Category Archives: Alt-right

If science fiction has an answer to fantasys The Lord of the Rings JRR Tolkiens epic saga of the battle to defeat the Dark Lord, Sauron then Frank Herberts Dune has to be a strong contender. Published in 1965, it is the story of the desert planet Arrakis, known as Dune; of the rare and priceless spice that can be found there; of the Atreides family, sent to Dunes dangerous surface to rule; of its native Fremen people, who are capable of surviving in this inhospitable environment. Of the giant sandworms, hundreds of metres long, which hunt beneath the sands, and of Paul Atreides reluctant ascent to messianic status. And it is finally getting the mainstream attention it deserves, thanks to Denis Villeneuves film adaptation, out in the UK on 21 October.

I first read Dune when I was 18. It left behind deep, haunting memories: Paul Atreides chanting the Litany against Fear as his humanity is tested by the Gom Jabbar; the first appearance of a sandworm, vast and magnificent; the complexity of Pauls rise to become the Bene Gesserits Kwisatz Haderach, the Fremens Mahdi (like much of the Fremens culture, the word is lifted from the vocabulary of Islam). As one character puts it: No more terrible disaster could befall your people than for them to fall into the hands of a Hero.

Director Denis Villeneuve, whose adaptation hits cinemas later this month is the fourth attempt, after Alejandro Jodorowskys plans came to nothing, David Lynch disowned his 1984 version starring Kyle MacLachlan and Sting, and a television miniseries. There are deep pleasures when there are images that youre able to achieve that are close to what you had in mind as a teenager, Villeneuve has said.

I read it the first time when I was 11 or so, says Kevin Anderson, the bestselling author who, together with Herberts son Brian, has continued the Dune series after his fathers death. I had read all of HG Wells and Edgar Rice Burroughs and Andre Norton and Ray Bradbury and all these great classic science fiction books, but Dune is something above and beyond those. When I read it, I just felt so immersed in the world that everything felt real. He had come up with not just a desert planet with sandworms, he had the full ecology worked out, all of the culture, even the language and the religion of the people and the giant galactic politics and how there are wheels within wheels and everything fits together.

Herberts first inspiration for Dune came in 1957, when he went to research a magazine article about a research project in Oregon to stabilise sand dunes. The article, They Stopped the Moving Sands, was never published, but a letter he sent to his agent, published in The Road to Dune, shows how fascinated he was: Sand dunes pushed by steady winds build up in waves analogous to ocean waves except they may move 20 feet a year instead of 20 feet a second. These waves can be every bit as devastating as a tidal wive in property damage and theyve even caused deaths. They drown out forests, kill game cover, destroy lakes, fill harbours.

Herbert would toy with the idea of a desert planet for the next five years, spending time in a desert as part of his research, plotting a short adventure novel, Spice Planet, but putting it aside for what would become Dune. He sent an early draft to his agent in 1963, and the story was published in serial form in John W Campbells Analog magazine that year. It was rejected by publishers more than 20 times in book form, one citing bursts of melodrama, another that nobody can seem to get through the first 100 pages without being confused and irritated. A comment from one rejecting editor, that it is just possible that we may be making the mistake of the decade in declining Dune by Frank Herbert, would prove as prophetic as one of Pauls own visions, as would anothers remark that he would turn it down despite the fact that it is the sort of writing that might attract a cult and go on for ever.

For good or ill, Frank wrote a book that was at the time unpublishable. If youre a business person advising Frank, you would say dont write Dune, nobody will publish this book this long, with this much culture and background, says Anderson. But were glad that he didnt listen to anybody, he just wrote his own book and its certainly one of the greatest science fiction novels of all time.

In the end, Chilton Books, better known for auto repair manuals, picked it up in 1965. It won a Nebula for the best science fiction novel of 1965, but sales werent stellar at first, despite the quote from Arthur C Clarke emblazoned on its cover: I know nothing comparable to it except The Lord of the Rings.

It wasnt perceived as an instant classic; publishers saw this big book on ecological themes as rather peculiar, a sort of Lawrence of Arabia in the stars, says American Gods author Neil Gaiman. It worked but it hit slowly it wasnt like [Robert Heinleins 1961 novel] Stranger in a Strange Land, which came out and caught fire, was utterly of its zeitgeist. In a lot of ways the things that took Dune into the zeitgeist were 70s things, the understanding of and passion for ecology, the idea of peoples place in the world.

By 1967, sales were picking up, and Herbert was working on a sequel by 1968. Dune Messiah would see Paul as emperor, presiding over a bloody jihad through the stars that eventually kills 60 billion people.

Gaiman describes science fiction as a conversation with the last round of what went before. What Herbert brought to the conversation was ecology as well as what Gaiman calls giant multigenerational soap opera.

Id say theres Dune DNA in Game of Thrones, in the willingness to kill your characters, that feeling of the grand sweep of realpolitik and how it affects human beings, says Gaiman.

Jeff VanderMeer agrees. It definitely has been very influential, and I think theres something very surreal about the navigators and the way the Dust is used, and then the absolute spectacle of the sandworms, whether it makes any ecological sense or not. That kind of thing really sticks with you on a wide canvas.

Side note: according to Brian Herberts biography of his father, Dreamer of Dune, when Frank saw Star Wars he picked out 16 points of what he called absolute identity between his book and the movie, enough to make him livid. Together with other science fiction writers who thought they saw their work in the film, Frank formed a loose organisation he called, with his tongue firmly placed in his cheek, the Were Too Big to Sue George Lucas Society.

The imminent release of Villeneuves adaptation means Dune, and its story of a young white man leading a tribal people to victory, is being interrogated afresh. Is it a white saviour narrative? Why are no Middle Eastern or north African actors taking on the roles of the Fremen, given the clear influence of the Arab and Islamic world on Herberts creations, asked Syfy? Academic Jordan S Carroll describes Dune as a key text for the alt-right in the Los Angeles Review of Books, adding that for the alt-right, Paul stands as the ideal of a sovereign ruler who violently overthrows a decadent regime to bring together Europid peoples into a single imperium or ethnostate.

But as Carroll goes on to point out, this is misreading the point of Herberts story. Fascist commentators overlook that their long-awaited sovereign Paul begins the series as a tragic character but ends it as a grotesque one, he writes. Herbert himself said that Dune began with a concept: to do a long novel about the messianic convulsions which periodically inflict themselves on human societies. Far from revelling in Pauls immense power, his idea was, he said, that superheroes were disastrous for humans.

For Hari Kunzru, writing in the Guardian six years ago, what makes Dune more palatable than, say, the gruesome spectacle of a blonde-wigged Emilia Clarke carried aloft by ethnically indeterminate brown slaves in Game of Thrones, is the sincerity of Herberts identification with the Fremen. Arrakiss people, writes Kunzru, are the moral centre of the book, not an ignorant mass to be civilised, and Paul does not transform them in his image, but participates in their culture and is himself transformed into the prophet MuadDib.

On top of this, Pauls rise, to put it mildly, is no positive thing, and Villeneuve, asked about the white saviour trope on his press tour for the film release, made this point. Its a critique of that. Its not a celebration of a saviour, he said. Its a criticism of the idea of a saviour, of someone that will come and tell another population how to be, what to believe. Its not a condemnation, but a criticism.

