Things need to shift dramatically. And theyre going to shift anyway.

Brook Andrew unveils his portrait of Professor Marcia Langton at Canberras National Portrait Gallery in 2010. Credit:Glen McCurtayne

Brook Andrew was 15 when he got his first real inkling of just how much the picture had to change. It was the mid-1980s and his biology teacher at Cambridge Park High School in western Sydney decided to bring the class up to speed on the first Australians. He was hysterical, Andrew remembers. He wore Hawaiian shirts and Stubbies, long socks, often thongs. And he stood out the front and pointed to his thumb and said, Real Aboriginal people have swirls on their thumbs and theres only a few of them left in the Central Desert.

Andrew was flabbergasted. Unmoored, he says, by the image conjured. It took a while for the full implications to sink in. I went home and I remember discussing it with Mum and she was rolling her eyes and having a giggle about it. I didnt really understand the gravitas until days and years went by. It made me think a lot more about the lack of visibility and representation. As if half of my body felt missing.

Andrew was growing up in the years leading up to the bicentenary. In the suburbs, where his father was a truck driver and his mother a homemaker raising four children. While there was a strong sense of his culture at home and in his extended family, for Andrew it had no wider context. I mean, there were about six Aboriginal kids in my year, and a lot of them were big footballers, so there wasnt much racism. But there was also no history of Aboriginal Australia or the frontier wars at school, for instance.

Another corresponding eureka moment came when he was 19. By then Id become very active in arts and Indigenous issues, he says. And one day my Aboriginal grandmother, who I was living with at the time, turned around to me and said, Brook, youre also white, you know. And it hit me like a ton of bricks, because she was very important to me and she was proud of her father, who was Scottish and Irish. She always kept me in balance. Its interesting, because even Aboriginal people say that white person, this white person and I just didnt grow up with that black against white, because all the white people in my family were allies. As my mother always said, We are a salt-and-pepper family.

Brook Andrews Jumping Castle War Memorial was so popular among 2010 Biennale of Sydney visitors, bouncing on it had to be banned.Credit:Brook Andrew

It is one reason humour and fun loom so large in his work, from Warrang to his zigzag-patterned inflatable objects, or the Jumping Castle War Memorial he made for the 2010 Biennale of Sydney, an actual jumping castle that so many adults took to in the first few days that jumping had to be banned for the pieces survival. Black humour is vital when were dealing with conflicted and traumatic histories, he says. Humour and having a lightness and balance is important for healing. Its important for letting a breath out, its important for truth-telling.

In the years that followed his big biology lesson, Andrew began to dig even toying with becoming an archaeologist. The first ethnographic photos I found were at Sydneys Mitchell Library in 1995, he recalls. They were so devoid of our lives. Its weird how somebody else owns the history of your peoples bodies and that representation.

Years later, he would come across the much larger hoard at the Royal Anthropological Institute in London that would inspire his 2007 series Gun-metal Grey, which conjure and conceal by turn their anonymous subjects, like lenticular lenses, a technique he says he laboured mightily to perfect. As he told Marcia Langton in an interview for a 2014 essay: I find it a complete and utter mystery. Because theyre from a time and a place that I myself, and my immediate family dont have any recollection ofitslike disappeared history.

Just a year after finding that first cache of pictures in the Mitchell, Andrew would create the work that made his name, 1996s Sexy and dangerous, a highly coloured rendering of a sepia photograph of a young Aboriginal warrior. The work became as immediately iconic as the lushly ironic Something More series by Tracey Moffatt, an artist Andrew cites as an early influence. And not just in Australia.

Andrews breakthrough work Sexy and dangerous (1996).Credit:

For a while there, it was on every bus stop in Tokyo, Langton says of Sexy and dangerous. If you look up the original, its just one of those horrible ethnographic photos. And in just a few moves, he makes that young man so handsome, so human, and the very colonial intent of dehumanising and turning him into a scientific experiment is almost entirely shed, but not so much that you dont recognise that its there.

Sexy and dangerous nailed all eyes, as if something that had needed to be expressed had finally found form. That message, We are sexy and dangerous and what gaze does not allow us this power, was a message that we needed and we still need, says MCA curator Anne Loxley. So obsessed did the National Gallery of Victoria (NGV) become with the work, says director Tony Ellwood, that it bought two of an original edition of 20 to ensure it could keep it on permanent display.

The speed with which Andrew had arrived was remarkable, particularly as hed taken his time getting started. After finishing school, he had studied marine biology in central Queenslands Rockhampton for a year. His parents, who had always encouraged him to follow his clear artistic bent, thought he was crazy. I needed to get away from the western suburbs, he says. Because even though theyre thriving, Im a gay man and I was growing up in [an area] that was homophobic and where Aboriginal people were football heroes.

Loxley first met Andrew just after this time, when she had her first curatorial job at Sydneys S.H. Ervin Gallery and he was doing a placement prior to studying art at university. He was quite contained and enigmatic, she recalls. But he always had charm. He was a proud Aboriginal man, but it wasnt just his cultural identity. He was interesting. He had a sense of his own intellect. There was something fascinating about him.

Charged with keeping Andrew occupied, Loxley asked him to re-cover the offices shabby chaise longue. It was a very average job, she says. Lets just say there were no signs of the phenomenal talent to come. That changed when she saw a work in his 1993 art graduation show, White Word I, now in the MCA collection. There had been something unreachable about him and then I saw that and I thought, Oh my god, hes not only talented but hes smart and hes brave.

Loxley and fellow curator Felicity Fenner included Andrew in their 1994 show of emerging artists, Fresh Art. That was when I got to know him deeply, she says. He can be as silly as me and so much fun mad fun the most fun. Just two years later, Sexy and dangerous landed. I dont think any of his works have passed into the canon in the same way, Loxley says. It has a communicability about it. You dont have to know much at all to get what is going on there.

As the sheer scope and range of work on show at last years NGV career survey demonstrated, Andrew has roamed across media and moods, from Gun-metal Grey to his neon and inflatable works. He goes from the absolute spectacular to the quite cerebral, miniature, detailed, conceptual, Ellwood says. I find him incredibly intriguing. There is always a slightly dangerous edge to his work. But its cloaked in this beauty. That is something very clever about him and its something I think all great artists do.

That beauty is anything but incidental. As Langton points out, it redeems all that is lost, much as his use of light is resurrectionary. Every bit as political as everything else about his work. And for all the immediacy of that first 1996 image, his subsequent work has been much more nuanced, Loxley says. Thats why hes one of the very top Australian artists for me. I like my art to mean something and to keep giving me stuff. His work always deals with something really important and something I didnt know and it always tells me in a way that is poetic rather than didactic. And the range of media he has mastered and his craftsmanship are out of this world. I like my art beautiful and he makes beautiful things.

Hes just got that artists eye, right? Which doesnt turn off, says Langton. Sometimes we come across people in art who have a special vision, and special talents. Hes just one of those very special people. With an extraordinary vision and awareness and capacity to work hard.

Not that Andrew is without detractors. Over the years, some artists and curators have accused him of being insufficiently respectful of aspects of the history that is his subject matter, which Andrew says is a complicated history to unpack. The fluency and fluidity of his work, its chameleon quality, has also perhaps meant he has not crystallised in the popular consciousness on the scale he may have had, had he stuck to one medium, theme, style.

Sometimes we come across people in art who have a special vision, and special talents. Hes just one of those very special people. With an extraordinary vision and awareness and capacity to work hard.

Hes certainly become ubiquitous, though, even in his variety. As the AGNSWs Brand points out, the first works that greet visitors to Sydneys main art museums are two very different Andrew creations: Warrang at the MCA and, at the AGNSW, the recently acquired AUSTRALIA VI, a large, coppery canvas based on an etching by the 18th-century German artist Gustav Mtzel of a corroboree he never saw.

That may have something to do with the currency of what Brand sees as Andrews overriding characteristic: curiosity. Theres certainly a political element in him, no question. But more than that, Brook is curious. Which is exactly what museums need most now. Curiosity is what you should enter a museum with, Brand says. Not to go see one work you know you like and then leave again, but with a sense of curiosity.

Brook Andrews Warrang arrow (2012) features a pattern derived from markers used by his mothers Wiradjuri ancestors.Credit:Brook Andrew

The zigzag motif that runs across Andrews career isnt confined to his art. A tiny blue-and-black version appears when he calls, where a photo might be. The pattern, ancient and modern, is both his sword and his shield. For a provocateur, Andrew is also fiercely guarded. He is happy to talk about his parents, who now live in Queensland and both of whom, inspired by their sons example, went back to study. His mother, Veronica, took a bachelor of visual arts and his father, Trevor, studied writing, journalism and social sciences. Theyre both dedicated community people, Andrew says. My father helps run the Shed Happens mens mental health group in Deception Bay and my mother belongs to the Yinna Yarnan womens group. I am so lucky to have them.

But his three siblings, like his son, are entirely off-limits because, he says, Im private. It is hardly surprising if you think of Andrews career as a decades-long investigation of what it means to be seen and not seen, forgotten or framed. Of who gets to look, and for what purpose. I refuse to be fixed, he says. No one should be. Theres so much to navigate especially for Aboriginal artists, who have to look a certain way or have certain politics. People are always being fixed by other people. Why do we do it to each other?

To read more from Good Weekend magazine, visit our page at The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age and Brisbane Times.

Read more:

Brook Andrew: The first artist and Indigenous man to lead the Biennale of Sydney - Sydney Morning Herald

The Zeitgeist Movement Australian Chapter

DAY ONE

Zeitgeist Movement supporters started pouring in from chapters all around the world as the doors opened to the very appropriately named New Globe Theatre in Brisbane, Australia, Saturday morning on the last weekend of March.

Organisers scurried excitedly, setting up the various areas, including: the merchandise space; the questions for PJ booth; the vegan food buffet; the bar; the workshop space, scattered with comfy chairs and recommended readings; and of course, the main stage, where presentations would be continuously running over the first two-day Z-Day main event.

Check out this great overview of Z-Day Day One by one of the very talented New Zealand coordinators, Wiri Te Moni.

The volunteer technicians, and chapter coordinators Jason Lord from LA and Michael Kubler from Adelaide, worked tirelessly, making sure we had quality recordings of each presentation for later viewing on the TZMGlobal YouTube Channel. Audience members got comfortably acquainted and seated. (Links to presentation recordings will be added to this post as they are uploaded.)

