Category Archives: Political Correctness

Time is ticking, and political commentators are starting to wonder about the presidents inaction on cannabis reforman issue with high support among Democrats. And since Democrats are currently in control of the White House and Congress, its on them to push a bill to the finish line.

During a June 3 Overtime segment on YouTube, the Real Time with Bill Maher host read an audience-submitted question to his guest, former Attorney General Eric Holder, about why President Joe Biden hasnt pushed for the federal legalization of pot. After all, decriminalization of cannabis at the federal level was one of President Bidens promises on the election trail.

Maherwho denies alignment with any partysaid that dealing with the issue would be dealing with reality, and it would also bring political benefit. But if Democrats continue to fail to legalize cannabis at the federal level, Maher thinks Republicans will take up the slack.

Republicans are gonna steal the issue. I think eventually, Maher told Holder. I mean, someone like John Boehner works for a marijuana company now. I mean, it could be one of those freedom issues. And, of course, Republicans smoke lots of pot too.

Not enough, Holder said to instant laughter in the audience. They need to mellow out just a little more.

Some Republicans have used cannabis as a freedom issue. Politico reported on leaders who are joining the fold, viewing cannabis through the prism of states rights, personal freedom, job creation and tax revenue.

In a survey, conducted by Pew Research Center from April 5-11, 2021, the majority72%of Democrats said cannabis should be legal for medical and recreational purposes versus 47% of Republicans. Only among conservative Republicans, the majority of people surveyed said they arent in favor of legalizing cannabis for both medical and recreational purposes. While its less popular among Republicans, there are some leaders launching their own bills such as Congresswoman Nancy Mace, with her States Reform Act.

Maher pointed out the recent push for social equity measures transforming the industry slowly, but it is an issue Republicans arent onboard with. Its the social equity provisions that are one of the few dividing points when it comes to cannabis bills. On the other hand, leaders like Senator Cory Booker believe social equity provisions are critical for any cannabis reform bill.

Now I understand the impetus to want to, like, for example, if youre gonna have new businesses that are legal in the marijuana field, yeah, they probably should go to the people who suffered the most during the drug war, Maher said. Republicans, of course, are saying this is a deal-breaker.

Maher acknowledged that leaders are not aligning with certain details on the issue, but didnt exactly provide a full solution.

What do you want, half a loaf? If they said okay, no equity, is it better to have the law passed or changed or is it better to hold out for equity? Maher asked.

Its better to have the law changed, Holder responded. And as I said, deal with the societal reality that we have and, you know, and try to make it as equitable as you possibly can, but I wouldnt want to stop the movement that I think makes sense for the sake of equity.

Maher serves on the advisory board with NORML and is a longtime known advocate for cannabis, and is known for slamming religion and political correctness in general. Maher was in the same room as High Times this past May, when the political talk show host made an appearance at Woody Harrelsons grand opening of The Woods in West Hollywood.

More here:

Bill Maher Thinks Republicans Will 'Steal' Pot Legalization - High Times

GUEST COMMENTARY - Even theNew York Timeshas toadmitunpleasant realities, like the departure of people from California and other deep blue states.

But one thing the paper, and other similarly-minded reporters based here, will never admit: the connection between the California economy and regulation and the rising out-migrations.

TheTimesaccepts that people are leaving in part due to costs, but puts much emphasis on other factors, like the decline in immigration under the monstrous Trump, Covid deaths and falling birthrates. Yet these factors have occurred across the country, and other regions, notably in the sunbelt and the South, have experienced rapid population growth. It turns out that policy choices that California has made seems the likely prime cause for the states shocking demographic decline.

This net out-migration, as theTimesadmits, has been going on for decades. Some people, particularly in academia and the mainstream media, continue to label claims of an exodus as essentiallyfalse; theLA Times, a good barometer of political correctness on the West Coast, called it a myth reflective of the political bias of haters. But as we show in our recentChapmanUniversity report, since 2000, California has lost 2.6 million net domestic migrants more than the current combined population of San Diego, San Francisco, and Anaheim (the cities).

In 2020, California accounted for 28% of all net domestic out-migration in the nation about 50% more than its share of the US population (19%).

Totally ignored by theTimes, and their cheaper imitators, is a possible connection betweenout-migration and an economy where, over the last decade,80% of all new jobspaidless than the median income. On a per-capita basis over the last 30 years, California had lower per-capita job growth in virtually every industry sector than its prime competitor states, and does particularly poorly in higher wage blue collar sectors like construction and manufacturing. Amid some of the great concentrations of wealth in the world, upwards ofa third or more ofthe populationis either poor or a pay cheque away from it.

Critically, those leaving are not primarily old folks or the poor without prospects, butincreasingly, peoplewho are middle classand in the family years between 34 and 54.This accountsin part for Californias now-below average birth rate, with San Francisco and Los Angeles competing for the lowest fertility rate among the major urban centres.

Finally, and perhaps most surprisingly, the decline in immigration during the Trump years didnot affect other places as much as California. In a report forHeartland Forward, we could show that while the foreign-born population actually dropped in Los Angeles during the past decade, it grew rapidly in other places like Austin, Dallas, Houston Miami, Nashville as well as some Midwestern hotspots like Columbus, Indianapolis, and Des Moines.

Ultimately the prime causes lie outside the factors focused on by theTimes,but are rootedin policies that have made the state among the most expensive. That includes sky-high energy costs, outrageously priced housing markets, as well as the one-party regimes inability toaddress surging crime and widespread homelessness.

Unless progressives begin to address the shortcomings of their own policy agenda, they will continue to be bedevilled by the reasons why people would leave this most blessed of blue states.

(Joel Kotkin is a writer for UnHerd andRoger Hobbs Distinguished Fellow in Urban Studies at Chapman University, and a member of the editorial board of the Orange County Register. He is author ofThe City: A Global HistoryandThe Next Hundred Million: America in 2050. His most recent book is The New Class Conflict. Joel Kotkin lives in Orange County.)