Herbert would follow Dune Messiah with Children of Dune, God Emperor of Dune, Heretics of Dune, and Chapterhouse: Dune. It gets more and more abstract. I found the second and third to be deeply strange, stranger than the first one, says VanderMeer. Herberts final Dune novel was published in 1985; he died of pancreatic cancer in 1986.

The end of Chapterhouse: Dune is just this huge cliffhanger clearly the story wasnt over, says Anderson. In the back of my mind, I sort of always assumed that Brian Herbert would pick up the mantle and finish the last book, and after 10 years, I finally got impatient enough that I tracked down a contact for him and I wrote a letter and I said, so are you going to finish the story, because I want to read it?

At this point, Anderson was winning awards for his own novels and penning bestselling titles set in the Star Wars and X-Files universes. He tentatively suggested to Brian that they might work together to continue the series.

My greatest preference would have been for Frank Herbert to be alive and write it himself, obviously. I didnt hear back from Brian for a few months it was just a shot in the dark, Anderson says. It turned out he had been asking a bunch of other authors about me, and he called me up one afternoon out of the blue. It became clear to him that I wasnt just some guy who read Dune once and wanted to make a buck off of it that I was truly passionate about working in the Dune universe.

The pair struck a $3m deal with Bantam for a new trilogy of prequels in 1997. At the time it was the largest single science fiction book contract in publishing history, says Anderson. Weve counted up something like 5m words weve written together, and hes still my best friend.

While titles such as Isaac Asimovs I, Robot stories now feel pass, says author and critic Lisa Tuttle, the fact that Dune takes place on a secondary world prevents it from feeling outdated. And since the 1980s, science fiction and fantasy has moved into the mainstream, she says. Theres a receptive audience willing to look at it its not seen as a specialist, niche, nerdy kind of thing; even when Dune was popular in the 70s it was very much a kind of narrow band of people.

Dune holds up today, says writer Alastair Reynolds, when many science fiction novels of its era dont, in part because Herbert future-proofed it, by setting his story 20,000-odd years ahead, after the Butlerian Jihad has replaced intelligent machines with human minds.

What Dune did that was huge and important, was give us a lovely, complicated thing that felt like a movie. It feels grand, its blood-stirring, agrees Gaiman. It doesnt feel like its been swept away into history. It was absolutely an important book, and I think its remained an important book.

Dune is released in Australia and the UK on 21 October, and in the US on 22 October

The main picture on this article has been changed. The original picture showed an early storyboard image from the Dune film adaptation, rather than a film still, as described

Here is the original post:

Dune: science fictions answer to Lord of the Rings - The Guardian

Reps. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) and Marjorie Taylor Green (R-Ga.) appeared together during an America First rally in Georgia this May. Both lawmakers attended the AmpFest conference at Trump National Doral last weekend.

Donald TrumpsMiami golf resorthosteda four-day conference for conspiracy theorists and far-right diehardsnamedAmpFestlast week.

Roger Stone, one of four attendees who previously received a pardon from Trump,hosted a martini-mixer.James OKeefe, whose Project Veritas uses undercover cameras (and sometimes artful editing) to catch journalists saying embarrassing things,starred on stage with asong-and-dance routine.

House membersMattGaetzand Marjorie Taylor Greenemilled about, snapping photos with admirers.Tickets ran$450 to $3,500, and roomssold separately by the former presidents companystarted at $209 a night.

Forbesoffers a lookinside the event,with the help ofattendeeswho wereeager to broadcastthe scene on social media:

At an add-on event with a ticket price of $1,000,Stone showed off how to make Richard Nixon's martini recipe with Tito's. That vodka was first distilled in 1995. Nixon died in 1994.

.

Standing behind the former president's family crest, one speaker flaunted his little friend.

.

Former National Security Advisor, Mike Flynn, a Trump pardon recipient, ran into an admirer.

.

Gaetz mingled with Anthony Sabatini, a state representative in Florida running for U.S. Congress.

.

Taylor Greene, a Georgia Republican,stuck it to the libswith somefriends.

.

Stonegot an earful froman adviser to Republicans for National Renewal. That dark-money group is working to ensure the GOP has "a foundation in populism and nationalism."

.

Trump pardon recipient George Papadopouloswasall smileswithStone.

.

Jackson Lahmeye, a pastor running for Senate in Oklahoma, mimicked the look of Doral's owner.

.

Joe Kent, a Trump-endorsed candidate running for the House in a primary against one of the 10 Republicans who voted to impeach the former president, took the stage. Joining him wasJosh Mandel, anOhioanrunningfor U.S. Senate, whose associated PAC spent $31,000 at Mar-a-Lago thisspring.

.

O'Keefe, of Project Veritas,wowed at least oneattendee.

.

Laura Loomer, a far-right provocateur running for Congress in Florida, rapped.

.

In AmpFest's photo booth, two attendees flashed the okay hand gesture. Depending on the context, the sign can mean "white power," according to the Anti-Defamation League.

.

Alt-right conspiracy theorist JackPosobiec, a personality at OANN, was among the manyincredible people oneAmpFestperformer met.

.

Conservative auteur, Dinesh D'Souza, another recipient of a Trump pardon, smiled with one of the former president's customers.

.

Read more:

Criminals, Congress Members And A Big Gun: Inside The Far-Right Conference At Trump's Miami Resort - Forbes

Summary

January 6th committee to move to hold Bannon in criminal contempt. Bannon criminal referral a critical test for the DOJ. Wall Street Journal say Attorney General Garland concerned that jailing insurrectionists for extensive periods could further radicalize them. Showdown between Trump aides and January 6th committee continues.

ARI MELBER, MSNBC HOST: You could tell me why I`m wrong about main courses.

That does it for me. For something much more filling, sustainable, we turn to THE REIDOUT with Joy Reid. Hi, Joy.

JOY REID, MSNBC HOST: How are you going to say fish is a terrible main course?

MELBER: It`s just -- I`m always hungry within three hours. Is that not a failure of a meal?

REID: You`re eating at the wrong places. I`m -- I`ll get to you actually later. You need better restaurants.

MELBER: Let`s go.

REID: Okay. We`re going to work on you. We`re going fix you. Thank you, Ari Melber. We`re work on you.

MELBER: Peace.

REID: Have a wonderful evening.

Good evening, everyone. We begin THE REIDOUT tonight with the criminal charges that may be in store for Steve Bannon. Today was the day that the alt-right Trump whisperer was supposed to be deposed by the select committee investigating January 6th, instead, he flouted their subpoena, snubbed the committee, and in the process put himself in legal jeopardy. He has now earned himself a criminal citation from that committee, which will be voted on next week.

Now not only was Bannon a key proponent of the big lie that inspired the Capitol siege, he was actively involved behind the scenes. As the committee points out, he was communicating with Trump prior to the insurrection, urging him to focus on January 6th. He attended a meeting with lawmakers at the Willard Hotel about decertifying Joe Biden`s election victory. And he famously hinted on the day before the insurrection that January 6th would be more than just a protest.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEVE BANNON, FORMER CHIEF STRATEGIST TO DONALD TRUMP (voice over): All hell is going to break loose tomorrow. Just understand this. All hell is going break loose tomorrow. It`s going to be moving. It`s going to be quick.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

REID: Now, for all his chest-thumping around January 6th, Bannon is now hiding behind Trump`s dubious claims of executive privilege. Why? Because Trump told him to. Bannon`s lawyer wrote the committee yesterday saying, Trump`s counsel stated that they were invoking executive and other privileges and therefore directed as not to produce documents or give testimony.