Photos by Michael Kubler @kublermdk, Renee McKeown, and Jason Lord

As soon as everything was ready to go, Z-Day Global kicked off, starting with my opening presentation, where I spoke about the theme of this years Z-Day: Towards Global Unity and Abundance, as well as advice on creating a sustainable and successful chapter, the amount of work involved in making Z-Day happen, ways to avoid economic bigotry, and concluding with a certain framing of encouraging a unified quest to understand the nature of reality rather than personal ambition to win over your perceived opponents.

Casey Davidson, Australian National Coordinator

This was followed by the very knowledgeable and insightful Franky Mller, National Coordinator of the German chapter. Franky shared TZM Understandings important information about The Zeitgeist Movement, refreshing our minds and filling in important gaps in knowledge for those still learning about the tenets and train-of-thought.

Franky Mller, German National Coordinator

See Frankys presentation here.

After Franky, the second of our presenters, Cameron Reilly entertained the crowd with a tongue-in-cheek questionnaire asking the audience about their own psychopathic tendencies and giving them the opportunity to measure it according to their results. He talked about the specific traits of psychopaths, touching on the idea that people who fit into this personality type are not changeable and will always be born. Additionally, the system we have created actually encourages people with these tendencies to acquire positions of power, hence the title of his presentation, the Psychopath Economy.

Simultaneously, we had set up a workshop space in the adjacent room for Z-Day participants who were more interested in being involved in activities and discussions. The first of these workshops came from Caroline Rentel, author and activist, who shared ideas about a relatively new writing genre, Solarpunk, basically based in a future society beyond scarcity and hierarchy, where humanity, nature and technology are integrated.

Caroline Rentel, Solarpunk author

Caroline and Camerons presentations lead into lunch time, where a selection of delicious vegan foods were provided as part of the Z-Day ticket. Curries, cakes, sushi, burgers and snacks were available for all participants served on eco-friendly plates with serviettes and cutlery. Thanks to the lead food volunteer coordinator, Vicky Syme and everyone else who worked so hard to make food available for everyone. For future Z-Day organisers, I would suggest that having food available at the venue is very important in keeping the audience members together to collaborate and be on time for the presentation straight after lunch.

Vegan chefs Vicki and Margarita

Lunch time!

Our first presentation after lunch came from Rich Penney, who we flew in from Toronto, Canada. Rich has attended several Z-Days as one of the most intruiging and informed presenters within the Movement. This year he shared the very clear Contradictions of Capitalism, in a way that allowed us some insight into Richs life living with disability, as well as intellectual gifts that cant be easily monetised in this society. This is a fantastic introductory presentation to help people understand the core problems of the way we have structured society.

We were next graced with the presence of two of the very talented guys from acclaimed Aussie band, Dead Letter Circus, Kim Benzie and Luke Williams. As I have personally been a long-time fan of DLC with their unique sound, emotionally evoking and incredibly conscious lyrics which fall in line beautifully with the tenets of the Zeitgeist Movement, it was amazingly awe-inspiring to hear Luke and Kim talk about their personal experience and journey as artists against oppression. The uplifting conclusion of their presentation of their song While You Wait, together with lyrics and the comically-titled anti-establishment drum solo moved the audience to a standing ovation.

Luke Williams, Dead Letter Circus Drummer

Kim Benzie, Dead Letter Circus Vocalist, Z-Day 2017

While these presentations were going on, Oliver Koslik from Canada presented interactively in the workshop space on Emotional Suppression: A short course on how to recognise and deal with gas-lighting/ambient abuse.

Oliver Koslik

The fun continued on the main stage as we introduced the next of our international guests, Euvie Ivanova from the Future Thinkers Podcast. As a co-host of the Future Thinkers Podcast, Euvie promotes technology, science and consciousness for social concern.

Here is a quick overview of the premise of the Future Thinkers Podcast.

Euvies presentation was particularly focused on consciousness development, as she spoke pragmatically about ways in which we can explore our consciousness using methods from a variety of doctrines. This was particularly interesting to the audience as something that hasnt been discussed in detail in regards to TZM.

Euvie Ivanova Future Thinkers Z-Day

The other half of the Future Thinkers Podcast, Mike Gilliland, followed Euvies presentation. Mike shared his thoughts on the potential of blockchain technology, beyond the limitations of bitcoin. Topics such as decentralisation, security and developing intelligent management systems were explored.

Mike Gilliland from Future Thinkers at Z-Day 2017

During Euvie and Mikes presentations, the Melbourne chapter coordinators Brad Cini and Sonny Vice sat with an intrigued group in the workshop space as they spoke about their upcoming Zero Waste/Minimalisation project they are in the process of creating, and hopefully recreating in cities outside of Melbourne.

Sonny Vice and Brad Cini from the Melbourne Chapter

Everyone was ready for another break to debrief and snack, before moving into the final presentation of the day from ex-Italian coordinator and futurist author Federico Pistono. Federico presented Ethics of Technology, sharing an alternative look at the worlds state of affairs, suggesting ways in which technology is already shifting humanity forward, and new ethical considerations that need to be taken into account regarding this. He shared some controversial topics for discussion that lead into his concluding statement about exponential empathy.

Federico Pistono at Z-Day 2017 Brisbane Australia

Just before the panel, Gilbert Ismail shared a brief update on the global chapters administration and new website. Mark Enoch shared his method for marketing the RBE message in the workshop space, followed by Matt Peddie and Vera L Te Velte from the CryptoParty who showed audience members ways to make their devices more secure.

After all the presentations, I was fortunate enough to lead the Day One Panel, where audience members had the opportunity to ask the speakers questions from the first days presentations on the main stage. This included a lively discussion where panellists authentically shared their thoughts on activism within TZM, as well as a range of social, economic and environmental concerns and ideas for consideration.

Panel from left:Casey Davidson, Franky Muller, Rich Penney, Luke Williams, Kim Benzie, Euvie Ivanova, Mike Gilliland, Federico Pistono, Gilbert Ismail

Day One Z-Day 2017 Panel At front: Casey Davidson Back from left: Franky Muller, Rich Penny, Luke Williams, Kim Benzie

Z-Day 2017 in Brisbane was the first Global event to have presentations as well as workshops. It was also the first with evening performances. A big thanks to the beautiful Anita Diamond for MCing and organising the evenings performances. Roger Smith shared his spontaneous outbreaks of reason, with his passionate funk/blues/rock sound, bringing urgency to the message of the Zeitgeist Movement. This was followed by other local artists including Aceso and The Duke. The evening was complete with DJ SAMARI, coming in from Auckland, New Zealand who shared his Zeitgeist Anaglyph.

Aceso

DAY TWO

Enthusiastic minds entered the New Globe Theatre for the second and final day of the Z-Day weekend with presentation and Q & A from Zeitgeist Movement founder and Zeitgeist film creator Peter Joseph. For a quick overview of the second day, check out Wiris vlog below.

Californian coordinator Jason Lord, kicked off Day 2 with his presentation, Defining Root Causes a short tour through common surface associations where people fall victim to seeing persistent problems as individual outcomes that need fighting or resisting. Jasons presentation explored how to see these problems as symptoms pointing to a systemic problem and helping people see how the system view can help shape your actions when it comes to activism and discussion with peers.

Jason Lord, California TZM Coordinator

Jason then introduced Peter Joseph, TZM Founder, who started with his concise presentation titled Train of Thought before delving into questions I took from the PJ booth and the audience. Just some of the topics discussed include adapting to natural laws, the victims of our structure particularly our social system, human nature, white imperial self indulgence, biodiversity, how every life support system is in decline, abundance producing mechanism, corporations, techno-capitalist apologists, structural violence, discussion about the Interreflections trailer, managing the Movement and its role in activism, philanthropy and consciousness.

Watch Peters Q & A in the video below.

After Peter, the audience once again enjoyed a delicious vegan lunch, before coming back for the final presentations, which were focused around the fight and the build towards the Zeitgeist Movements ultimate vision of a Resource-Based Economy (RBE). Richard Ostmason of the Money Free Party New Zealand, shared the work he has been doing within the political establishment to engage people into thinking about the potential of actually seeing an RBE in the short-term, particularly in New Zealand.

Richard Ostmason, Money Free Party NZ, presenting at Z-Day 2017

Next, Adelaide coordinator, Michael Kublers presented about the Price of Zero Transition, making a very important point that we cant wait for collapse and then expect to grow the world we want to see out of the ashes (coined the Phoenix Model). Rather, we need to start making systemic changes now in a variety of ways if we truly want to see an RBE.

Michael Kubler presenting at Z-Day 2017

This was followed by Ziggy Tolnay of the Sydney chapter, who shared a concept called the RBE10K project, about creating a physical community in which people could participate in as a transitionary method towards a global RBE.

Ziggy Tolnay presenting at Z-Day 2017

By this stage, the crowd was growing exceedingly weary after two full days of learning and sharing, but were very fortunate to be jolted back to the present with the very talented and insightful Eleanor Goldfield, with her emotionally evoking and painfully accurate spoken word performance about capitalism and activism. This was followed by her presentation, which rounded up the whole two days worth of events as she shared her very honest and authentic thoughts on the importance of the fight and the build that needs to happen as we work towards a post-capitalist society, making clear that capitalism will die, but whether we die with it is up to us.

Eleanor Goldfield performing and presenting at Z-Day 2017 Brisbane Australia

Eleanor Goldfield performing and presenting at Z-Day 2017 Brisbane Australia

Eleanor Goldfield performing and presenting at Z-Day 2017 Brisbane Australia

During the main stage presentations, a generous portion of the audience had made their way into the workshop space to engage with a very interesting and important presentation with one of the most experienced, thoughtful and knowledgeable ethics and systems designers, Richard Mochelle. Richard shared his thoughts on a tangible way to acquire land for a Resource-Based Economy, outside of the current methods of land acquirement, which requires submission to the current economic paradigm. Richard suggested that this land could be acquired through creating an RBE trust, in which baby boomers ultimately give their land to a cause in which promises are made to care for their land and not sell it back to the banks.

Richard Mochelle and Casey Davidson

The audience had another quick break before joining us again for the final panel with Day 2 presenters, including Peter Joseph. A range of topics were once again discussed including UBI, as well as other concerns and questions regarding transition.