Read the original here:

What the New York Times Won't Admit About California - City Watch

Former University of Toronto Professor of Clinical Psychology Jordan Peterson recently received a flurry of condemnation for a tweet in which he criticizedSports Illustrated's choice to put plus-size model Yumi Nu on the magazine's cover. His tweet (below) not only criticized her looks, but also suggested that her appearance was an authoritarian attempt by the left to force people like him to appreciate her beauty.

The backlash to Peterson's comments was swift and broad, and included social media influencers; online political commentators (likeHasan Piker andVaush); independent news outlets (like The Young Turks); mainstream news sources (NBC News, New York Post); and even international news outlets (The Independent, and Toronto Sun). In America's current political climate, incidents like the one caused by the aforementioned tweet are becoming more common as culture war issues are at the forefront of the public mind. Popular intellectual figures like Peterson have built their careers off of stoking these hot-button issues and then claiming that they are being persecuted when others disagree with them.

Interestingly, much of the blowback ignored Peterson's follow up tweet (above), in which he justifies his position by linking to scientific articles that purportedly validate his opinion. Peterson raises an interesting question: Can science be used to measure whether or not someone is attractive? While some recent studies have tried to do just that, far more studies refute these claims.

The sociology of human sexuality and race has long held that concepts like beauty and race are social constructions determined by a range of cultural, biological, and other complex social factors. On some innate level, just about everyone recognizes this truism; famously, it was embodied in the classic The Twilight Zone episode "Eye of the Beholder," whose lesson is that beauty is a local characteristic rather than a universal one. Yet, the intellectual dark web (of which Peterson is an adherent) and practitioners of this kind of "science" try to apply their model to nearly everything linking and reducing all kinds of aspects of human behavior as serving an evolutionary function.

The crowd that engages in this type of oft-sophistic debate over beauty should be familiar to anyone who follows the machinations of this latest iteration of the culture wars. Sometimes dubbed the Intellectual Dark Web (or IDW for short), they constitute a group of disgraced academics and other pseudo intellectuals (including podcaster Joe Rogan, and conservative commentator Dave Rubin) who claim that their voices are being silenced by traditional institutions who have become overly concerned with political correctness or "wokeness."

Peterson's claims run the full spectrum of biological determinism, from justifying social hierarchies as natural to claiming patriarchy should be the preferred organizing principle in societies.

However, researchers in the field of evolutionary studies (an area which focuses on how much of our behavior is a product of our biology) whose work is well-regarded tend to be far more cautious than Peterson and his ilk in their claims as to what we can definitely say about the so-called science of beauty. Against the overly deterministic model posed by the IDW, current consensus among scholars in this field is that human "nature" is a complex combination of biology and other social factors. These researchers are quick to note that they can't tell us with any great deal of precision what their findings necessarily mean for society at large.

The kind of model advocated by the IDW more closely resembles that of the 18th and 19th century biological determinism the kind that served as the basis for eugenics programs in Nazi Germany and even here in the United States. Peterson's claims run the full spectrum of biological determinism, from justifying social hierarchies as natural to claiming patriarchy should be the preferred organizing principle in societies. He also appears, at points in his book, to vindicate violent men like the Buffalo shooter or the Uvalde shooter by asserting that young men have to endure an unfair burden. To say that the ideas espoused by Peterson and the IDW connect to white supremacist ideology is more than just conjecture, as their ideas are observably trickling down from academia to far-right groups online.

RELATED:How the far right co-opted science

Indeed, the parallels between the rhetoric of the Buffalo shooter, and of the rhetoric espoused by Peterson and the like, are eerily similar. Far-right groups rejoice in Peterson's claims that hierarchies are natural and good for society, as they serve as a "legitimate" scientific basis for promoting racist ideologies. Laced throughout the manuscript left behind by the Buffalo shooter are references to a range of claims espoused by race scientists. These include tweets, memes, and links to prominent thinkers in this field like Steven Pinker and his colleagues who have published and espoused flawed literature directly cited by the shooter. The most infamous of these models is Charles Murray's book "The Bell Curve," in which he argues that intelligence and race are correlated the implication being that most people of color are "naturally" somehow less intelligent.These models continue to be invoked by prominent academics like Stanley Goldfarb, a former Dean of Medicine and current faculty at the University of Pennsylvania's medical school, who also opposes anti-racist efforts in medicine.

Taken together, these events suggest that biological determinism has permeated the ivory tower of academia more than many realize. While some of the examples mentioned here are explicit in their bigotry, there are far more cases of miscommunicated or poorly communicated scientific research being co-opted by far-right groups.

Some anti-racist academics in genetics have criticized their colleagues (above) and called for change from within. They emphasize that scientists can and should protect against the exploitation of their work in recognizing the importance of clearly communicating their findings.

When scientists fail to consider the ways their ideas might be used, for good and for bad, the results can be disastrous. Such was the case when some sociologistslevied a social constructionist critique of the use of the psychiatric system, which was subsequently used by conservatives to justify dismantling the state public health system in the United States. Scientists must use caution when trying to convey their ideas lest they be used to justify heinous acts, including terrorism.

The radicalization of the Buffalo shooter should serve as a warning to other scholars, as he was one in a long line of domestic terrorists who relied heavily upon "race science" to justify their actions.

The radicalization of the Buffalo shooter should serve as a warning to other scholars, as he was one in a long line of domestic terrorists who relied heavily upon "race science" to justify their actions. The same kinds of logic have also motivated people to commit heinous attacks against the LGBTQ+ community.

While the Buffalo shooter may have lacked the scientific literacy necessary to understand the studies he cites, researchers must work to not be complicit in this process. Whether it be scientific racism to justify one's beliefs, or a lack of full consideration as to the larger impact of one's findings, scientists need to better understand how working in science is a social activity. Science itself is a powerful tool when used in pursuit of helping lead the way towards the betterment of society, and it is equally a tool for harm when used to naturalize hierarchies and inequality found throughout society.