Yes. But the thing is, Bannon`s no-show before the committee today has opened him up to criminal charges. As Chairman Bennie Thompson said today, we reject his position entirely. The select committee will not tolerate defiance of our subpoenas, so we must move forward with proceedings to refer Mr. Bannon for criminal contempt. The committee will vote on that Tuesday night. Then once it passes the full House, it will go to the Department of Justice, which will decide whether or not to charge Bannon criminally.

And that`s where this becomes a critical test for Attorney General Merrick Garland, namely, will he have the guts and the common sense to enforce the lawful subpoenas of a congressional committee?

Now, the answer should be obvious. But, unfortunately, we have seen this department go soft on Trump and his supporters, including members of the MAGA lynch mob who laid siege to the U.S. Capitol. The Wall Street Journal reports that according to people familiar with the matter, Garland has told other Justice Department officials that he is concerned that jailing protesters who weren`t hard-core extremists for extensive periods could further radicalize them.

Really? Okay. So let me get this straight. Merrick Garland is scared that these people might become more radicalized? I`m sorry, what`s more radical than staging an insurrection? I mean, is Merrick Garland familiar with the well-documented disparities in America`s criminal justice system? Because if he was, it`s hard to imagine him going with that story. I mean, if only the millions of people incarcerated for actual low-level crime in this country could be so lucky.

Garland`s lean towards leniency for the MAGA faithful, hopefully not just because they`re supporters of the former president, so just that he might not actually see eye-to-eye with the select committee when it comes to punishing uncooperative witnesses. So, Mr. Attorney General, sir, please, be my guest and prove me wrong.

With me now is Congressman Bennie Thompson of Mississippi. He is the chair of the select committee to investigate January 6th. And, Mr. Chairman, thank you so much for being here.

I am very interested to get your reaction to the apparent reluctance of the attorney general of the United States to be too hard on the people who broke into our Capitol, threatened the lives of yourself, your staff members, the speaker of the House, threaten to hang Mike Pence, brought a noose, a lynch mob. Multiple people died as a result of what happened. What do you make of the attorney general of the United States saying, oh, if we`re too hard on them, they might get more radicalized, so we shouldn`t be too hard on them?

REP. BENNIE THOMPSON (D-MS): Well it`s my wishes, Joy, for the attorney general to decide to expedite the process and the document that we said. Clearly, the law says he has to receive it, present it to a grand jury, indict Mr. Bannon. And so he needs to do his job. We have kept the firewall between our committee and the Department of Justice so they can`t say there was any unfair leverage or influence we were using.

[19:05:08]

But given the timeframe that we are dealing with, Joy, we hope that the attorney general sees the importance of moving ahead with this indictment, moving ahead with locking Steve Bannon up, moving ahead with clearing the air that you can`t conduct an insurrection on the government of the United States of America and nothing happen.

So, clearly, it will be in the Department of Justice`s hand. Our committee on Tuesday evening, we will do our job, but this is just the beginning. I assure you there are others if they do not cooperate, they`ll suffer the same fate. But, clearly, because Mr. Bannon took former Trump`s advice not to cooperate, and it`s well-documented that he was part and parcel to creating what happened.

So, we look forward to our day on next Tuesday. The public is invited. It will be a business meeting of the committee. You will see all the information we have available. And the reason we will put this before the United States House of Representatives, ask for a criminal referral. If we get the votes, the speaker will then transmit that document to Merrick Garland, and he has to do his job.

REID: And here`s -- I`m going put up just for the audience. This is the people -- some of the people who have been subpoenaed so far. So, Steve Bannon, we know, he has already claimed that he is going with executive privilege, even though, let`s just be clear, the White House, the current White House is in charge of who gets executive privilege. They`ve said, no you don`t get it. You have also Kash Patel, Dan Scavino, and Mark Meadows, who was chief of staff.

There has been some postponement because of delays in delivering the subpoenas to Mr. Scavino. They`re engaging. What does that mean, Kash Patel and Mark Meadows are engaging with the committee? Can you tell us what that means?

THOMPSON: Well, it means that they are talking to our lawyers and we`re trying to set up times for them to come in and potentially give depositions or information.

REID: So, they haven`t said no?

THOMPSON: They have not said no. Steve Bannon had said no. That`s why he is getting a criminal referral.

REID: Can you imagine a scenario, sir, of anybody in Mississippi. Let`s make a theoretical case. Black Lives Matter protesters in your home state saying we`ve been subpoenaed, we ain`t coming. Can you imagine any other situation in the criminal justice system where a prosecutor would say in advance, we don`t want to be too hard on them because of their associations with Black Lives Matter? So we fear that that might radicalize them. Can you imagine that being said about anyone other than Trump supporters?

THOMPSON: Well, given the double standard that people of color in my state have had to endure for quite a long time, then that means that most black people who go into jail in Mississippi would come out radicalized. But that`s not the case.

So, clearly, I think Merrick Garland needs to rethink his position that he`s credited with having. We can`t have that. Look, January 6th, Joy, was awful. It was not a movement. People saw it in real-time. They saw it with their own eyes. And so we have been tasked with the responsibility of crafting a solution. Merrick Garland has to do his job in a timely manner in order for us to make sure that this doesn`t happen again.

Steve Bannon and anyone else can`t flout the law and expect nothing to happen. Our committee is unified on this. We`re bipartisan. And I guarantee you on Tuesday night you will see that bipartisanship.

All of us love this country. And what we saw that the insurrectionists did on January 6th should never happen. And I assure you our job is to make sure that we produce a document that guarantees, if adopted, it will never, ever happen again.

REID: Congressman Bennie Thompson, who chairs the January 6th committee, thank you so much. We really appreciate your time tonight. And we will be watching what happens next week. Thank you, Sir. I really appreciate you.

All right, joining now is Daniel Goldman former U.S. -- Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York who served as Majority Council in the first Trump impeachment.

[19:10:01]

I really have the same question for you, about the precedent -- I frankly was shocked reading what Merrick Garland, Attorney General Garland allegedly said about worrying that prosecuting these people for committing this crime would further radicalize them.

I may not -- I know that he was involved during the 1990s when we did prosecute domestic terrorists, and he didn`t worry about that. And, suddenly, I worry that the reason he is saying that is just because they are supporters of a former Republican president.

This was what Rob Reiner, Actor Rob Reiner, who is also a very strong political activist, tweeted. The only reason a prosecutor would choose not to indict Trump is the fear that if he did, he`s cult would start a civil war. But if you don`t indict a man who tried to overthrow the government, then that civil war has already been lost.

And this is what Constitutional Lawyer Laurence Tribe responded, how he responded. He said a sobering thought. So let`s hope A.G. Garland hasn`t already decided not to bring criminal charges against the probably guilty former president.

Do you worry, as I do, that he already has made that decision, and it is a political decision, that he does not want to strongly go after supporters of the former president?

DANIEL GOLDMAN, FMR. HOUSE IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY MAJORITY COUNCSEL: I don`t think that he is making that decision based on politics. I actually think that what he is saying has some merit. The problem with what he is saying is that it is very selectively targeted at the Trump supporters for January 6th.