Day 2 Panel Z-Day 2017

Id like to put out a big thanks to Vince and JV, who have attended every Z-Day Global since its incarnation, and have worked on the door every year, providing a significant help to coordinators, including myself.

JV and Vince Z-Day 2017 Brisbane Australia

A big thanks also to my wonderful local chapter team who managed the merchandise stand, who helped set up and pack up the venue, who managed the workshop space, and generally made everything run smoothly. Particularly to James Pauly, Karl Hansen and Lara Jordan. Thanks also to the New Globe Theatre for providing the wonderful space.

James Pauly

TZM Merchandise

Thanks also to the lovely vegan activists who spent two full-days at the event sharing their knowledge about the environmental and personal benefits of a direct active change Zeitgeist Movement advocates can make towards ethical consumer choices, including a vegan lifestyle.

Vegan Stall at Z-Day 2017

Thank you also to all of the other people behind the scene who found the power within yourself to volunteer your time and energy and provide assistance without any expectation of personal gain, but purely for the message of TZM. This includes those who lent and donated needed funding, anyone who bought a ticket, anyone who was offered a free ticket due to your circumstances, anyone who asked a question, participated in any way, who offered an idea, a question, who bought merchandise or a drink, who offered their assistance in any way shape or form, or even sat passively as an audience member. Bums on seats count, and matter particularly to organisers, presenters and performers. Thanks also to our global online audience who made a weekend of it by participating in the online streaming from afar.

Paul Doyle from Frequencies TV Life Streaming for ZDay Global Brisbane

Another big thanks to Jason Lord, Michael Kubler and Paul Doyle who made sure the video content including streaming and videos for later viewing would be available to our global audience who couldnt make the big trip to Brisbane. This is a significantly huge job and anyone with technical skills is always encouraged to help in this regard to make sure our content reaches a larger audience and forever into the future.

Jason making sure everything is running smoothly

Michael Kubler, usually behind the camera

Id also like to extend my gratitudeto all of the other people behind the scene who found the power within yourself to volunteer your time and energy and provide assistance without any expectation of personal gain, but purely for the message of TZM.

Z-Day 2017 Group Photo

Z-Day 2017 Setting up for Group Photo

A special mention to Zac Syme for your support as well as opening your home for the presenter social night and providing a home for so many people leading up to, and over the event. Thanks to others who opened their home to travelling guests, including Simon Cole, Caroline and Karl, Ricky, Grant, Anita and Tim, James, Lara and Jack.

Zac Syme, Queensland TZM Coordinator and Federico Pistono, Author, ex-Italian Coordinator Photos by Michael Kubler

Thanks again to Paul Doyle for offering your studio Frequencies TV where we recorded podcasts with coordinators and the Future Thinkers Podcast hosts Mike and Euvie, as well as for the public social night on Friday night before the event. More photos of the Pre-Z-Day Party here.

2017-03-24th Pre ZDay global public event at Frequencies TV, Brisbane Photos by Michael Kubler @kublermdk

Regardless of how far the Movement may or may not have come, we still have significant momentum, and your support however much or little you can give makes a differences to our ability to spread the message. Im eternally grateful for all of the support and truly believe with the mindset of the participants in this years Z-Day we can make the drastic change we need to see to truly create a unified, abundant world.

More photos by Michael Kubler and others here.

Peter Joseph (TZM Founder) and Casey Davidson (TZM Australia Coordinator)Article by Casey Davidson

See original here:

The Zeitgeist Movement Australian Chapter

The Zeitgeist Movement – Skeptic Project

Author: Edward L WinstonAdded: June 13, 2010Discuss: Discuss this article.

Over the last couple of months, mainly since Zeitgeist Movement (TZM) members began trekking to our forums, I've gotten a lot of emails from TZM members asking me various questions. This post is to outline the topics covered in my correspondence with said members.

I'll likely update this page as I get feedback from people.

Primarily the issues discussed are why I believe TZM will fail and why I think it's impossible to find common ground with TZM. I want to be clear that, given a different set of circumstances which I will discuss, maybe TZM could be successful and we could find common ground, but if things don't change, neither will my stance.

The leader of TZM, Peter Joseph, is far more damaging to his own movement than I imagine many of the hardcore members want to believe:

More could be said about Peter Joseph, and is said in later sections, but our forums are full of former TZM members who shed even more light on the emerging cult of personality around him.

The most important issue here is that Peter Joseph is the leader of TZM and his word is law, despite claiming that he doesn't consider himself the leader, he acts unilaterally to forbid members for talking to outsiders, for example banning members who post on our forums that aren't glorifying him.

Something that I never stop hearing is the phrase the movies aren't the movement. This referring to the fact that the movies promote conspiracy theories, but TZM is something else entirely, and exists separately from the movement. I would believe that if not for the following issues:

A lot of people don't like that I use foul language, but I needed to display the utter lack of compassion for other human beings TZM leadership seems to have, as well as some hardcore members. The situation in Haiti, again, is a great example of this -- reading many posts on the forums from members, it's quite clear that unless The Venus Project (TVP) is going to be the solution to the problems in Haiti, there's no use in helping them after the earthquake there.

I get asked "well, what are YOU doing to improve the world?" by TZM members a lot. I constantly bring up that I volunteer pretty much every weekend and I donate 10% of my income to charity, and a lot of time I will donate more than that. Most come back with the fact "charity doesn't fix the problem." While they're right that charity doesn't fix the problem permanently, sitting on a forum doesn't either -- though some members have the audacity to claim that TZM is a charity, despite never lifting a finger for anyone else.

The example I use when talking to TZM members about this is:

If you saw a starving/dying man in the street, would you do something to help him, or would you say "once our movement gets to 50 million members, I'll be able to help you, but until then, see you later!"?

That's essentially the logic behind the leadership of TZM and what many members parrot to me, just in a much nicer way. They love talking about how many children are starving to death today, but they refuse to help them today, and instead speak of some far off future that they can't figure out how to get to.

I know and understand that not all TZM members are like this. I've seen some wonderful generosity and so forth coming from members, but more often than not, these members also don't follow Peter Joseph blindly, because the ones that do refuse to help anyone else.

Here's a list of problems that I believe TZM has:

There could be more added here later.

I don't really see a future for TZM outside of degrading to hardcore members. Peter Joseph talks about a new movie coming out in October of 2010 that's going to get "millions" of new members, so essentially nearly 2 years of doing nothing but waiting for yet another film are what TZM has to show for.

I think it's all a shame, however, because getting all of those people together could have done something, could have lead to actual success in some way, but it's not even close to that. This hasn't stopped members from discussing the transition to the Resource Based Economy, despite the fact they're discussing step 10,000 when they haven't even reached step 1 and don't seem to want to.

At this point is essentially a way to stroke Peter Joseph's ego rather than accomplish any goals.

Sometimes I'm asked what I'd change about TZM, in order to make it more acceptable. Well, while I don't think most of these changes are possible due to the way TZM is run, I usually humor those who ask:

So, essentially my "5 point plan" is completely incompatible with a movement where Peter Joseph is the overlord.

Would you like to know more?

Original post:

The Zeitgeist Movement - Skeptic Project

Top Five Zeitgeist: The Movie Myths! – Peter Joseph

Top Five Zeitgeist The Movie Myths!

1) The Zeitgeist Movement is all about support of Zeitgeist: The Movie!

Actually, as per my experience over the past 6 years, most within The Zeitgeist Movement (TZM) do not subscribe or agree with this film in general, although mixed reactions are most common. Zeitgeist: The Movie was created years before TZM was formed. TZM was created originally to support Jacque Frescos Venus Project (TVP). After TVP and TZM split three years later, TZM became a self-propelling institution with its own body of work. The text The Zeitgeist Movement Defined is the core source of Movement interests and expresses what TZM is about clearly.

As of 2015, any ongoing association with TZM and Zeitgeist: The Movie is often perpetuated by those merely with malicious intent. As the rest of this list will express, Zeitgeist: The Movie has been a point of extreme attack and bigoted reactions since its inception. Having been seen by literally hundreds of millions of people, it is no surprise so many in vehement disagreement rise to the top. I wish I counted the number of death threats and the amount of cyber stalking I have personally endured. I have spent upwards of $20,000 in legal fees fighting constant defamation by those offended by that film.

As an aside, many have suggested that a simple name change (remove Zeitgeist) would have solved the problem. Yet, if a name change alone is that persuasive, isnt that actually indicative of a deep lack of critical thought? Where a mere superficial title changes peoples sense of association? I find this troubling if so. But regardless, the genie cannot go back in the bottle. Love it or hate it, Zeitgeist: The Movie isnt going anywhere and its content/implications 8 years later seem to only get stronger and more validated. According to my online distributor, it is one of the most popular docs on Netflix, now in many languages/regions there.

2) Its all been debunked!

The term debunked has become a mantra of sorts by the anti-ztm crowd. You also see this kind of overly zealous absolutism in other communities as well, such as the atheist community. As an atheist myself, I have learned that compassion is much more powerful than ridicule and if the goal of any communication is to change minds, taking a condescending and absolute approach does nothing but inflate the initiators ego not help educate others.

In that, many interpreted the first section of Zeitgeist: The Movie as an attack on religion. I would say it is providing a contrary view of its history and it does so in a non-derisive way. It is very academic in its presentation and to call it an attack is without merit.

That noted, Zeitgeist: The Movie was an art piece first and foremost and a great deal of liberty was taken in its expression. In the very first edition, I had a section with John F. Kennedy talking about the grand conspiracy of Communism and overlaid it onto his assassination footage. I knew what I was doing and did so because it was an amazing artistic effect. It wasnt until the film was grossly misinterpreted in its mixed genre style and artistic license that I later went back and made such editorial changes to conform it to a more documentary form.

I was sad to have to do this, in fact but It seems it was too advanced a piece for common culture and people were not ready to be critical of such liberties; understand the context. Zeitgeist: The Movie was the ultimate expression of demanding critical thought. It wasnt made to declare, it was made to challenge.Same goes for the long held up cry of manipulative filmmaking, such as when footage of the Madrid subway bombing was used to introduce a section on the 7/7 London Bombings. How dare I show a different explosion!