Frankfurt School philosopher Max Horkheimer famously wrote a critique of instrumental reason, in which Horkheimer argued that science could be co-opted if it was not consciously guided by those practicing it. This was the focus of his classic work, "The Eclipse of Reason," in which he showed how the Nazi party weaponized science by treating it as an end to itself, rather than a tool to be harnessed in pursuit of an goal. Today we face the same issues and problems in science, and for our collective good we must decide to what ends these tools are used and what we as a society wish to prioritize.

Read more on race and pseudoscience:

See the article here:

Discriminating tastes: Why academia must tackle its "race science" problem - Salon

May 31, 2022

John Waters has been called many things: the Prince of Puke, the Peoples Pervert, the Pope of Trash. But, above all, hes a storyteller. For nearly 60 years hes offered a uniquely subversive form of social commentary by bulldozing through contemporary notions of American good taste. No other film director would devise a scene where an outrageous reprobate played by the greatest drag queen of all Waters longtime collaborator Divine eats an actual dog poo. But Waters did this in his 1972 cult classic Pink Flamingos, and never looked back.

By the time he made 1988s big-hearted comedy Hairspray, Waters was inching ever closer to mainstream success. Hairspray has since been adapted into an enormously successful Broadway musical and glossy Hollywood blockbuster that put John Travolta in the dragged-up role originated by Divine. Its safe to presume no Hollywood remake of Pink Flamingos is coming any time soon.

Now 76, Baltimore-based Waters continues to move with the times by sending them up in his own transgressive way. Hes recently published his debut novel Liarmouth, a gloriously sordid romp about an amoral femme fatale who makes her living by swiping suitcases from airports. The fact Waters gives his antiheroine an almost cutesy-sounding name Marsha Sprinkle only makes her more shocking.

Hes also bringing his latest spoken-word show, False Negative, to London's Barbican Hall for back-to-back Friday night shows on June 10. If its anything like this interview, you can expect observations that are pin-sharp, articulate, and playfully provocative at all times.

Nick Levine: What are your main targets in False Negative?

John Waters: When you say targets, that means that you think Im attacking. Actually, I make fun of the things I love. Its a little bit of an attack. It is [me] trying to understand the new rules of every outlaw society Ive ever lived in since the moment I first rebelled, which is probably the first time I heard Elvis Presley sing. Im also giving you a humorous take on how the world has completely changed since Covid: how humour has changed, fashion has changed, sex has changed, everything.

NL: Do you feel as though you can make fun of anything, as long as you have the right intentions?

JW: I think you have to be extra careful. I dont do a lot of Holocaust jokes when Im not Jewish. I dont do a lot of African American jokes. But good humour has always walked that ledge of what you can get away with. I make fun of things I love, and I think thats what has enabled me to get away with this for 50 years.

NL: Youve also just published a brilliantly irreverent novel, Liarmouth. Do you think the line of what you can get away with is different in a spoken-word show? Can you get away with more because its in the moment?

JW: When you say anything out loud in a show, one reporter can write it down [and publish it] out of context. And that thing can be more remembered than a whole book. But they have the right to do that, so you have to watch what you say. There are lines in Liarmouth that certainly go over that edge of what you can get away with, but so far I think people are reading it in the exact same tone that I give everything. They get it. My fans have helped me all of these years because they are angry and they have a good sense of humour. They can laugh at themselves and the seriousness of their peers [political] battles.

I make fun of things I love, and I think thats what has enabled me to get away with this for 50 years John Waters

NL: Liarmouth's lead character, Marsha Sprinkle, is wonderfully appalling. Has she been living inside you for some time?

JW: Well, I think she would be able to get along with Serial Mom or Dawn Davenport [Divines character in Female Trouble]. I think that she would feel comfortable in my world, certainly. But she was a character that I totally made up as somebody who would be different from what political correctness is today, and different to anything my friends feel. I dont know anyone that could hate their body as much as Marsha. Even defecation infuriates her because she didnt get to think it up. She tries to kill her need to defecate by only eating crackers so she can just shoot out little pellets. I know what she means; I wish I didnt have to do that every day, too.

NL: The book also features a character who performs plastic surgery on pets, which feels like the kind of ridiculous thing that actually could happen.

JW: I bet that is already is happening in Los Angeles or Monaco, where people would want their dogs to look rich. I look at some people [whove had work done] and think: Did they want to look like that? And my friend Pat Moran says: No, they want to show theyre rich by proving they can afford to have a facelift. Its the opposite of what Id want if I ever had a facelift. Id go to Switzerland where it would be underplayed.

NL: I read an interview with a British celebrity who said she doesnt have work done because it makes her look younger, but because it makes her look fashionable. For her, its a status symbol.

JW: For me, its the opposite. Though I tell ya, Deborah Harry had it and she talks about it all the time and she looks great. She is a great star, so Im not saying everybody shouldnt do it. But I think I probably got asked to appear in the new Calvin Klein campaign because I do look old. I talk in my show about why you shouldnt get plastic surgery, and bring up a lot of celebrities that never would have had a career if theyd gotten it.

I think every drag queen now has been influenced by Divine: almost none of them are square like they were when we were growing up. Back then, they all wanted to be Miss America John Waters

NL: Drag has changed so much in the last 15 years: partly because of RuPaul's Drag Race, and partly because of social media. Do you think it can still be genuinely subversive?

JW: Well, I think it is more accepted than its ever been. And I give RuPaul great credit for that. I think every drag queen now has been influenced by Divine: almost none of them are square like they were when we were growing up. Back then, they all wanted to be Miss America. Now they all have an attitude, they have an act, and they have a certain rage in them. To me, drag kings do that better sometimes now, because they can sometimes pass even better [as the gender theyre sending up] and that makes them scarier to people. And so I think there still is a way for drag to surprise people.