I think it`s generally true that black and brown people across the country who are put in jail for extensive narcotics, nonviolent offenses and other minor offenses, as you point out, go to jail and they are radicalized. I think we need a lot of reform as it comes to our system.

The bigger issue, I think, for Merrick Garland right now is what he is going to do with Donald Trump and what he`s going to do with Steve Bannon. And the reason why it is so important is that if he does not open an investigation, and we have no reason to believe that he has, into Donald Trump and his activity in the lead-up to January 6th, and including January 6th, about all of his efforts to overturn the election, and then if he also does not enforce the Steve Bannon subpoena, by criminally charging Steve Bannon with contempt of Congress, then I fear that his actions will ultimately lead us to fail to understand what exactly happened on January 6th. Because if he doesn`t enforce the subpoena for Steve Bannon, and everyone who comes after him, then the January 6th committee is not going to have time to get to the bottom of what happened.

And then on the other hand, he could do it himself if he looked into Donald Trump`s actions and those around him, the lead-up to January 6th. But by all accounts, his investigation is focusing just on the rioters and not on the senior White House officials, including the former president.

REID: And despite -- yes, the disparities are obvious. If these had been - - and, by the way, like 95, 96, 97 percent of Black Lives Matter protests were entirely peaceful. We`ve seen instances where you`re at infiltration by white nationalists. And I`m not sure any of those have been arrested and prosecuted for coming in. We saw the guy who broke the glass in Minneapolis who had all black on. I don`t even know that guy has been arrested and prosecuted, even though he`s been identified as a white nationalist. There is a pattern here where if you support Donald Trump, or if Donald Trump is involved, this attorney general doesn`t take a whole lot of action.

Sarah Kendzior, she tweeted a pretty brutal thread about Merrick Garland late last night. And she listed some of the things that he has done or failed to do. He defended Donald Trump in a personal lawsuit against E. Jean Carroll, who accused him of rape. He asked a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit against William Barr relating to the beating and gassing of protesters in Lafayette Square, a terrible ;precedent. He refused to release the OLC memo that William Barr used to clear Trump of obstructing justice. He appealed the ruling the Dems had won, seeking to exposed corruption at the Trump Hotel. He wants to implement a 50-year delay, 50 years, on when courts can consider releasing materials from federal grand juries.

At what point does Merrick Garland go from protecting the presidency to looking like he is just simply defending Donald Trump because he thinks that going after Donald Trump in any way will make his supporters sad and will make them mad and might make them violent when they`re already violent?

GOLDMAN: Well, I think he has been very clear that domestic violent extremism is the number one problem. He created a task force to address it. He has doubled the number of prosecutors who are investigating domestic violent extremism. There are over 600 people who have been charged for January 6th, the insurrection.

[19:15:04]

So, yes, he has a lot of institutional concerns that he has to be aware of, and I can`t go line by line and address each of them. But there is no question that the Department of Justice recognizes the seriousness of domestic violent extremism and has been quite active and aggressive in charging everyone for January 6th.

I think the biggest problem that you`re pointing out is less about prosecuting Donald Trump supporters and more about actually seeing the facts, seeing the evidence and investigating the former president and those around him for trying to subvert the election and overturn the will of the people. And that is a really dangerous precedent.

There is obviously a lot partisanship and political concerns involved with doing that. But at some point, we need to take a stand against this anti- democratic behavior. And from what I see in the public sphere, there is a lot of evidence to investigate.

REID: Yes. Saving our democracy is a big job. We`re going see if he is up to it. Because, you know, you can`t save our democracy and also worry about the feelings, the delicate little feelings of MAGA supporters and try to give them exculpation from justice, shield them from justice just because you think they might become even more dangerous. That`s why they`re dangerous, because they`ve been getting away with this stuff for far too long. Do something, Merrick Garland. I would like to be wrong, I would like to be wrong this time, but I`m worried. Daniel Goldman, thank you very much.

Up next on THE REIDOUT, the gospel of Donald Trump is built around one grievance that he just cannot accept that he lost and his feelings are hurt.

Plus, a REIDOUT exclusive, Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro, who was been at the forefront of the battle against the big lie, joins me in his first national television interview since launching his campaign for governor.

Plus, the high price that a black Maryland school superintendent paid for simply stating that racism exists and Black Lives Matter, that superintendent, Dr. Andrea Cane, joins me.

And tonight`s absolute worst, taking a stand for something destructive isn`t courageous, it`s indulgent, and probably deadly for some of the people who look up to you.

THE REIDOUT continues after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:21:29]

REID: It is now the dogma of the Republican Party that the insurrection was good, it was great.

That was the messaging last night at a festival of Trumpism in Virginia, under the guise of a rally for a Republican candidate for governor Glenn Youngkin, where this actually happened:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I also want to invite Kim from Chesapeake. She`s carried an American flag that was carried at the peaceful rally with Donald J. Trump on January 6.

(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I ask you all -- I ask you all to rise and join us as Mark Lloyd leads us in the pledge.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Face the flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

REID: It is idolatrous and deranged. They are now worshipping this totem to the insurrection.

But in the end, the religion of Trump really just boiled down to the fact that decrepit old orange Julius Caesar simply cannot accept that he lost the election. And his followers have built an entire religion around that pathetic fact.

Youngkin himself was not there for the call to worship. And, today, he distanced himself from the pledge that he called weird and wrong.

But at the event led by man of many shirts and unanswered subpoenas Steve Bannon, his twice-impeached former boss phoned in to support Youngkin and lied about the election, as did an Arizona State representative who was a leading proponent of that state`s fraudit.

If mango Mussolini would just wake up and say, I lost, it could just be over. But no, no, no, no.

So they`re prepared to take down the entire Republican Party in his honor. A Michigan right-wing radio host told followers to give power to the Democrats if Republican lawmakers don`t review Trump`s election, the one he clearly lost. And Trump says Republicans won`t vote in 2022 or 2024 if they don`t make solving his big lie their top priority.

You know what? Yes, do that. Do that in fealty to your false idol, that one guy who lost an election, a true believer. They wouldn`t say no, would they, right?

I`m joined now by Democratic strategist Juanita Tolliver and Kurt Bardella, adviser to the DCCC, who is also consulting with the DNC in the Virginia governor`s race.

Juanita, I grew up in church. And the way I understood the Gospel is that there was one God. But, apparently, in the Republican Party, there`s a new one. He`s been replaced by Donald Trump. And his symbols include golden Donald Trumps that they bow down to at CPAC and a flag flown at his insurrection that they now pledge allegiance to.

Your thoughts?

JUANITA TOLLIVER, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: This undying faith is what is going to continue to consume the GOP, because they`re so thirsty to tap into the energy of his base. There`s so thirsty for it.

And that threat that you mentioned Trump making as far as, hey, my voters won`t turn out for you in 2022, or the radio host saying vote for Democrats, I`m sure Democrats are hearing that like, I guess we will take it, right? Like, give us the power, please, I think.

But it comes down to Trump yet again flexing on the GOP members who tethered their party to him all for the sake of self-preservation, all for the sake of potential control of Congress. And what they`re going to get back is this consistent blowback.

[19:25:02]

And I`m sure they`re pissed to think about the fact that they`re going to go into the 2022 midterms talking about the 2020 election? This is still a look backwards. And they`re going to do it because they always fall in line. They all have that fear, as you said, as though Trump is some form -- type of deity to them. They`re scared of him. They`re too afraid to cross him.