In 2010, I cleaned it up to conform to a more traditional documentary form and produced a free 220 booklet to support the literally 100s of claims made in the work. To date, no one has addressed this text. I would also add that while points made in the film from the origins of religion, to the events of Sept 11th, to the history of war for profit and social manipulation by financial interests are subject to interpretation and could perhaps be wrong, no single opposing claim or group of contradictions debunks the whole film. As the filmmaker, I will state that even I am not sure about some of the claims as far as what the absolute truth is. But again, that isnt the purpose of this work.

3) There are no sources!

I have seen this claim posted in reviews constantly. Zeitgeist: The Movie is likely the most sourced film in documentary history. I know of no other work that has painstakingly shown where the content came from. Again, one can argue about the truth of any given idea, but to say it is made up is beyond absurd.Companion Source Guide : http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/Zeitgeist,%20The%20Movie-%20Companion%20Guide%20PDF.pdf

4) Its anti-semitic!

This one really took me by surprise when I starting hear about it, especially since I end the film with one of the most heart warming/human unity quotes of all time by Carl Sagan. It appears to have started with a woman named Michelle Goldberg. She essentially stated that my use of a 1941 anti-war speech by Charles A. Lindbergh implied this, as Lindbergh was supposedly anti-semitic.

In the opening section of part 3 of the film, she claims Charles A. Lindbergh was talking about the jews when describing warring interests trying to bring American into WWII. This is just about as wrong and irresponsible as it comes. Sadly, this theme has carried forward through history as the echo of pro-war/pro establishment media propaganda redefines reality. Long story short, Charles A Lindbergh was a famous American aviator, author, inventor, explorer, and social activist. He was the son of Congressman Charles Lindbergh Sr. who was extremely outspoken against the banking system a generation prior, writing texts on the Money Trust, referring to the financial system and its power. (He too was often called anti-semitic with no validation as a means of personal attack.) Charles A. Lindbergh deeply opposed US involve in WWII. He was an isolationist. In this crusade, he was attacked as anti-semitic in order to pollute his message. (sound familiar?) Its that simple. To his discredit, his speaking skills were poor and he often spoke primitively about groups. He held some bad science views that were very common of the time and its easy to look back on such un-informed issues and find false relationships. Yet, his non-racist stance is very clear to those paying attention.

For example, he once stated: I am not attacking either the Jewish or the British people. Both races, I admire. But I am saying that the leaders of both the British and the Jewish races, for reasons which are as understandable from their viewpoint as they are inadvisable from ours, for reasons which are not American, wish to involve us in the war. We cannot blame them for looking out for what they believe to be their own interests, but we also must look out for ours. We cannot allow the natural passions and prejudices of other peoples to lead our country to destructionThis was a political statement, not a racist one but the press at the time ran that it was anti-semitic, which, again, is a good ploy if you want people to distrust someone. We see this technique being used today, constantly. Here are the last lines of the speech used in Zeitgeist: The Movie (that was called anti-semitic), along with the next sentence, not included in the film (in bold):

Our theaters soon became filled with plays portraying the glory of war. Newsreels lost all semblance of objectivity. Newspapers and magazines began to lose advertising if they carried anti-war articles. A smear campaign was instituted against individuals who opposed intervention. The terms fifth columnist, traitor, Nazi, anti-Semitic were thrown ceaselessly at any one who dared to suggest that it was not to the best interests of the United States to enter the war. Men lost their jobs if they were frankly anti-war. Many others dared no longer speak.

Later in the speech he then states: No person with a sense of the dignity of mankind can condone the persecution of the Jewish race in Germany.

Does this sound like a racist to you? In a book written by his wife, she states: His prewar isolationist speeches were given in all sincerity for what he thought was the good of the country and the worldHe was accused of being anti-semetic, but in the 45 years I lived with him I never heard him make a remark against the jews, not a crack or joke, and neither did any of our children.So what we have is a victim of the media culture, glamorized through history with the vile horror of hindsight given the horrors/persecutions around WWII. Lindbergh might not have been the smartest and most strategic in his manner of activism and communication but there is no evidence he was a racist.

5) Its an anti-New World Order Conspiracy Film!

Proponents who talk about the New World Order, (long before Zeitgeist The Movie) have always agitated me. I have never supported this bizarre and esoteric body of assumptions and, to this day, can honestly say I have no idea how the current ideas even came about given the origin of the original term. New World Order is a term put forward by H. G. Wells in his book of the same title. In this, he speaks about the world unifying as one for the better. Since that time, however, the term has been skyrocketed into bizarro land.The only times I have ever sympathized with anyone who does have this pop culture belief was when I tried and get behind it and talk about root causes of human behavior and power abuse. And yet, even the current Wikipedia entry on Zeitgeist: The Movie says it is about New World Order forces But then again its Wikipedia the encyclopedia that lets random opinion and select news sources serve as historical fact.

Anyway, while the very original version of the film did talk about global government run by corporate power as an Orwellian 1984 type assumption for the future, this was artistically presented and deduced as a result of global financial power and the tendency to constantly concentrate this power. I later removed this section entirely (in 2010) as I was disgusted by the constant misinterpretations.

Likewise, the notion of a Conspiracy film is equally as misguided. This is simply derision by categorical association. No different than how the term communist was used to force people to shy away from any information or ideas that were against the status quo during the Mcarthy Era in the 1950s.

Zeitgeist: The Movie takes three subjects and bridges them within the context of social myth. This context is then evidenced to show how people become biased and can be manipulated based upon those dominant shared (bogus) beliefs (hence the term zeitgeist itself).

In the context of the real world, power abuse is obvious since the nature of our economy supports massive class division and the movement of power and money to a small group. This isnt conspiracy it is a system reality. We live in a war system and massive gaming for personal/group self-interest is happening at every moment.

Thats enough for now.

~Peter Joseph, Feb 22nd 2015

More here:

Top Five Zeitgeist: The Movie Myths! - Peter Joseph

The Zeitgeist Movement UK

Reserve your free ticket here: https://zdaylondon2019.eventbrite.co.uk The Zeitgeist Movement is a global sustainability advocacy group working through education & explicitly non-violent means to bring the world together for the common goal of human and environmental sustainability. Please join us in London to hear us & as always Z-Day gives members the opportunity to socialise, make []

Read More

The Zeitgeist Movement is a global sustainability advocacy group working through education & explicitly non-violent means to bring the world together for the common goal of human and environmental sustainability. Please join us in London to hear us & as always Z-Day gives members the opportunity to socialise, make new friends, discuss & hopefully put []

Read More

Zeitgeist Day, or Zday for short is an annual global educational symposium that works to amplify a context upon which existing/emerging scientific findings may find a concerted social imperative aiming to create a more truly responsible, sustainable, peaceful, global society. This years theme in London is based heavily on activism, what a person can set []

Read More

Hi everybody! Count down to ZDAY London 2016. Have a look at the program for the day. Theres still tickets available, so make sure you have got them as soon as possible, if youd like to guarantee your seat. Click on program image to zoom in, please. TICKETS here:https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/z-day-london-2016-tickets-21680330452 Thank you! And see you on []

Read More

Were glad to announce that Barb Jacobson from Basic Income UK will be speaking! She has been active in community organising since 1982, a co-ordinator of Basic Income UK and on the board of Unconditional Basic Income Europe, a network of organisations and activists in 25 countries. Basic Income UK is a collective promoting unconditional []

Read More

See the original post here:

The Zeitgeist Movement UK

The Zeitgeist Movement Defined: Realizing a New Train of …

The Zeitgeist Movement Defined is the official representative text of the global, non-profit sustainability advocacy organization known as The Zeitgeist Movement (TZM).

This tediously sourced and highly detailed work argues for a large-scale change in human culture, specifically in the context of economic practice. The dominant theme is that the current socioeconomic system governing the world at this time has severe structural flaws, born out of primitive economic and sociological assumptions originating in our early history, where the inherent severity of these flaws went largely unnoticed.

However, in the early 21st century, these problems have risen prominently, taking the consequential form of increasing social destabilization and ongoing environmental collapse. Yet, this text is not simply about explaining such problems and their root causality - It is also about posing concrete solutions, coupled with a new perspective on social/environmental sustainability and efficiency which, in concert with the tremendous possibility of modern technology and a phenomenon known as ephemeralization, reveals humanity's current capacity to create an abundant, post-scarcity reality.

While largely misunderstood as being "utopian" or fantasy, this text walks through, step by step, the train of thought and technical industrial reordering needed to update our global society (and its values) to enable these profound new possibilities. While this text can be read strictly from a passive perspective, it was created also to be used as an awareness or activist tool. The Zeitgeist Movement, which has hundreds of chapters across dozens of countries and is perhaps the largest activist organization of its kind, hopes those interested in this direction will join the movement in global solidarity and assist in the culmination of this new social model, for the benefit of the whole of humanity.

Note: This text is produced for sale in paperback and proprietary ebook form only at the exact cost of publishing and nothing more. It is a non-profit text which is also available for open, non-commercial distribution in whatever form, as protected by its associated Creative Commons License (Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International). One may view this text online for free as well at TZM's global website.

-- Contents --

Preface

Part I: Introduction

1: Overview

2: The Scientific Worldview

3: Sourcing Solutions

4: Logic vs Psychology

5: The Case for Human Unity

6: The Final Argument Human Nature

Part II: Social Pathology

7: Defining Public Health

8: History of Economy

9: Market Efficiency vs Technical Efficiency

10: Value System Disorder

11: Structural Classism, The State and War

Part III: A New Train of Thought

12: Introduction to Sustainable Thought

13: Post-Scarcity Trends, Capacity and Efficiency

14: True Economic Factors

15: The Industrial Government

16: Lifestyle, Freedom and the Humanity Factor

Part IV: The Zeitgeist Movement

17: Social Destabilization and Transition

18: Becoming The Zeitgeist Movement

Read this article:

The Zeitgeist Movement Defined: Realizing a New Train of ...