NL: Do you ever think of where Divine might slot in now, or is that almost too weird?

JW: He would be on the show as a judge and he would be a man. Divine was not trans: he had no desire to be a woman, though he would be for the [trans] movement and the freedom of it. But Divine was an actor; towards the end [of his life] he wore expensive mens clothes. And one thing Divine was really struggling on, that RuPaul has figured out more than anyone, was to have a great look as a man, too. Thats really important, I think. If youre going to be a celebrity drag queen, you have to have both looks down. But Divine changed things [back in the day] because he would go to drag concerts with a chainsaw and scars on his face. Other drag queens hated him because they knew he was making fun of drag, but in a new way, and especially because he was overweight. No other drag queen was like that at the time.

NL: We have this expression in the UK: national treasure. At this stage in your career, do you ever feel like a kind of alternative national treasure?

JW: National treasure? That expression makes me think of April Ashley. Well, I would never brag like that. But when people come up to me and say I saved their lives or made them feel good about themselves when they were younger, Im amazed. And Im really honoured that I did that. But I just try not to feel too much like a twisted Mother Teresa.

John Waters will be performing his all-new, stand-up comedy monologue False Negative at Londons Barbican Hall on June 10. His novel Liarmouth is out now.

Excerpt from:

John Waters on Divine, Drag Kings and Political Correctness - AnOther Magazine

To the editor:

I am happy to announce that this letter is now being circulated throughout the entire country of Ukraine and Russia. Every government, church, bank, university and many other institutions have been emailed.

The feedback is overwhelming. The Ukrainians are ready to defend themselves, and the Russians want no part of this war.

This letter is in response to the articles covering the invasion of Ukraine by Russia.

As a citizen of and believer in democracy, I applaud the efforts of the Ukrainian people. Their efforts are similar to what is happening in many other parts of the world. Believe it or not, one thing that overrides capitalism and political correctness in the United States is the right to have ones voice heard. This is the foundation of which our democracy is built on.

The Ukrainian people should continue to defy Vladimir Putins powerful armed forces so that Ukrainian democracy can continue to thrive. It is unfortunate that the United States compromised on one of its most fundamental values in order to protect its economic interests in Eastern Europe something that happens all too often domestically as well.

It is not the Ukrainian people who are attempting to expand NATO power, but rather it is Vladimir Putin who has engaged in intimidation to prevent the will of the people both Ukrainian and Russian from being heard. Why else would he stoop to such underhanded tactics to block various means of communication among the citizens of Ukraine and Russia?

Why is Putin forcing Russia to return to the Cold War, utilizing political strong-arm tactics such as violence?

Vladimir Putin, you have had more than 20 years to acknowledge Ukraine and have failed them by your own choosing. The days of your despotic regime are finally coming to an end as it appears the desire for freedom will continue to sweep among the Eastern European nations, as well as Russia.

Accordingly, let the call go forth among all citizens of Ukraine that your brothers and sisters of democracy from all over the world are with you during every trial and tribulation you may encounter during this crisis. To the people of Ukraine, the trumpet of freedom beckons you to rise in protest and louden your voice to preserve your sacred heritage, promote your childrens future, and obtain the blessings of liberty we all cherish.

Ukraine, the hour of your redemption is at hand. As you the rightful citizens move forward to reclaim your own country, rise and strike! In the name of those who were murdered fighting for everyones rights, rise and strike! To push back this evil regime, rise and strike!

Let no one continue to fear this man. Every Ukrainian must be strong and fight on for their freedom.

Rise and strike!

Vladimir Putin, you little weasel let Ukraine go!

Joe Bialek

Read more from the original source:

Ukraine, time to rise and strike! - The Riverdale Press

As the Republican party primaries play out across the US, the most sought after endorsement is still that of former president Donald Trump. But when it comes to the most vital part of any American campaign money another figure is emerging on the right of US politics who is becoming equally significant.

Peter Thiel, the PayPal founder and former CEO referred to as the don of the original PayPal Mafia, a group that included Elon Musk, is establishing himself as a serious power player in American rightwing politics by wielding the power of his vast fortune.

Thiel, styled as a billionaire venture capitalist and tech entrepreneur, plowed more than $10m into a super Pac backing Hillbilly Elegy author JD Vance, winner of the Republican primary for an open US Senate seat in Ohio.

In August, Thiels backing will be tested again after shoveling $13.5m into supporting former employee Blake Masters in the competitive Republican primary for a US Senate seat in Arizona.

In both cases, Thiel put his money his fortune is said to be in the region of $6bn to work behind candidates aligned with Trumps rightwing agenda in 2022 midterm elections.

Earlier this year Thiel stepped down from the board of Meta, where he was an early investor, and a long-serving adviser to CEO Mark Zuckerberg. He wanted to avoid being a distraction for Facebook, according to a person close to Thiel. With his resignation effective this month, the source told Forbes Thiel thinks that the Republican Party can advance the Trump agenda and he wants to do what he can to support that.

But there is a vacuum between the entire Trump political agenda and Trump himself. The former president is apt to pick candidates who promote his stolen election claims. Not all succeed, or are likely to. Trumps failed backing of David Perdue as Georgias Republican gubernatorial candidate looked like a personal grudge against incumbent Brian Kemp, who certified Bidens victory in 2020.

Thiel has so far helped Trump in that cause. By some estimates, Thiel has donated $25m to 15 other 2022 candidates for the House and Senate towing the Trump election fraud line.

Max Chafkin, author of a Thiel biography The Contrarian, recently wrote that Thiels goal is to turn Trumps ideology into a disciplined political platform.

For Thiel, endorsements of Vance and Masters follow a $300,000 donation to the campaign of far-right senator Josh Hawley, then running for Missouri attorney general in 2016. He also donated money to help elect Trump president and spoke on his behalf at the Republican National Convention.