And this is only going to continue for the foreseeable future, because no member of the GOP has a backbone to stand up to this man. They have shown this time and time again. This is who they are. This is who they align with. And it looks like Youngkin is no different, frankly, right?

He might not have been in the room. But these are words that he believes. This is stuff he said in the GOP primary in Virginia. And he`s just tapping back into that, because, even though he wasn`t in the room yesterday night, he`s still been doing radio with Seb Gorka. He`s been out on the stump with Virginia Senator Chase, who we know repeats these same lies.

So expect Democrats to hit that drum, roll that same playback you just show, Joy, because they know that`s going to help Democrats turn out and they know it`s going to turn off independents and swing voters across the commonwealth.

REID: Yes.

I mean, Kurt, the thing about a god is that they are invisible when they`re not in their golden idle form. So when Trump is not in his gold form at CPAC, where he can see them, he`s invisible. And so Mr. Youngkin may want to put out a little statement saying, well, that was weird and wrong, but he`s now probably got to like coil himself in a ball and wait for their invisible god to hit him, because he can -- even without Twitter.

If Trump were to come out and be like, F. Youngkin, he would panic because he needs those voters, right? He needs the freak vote. He needs the religion vote. And he thinks he can also somehow get the regular moderate normal people vote. So where does he go from here? Can he withstand that was weird and wrong, or is he eventually going to have to take the knee?

KURT BARDELLA, DCCC ADVISER: Oh, come on, Joy. We have seen this play over and over again. He`s going to take the knee, just like Lindsey Graham did, just like Marco Rubio did, just like Ted Cruz has done, just like every single person who was a part of the Republican Party establishment now.

And let`s be clear. This is the Republican Party establishment now, the Steve Bannons, the Donald Trumps, the Josh Hawleys. All of these right- wing, racist, authoritarian wannabes is the establishment Republican Party.

And Glenn Youngkin is first in line wanting to be a part of them. I don`t care what he said in that statement.

If you want to put out a real statement that addresses this, then go out there, Glenn, and say: I don`t want a single person who applauded when that flag came out to vote for me. I don`t want a single person who participated in Charlottesville to vote for me. I don`t want a single person who believes in the great lie to vote for me, I don`t want a single person who thinks that the domestic terrorist who participated in January 6, I don`t want them to vote for me.

Excerpt from:

Transcript: The ReidOut, 10/14/21 - MSNBC

Whats happening to inflation? We know, of course, what the current numbers say: Inflation is high right now, although not 1970s high. But is this a blip or the beginning of a longer-term problem? Economists are deeply divided. Im basically for the former, on what has come to be known as Team Transitory, but I might be wrong and the data are sufficiently ambiguous that both sides can claim that the evidence supports their take.

Yet policymakers cant just shrug their shoulders; they have to, um, make policy. So what should they do in the face of uncertainty? The answer, Id argue, is to make decisions that wont do too much damage if their preferred take on inflation is wrong.

In the current context this means that the Federal Reserve should ignore calls for a quick tightening of monetary policy.

Why is it so hard to make a call on inflation right now? Because the current economy, still very much shaped by the pandemic, is, to use the technical term, weird. In particular, the standard measures economists use to distinguish between temporary price blips and underlying inflation are telling different stories.

The traditional measure of underlying inflation is the rate of change in the core price index, which excludes volatile food and energy prices. But there are alternative measures, like the median (as opposed to average) change in prices, which excludes drastic price moves in any sector.

During the last economic crisis it didnt matter much which measure you used. All of them had the same message: Dont panic. For example, when headline inflation was running hot in the winter of 2010-11, leading Republicans berated Ben Bernanke, the Fed chair, for loosening credit, warning that easy money might debase the dollar. But measures of underlying inflation were low and stable:

So the Fed stayed the course, and it was right.

These days, however, the different measures are telling very different stories:

A few months ago core inflation was looking high, driven by things like used-car prices which clearly dont represent underlying inflation, but are still part of the standard measure while median inflation was subdued. More recently, core has subsided, but median inflation mainly reflecting shelter prices has surged.

So how serious is the inflation problem? We can argue about that, but maybe the crucial point is that nobody is going to win that argument in time to give helpful guidance to policymakers. Sorry, but ranting on cable TV and tweeting in CAPITAL LETTERS isnt going to settle this.

So what should guide policy? Id suggest that we heed the advice of Oliver Cromwell: I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken. (OK, you can maybe skip the gastroenterology.)

Consider, as an example of what not to do, the fate of the Obama stimulus package that was enacted in 2009.

Its now clear that while stimulus was necessary, the actual plan was much too small and short-lived (as some of us warned at the time). Why the undershoot?

Part of the answer is that the administrations economic forecast was excessively optimistic, envisioning the kind of quick recovery that rarely happens in the aftermath of financial crises. But the larger problem was a failure to think through what would happen if the forecast was wrong.

If the stimulus had turned out to be too big, that wouldnt have been a big problem: The Fed could have raised interest rates a bit to head off overheating. But if the stimulus proved too small, the Fed couldnt cut rates because they were already zero. So then what?

A memo from Larry Summers, Barack Obamas top economist, suggested that the president could simply go back to Congress for more: It is easier to add down the road to insufficient fiscal stimulus than to subtract from excessive fiscal stimulus. But this was a wild misjudgment of the political landscape again, something some of us warned at the time.

The point is that the Obama team messed up not by making a bad forecast, but by failing to understand that the risks of going too small were much higher than the risks of going too big.

What does that say about our current situation? Fiscal policy is pretty much off the table: Whatever the fate of President Bidens spending plans, they arent likely to have much impact on short-run economic developments. So the question is about Fed policy. Should the Fed raise interest rates soon, to head off inflation, or wait and see whether recent inflation proves transitory?

There are risks both ways. If the Fed waits, inflation might become embedded, and bringing it back down again could be painful though doable. On the other hand, if the Fed raises rates to head off an inflation problem that proves exaggerated, it could damage the economic recovery in ways that are hard to reverse. (Interest rates are still very low, so there would be little room for cuts if the economy weakens.)

So wait-and-see looks like the prudent thing to do. I think current inflation is transitory, but Im not sure. I am, however, confident that tightening monetary policy based on what we know now would be a big mistake, because the risks of moving too soon and moving too late are highly asymmetric.

In short, dont just do something. Stand there at least for now.

Visit link:

Opinion | The Fed Shouldnt Make a Call on Inflation Yet - The New York Times

BuzzFeed News; Getty Images

It was early June and Penny Farthing had finally had enough.

Ive been a faithful reader of this site since like 2008 but I have just about had enough of the QAnon garbage that gets posted lately. The very first post I read here was about Gary Busey trying to use gold doubloons as legitimate currency and tbh I would just like more of that please.

Posted to the celebrity gossip blog Crazy Days and Nights, the remark distilled the frustration many readers had been feeling as scandalous tidbits of Hollywood intrigue got crowded out by what another longtime reader described as ludicrous QAnon horror stories lifted from Twitter.

The post Penny Farthing was replying to was a "blind item" claiming an actor had forced his friend to join a rape club (commenters guessed it referred to Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt). Another was an item about Bill Gates using the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to test experimental new foods on people in developing nations. Multiple posts have accused Tom Hanks, a frequent Q target, of licentious behavior on a yacht belonging to Hollywood mogul David Geffen. And an ongoing parade of posts describe Hollywood stars abusing minors.