Zeitgeist – International – SPIEGEL ONLINE

Zeitgeist - International - SPIEGEL ONLINE

Christine Simon-Noll is active helping refugees in Hamburg's HafenCity neighborhood. She says it is getting much tougher to find volunteers. In an interview, she outlines what needs to happen in order to ensure successful integration. Interview Conducted by Marianne Wellershoff more... [Comment]

Canadian accident investigator Larry Vance claims to have solved the mystery of the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370. In an interview, he explains why he believes the plane's captain deliberately ditched the aircraft. Interview Conducted By Marco Evers more... [Comment]

Arthur Edwards has spent over 40 years photographing the royal family for Britain's Sun newspaper. In an interview, he talks about his experiences and Prince Harry's wedding this weekend. Interview Conducted by Hauke Goos and Jrg Schindler more... [Comment]

The Swedish Academy will not be awarding a Nobel prizein literature this year. And a closer look at the swamp of scandal in Stockholm raises doubts as to whetherit can ever be rehabilitated. By Georg Diez more... [Comment]

The attack on former spy Sergei Skripal thrust the nerve agent Novichok into the spotlight. For many, it was the first time they had heard of the poison, but it has long been a bone of contention between Moscow and the West. By Klaus Wiegrefe more... [Comment]

Each year in Germany, 800 people throw themselves in front of speeding trains, transforming the drivers into involuntary killers. Stephan Kniest has run over four people so far in his career - and fears that a fifth could do him in. By Hauke Goos more... [Comment]

British pop singer Morrissey has accused DER SPIEGEL of falsely quoting him in a recently published interview. The magazine stands behind its reporting and has made the decision to post the audio online in response. more...

An animated reality check of the man who claims to be the greatest U.S. president ever. more... [Video]

How do we want to live in the future? The Social Design Award has selected a shortlist of urban development projects focusing on plants in the city. Now it's your turn to decide which finalist will receive the 2,500-euro audience award. By Marianne Wellershoff more...

Community gardeners and other activists in Berlin are helping the Transition movement to take root in the German capital as part of its worldwide campaign for a sustainable society. By Michael Sontheimer more... [Comment]

Bitte deaktivieren Sie Ihren Adblocker!

So schalten Sie Ihren Adblocker auf SPIEGEL ONLINE aus!!!:

Sie haben gar keinen Adblocker oder bereits eine Ausnahme hinzugefgt?

Bitte prfen Sie, ob Sie hnliche Erweiterungen, Do-not-Track-Funktionen oder den Inkognito-Modus aktiviert haben, die ebenfalls Werbung unterdrcken. Oder haben Sie einen anderen Browser? Hier finden Sie mehr Informationen.

Welche Bedeutung Werbung fr SPIEGEL ONLINE hat, was wir fr Ihre Sicherheit im Netz tun, wie unsere Redaktion arbeitet Fragen und Antworten finden Sie hier.

Read the rest here:

Zeitgeist - International - SPIEGEL ONLINE

About Us | The Zeitgeist Movement – Australia

The Zeitgeist Movement is a sustainability advocacy organization, which conducts community based activism and awareness actions through a network of global/regional chapters, project teams, annual events, media and charity work.

The movements principle focus includes the recognition that the majority of the social problems that plague the human species at this time are not the sole result of some institutional corruption, absolute scarcity, a political policy, a flaw of human nature or other commonly held assumptions of causality. Rather, the movement recognizes that issues such as poverty, corruption, pollution, homelessness, war, starvation and the like appear to be symptoms born out of an outdated social structure.

The Natural Law/Resource-Based Economy (NLRBE) is about taking a direct technical approach to social management as opposed to a monetary or even political one. It is about updating the workings of society to the most advanced and proven methods known, leaving behind the damaging consequences and limiting inhibitions. which are generated by our current system of monetary exchange, profit, business and other structural and motivational issues.

There is little reason to assume war, poverty, most crime and many other monetarily-based scarcity effects common in our current model cannot be resolved over time. The range of the movements activism and awareness campaigns extend from short to long term, with methods based explicitly on non-violent methods of communication.

The Zeitgeist Movement has no allegiance to country or traditional political platforms. It views the world as a single system and the human species as a single family and recognizes that all countries must disarm and learn to share resources and ideas if we expect to survive in the long run. Hence, the solutions arrived at and promoted are in the interest to help everyone on Earth, not a select group.

See the article here:

About Us | The Zeitgeist Movement - Australia

The Venus Project and The Zeitgeist Movement splitting up …

The Venus Project and The Zeitgeist Movement is splitting up.

Personally, I think this is a good thing. Ever since I heard about The Venus Project (TVP), The Zeitgeist Movement (TZM) and a Resource Based Economy (RBE), I thought that TZM should not be the activist arm of TVP. Rather,TZM should be the activist arm of a Resource Based Economy.

A resource based economy can be many things, and The Venus Project holds but one of these solutions.The notion of RBE can not be defined by a single organization alone, like TVP or TZM. RBE has to be an open system, where all the people of this planet has to contribute. And as far as I am concerned, RBE is still a concept that has to be developed and take root deep in the mind of Humanity. Just like the notion of money and ownership is rooted in the mind of humanity now, the notion of a money- and propertyless society has to replace the old notion and become even deeper rooted. And this has to happen through the spreading of information through all possible channels.

TVP has a lot of good drawings and suggestions for new design and technology, but I feel they are lacking somewhat in understanding humans. I agree with many things that Mr. Jacque Fresco says, but I also disagree with a few.

RBE is a concept that has to take root in the mind of humanity, and the main aspect of it is not TVP and its drawings, it is the notion of a money- and propertyless societywhere we share and give instead of trade, buyand sell. This is the core of RBE. Sharing and giving. No matter how much we automate things or how many machines we have, this has to be and is the core of a resource based economy. Actually, it hasnothingto do with technology, but everything to do with our mindset and values, and how we see the world. Any technological development and how we use technology will come as a result of this mindset.Actually, I do think that TVP have the same view. It is only that it tends to get a focus on machines and technology instead of humans and values.

The Venus Project has undoubtedly added valuable designs and thoughts to the pool of the knowledge of Mankind. Knowledge that shall and will be utilized in all ways possible. There is no doubt about that. But Jacque Frescosays outright that we cant create this new world without TVP, which is a huge mistake. To rely on one persons thoughts and designs for the whole planet is not only foolish, but impossible. There are too many creative and intelligent beings on this planet for this to happen. Not to speak of too many different preferences and cultures.

I think it is good that The Zeitgeist Movement is now on its own, and realizes that it is a resource based economythat is the umbrella term, not The Venus Project. RBE can come in many different shapes and forms, not only TVPs form. We can even have RBE without any new technology, with old wooden houses and horses and carts, which is what we actually had. In old times, there were many societies based on sharing and giving in stead of trading with each other. And the land was not owned by anyone. As said, RBE is not really about technology, but our mindset. Yes, technology willevolve, and wewill use it, but technology is not the main point. Sharing, giving and collaborating freely is the point. A money- and propertyless economy is the point. A caring and compassionate society is the point.

TVP think that everything has a technical solution, and many things do, but then they tend to forget that Humans are not technical solutions. Well, our bodies are somewhat technical, but Humans also have feelings, thoughts and aspirations of their own. Humans has to realize for themselves this new world. Humans can not be told this is the way things are, no go and do it!. No, humans has to get their own experiences, and the mindset they are in has to change gradually. Unless the total mindset of Humanity changes away from trading, ownership and individual power towards sharing, collaboration and common strength, we will not get a resource based economy or anything like it on this planet. No matter how technologically developed we are.

One thing that seem totally absent in TVP is the understanding of consciousness. How everything is connected, where the Life Force comes from, what thoughts really are, what mindis, what the soul is, why we are here and what our purpose really is. They seem to believe that absolutely everything we do is based on conditioning by society. Of course we get conditioned by society, but that doesnt explain everything. One can ask what conditions society? Where does it all start?

Why does Mr. Fresco do what he does? Is it only conditioning? Then why didnt his brother, or someone with similar conditioning do what Fresco does? He clearly tells us that he went against thecurrent in his young days. He didnt want to stand up and sing the american national anthem because he believed in the whole worldas our common land, not only USA. Now, if everyone around him was conditioned to one thing, why did he go the other way?

So, where did it come from, if not his conditioning? His DNA? It is now shown that also the DNA is not constant, but does change in regards to, yes, conditioning. But still, conditioning doesnt explain all behavior. Personally, I believe that this third element, the element that is is not heritage (DNA), and not conditioning, is the element that comes with us when we are born. It is a personality and aspirations we bring with our consciousness from life to life.

Personally, I believe that we are consciousness, that everythingis consciousness, thatthis world is created out of our thoughts, that the fear and the EGO is the basic things that are stopping us from reaching our goals, and that Love, Joy, Bliss and positive feelings will create positive results in this world.And that the search for Fulfillment is what is driving us to do the things we do. And this fulfillment is based on something invisible. Something that is inherent in us when we are born.

To me these questions are CRUCIAL to a Resource Based Economy. Because if we dont have money or trade or barter, we would have to think totally different in terms of motivation. TVPs motivation seems to be to eradicate war, pollution, natural disasters, etc. etc., which is all good, of course. But then what? What would be the meaning of life when we have eradicated all of that? TVP doesnt seem to have an answer for this other than that there will always be new problems to solve. This might be well and good for TVP, but not all the worlds people, and certainly not me. I need deeper answers and reasons to live.

The struggle we have on this planet today, is not technological or scientific, it is a struggle of the EGO. We have to leave our egos behind to get this new world, RBE or whatever you want to call the system. In any case, a new system alone can not save us, we have to bring with us the realization that we are all one.I am not saying that we can get rid of our egos completely. No, we only have to be aware of them, understand them and not let our words and actions be guided by them. Being guided by the ego is being guided by fear. Instead we have to look to Love and Peace in our guidance. Sounds like cliches, and they are. But theres a reason why things become cliches, and thats because cliches tend to be true.

Ive criticized TVP more than TZM here for a reason. TZM was rightly enough initiated by Peter Joseph, but now TZM consists of a conglomerate of chapters and groups all over the planet, with many working diligently to spread awareness about RBE. This is not only the way it should be, but the only way it canbe if this information is to reach any significant proportion of the population of this globe. Remember that not many people had heard about TVP before PJ made his films and TZM was started.

TVP, it seems to me, still consists basically of two persons holding the reins tight, not to let anyone interpret any of their information in their own way. They obviously also want the information to be spread across the globe, but seem to be so protective about their work that they wont let anyone one else touch it without their approval. I understand that when someone has spent their life on designing so much houses, buildings, transportation, cities and more, credit is wanted, and a say in the building as well.But they need to let go of some control if they want their creations to see the light of day. The blueprints can be licensed out to contractors and countries around the world right now, and I am sure many would be interested in TVPs designs if they only let them out. There are many ways to do things, not only one.