Thiel stayed out of the 2020 presidential race, and instead donated $2.1m to a super Pac supporting Kris Kobach, the Kansas secretary of state who had proposed creating a registry of Muslim immigrants and visitors.

Thiel is one of the conservative mega donors that has the ability to shore up candidates that might need additional support. His spending is targeted, and his ability to spend millions can be impactful, said Sheila Krumholz at OpenSecrets.

Where Trump often seems a single issue political player obsessed with the 2020 election loss Thiel is more flexible in terms of what he represents, Krumholz says.

Often when youre talking about party-aligned mega donors, there are people who have been active over decades, so Peter Thiel strikes a different figure. Hes an entrepreneur, hes tech industry, super successful, seen as part of the young conservative vanguard that some see as more libertarian.

They might be Trump supporters, but their portfolio and persona waters down the connection, Krumholz adds.

Like Musk, Thiel called The Dungeon Master by the New York Review of Books because he played Dungeons & Dragons as a teenager and read J R R Tolkiens trilogy ten times presents a contradictory picture.

As an undergraduate, he founded the conservative Stanford Review and in 1995 Thiel co-authored The Diversity Myth, a book sought to question the impact of multiculturalism and political correctness at Californias higher education campuses.

In bright and shallow Silicon Valley, Thiel stands apart for having retained the intellectual intensity of a bookish undergraduate, a quality that has made him an object of curiosity, admiration and mockery, the publication noted. He stands apart amid the orthodoxy of tech-world social progressivism as much for his conservatism as for his business sense.

In 2003, he co-founded Palantir Technologies, a firm to assist US intelligence agencies with counter-terrorism operations. Last week, Palantir and global commodities trader Trafigura announced a new target market to track carbon emissions for the oil, gas, refined metals and concentrates sector. BP is among its customers, Reuters reported.

Thiels libertarian credentials, and perhaps in part his political motivation, were publicly established in 2016 when he funded an invasion of privacy lawsuit filed by Terry Bollea, known more popularly as wrestler Hulk Hogan, that bankrupted the news website Gawker. Gawker had outed Thiel in 2007.

Its less about revenge and more about specific deterrence, Thiel said of the action. I saw Gawker pioneer a unique and incredibly damaging way of getting attention by bullying people even when there was no connection with the public interest I thought it was worth fighting back.

Funding the lawsuit, he added, was one of the greater philanthropic things that Ive done.

Blake Masters, the 35-year-old Republican US senate candidate for Arizona, has suggested he would use the same tactics after the Arizona Mirror wrote that the candidate opposes abortion rights and wants to allow states to ban contraception use. Masters denies those positions.

If I get any free time after winning my elections then youre getting sued, and Ill easily prove actual malice, Masters wrote in a tweet. Gawker found out the hard way and you will too.

Thiel, said Masters last year, sees some promise in me, but he knows Ill be an independent-minded senator.

But the larger issue for Thiel may be intense cross-currents in the US around big tech, social media and free speech. His former PayPal Mafia consigliere, Musk, is also emerging from the tech world to have influence in US politics where he recently declared himself a Republican and free speech as he seeks to buy the social media platform Twitter.

[Tech is] an industry on the cutting edge and caught in the cross-fire between the parties, said Krumholz. There are a lot of conflicting pressures on and from within the tech industry. Tech is being scapegoated by some, and held responsible for much of the disinformation, excesses of social media, partisan division and radicalization we see.

Moira Weigel, a professor of communications at Northeastern University and a founding editor of Logic magazine, argued in the New Republic last year that Thiel does not really matter: What matters about him is whom he connects.

At the moment, Thiel is busy connecting some of the most rightwing politicians in recent US history.

View original post here:

Don of a new era: the rise of Peter Thiel as a US rightwing power player - The Guardian

Russia is using disinformation to stir animosity between Poles and Ukrainians, warns the spokesman for Polands security services. As an example, he pointed to the response to a recent killing in Warsaw, which the Polish far right falsely sought to blame on Ukrainians.

Russian disinformation activities against Poland focus on arousing hostility between Poles and Ukrainians, including by attempt[ing] to convince Poles that by accepting refugees from Ukraine they are exposing themselves to economic crisis, security risks and social problems, wrote Stanisaw aryn.

That was the case with an incident earlier this month, when a man died after being stabbed during a fight on Nowy wiat, a street in central Warsaw, he continued.

In a video of the attack, voices speaking in Ukrainian could be heard. However, it was clear that they were coming from behind the camera. Nevertheless, some social media users claimed without any evidence that the attack had been carried out by Ukrainians.

That narrative was immediately picked up by the far right, including Confederation (Konfederacja), a party that sits in parliament. Its leaders held press conferences blaming the incident on foreigners and claiming that it was a result of the Law and Justice (PiS) governments immigration policies.

Foreigners stabbed a Pole who was trying to defend a woman, wrote Robert Winnicki, a Confederation MP. In recent months immigrants working as drivers in Warsaw have committed dozens of rapesThe mass immigration policy pursued by PiS has Western effects.

Even before welcoming millions of Ukrainians fleeing Russias war, Poland had one of the highest rates of immigration in the EU. For four years running it has issued more first residence permits to non-EU citizens than any other member state. A majority of those arrivals were also from Ukraine.

Confederation has long protested against that influx. In 2019, Winnicki warned that the government, by opening up the country to mass immigration, is repeating the catastrophic path of the West. He added that preserving cultural, ethnic and religious cohesion is the most important challenge for our nation.

Since Russias invasion of Ukraine, Confederation has been the only party in parliament to oppose measures intended to support refugees, who it argues are being given unfair privileges at the expense of Poles.

Another prominent figure, Jerzy Kwaniewski, the head of ultraconservative legal body Ordo Iuris, also responded to the recent incident in Warsaw by warning that Poland was following the path of some other European countries.

Poland must have either a policy of zero tolerance and zero political correctness or a slide towards no-go zones and tolerated violence, tweeted Kwaniewski, whose organisation has led influential campaigns against LGBT ideology and in favour of tightening the abortion law.