Since 2006, people have come to CDaN for blind items that run the gamut from true (Kaley Cuoco getting divorced) to ridiculous (Beyonc faked her pregnancies) to fantastical (Anna Wintour and Bob Marley had a secret baby together). The site has a well-earned reputation for being both prescient and endlessly entertaining, so it was hardly surprising that its devotees were irked by blind items that seemed to refer to QAnon, the collective delusion that (I cant believe Im writing this) a satanic cabal of Trump-hating, child-abusing, moneyed elites runs American politics and media.

Blind items are a form of gossip where the actual name of the person is left out and some of the details are obscured. Its like a game: In the comments, readers can guess who the celebrity might be. For example, this one-named A+ list foreign-born singer is about to release an album (Adele). This mechanism is oddly similar to QAnons, which also involves a pseudonymous insider posting cryptic message drops about famous people.

I stopped reading when the Q stuff started, Annie Tomlin, a former CDaN fan, told BuzzFeed News. Its really disturbing to see this right-wing conspiracy theory bullshit show up in gossip.

I have no doubt whoever came up with Q has read my site at some point.

Tomlin is hardly alone in thinking there might be some weird political agenda behind negative items about celebrities from the political left Chrissy Teigen, Tom Hanks, Robert De Niro. A poster to the pop culture message board Datalounge wrote, The site is custom made for right wingers, people who hate Hollywood and loudmouthed liberals with a passion. Thats indeed a common strategy by the alt-right to level pedophilia accusations at any detractor to destroy their credibility.

Viewed through a political lens, QAnon is a far-right absurdity with a surreal and terrifying real-world reach. But viewed through a celebrity gossip lens, it seems to make a little more sense. Hollywood elites engaging in morally repugnant or taboo sex? Facing no repercussions for bad actions? Using their fame and money to silence those who might reveal their misdeeds? This is practically conventional wisdom. Gossip fans and QAnoners share a core belief: that behind closed doors, celebrities are doing unspeakable things.

Crazy Days and Nights might not be trafficking in hardcore Q dogma, but theres a Q dog whistle somewhere in the background if you listen for it. And whether intentional or not, its made the long-running blog a favorite of actual QAnon adherents who see it as reinforcing their elaborate shared delusion.

And thats not particularly surprising to Enty, the name under which CDaNs creator publishes. I have no doubt whoever came up with Q has read my site at some point, he told BuzzFeed News.

Enty, who purports to be an entertainment lawyer in Hollywood, started Crazy Days and Nights back in 2006. It has never had the name recognition of peers from the mid-aughts like Perez Hiltons blog, but it has a loyal cult following among gossip fans. Gen Z discovered the blog through TikTok, where some creators have gone viral for discussing its blind item posts.

Anne Helen Petersen, a historian of celebrity gossip (and former BuzzFeed News reporter), said its not surprising that the readers of Crazy Days and Nights might also follow QAnon, and vice versa.

According to Petersen, blind item fans think of gossip as a puzzle they can solve. When you think of the people who love QAnon, devouring those drops, thats what they love. Theres pleasure in that analytical puzzle solving, and that translates very easily from Save the Children or Q to Crazy Days and Nights.

Problem is, theres a nasty gulf between the two. Celebrity gossip is typically harmless (though perhaps not for targeted celebrities) and unlikely to inspire a coordinated assault on the US Capitol. Real Housewives fans probably wouldnt wear a horned bearskin headdress and carry a spear on a visit to Congress.

Enty was the best until he got Q-pilled.

But in the Hollywood sexual harassment scandals, CDaN and Q found common ground: the real or imagined shitty behavior of powerful men.

A weird thing happened post-#MeToo where CDaN and old-school casting couch stuff, which has always been at the core of CDaN, crossed paths with QAnon, Troy McEady, cohost of the celebrity gossip podcast Beyond the Blinds, said. And now they exist in the same world, so its become hard to navigate.

Too hard, for some.

Eventually the tone shifted from being silly blinds about celebs being awful on sets or partying too hard or cheating to child abuse, yachting, sexual assault, and QAnon, one former reader told BuzzFeed News. Thats when I stopped reading.

Tara Giancaspro was another formerly enthusiastic CDaN reader until the sites shift toward conspiracy turned her off. I started to feel that Enty had an agenda or a value system that went beyond neutral reporting on celebrity high jinks.

Another former CDaN reader was a bit more pointed in a remark they posted to Reddit: Enty was the best until he got Q-pilled.

Commenters on the blog guessing that a blind item about child trafficking was about George Clooney.

Commenters on Crazy Days and Nights believing in some sort of cabal.

Enty denies this, vehemently.

In an interview, the pseudonymous author of the site told BuzzFeed News any appearance of a connection between QAnon and CDaN is a coincidence. If it seems like there have been a lot of items about child predators on the site, maybe thats just because there are a lot of child predators in Hollywood, he said. And by the way, he added, there is no political slant to the site. He typically passes on political tips and will post one only if its celeb adjacent, or if its somebody both sides want to talk about, like Matt Gaetz.

Enty has a more professional quibble with QAnon: the quality of the drops. What makes a good blind item is if you only have two or three possibilities, not 100, he explained. But with Q posts, you could go any direction with those.

I dont believe in lizard people, but Im willing to believe theres a cabal.

Enty insists hes not a Q follower, though he did admit to being familiar with Q lore. (Sure, Ive seen some. It wasnt an everyday thing it wasnt like I had an alert on my phone.) So any appearance that CDaN has gone Q is really more an issue of overlapping worldviews, he said. To Crazy Days and Nights, Hollywood is a liberal Gomorrah, full of extramarital sex, child sexual abuse, cult recruitment, gold diggers, drugs, rape, and the misdeeds of hypocritical, virtue-signaling stars. To the QAnon deluded, it's pretty much the same thing.

Everyone believes in one conspiracy theory, said Mia Bloom, professor of communication and Middle East studies at Georgia State University and coauthor of the book Pastels and Pedophiles: Inside the Mind of QAnon. People who are radical think in shades of black and white. But with QAnon, were seeing people say, OK, I dont believe in lizard people, but Im willing to believe theres a cabal.

Internet celebrity gossip requires its readers to be slightly conspiratorially minded to believe theres something happening beyond whats printed in Us Weekly. But Enty is more open to conspiracy than most thats how he built one of the most influential celebrity gossip sites on the internet. And perhaps that's why CDaN seems to have collided with the QAnon delusion: Maybe the instincts that make for a compelling celebrity gossip site are the same ones that make for a compelling political conspiracy. Chief among them is a forced credulity.

Do I believe the moon landing was staged? No, Enty said. But Im willing to listen to the arguments. Im willing to have the discussion. Its Buzz Aldrin who will punch you in the mouth if you say its fake.

Oct. 15, 2021, at 19:48 PM

Correction: Tara Giancaspro's name was misspelled and the title of the podcast Beyond the Blinds was misstated in a previous version of this post.

See the original post here:

Crazy Days And Nights Readers Fear The Gossip Site Has Gone QAnon - BuzzFeed News

Twitter is great for lots of things. Its one of the best places on the internet to get news. Its full of funny and interesting commentary by comedians, celebrities, and journalists. Its also a great place to watch people ruthlessly mock one another and very good for picking a fight with a stranger. No other technology is referred to as a cesspool more often. The app is great at being a cesspool.