I believe that the people of TVP are most sympathetic, intelligent and creative people, and that what they have done is nothing but incredible. And I believe they mean only well. I owe TVP all credit for putting me on the track of a resource based economy. I would like nothing better than to see this world become reality, but I hope and believe that all of us will create it together. That there will be room for many peoples designs and plans, and that we can and will have an open and fruitful communication and collaboration in creating this new society, where The Zeitgeist Movement still works to raise awareness about RBE, get people to think, inform and educate, while The Venus Project does the same, each in their own way, but towards our common goal.

Here are some links about what I think TVP is lacking in their thoughts about this new world:

The Moneyless Manifesto

Peerconomy

The Wealth of Networks

The Commoner

Related

Original post:

The Venus Project and The Zeitgeist Movement splitting up ...

The Zeitgeist Movement Global – Home | Facebook

The 2018 main event will be held in Frankfurt, Germany at the "Kunstverein Familie Montez" on April 7th, 2018, 15:00 - 20:00 CET.

The 2018 symposium will address the growing severity of emerging social destabilization, war, income inequality, slavery, dramatic environmental failures and, in short, overall public health and societal crises playing out on the Earth's stage today.

This five-hour event will feature speakers such as Peter Joseph, Colin Turner (The Free World Cha...rta), Anna Brodskaya, Michael Kubler, Bert Zimpel, Serf Doesborgh and many more who will be covering a range of topics, from The Zeitgeist Movement's train of thought, observations and proposals; to effective activism, transitional possibilities, technological developments, the importance of independent journalism, non-violent communication, the role of humor in activism, dealing with opposition and much more.

Speakers List:

Peter Joseph (TZM US)Anna Brodskaya (TZM Ireland)Michael Kubler (TZM Australia)Serf Doesborgh (TZM Netherland)Bert Zimpel (TZM Germany)Arjang Jameh (TZM US)Abby Martin (Journalist/Artist)Lee Camp (Comedian)Colin Turner (The Free World Charta)Rowena Bernardo (Blogger/Innovation Engineer)Timm Wille (Open Source Ecology Germany)Markus Kollotzek (GreenNet-Project)

Hosted by: Franky Mller (TZM Germany)

Tickets: buytickets.at/zdayglobal

ABOUT Zeitgeist Day:

Zeitgeist Day, or Z-Day for short, is a global annual event day which occurs in the middle of March each year. The goal is to increase public awareness of The Zeitgeist Movement. The first official Z-Day took place in 2009. These events were well-documented by news agencies across the world, including the New York Times in America. An archive list of those events can be found on the zdayglobal.org site. The 2010 Z-Day had 330 sympathetic events occur in over 70 countries worldwide. These events were also well-documented by news agencies across the world, including the Huffington Post in America.

ABOUT The Zeitgeist Movement:

The Zeitgeist Movement is a global sustainability activist movement presenting the case for the needed transition out of our current unsustainable economic model and into a new sustainable socio-economic paradigm based on using the best that science and technology have to offer to maximize human, animal and environmental well being in accordance with the natural world.

https://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/

Follow this link:

The Zeitgeist Movement Global - Home | Facebook

ZEITGEIST HOME – Zeitgeist

KARIN KRAEMER &PAT JOYELLE

I grew up in Minneapolis and received my BFA in glass working from St. Cloud State University in 1986. After blowing glass in Colorado, MinnesotaandWisconsin, I moved to West Virginia, where I began to make clay work and pit firing it in myyard,and was hooked. I moved to Carbondale, Illinois and did graduate work in Ceramics, there. I received my MFA in 1996, moved to Victoria, British Columbia and spent two years making pots, gardening and traveling. Duluth became my new home in 1998.

My studio, the Duluth Pottery has moved to1924 W. Superior Streetin Duluth, smack in the middle of the new Lincoln Park Crafts District on the same block as Frost River, Bent Paddle Brewery, and the new OMC Smokehouse! We have a beautiful fine clay gallery and have more room for making pots and events of all sorts.I enjoy working in pottery andtile,because they bring art to the table andevery dayuse. Clay is a great medium for expression. I love that I exist in a long line of potters through history and a reflection of our culture.My work is Maiolica, an in-glaze hand painted tin glaze technique. I make functional pots and tiles that are meant to celebrate the day. My individual wall pieces and compositions of tiles are hand built and decorated with colorful, loose brushwork.I draw fromevery dayscenes and objects for my imagery. Capturing the color and movement of the moment is my aimthe flowers in my garden trembling in a slight breeze and the sun glowing through them, or the light coming in the window and lighting the room.

For years, Pat Joyelle has been working in my studio, painting Duluth grill cups with me, as well as making her own beautiful tiles. She is a fabric designer, fine clothes maker, jeweler and much more. I am so happy to be able to show our work together here.

PAT JOYELLEMy tiles are a celebration of color in flowers, leaves, branchesandtwigs. Majolica is the perfect vehicle for this celebration. The intensity, varietyandflatness of the glazeinspiresmy paintings and encourages me to explore a variety of subjects in the natural world. It is a

Go here to see the original:

ZEITGEIST HOME - Zeitgeist

ZDay Global – ZDay 2017

The Zeitgeist Movement

Presents the

The 9th Annual ZDay

The 2017 Main Event will take place:

at the New Globe Theatre inBrisbane, Australia

on March 25-26th, 2017

Click Here For Tickets

Join international activists and presenters as we discuss how science and technology are leading the way towards a more sustainable and equitable future.

Discuss how the current money-market system we live in is responsible for issues such as poverty, corruption, pollution, homelessness, war and starvation and how our understanding of the system can help us become the change we want to see in the world.

Casey Davidson, The Zeitgeist Movement Australia National Coordinator will be hosting the event, joined by change-makers from all over the world.

You will also have the opportunity to join in

We look forward to meeting you on our journey towards global unity and abundance.

IMPORTANT INFORMATION REGARDING TICKETS:

As Australia is a long way for many of our regular main event presenters, as well as some other well-regarded changemakers who support TZM, we're reaching out to the wider Zeitgeist community to make contributions through ticket sales and phantom tickets (that's for people who can't actually get here but would like to contribute). If you would like to provide a more significant contribution, please email This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it (to avoid eventbrite fees).

The Australian chapter of the Zeitgeist Movement are just people - we all work just like everyone else to make ends meet, but put our hard earned dollars into making this event a reality. We have managed to cut costs where possible - thanks to Paul from the New Globe Theatre for providing a free amazing venue and others who are volunteering their skills and knowledge. We also provide free food and exchange services wherever we can, to promote the values we stand for. However, some costs, such as flights for international guests are unavoidable. We need to raise about $25,000. Please think about this when considering your ticket choice. We are also providing some free tickets for people who are avid supporters of the Movement but are in a difficult financial situation. If you'd like to appy for a free ticket, please completethis funny quiz and we will email you with your results and possibly your ticket.

Follow this link:

ZDay Global - ZDay 2017

How Progressive Activists Are Leading the Trump Resistance … – RollingStone.com

During the Fourth of July congressional recess, grassroots activists in Wauwatosa, Wisconsin, flooded a town-hall meeting hosted by Republican Rep. James Sensenbrenner. The crowd had come to hold their barrel-bellied congressman accountable for his vote in favor of the House Trumpcare bill, legislation that would have led to 23 million Americans losing their health insurance.

Trump's victory exposed the party establishment as utterly broken now Dems hope to rebuild in time for a 2018 comeback

Ninety minutes later, as Sensenbrenner fled the public library parking lot in a black sedan under police escort, sirens bleating through chants of "Shame! Shame! Shame!" these protesters had demonstrated the power of a new wave of local activism in the age of Trump.

Nationwide, this tide of progressive resistance has sent GOP members of Congress into hiding from their own constituents, and steeled Senate Democrats into a unified opposition. "When you see Charles Schumer out there calling for 'resistance,' you realize something's happening," says Theda Skocpol, the famed Harvard political scientist who studies American civic engagement. "That's not his natural state."

This explosion of political action has the Democratic Party's new leadership wagering that success in 2018 will hinge on its ability "to channel people's energies not only into town-hall meetings," says Democratic National Committee Chair Tom Perez, "but also into the ballot box." But this mission-critical job stands as an uneasy work in progress. Despite calls from national leaders to make common cause with resistance activists, state and local Democrats are often missing in action. Perhaps more troubling: The unifying purpose of opposing Trump has not papered over the party's rawest policy divides.

Wauwatosa "Tosa" for short is a mixed bag, politically. The leafy Milwaukee suburb was the home of Scott Walker, and voters here backed the Republican governor in three elections. Yet Tosa gave Donald Trump just 35 percent support in 2016. And there's the rub: Sensenbrenner touts a maverick streak, but he has voted with Trump 93 percent of the time.

The congressman gets credit for showing up. Nearly 150 Republican members of Congress have yet to hold a single town-hall meeting, but this is Sensenbrenner's 83rd during the current congressional session. "You probably know some of these meetings have become very contentious," he tells the standing-room-only crowd. His crotchety, Midwest-inflected voice is a dead ringer for the late 60 Minutes complainer Andy Rooney's. "If, at any time, participants become rude or disruptive," he says, brandishing a wooden gavel, "I will immediately adjourn the meeting!"

The exchange that follows is heated but civil. Sensenbrenner responds to a no-holds-barred question about his Trumpcare vote with a disgusted bark: "No, I do not have 'blood on my hands!'" Resistance activists have distributed red disagree signs, and constituents flourish them with gusto. Outside the library's wide glass windows, a spillover crowd of more than 100 is marching. Three "handmaids" dressed in white bonnets and crimson robes a visual nod to Margaret Atwood's dystopian novel about the collapse of democracy walk in eerie silence. Other protesters hold aloft paper tombstones with inscriptions like DEATH BY TAX BREAK SAD! and chant, "Sensenbrenner, Sensenbrenner, where's your soul?!"