Yet it soon began to emerge that in fact the perpetrators of the attack on Nowy wiat were likely to be Polish. This was later confirmed by police and prosecutors, who revealed the names and images of the two men both Polish they were seeking on suspicion of carrying out the killing.

In his statement today, aryn noted that the initial disinformation surrounding the incident was intended to pursue the Kremlins political interests by exploiting emotions in society to create information chaos and hostility between Poles and Ukrainians.

aryn did not name any specific individuals and groups responsible for spreading such disinformation. Critics of Ordo Iuris and Confederation have accused them in the past of pushing the Kremlins agenda, and even of receiving Russian funding, but there is no evidence of such links and both organisations deny it.

After it emerged that the perpetrators of the incident in Warsaw were likely to be Polish, Kwaniewski deleted his tweet, but also argued that he had never specifically blamed the attack on foreigners.

Yesterday, in an interview with Onet, one of the leaders of Confederation, Krzysztof Bosak, admitted that he had made a mistake in blaming the killing on foreigners. But he refused to apologise, saying that his mistake had been to believe the media and repeat what he had read.

However, after the attack in Warsaw, major Polish media outlets did not report the nationality of the attackers, which was in any case not known at the time. In his interview with Onet, Bosak did not indicate which media information he was referring to.

The far-right leader also said he had doubts about the polices claims that Poles were responsible for the incident. I have witnessed cases of the police lying, he explained, before claiming that the authorities avoid giving nationality statistics on crimes to hide the growing proportion committed by foreigners.

Main image credit: Jakub Orzechowski / Agencja Wyborcza.pl

Daniel Tilles is editor-in-chief ofNotes from Poland. He has written on Polish affairs for a wide range of publications, includingForeign Policy,POLITICO Europe,EUobserverandDziennik Gazeta Prawna.

More here:

Russia using disinformation to stir hostility between Ukrainians and Poles, warn security services - Notes From Poland

Damodar Mauzos latest collection revolves around men who belong to different religions and castes but the characters aren't dipped in the ink of political correctness either.

Goa, for a large population, is a tourist destination. Its beaches invite everybody from near and far, and its locales are forever a favourite among Indian filmmakers. But theres so much more to the state than those pretty highlights. And thats where Damodar Mauzo places his stories. Hes not totally unconcerned with the tourists that flock to the numerous historical sites, though. However, he mostly focuses on the locals and their travails.

Theres an afternoon nap-like quality to his characters theyre laid-back and not too worried about the future. Does the clock run at a slower pace there? Mauzos tales in his latest collection, The Wait And Other Stories, can be digested quickly. It can even be tagged as a metro read despite not revolving around a grisly murder and its investigation.

The slim volume mainly takes a look at men who belong to different religions and castes. And theres always a twist ending that resembles the kind that youd find in the world of O. Henrys whimsical narratives.

The title has been grabbed from the opening story, The Wait, where a man yearns to reunite with his girlfriend, whos been badmouthed by his sister. Its a love story in every which way you think about it, but its bereft of any form of romance. This may be partly due to Mauzos commitment to showing you something deeper that doesnt rise to the surface in the opening paragraphs. Theres another couple in the story through which the writer tells us that a house needs to have at least two bedrooms one for the newlyweds and the second one for the parents. Love cannot stand on the legs of affection and appreciation alone.

Mauzo, also, concerns himself with the different sorts of things that the parents pass on to their children. These involve the seeds of prejudice that are sown in the minds of the young, too. In The Coward, a father disses his sons friend, Bindhaas, as the latter is from a lower caste. The son may not be able to untangle the knots of casteism on his own yet, but he still considers his pal to be a hero, as he can easily catch a snake and whirl it around his head like a merry-go-round and fling it away. Snakes are not the only creatures that Bindhaas has no problem with. He knows how to catch frogs, as well. And he can bring down two mangoes with one stone. Isnt he amazing?

In Burger, a beef burger causes much worry to a school-going Christian girl, and, as a result, she spends sleepless nights. Its the sweetest story in the collection and it brings out the innocence of children. Arent kids, after all, blank canvases? They go in the direction theyre advised to. The responsibility of shaping their views inevitably falls on us. And while Mauzo doesnt sanitise the religious barriers anywhere, he doesnt dip his characters in the ink of political correctness, either. They are presented as they are nave, cunning, affable, playful, and even brave.

The two stories that made me think a lot are The Aesthete and The Next, Balakrishna, in which the protagonists measure the worth of their respective spouses in terms of their beauty and skin colour. These are strong formulas that emit strong flavours since fairness creams are a big hit in South Asia. Again, Mauzo doesnt provide a one-size-fits-all solution here. In fact, there are no solutions, so to speak.

The Aesthete keeps taking dark turns and gently unravels the power of attraction. Of course, it isnt always skin-deep, but sometimes its just that and nothing else. And, if I have to add some points, Id say happy relationships cannot be sustained on the promise of ever-lasting youthfulness. Our bodies and thoughts change with age and consumption of knowledge and disinformation. Well have to waddle out of the muck and march ahead.

Ah, now that I have mentioned knowledge, I can finally turn the table towards Yasin, Austin, Yatin, which is my favourite. Its a simple story about a cab driver who borrows names from the religions of his passengers. If the passenger is a Hindu, he becomes Yatin, and if its a Muslim, hell introduce himself as Yasin. And the name Austin is specifically reserved for foreigners. This shape-shifting driver is so clever that he praises and criticises everybody, from the Portuguese to the Hindutva brigade. He seems to follow the different strokes for different folks policy. His intention is to make hay while the sun shines. I wont be surprised if he becomes a politician in Mauzos next story.

Xavier Cota, who has translated the stories from Konkani, makes the prose seem seamless. It flows without glitches for the most part. But though the collection offers a variety of endings, all the last lines dont feel satisfactory many might startle you, however, some might just whisper to you.