But Twitter Inc. is trying to change that. It has spent the past year experimenting with subtle product tweaks designed to encourage healthier online behavior. It now alerts people who are about to retweet misinformation on topics such as elections and Covid-19, and it recently began asking people to actually read articles before retweeting. In some cases, if users try to tweet something mean or offensive, automated pop-ups now ask them to think twice before doing so.

Excerpt from:

How Twitter (TWTR) Tries Get Users to Be Nice on Social Media - Bloomberg

TOP CHAIR

Credit:John Shakespeare

Theres a modest Games of Thrones under way for Federal Parliaments own Iron Throne chairing the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Economics.

This was the preserve of franking credits warrior Tim Wilson. The Melbourne MPs adroit use of the post saw him elevated to the giddy heights of Assistant Minister for Industry, Energy and Emissions Reduction. Clearly, going after industry super funds really pays off.

So who will get the gig? Committee member Jason For the Beaches Falinski, the MP for the Sydney Northern Beaches seat of Mackellar, is said to reckon he is the leading contender. It is less clear if anyone else thinks that.

Nevertheless, the Our Lady of Good Counsel Primary School Forestville graduate started off strong on Monday, bashing industry super, demanding EISS Super directors apologise for recent events (accusations of lavish spending etc, etc) and ticking them off over perceptions of mis-managing conflicts of interest.

Loading

But hold your horses, Falinski. The Baratheon-esque MPs push for a net zero emissions target doth not a good friend of Prime Minister Scott Morrison make, given the PMs office delights in hurting its enemies and promoting its friends.

Also stepping up to the chair is Perths member for Curtin, Celia Hammond.

But some Liberals feel she doesnt have enough experience.

Well, she was formerly vice-chancellor of the University of Notre Dame no less.

Other Coalition members include Queenslander LNP members Julian Simmonds and keen amateur photographer Andrew Laming. No, we dont think so either.

The appointment will be a captains pick by Morrison, and he might gift the post to someone not on the committee.

Time is running out as the appointment needs to be tabled in Parliament next week.

Biggest news in TV this week was the launch of Channel Sevens 2020 schedule. Media journalists were surprised by the segment hosted by Katie McGrath, Sevens chief people and culture officer, who spruiked the networks commitment to cast diversity. Possibly a reaction to criticism of the networks casting choices on its flagship SAS Australia reality-TV program, where bloggers have criticised the casting of various celebrities who have either been accused of or admitted violence against women.

Seven will have a better story to tell in 2022 when it broadcasts Claremont, the imaginatively titled drama about the 1990s serial killings in Perth. As Sevens blurb states: The disappearance of young women launches a 25-year investigation by the police and one tenacious journalist, all in dogged determination to seek justice.

A sketch of Bradley Edwards, drawn during his sentencing on December 23, 2020.

So who is the tenacious journalist? Seven wont say, but CBD has learnt that it is none other than legendary Perth Channel Seven courts and crime reporter Alison Fan who has been on the tools for Seven since 1971. In the 1990s, she covered the Claremont serial killings and then came back for last years trial which found Bradley Robert Edwards guilty of two counts of murder.

Loading

Fan became famous in 1989 when $1 million worth of gold was sent to her personally after more than a decade of covering the conviction and jailing of the Mickelberg brothers for the Perth Mint Swindle, which was later overturned.

Then there was the time a man on the run from police after a gun siege gave himself up to Fan. She has quite a story to tell.

The Morning Edition newsletter is our guide to the days most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up here.

Go here to read the rest:

Activists Monica Smit and Avi Yemini back in court - The Age

As the mom of four boys, two dogs, and a budding anxiety disorder, I know how hard it can be to provide your family with nutritious dinners that are also tasty, eco-conscious, cookbook-cover-worthy, and affordable. But because of misogyny built into the very fabric of our society, Im somehow expected to! Thats why I like to meal-planto set myself up for success each week. Disclaimer: Success varies greatly. Typically manifests as failure.

Before we dive in, I know youre wondering, Are we supposed to just go about our everyday lives and pretend that the collective trauma of a seemingly endless pandemic, the near-overthrow of our democracy, and irreversible damage to our climate isnt real? Also, do you have vegan options? Yes and yes!

Grocery List: First things firstis it safe to shop in person, or should I still get groceries delivered? What a great, unanswerable question! Luckily, all these meals can be made with basics from your pantry, unless, of course, your definition of basics is boxed wine and a pallet of family-sized hand sanitizer. Quick veggie-drawer hack! Wrap your greens in a tea towel to keep them crisp longer. Death and decay are inevitable, but wasting arugula doesnt have to be.

Monday: Start the week off strong with an easy, vegetarian three-bean chili. All youll need is one pot, eight ingredients, thirty minutes, and a health-insurance plan that at least partially covers cognitive-behavioral therapy. Eco-tip! Use reusable bowls, utensils, and straws, but somehow never wash them because that wastes water. Its a real Catch-22, which is a book you know well since you had to teach it to your kids in remote school last year.

Tuesday: Normally, Tuesday would be burger night, but there was an alt-right, anti-mask, pro-horse-dewormer rally outside the grocery store today, so you couldnt pick up buns. Then, on the way home, you listened to a podcast about how the industrial meat industry is destroying the Amazon rain forest. All of this might sound like a setback, but its actually a set-back-to-the-drawing-board. Serve veggie burgers wrapped in lettuce, call the French fries pommes frites, and boom! Youve got yourself a healthy, classy dinner. Fruit for dessert.

Wednesday: O.K., the kids are still pretty mad about the whole fruit-for-dessert thing. No better way to rebound than with a tuna noodle casserole. I recommend a couple of tweaks: sub ground turkey for tuna because tuna is high in mercury, and you cant afford to damage your kids brains any more than constant exposure to screens already has. Sub zoodles for noodles, sub yogurt for mayo, and then sub the whole thing for pizza because, what the hell, youre pretty sure the kids love their dad more anyway.

Thursday: You know those videos in which perfectly manicured moms use multicolored batter to make fun cartoon-character pancakes for their delighted children? You dont know how to do that. Sandwiches.

Friday: T.G.I.F.! Which in this house stands for Thank God I (bought) Frozen dinners! Did you know that you can eat frozen dinners for breakfast and lunch, too? Its true! Plus, your kids will get a decades supply of sodium. For dessert, hand each kid a hatchet, shove them all outside, and lock the doors. Foraging for dessert has a fun make-your-own-sundae vibe and will be a necessary skill in the afterscape. Bonus: this also counts as family game night!

Saturday: Pull out some cereal and sniff the milk. Since time is meaningless, its breakfast-for-dinner night! This one requires almost zero prep, which gives you a few minutes to reflect on how the labor of creating a meal plan and doing all the budgeting, shopping, and cooking takes away from your ability to do other things, like staring at a wall. Hmm, that wall looks pretty dirty! Better clean it while remembering the birthdays of every member of your immediate and extended family.

Sunday: Time to start planning for next week! Because the weeks never end! They just roll on, oblivious of our attempts at stackable food-storage solutions or our efforts to eat the whole rainbow every day. Yet we continue the strange performance of planning, as if playing a sonata on the deck of the Titanic. A futile attempt at control as we slip through chaos into darkness and maybe, finally, into peace. Taco night!