The Wauwatosa uprising wasn't ginned up by the Democratic Party, which had zero presence at the rally. It was organized by friends and neighbors in a node of the Indivisible movement, calling itself Indivisible Tosa, which structures its activism according to the viral how-to civics manual "Indivisible: A Practical Guide for Resisting the Trump Agenda."

The Indivisible movement which now counts more than 6,000 chapters nationwide is the centerpiece of a robust new grassroots machinery that has arisen to confront the crisis of the Trump presidency. Rivaling anything accomplished by the Tea Party, the passionate activism of hundreds of thousands of progressives has already achieved the impossible in Washington, D.C. overwhelming Republican control of Congress and the presidency to stymie the repeal of Obamacare.

Looking ahead, Democratic Party leaders are determined to ride this political uprising to victory in the House in 2018. But neither the DNC nor the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee have shown the technological savvy or comfort with grassroots engagement to create a platform for this activism within the party itself. Indeed, for many of the activists on the ground, the current Democratic Party appears less a vehicle for change than an obstacle to it. "The party is utterly irrelevant," says Markos Moulitsas, the 45-year-old founder of Daily Kos, a pioneer of the "netroots" that has become a hub for digital resistance in the Trump age. Noting that there are thousands of registered Democrats in every congressional district, even the reddest ones, Moulitsas adds, "If we get 10,000 people volunteering and create a culture where being a liberal citizen in America is normal you will volunteer, you will be a part of that army every year that changes the equation and empowers the dominant liberal majority that actually exists in this country. But the party has nothing to do with it."

What's indisputable is that the election of Donald Trump awoke a sleeping giant of progressive activism. "We're at a very rare political moment where there's an abundance of volunteer time and energy, rather than a scarcity," says Micah Sifry, executive director of Civic Hall, which fosters tech innovation in politics. And these new activist groups "make big asks of people's time and of their idealism."

The innovation and moxie of the new organizations have made an impression. "The energy is palpable," says DNC Chair Perez. "They push us as they should!" he says, adding, with perhaps more hope than conviction, "They all want the Democratic Party to succeed."

For some groups, like Swing Left, Perez's assessment holds true. Dedicated to helping progressives flip their nearest contested House seat in 2018, Swing Left is in easy alliance: "We're here to support the Democratic Party and be a new take on things," says co-founder Ethan Todras-Whitehill. "We have the same goal of getting Democrats back into power."

But for other groups, the fact that the new machinery is rising outside the party is a feature not a bug. "We don't view ourselves as an arm of the Democratic Party," says Ezra Levin, a founder of the Indivisible movement. "If we were, it would be difficult to apply pressure to make Democrats stand up for progressive values," he says. "This is not a switch that gets flipped," he insists. "This is pressure that ought to be applied regularly."

Marshall Ganz is a storied organizer who was active in the civil-rights and farmworker-union movements of the Sixties and Seventies and more recently helped structure the 2008 movement that elected Barack Obama. "The fact that Indivisible is rooted outside of the Democratic Party is an enormous strength," he says. "They can develop their own agenda. They can be the ones exercising influence over Congress, the Senate or the presidency which is something the Obama organization could not do because it was owned by Obama." Once inside the White House, Obama muzzled his activists in favor of an establishment brand of governing. "The approach he took," Ganz says, "there was no real role for people."

Moulitsas points to lessons of the Obama presidency to argue that movement politics can't thrive inside the Democratic Party. "What happened when Obama won? We all went home." But he is confident that progressives will reform the party most quickly by breaking ahead and letting officials play catch up. "That's actually ideal: Let the party piggyback off that popular wave rather than the other way around."

With resistance groups taking ownership of high-tech organizing, data and fundraising tools that previously lived inside parties or campaigns, the power has shifted, Moulitsas says. "We finally have the opportunity to build the infrastructure that we should have built a long time ago.

The Indivisible movement has emerged as the liberal answer to the Tea Party. But its creation was a viral accident. In the aftermath of Trump's election, husband and wife Ezra Levin and Leah Greenberg earnest thirtysomethings with experience on Capitol Hill saw friends and family eager to resist the new administration but misfiring in their efforts to apply political pressure. They put too much faith in online petitions or one-off phone calls to House Speaker Paul Ryan's national office. "They didn't fully understand how Congress works or how you could have real impact," Levin tells Rolling Stone.

Levin is a former staffer to Rep. Lloyd Doggett, an Austin Democrat who was one of the first members of Congress to feel the Tea Party's bite. Levin recalls watching how a "relatively small set of individuals spread throughout the country was able to stall and in some cases defeat a historically popular president's agenda." Tea Party tactics weren't revolutionary; they were Civics 101. Energized constituents tirelessly bird-dogged their own members of Congress. "Separate out the Tea Party's racism," Levin says, "and they were smart on strategy and tactics."

The couple began distilling do's and don'ts of congressional activism into a manual for citizens seeking to resist Republican rule in Washington. Levin a freckled 32-year-old with close-cropped brown hair wanted to "demystify the political and the policy process" and answer "nuts-and-bolts organizing questions like: How do you run a meeting? How do you create leadership? How do you structure action?" The Indivisible guide's ultimate purpose is to help constituents get inside the heads of their members of Congress, making them sweat at every vote: "How am I going to explain this to the angry constituents who keep showing up at my events and demanding answers?"

The Indivisible guide began, humbly, as a Google Doc, shared in mid-December via a tweetstorm from the couple's row house in Washington, D.C. With just a few hundred Twitter followers, Levin had little expectation the guide would go viral. But then the Google Doc crashed. And groups across the country began announcing themselves. "People started telling us, 'We got 20 people together, and we're Indivisible Roanoke' or 'We're Indivisible Auburn, Alabama,'" says Levin. Chapters proliferated in particular after the inauguration-weekend Women's March. Levin recalls that he and Greenberg faced an "unexpected choice" at the end of January. "We could say, 'Hey, we just put out a Google Doc good luck to ya.' Or we could try to set up some kind of structure that supports that local leadership."

They launched a national Indivisible organization, offering guidance without micro-management. "These groups are fundamentally self-led," Levin insists. "We're not franchising out Indivisibles. You don't have to call yourself Subway and sell $5 foot-longs to be an Indivisible chain." Ganz sees the national Indivisible group providing crucial direction for its far-flung chapters. "Leadership is different than control," he says, adding that Indivisible is "equipping people with skills, and framing strategy at the local level, the state level and the national level."

As a movement, Indivisible is every bit the Tea Party's equal, says Skocpol, author of The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism. Skocpol is now researching Indivisible groups as part of a study on eight counties won by Trump across swing states from North Carolina to Wisconsin. "The scale of the activity, the energy behind it is comparable to if not more than what was going on with the Tea Party back in 2009," she says.

Yet Indivisible is not a mirror image of the right-wing uprising of the Obama age. "Unlike the Tea Party, Indivisible has figured out how to be independent of the Democratic Party without being the crazy wing of the Democratic Party," says Sifry. Where the Tea Party represented a "resurgence of a white, nativist, rural wing of the Republican right," he says, "Indivisible doesn't map the same way. You can't say this is just the hippies and those old New Lefties. The only thing that's analogous is the strategy: You have elected representatives who are supposed to listen to you, so go make their life a living hell."

Indivisible Tosa the group that turned up the heat on Sensenbrenner in July is a typical Indivisible success story. The group was launched over beers in the living room of Joseph Kraynick's modest Wauwatosa bungalow. Kraynick is a 46-year-old special-education paraprofessional; he's got a shaved head and a goofy, infectious smile. After Trump's election, he says, he found himself despairing: "What the hell am I going to do? I don't have any money. I don't know anyone who has any access or contacts to a politician. How can I get them to pay attention to me?"

Then his wife returned from the Women's March in D.C. on a bus full of activists buzzing about the Indivisible guide. "I read this thing, and a whole world of ideas opened up to me: 'Oh, OK, I can do this!'" he says. "I can bring 20 people with me, and we can go to a local office and talk to the congressional staff. I can get 50 or 100 people to make phone calls and push for the same thing and they're actually going to have to listen to that.

"I never considered myself an activist," Kraynick says. "And no way in hell I'd have ever considered being an organizer. I'm not an organized person." But Indivisible Tosa took off, and Kraynick soon found himself a co-leader of a thriving grassroots community that's grown to more than 300. Members, Kraynick says, have transformed their diffuse outrage into coordinated political muscle. "It feels like we're creating power for ourselves," he says, "and trying to put things right."

For the Indivisible movement, job one of "putting things right" was blocking the Republicans' campaign to dismantle the Affordable Care Act and hobble Medicaid. "The proof is in the pudding," says Levin, who underscores that Obamacare repeal was the chief legislative goal of a unified Republican Congress and the GOP's central campaign promise for seven years. "Through months of relentless local pressure," he says, "Indivisible groups and other volunteer advocates convinced Democrats to play political hardball and peeled off enough Republicans to sink the bill."

Indivisible has focused on defense grinding the Trump train to a halt. Other progressive groups are looking to play offense, tackling critical political work in advance of the 2018 midterms. If the Democratic Party were more technologically adept, one could imagine this being done under the auspices of a Democratic committee. But with the DNC and DCCC still rebuilding following the 2016 wipeout, it's being driven from outside the party.

Ethan Todras-Whitehill, a lanky 36-year-old travel writer, GMAT tutor and aspiring novelist with a mop of curly hair, awoke from the despondency of election night ready for battle. "I go through stages of grief fairly quickly," he says, laughing. "10 a.m., day after the election, I was like, 'OK, the House. 2018. What can we do?'"

A resident of the safe blue congressional district of Amherst, Massachusetts, where his wife is a university professor, Todras-Whitehill realized he would need to project his activism elsewhere. But after spending 20 minutes locating his nearest swing district, inspiration struck: "Why isn't there a tool to do this?" he asked. "That was the genesis of Swing Left."

With help from friends, he launched a website the day before inauguration with a tool that matched liberals to their closest 2018 swing district seeking their commitment to volunteer and donate to help Democrats win the seat. "We thought we'd get to 20,000 sign-ups by March," Todras-Whitehill says. "Instead, we had 200,000 by the first weekend."

Swing Left's rookie activists quickly found themselves out over the tips of their skis. "We didn't have any political organizing experience," he admits. But Swing Left has benefited from seasoned political operatives who emerged from the woodwork to professionalize the experiment. That includes Matt Ewing, a former national field director for MoveOn, who became Swing Left's head of organizing and helped it make the leap from ragtag volunteer collective to flourishing nonprofit.