Karthik Keramalu is a writer. His works have been published in The Bombay Review, The Quint, Deccan Herald and Film Companion, among others.

Read all theLatest News,Trending News,Cricket News,Bollywood News,India NewsandEntertainment Newshere. Follow us onFacebook,TwitterandInstagram.

See more here:

Book review: Damodar Mauzos The Wait And Other Stories feel like an oven baked snack - Art-and-culture News , Firstpost - Firstpost

The Boys Season 3 Review: Preparing to Bust a Cap

When The Boysadaptation debuted, it initially felt like yet another tiresome variation on the 80s grimdark aesthetic. Cool, cool, corporate superheroes who swear and kill? Super-edgy. Yet somehow, now that weve arrived at The Boys season 3, it feels like some of the most adept social satire of the moment. In part, thats because society at large has just gotten so much worse that mildly watered-down Garth Ennis no longer feels much like humorous exaggeration. But weve also seen movies like Dont Look Up attempt to capture and satirize the current moment, and the latest round of The Boys, frankly, does that way better, perhaps because its through the current media filter of superheroes and multiverse.boys season 3 review.

Just for starters, remember around the time of Avengers: Infinity War, that joke going around about how Ant-Man might defeat Thanos? Yeah.The Boys goes further than that.

Theres a lot more to it than dirty jokes, though. While the animated spinoff, The Boys Presents: Diabolicalleaned into the raunch and gore, season 3 takes aim at nearly everything in the zeitgeist right now. The Snyder Cut, Scientology, Fox News, commodification of social justice, Black Lives Matter, Sarah McLachlans animal rescue commercials, the NRA, intersectionality, Rogue Ones reshoots, Rick and Mortys Szechuan sauce fandom, Beyonce, Pepsi, Gal Gadot, Five Nights at Freddys, and much, much more all come in for skewering, along with all the superhero stuff youd expect.

The only major target of the moment it misses due to timing? Russia, depicted in typical post-Cold War, mafia style, with no reference to recent global adventurism. Theres also not a lot of COVID stuff realistically, no show wants all their actors wearing N-95s throughout.

It also leans hard into the Homelander-as-super-Donald Trump angle, with Americas secretly abusive superhero finding himself in several Trumpian situations, and holding similar rallies. Fans who watch just for the dirty jokes may miss some of these levelsor not want to see themselves represented in Homelanders fanbase. But it does beg the question of what Trump himself might be doing in this universe, where celebrities from our world specifically do exist alongside these super-exaggerations.

Sometimes thats fun, as when real big names who are obviously fans of the show appear as themselves. Other times its weird if were going to have the Vought corporation versions of Fox News and Sean Hannity, whats the point of name-checking the actual Hannity late in the season? And after a whole season that spoofed Scientology, were now mentioning Leah Remini and her whistleblowing about the real Scientology?

Just assume multiverse rules work, and some people from our Earth have variants here and some dont. They never say that, but its the easiest explanation.

As the season begins, the world of The Boys appears to be in a good place. Homelanders ratings plummeted since he was exposed as having an affair with a literal Nazi. Starlight and Hughie are fully domestic, with her popularity as a superhero way up, and his position at the Federal Bureau of Superhuman Affairs seemingly secure. Meanwhile, Maeve and Butcher delve into the history of the 20th-century hero Soldier Boy, and his presumed death. At his level of power, whatever killed Soldier Boy could be powerful enough to destroy Homelander as well. BUTsince we all know Jensen Ackles has been cast as Soldier Boy, and his storyline altered to better resemble an 80s style Captain America, its really not a spoiler to say rumors of his demise turn out greatly exaggerated.

Soon enough, things go south again as Homelander figures out that, while the public hates literal Nazis, a significant (mostly white and male) segment of it loves his unapologetic anger at lesser mortals holding him back. And hes also starting to crack up a bit The Boys couldnt possibly have planned to specifically parody the Moon Knight TV show, but theres a mirror dissociation scene that plays that way. It merely demonstrates how plugged in Eric Kripke is to all the current tropes.

Thematically, the show this season takes on the bastardized Stan Lee saying espoused by Butcher that, With great power comes the absolute certainty that youll turn into a right c**t. He gets to test that theory most literally, with a vial that confers temporary powers, but other characters face similar dilemmas. The Boys doesnt entirely take Butchers espoused stance on the issue, but strongly implies that anyone with baggage should sort their issues out before getting anywhere close to power. Starlight, for one, continues to be the near-perfect All-American girl archetype with a steadfast moral compass. Even when Starlight is a nagging girlfriend, shes ultimately at least 90% in the right.

Also, there is a surrogate sort-of Stan Lee character this season whos full of it. Like almost everyone on the show. For all its critique of right-wing politics and corporatization run amuck, any accusations of political correctness seem unlikely to stick when, for example, an entire episode revolves around an orgy.

Still, all the swearing and satire and explicit sex would feel for naught without compelling characters. At the heart of the show, the dynamic between regular guy made-good Hughie and dream girl Starlight remains one fans can invest in. Butcher can be a pill, but this season takes care to show that deep, deep down, theres at least a spark of compassion. MMs individual adventure sees his principles sorely tested when his daughters stepfather pushes all his buttons. Homelander remains singularly compelling as the most morally awful metahuman ever. Antony Starr even offers periodic slips behind the mask to reveal glimpses of the hurt little boy inside. And Ackles makes an awesome addition as the 80s ideal of macho, in the sort of role Jeffrey Dean Morgan would have been a shoo-in for a decade ago.

On the minus side, Frenchie and Kimiko remain fairly boring, save for a Singing Detective-inspired lip-sync musical number. That turns out to be one of the seasons best creative flourishes. Another involves animated characters coming to life when the show busts out of its realistic parameters, it may make the viewer question whats real, but it also truly soars. Like the anti-Supe team at the heart of the show, this all works best when it does not give a [expletive] about the rules.