Read this article:

The Stress-Free Family Meal Plan - The New Yorker

Oct 13th 2021

SHOULD VIDEO websites have to review content before they publish it? Where does the boundary lie between hate speech and incitement to violence? Is pornography created by artificial intelligence an invasion of privacy? These are all hard questions, but behind them lies an even more difficult one: who should provide the answers?

On the internet, such dilemmas are increasingly being resolved by private firms. Social networks are deciding what kinds of misinformation to ban. Web-hosting companies are taking down sites they deem harmful. Now financial firms are more actively restricting what people can buy (see Finance section).

The digital gatekeepers are doing a mixed job. But it is increasingly clear that it is not their job at all. The trade-offs around what can be said, done and bought online urgently need the input of elected representatives. So far governments have been better at complaining than at taking responsibility.

For an example of how private firms have become the digital police, consider the rules on internet pornography being introduced by Mastercard on October 15th. In a bid to weed out illegal material, the card firm is demanding that porn sites take steps that go beyond what the law requires, including reviewing footage before publication and checking the identity of those who upload or feature in it. Sites that think these sorts of rules too onerous are under no obligation to work with Mastercard. But Visa is also cracking down, and the two firms handle 90% of card payments outside China, meaning that they are becoming the industrys de facto regulators.

Liberals must strike a balance. Private firms should in general be free to deal with whom they like. Just as Facebook may legally ban people like Donald Trump from its network and Amazon Web Services can decline to host alt-right-friendly apps like Parler, Mastercard is free to drop particular porn sites. Yet the market power of these firms and their often like-minded rivals means that without their approval and support, individuals or businesses may face exclusion, even if they have broken no law. In edge-cases, private gatekeepers will err on the side of caution. What incentive is there for a social network to allow borderline hate-speech, or for a bank to deal with a legally tricky industry like cannabis?

The best remedy would be more competition, so that if Visa and Mastercard bar a porn site or Facebook cancels a controversial figure, consumers have alternatives. That will not happen quickly: network effects are powerful in social media and crushing in the payments business.

In the meantime, private companies that find themselves acting as gatekeepers should be transparent about their rules, how they make them and what redress they offer. Under public pressure, social networks have taken steps in this direction. Facebook sends difficult decisions to an independent oversight board; Twitter this week published a set of principles for regulating online speech. Financial institutions are more opaque. Mastercard explained its new rules in a blog post. When OnlyFans, a site known for sexually explicit content, blamed banks for forcing a change in its content policy earlier this year, the banks in question made no comment.

Yet the bigger responsibility lies with governments. They are right to be wary of constraining speech. In much of the world leaders are only too ready to muzzle online debate (see International section). But the careful definition of how to draw lines around free expression and build in safeguards would help clarify where despots have overstepped the boundary.

What is more, in many areas the gatekeeping power wielded by private firms is really a consequence of government inaction. Keeping revenge-porn off the web or limiting childrens access to viral content are areas where governments could act if they wanted to. Instead, the approach of many has been to do nothing and then feign shock when profit-maximising companies come up with answers that may not be in the interest of society.

Politicians are right to warn that some private companies have too much power online. But those firms have ended up with so much responsibility partly because politicians themselves have abdicated it.

Go here to read the rest:

Who should police the web? - The Economist

We came for the football. What we got, with the anthems still fresh, was 10 minutes of violent culture clash in the Wembley seats. This was a tableau of viciousness played out via the fists of Hungarys travelling ultras and what looked, at times, like a lone Metropolitan police officer waving his (massively outgunned) baton of liberal justice.

Ultra-nationalist football thugs versus the Met. And its live! It was a dismal, toxic, at times surreal night at Wembley Stadium. At 7.45pm Englands players kicked off this Qatar 2022 World Cup qualifier to the usual hopeful, tinny cheers. By 7.48pm, the first fists were being thrown in the Hungary end. By 7.50pm the police had arrived in the stairwell above the main mass of away supporters and begun an attempt to force them back.

Fast forward another five minutes of full-contact free-for-all and the Met, punched, kicked and swarmed by superior numbers, had retreated back to the concourse. And so it came to pass that with the game itself barely started the away support had created a kind of Hungarian embassy in the Wembley seats. The flag will fly. This patch of soil is ours.

At half-time the police tweeted a statement. Shortly after the start of the game officers had entered the Hungary end to arrest a spectator for a racially aggravated public order offence. Before kick-off the England players had taken the knee. It drew an energetic reaction in the Hungary section. A flag was raised with a drawing of a stick man taking the knee, with a line daubed across it. Hungarys football supporters are enthusiastic repeat offenders when it comes to racist abuse.

As the officers made the arrest, minor disorder broke out involving other spectators. Order was quickly restored and there have been no further incidents at this stage, the statement continued. This is only partly true. Order was not restored. Or at least, not the order of the Met, but a little taste of alt-right dictator-culture staking its flag in the London Borough of Brent.

To their credit, the police attempted to enforce the law here. This was an attempt, undermanned and overwhelmed, but also undeniably brave, to impose the principle that racism is a crime in this country. At the same time it seemed odd even before kick-off that there was so little in the way of police presence, so little feel for the occasion and for the reputation of the visitors. What did they think was going to happen here, wading in to that 2,000-strong end in a small luminous-jacketed platoon?

Some will ask why, given Hungary were ordered to play their last home game behind closed doors for abusing Englands black players, it was then deemed acceptable for thousands of Hungarians to gather to watch football in London. Football makes noises about regulation, about saying no to racism.

Its governing bodies voice their shock every time, all the while cosying up to the nearest seedy dictator. It is a risible and insulting pretence.

The violence had started when Hungarian supporters clashed with a group of stewards. Stewards are not security guards. These people are there to manage the crowd and to help with the flow. Twenty to 30 police appeared at the top of the stairwell and were soon thrashing at the crowd with batons. The Hungarian fans surged, swarming around these insurgents in their luminous jackets. After the deserved criticism the Met have taken over recent horrific events, the internal culture of the force, failings of management, this will draw little sympathy from some. Could they not just flag down a bus?

It is worth bearing in mind who was on the other side of that line. Viktor Orban has weaponised football as a statement of personal power, and also as a muster point for an aggressive young male cultural militia. There was something jaw-dropping during the summers Euros at seeing assorted English TV pundits gushing, presumably out of ignorance, at the thrill, the warm feelings inspired by seeing men in black shirts punching the air and projecting their own kind of aggressive nationalism. Just great to see the crowds back, eh?

Here, that early incident seemed to overshadow the game. Hungary scored midway through the first half, the signal for a huge green smoke bomb in the away end. When England equalised there was some brief alarm at attempts on all sides to clamber over the security tarpaulin, but thankfully it fizzled out. By the final whistle reports suggested the police had arrested 40 Hungary fans, and were waiting for reinforcements to arrive to remove them from the stadium.

For Wembley this was another bruising night. The Euro 2020 final brought its own kind of domestic meltdown. Perhaps you could try to explain that away as a by-product of lockdown desperation, given fuel by cornercutting security and shoddy planning. Cut it back. Squeeze the margins. Hope for the best. The reality of England in 2021 went steaming right though that illusion of order, splintering it like a cardboard western set. This was something else. Welcome to the world, Wembley Stadium. It is, make no mistake, a little dark out there.

Visit link:

Hungary fans provide Wembley with another dark and bruising night - The Guardian