Swing Left is targeting 64 House seats and has activated local, self-organized teams across the country to begin canvassing their respective swing districts including knocking on doors to survey constituents' concerns, registering new voters at farmers markets and recruiting locals to build up volunteer capacity inside the targeted districts.

"We're not trying to control what people do," Todras-Whitehill says, describing Swing Left as "an organization trying to keep up with our members." His priority is to create tools and platforms that structure the "organic momentum" of Swing Left volunteers. "We give them our best theory of what will make the biggest difference but what's most important is that they are out there doing the hard work of voter contact 18 months before the election."

Swing Left is laying the groundwork for Democratic campaigns whose candidates haven't even been chosen yet. "Our goal is that, the day after the primary, we can hand each campaign an army of grassroots volunteers that have trained and organized and already been talking to voters in that district for over a year." Swing Left is also building campaign war chests for each of its swing districts. "We have about $260,000 waiting for Darrell Issa's opponent," Todras-Whitehill says, referring to the California congressman who is one of the most endangered GOP incumbents. On the night of the House Trumpcare vote, Swing Left also launched a fund to be split equally among the opponents of swing-district Republicans who voted for the bill. "We sent this thing out the door a half-hour after the votes," he says. "It did $1 million in 24 hours."

In the face of upcoming Democratic primaries, Swing Left is devoutly hands-off letting voters decide. "We don't want to be relitigating the Bernie vs. Hillary thing," Todras-Whitehill says. "We need to get behind whoever emerges as nominees in swing districts. They are part of our best chance to put a check on Donald Trump by taking back a branch of Congress."

Not every organization in the new constellation of resistance groups is ready to pledge allegiance to any candidate who puts a (D) after his or her name.

Our Revolution is waging a fight for the heart of the Democratic Party's platform. "Resistance is good," says Nina Turner, the group's new president. "But we have to go further than that. We have to plan for when power is back in the hands of progressives." This means backing politicians "who will push progressive issues once they get the people's power," she says. "Otherwise, what difference does it make?"

Our Revolution was founded to continue the movement politics of the Bernie Sanders campaign, inheriting the grassroots infrastructure that raised more than $200 million to propel the democratic socialist senator in his unlikely contest with Hillary Clinton. Our Revolution is poised to be a power broker in 2018's contested Democratic primaries as progressive politicians seek the support of its activists and the power of its fundraising network.

Turner is a charismatic 49-year-old -African-American who served as minority whip in the Ohio State Senate. She took the reins of Our Revolution in June, replacing Sanders' former campaign manager. The Sanders movement has been criticized as a bastion of "Bernie bros" younger white men with an alarming tendency toward misogyny. But with Turner at the helm, Our Revolution stands as a rare grassroots powerhouse led by a black woman.

Our Revolution distributes its decision-making among its local chapters now numbering around 400 in 49 states. The idea is to empower the grassroots, Turner says, "instead of us running it from on high in D.C." Candidates seeking an endorsement must first convince their local Our Revolution affiliate. "They have to go talk to the citizens in their community the very people they want to represent."

Turner says the guide star of the Democratic Party has to be brighter than putting "a check on Trump" and calls the fight for Medicare for all "a foundational issue." She points bitterly to California, where Democratic leadership spiked single-payer legislation that could have passed without GOP support. "It wasn't the Russians. It wasn't the Republicans," Turner says. "The Democratic Assembly leader killed Medicare for all in California. How are we showing people that we're any different? That we're not controlled by the pharmaceutical and medical industry? That one example in California hasn't showed them that."

Our Revolution makes no apologies about taking its fight to the national party. Progressives cannot settle for "half measures," Turner says, and need to insist on "Democrats who really stand up for what it means to be a Democrat."

For Turner, the Democrats' new "Better Deal" platform is deficient. Unveiled in July, the Better Deal pledges a $15 minimum wage, a $1 trillion infrastructure plan (not unlike President Trump's), corporate tax credits for job training, and a wonky proposal to crack down on business monopolies. It offers no solutions on expanding health coverage, combating climate change or fostering racial justice.

In late July, Turner and Our Revolution activists marched on the DNC building south of the Capitol to present a 115,000-signature petition demanding a "people's platform" that includes universal healthcare, an end to private prisons, free public college and a tax on Wall Street. Far from rolling out the welcome mat for these reformers, the national Democrats' security team barricaded the building's front steps. The DNC insists this is standard security protocol. But Turner seized on the symbolism, calling the barrier "indicative of what is wrong with the Democratic Party." Through a megaphone that could surely be heard from Tom Perez's corner office, Turner shouted, "This ain't about fancy slogans on the way to 2018. We need a new New Deal!"

The Democratic Party is at its weakest in the state legislatures, where it lost hundreds of seats during Obama's two terms at a stark human cost. Unified GOP state governments cut social services, rammed through tax cuts for the wealthy, defunded Planned Parenthood clinics, adopted restrictive voter-ID measures and passed discriminatory bathroom bills.

Rather than trust the party to right itself, a pair of grassroots groups are working to rebuild state power in advance of the once-a-decade redrawing of congressional boundaries known as redistricting, which will follow the 2020 census. At the leading edge of this effort is Sister District, founded by Rita Bosworth, a 38-year-old former federal public defender from San Jose, California, who is adamant that progressives need to focus on "races that are competitive, winnable and strategic."

Sister District's mission is similar to Swing Left's but applied to legislative districts. Bosworth was drawn to these races because they're cheap to win and can unlock a broader Democratic revival. "When you win back state legislatures," she says, "then redistricting happens and you get a more representative Congress at the national level."

Counting 25,000 volunteers, Sister District has more than 100 locally led teams in all 50 states. Bosworth is intense and dispassionate a characteristic that puts her at odds with the grassroots zeitgeist. She was disheartened to watch Democrats pour a record $23 million into the Jon Ossoff special House election in Georgia, a "shiny object" of a race, she argues, with little lasting strategic value to the party. She points instead to state legislative contests coming up in Virginia this year. "If we put $23 million into Virginia, we would just win Virginia," she says. "And then we could redistrict." By undoing Republican gerrymandering, more Democrats would win as a matter of course. "We wouldn't have to spend $23 million on them!" Bosworth has a stern message for fellow progressives: "We're not thinking strategically, and we're not thinking long-term. And we're going to keep losing unless we start doing that."

Improving Democratic chances of winning down-ballot races means bolstering the quality of progressive candidates running for office. That's the mission of Run for Something, which has created a platform for younger Americans to jump into politics. Amanda Litman, the 27-year-old co-founder, ran Hillary Clinton's e-mail fundraising program in the 2016 election, helping to bring in nearly $400 million. In the aftermath of the November election, she kept falling into conversations with friends and acquaintances who said, "I want to run for political office. What do I do?"

Litman didn't have an easy answer. She knew underfunded state Democratic parties were poor incubators of political talent. So she launched Run for Something to connect novice politicians to resources and mentoring. Her ambition was modest: "In the first year, we figured we'd have to hustle to find 100 people to run, because this is hard." But Run for Something has already been contacted by 10,000 aspiring progressive politicians. The group is now vetting prospective candidates; those who pass muster join the group's Slack channel, where they can connect with fellow rookies and receive mentorship from more than 200 volunteer Democratic campaign veterans, including many top talents from the Obama and Clinton organizations, who work pro bono.

What excites Litman about the new recruits is that they "are real people and the people our party is supposed to be representing," she says. "It's teachers, students, nurses, single moms, veterans, immigrants. They're not old, rich, white lawyers."

Fresh off its victory blocking Trumpcare, the Indivisible movement is plotting a shift from defense to offense. It's engaged in a listening tour of its chapters, seeking a common progressive political platform to fight for, even as it continues to fight against Trump. The group has hired a new political director Maria Urbina, formerly of Voto Latino who is clear that Indivisible will remain independent from the Democrats. "We don't coordinate with the party," she says. "The power lies with the people who have brought this movement to life."

But Levin sees the Indivisible movement as paying long-term dividends for progressive politicians. "If you have a healthy movement of thriving local groups, you win elections," he says.

Ganz, the veteran organizer who now lectures at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, hopes national Democrats embrace this opportunity for bottom-up renewal. "One can hope that they'll get it and not try to fight groups like Indivisible. And realize how valuable they are."

The early returns are mixed. The very existence of a group like Run for Something stands as an indictment of the party's capacity to foster fresh talent. But Litman believes that this is a productive tension. "We're frenemies," she says.

In a recent interview in Washington, D.C., deputy DNC chair Keith Ellison told Rolling Stone that the Democratic Party needs to show solidarity with new resistance groups by showing up: "We can't just let these heroic, brave organizations get out there with us not being there," Ellison says. "We gotta be there, so we can offer ourselves as a party that's going to fight for people, and that they have some confidence in."

"The new national team at the DNC is trying to be responsive," says Skocpol. But the Democratic Party is a decentralized beast, and not all state parties are following through on the rhetoric from Washington. In her research across four swing states, Skocpol says, the relationship between party leaders and Indivisible activists runs hot and cold: "I see a range from complete non-contact to close cooperation."

The DNC has launched a Resistance Summer program, offering grants to state parties to engage with voters at protest events. But the lesson from Wisconsin is that the party still has a lot of work to do. The Sensenbrenner town hall was one of only a handful that GOP politicians dared to hold over the Fourth of July recess anywhere in the nation. The Tosa protest drew hundreds of local activists, but no one representing the state or local Democratic Party.

Protester Mike Cummens a 65-year- old family physician who looks a bit like Ed Begley Jr. is a member of an Indivisible chapter calling itself Stop Jim Sensenbrenner Indivisible. To Cummens, the Democratic Party is "kind of a dirty word." When it comes to tapping into the energy of the resistance, he says, "There's been no support, no outreach from them. Nothing." The distrust runs both ways. "None of us really like them that much," he says. "They're not doing their job!"

With a grim smile, Cummens points to the Indivisible crowd that has packed the library to overflowing. "It's a telling picture," he says. "This is where the activism is. It's not the Democratic Party."

Sign up for our newsletter to receive breaking news directly in your inbox.

More:

How Progressive Activists Are Leading the Trump Resistance ... - RollingStone.com