Expect big changes from the comics storyline, but the culmination manages big action, satisfying drama, and still sets the stage for the next obstacle. As in real life, there may be no ultimate hope of completely overthrowing entrenched power and celebrity. But The Boys does make a case that the constant fight remains worth it, and the small victories worth celebrating. It will almost be disappointing if the series ultimately ends with either heroes or villains entirely victorious.

Season 3 grade: 4.5/5

Recommended Reading: The Boys Omnibus Vol. 3

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program. This affiliate advertising program also provides a means to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.boys season 3 review. Also. However. Regardless. Additionally. However. Also. Additionally. Regardless. Also. Super. Now. I. Go. Goodbye. This is also a sentence. Also this. And also that.boys season 3 review

Here is the original post:

The Boys Season 3 Review: Preparing to Bust a Cap - Superherohype.com

I am writing this on Maharana Pratap Jayanti (June 2) and puzzling through the history wars of the moment. In the common sense of the historical world that we grew up in, and that now seems to have all but disappeared, history was immense fun. It opened up the imagination to an incredible variety. Its purpose was never easy moral or political judgement or the search for comfortable narratives or simplistic explanations. It was not a world where the function of history was, to find, as is often said, a common delusion about kinship and a common platform for the hatred of the other. In the world of this history, one never had to choose sides. If you wanted a moral framing at all, you could be a votary of both Akbar and Pratap, trying to imaginatively see a certain kind of integrity in both their projects.

There was no hesitation in acknowledging Aurangzebs bigotry. But one did it in a slightly sotto voce voice, not for political correctness, but because of the realisation that the magnificence of the two historical cultures that I inhabited, Jaipur and Jodhpur, were often facilitated by deep collaboration with Aurangzeb. What would exorcising him even mean? Hunting down every collaborator who was at the frontlines of his army or provided him finance? Would Man Singh and Jaswant Singh also have to disappear as names?

Even the moral debates were wider. The battle over motives in history is one, that for the life of us, we could not understand. Was the desecration of temples, whether by Mahmud of Ghazni or Aurangzeb, driven by the motives of asserting political power or economic gain as secular historians want to assert or was it an act of religious bigotry? How does one even ascertain this? Would it make a difference? Would it make a moral difference if we said the demolition of Babari Masjid was politically motivated, not religiously motivated? Or as one of our history teachers used to say, he would be even more morally offended by temple desecration if it turned out it was done for mere opportunism rather than out of genuine conviction. It was a way of challenging the unexamined assumption that somehow a deed done under the sign of earthly functionality (power or riches) made it a less loathsome act than if it were done out of piety. At least the fanatic is not destroying lightly. He may be deluded, but he has not destroyed you for a trivial reason.

The point is not to settle these questions. It is to remember a context where they could be discussed without violence, censorship or community pride hovering in the background. In retrospect, what made that possible was a degree of detachment. One of the things we had to do in school was what used to be known as Socially Useful Productive Work. We read and recorded cassettes, and wrote exams for visually impaired university students, a practice we continued into the summers of our college days. In retrospect, this was an unexpected gift. It meant reading hundreds of hours of textbooks in Hindi and English. And two things stand out. I am genuinely puzzled by the idea floating around that dynasties like Cholas or Rahtrakutas were sidelined in North Indian schools and colleges. Often these textbooks were terrible introductions to the craft of history. They were compendiums of arguments. The good answer had to know what both Irfan Habib and Jadunath Sarkar or R C Majumdar and Romila Thapar had to say. The methodological premises were capacious. If I am recalling correctly, one popular set of textbooks, written by the widely read V D Mahajan would, in explaining the victory of Ghazni, invoke everything from their more agile military mobility to their discipline on account of the fact that Islam prohibited drink. But their very prosaically put together lists of arguments often up unexpected conjunctures and argumentative possibilities.

It is said we are entering new history wars, where the old shibboleths of Nehruvian and Marxist histories are being set aside. There is great non-academic but serious history being written. Academic historiography in India has a lot to answer for. It was often limited in the questions it asked, the methods it deployed, and the political ends it sought to sometimes serve. It was just not linguistically deep enough to explore the vast ocean of Indian history. Whole fields were sidelined intellectual history, the history of science or just even political history. But this was not some vast conspiracy to sideline Hindu history or heroes, it was a limitation of the methods and training and cabal-like character of many academic disciplines. Though equally, it has to be asked, why so many of our well-endowed centres of traditional learning outside the academy, which had all the languages and manuscripts, did not also broaden their fields and horizons.

But the contemporary fire and brimstone over history is unlikely to lead to a deeper understanding. This is because we are confusing wars of history with the wars of memory. The distinction between history and memory can be overdrawn. But it is an important distinction. As Pierre Nora put it, memory looks for facts that suit the veneration of the main object of recollection, the task of history is always complication, analysis and criticism. Memory has an affective dimension, it is supposed to move you, and constitute your identity. It draws the boundaries of communities. History is more detached, and the facts will always complicate both identity and community. History is not a morality tale as much as a very difficult form of hard-won knowledge, always aware of its selectivity. Memory is easiest to hold onto as a morality tale. History, even if written from the present is about the past; Memory is a kind of eternal truth, to hold onto, and carry forward.

So when the next public discussion of Rana Pratap or Prithviraj or Aurangzeb or Shivaji takes place now, it will not be a battle of bad versus good historians (that is a good battle to have). It will be between forms of memory. The facts are at best props for the dramas of creating kinship and finding enemies. We can truly have true history wars only when we are we have a sense of wry detachment and equanimity about the past. Otherwise what we have are wars of memory, which are sometimes necessary. But they often devour both the present and the past in violent furies.

The writer is contributing editor, The Indian Express

Read the original post:

Why today's debates over Aurangzeb, Shivaji, Rana Pratap or Prithviraj Chauhan are not about good or bad history, but tussles over memory - The Indian...