Category Archives: Politically Incorrect

You might as well debate whether autumn should follow summer, Tony Blair once said, as debate the nature or desirability of globalisation. Blair was, as so often, intellectually clear, politically provocative, and entirely incorrect.

For globalisation the treaties, processes and structures that have made the world more complex, inter-connected and inter-reliant is the product of political choices. Those choices, such as the regulation and deregulation of labour markets, the regulation and taxation of capital, and the terms on which countries traded with one another, determined not only that globalisation proceeded apace, but the nature of change it brought.

Trade in manufactured goods was liberalised, while services were protected. Trade deals with states that would clearly ignore the terms most notably China were agreed with little regard to their abuse. With domestic policies, some countries did more than others to protect their people from the winds of change, and some did more than others to protect their national infrastructure from the prying eyes of hostile states.

For a while, all seemed fine. We imported cheap clothes and manufactured goods. Our borrowing costs and inflation were kept down by government policies and savers in Asia. House prices rose and plenty felt better off for it.

But slowly the costs became more apparent. Mid-skilled work disappeared. Pay stagnated. As productivity increased, returns for workers failed to keep up with those for investors. As factories closed and manufacturing moved to Asia, the link between the success of British companies and the prosperity of British people ruptured: while once executives might have shared some gains with low and mid-skilled workers, these days such workers are employed in other countries.

Even some of the fruits of globalisation are turning to rot. While the limited development of the Chinese economy once kept inflation low, now it drives it up as we compete for scarce resources like oil and gas. While the abandonment of manufacturing was seen as the height of modernisation, during the pandemic we found we were exposed without it. While openness to foreign investment was once our leitmotif, now we understand it is exploited by hostile states to launder dirty money and gain leverage against us.

Even now our leaders are reluctant to see the truth. They cling to long-disproved liberal assumptions that our values are universal, that the rest of the world wants to become like us, that interconnectedness makes war impossible, that the liberalisation of trade inevitably leads to open societies and democratic politics and hope that events might still swing their way.

The longer this foolhardy hope goes on, the more painful the inevitable change will be, and the more our rivals and enemies will conspire to inflict new blows upon us. Russia, so long as it is led by Putin or his allies, cannot expect a return to normal diplomatic or economic relations. And like it or not, Western countries will soon be forced to decouple, perhaps to varying extents, from China.

But if this phase of globalisation is over, what comes next? To answer we first need to be honest with ourselves. We do not, as we often tell ourselves we do, live in a liberal, rules-based order. Since the Cold War we have lived in an American-led order, in which US military and financial might has allowed Washington to dominate the world. American hegemony is preferable to anything that might replace it, but we should not delude ourselves that global institutions and structures are in any way fair. They are backed by force, and the rules are bent to protect American interests.

That US-led order has not been destroyed, but it is challenged. America lost its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Through naivety and neglect, it invited China into the global trading system and watched as Beijing broke all the rules, dumped cheap products on the West, pilfered economic and military secrets, and caused deindustrialisation and social decay across the Rust Belt. American political instability, repeated elsewhere in the West, is directly linked to the economic and social anxiety fuelled in part by globalisation.

The rivals and enemies who challenge us do not seek to export their ideology, overthrow our system of government, or destroy our culture. But as China becomes more powerful, its global interests are growing and with them its security and military interests grow too. As Western relative power declines, the likes of Russia, Iran and North Korea will become more assertive.

The new model, then, needs to resist and restrict our rivals and enemies. It requires recognition that economic might matters, and so the pursuit of growth is not optional. It requires us to prioritise national resilience over the notional efficiency of stretched supply chains. It requires economic nationalism, strategic planning and the maintenance of domestic production and core capabilities.

It also demands closer cooperation across the West, and with allies who stand with us. We need new institutions and fora to secure such cooperation, and coordinated policies on defence and security, access to commodities like energy, and vital tech capabilities, from the manufacture of chips to expertise in sectors like artificial intelligence and telecommunications. We need to be prepared for the end of the open, global internet and a challenge to the dollar as the worlds reserve currency.

We will need to accept the reality of spheres of influence and, engage in a contest for support, power, trade and access to natural resources in non-aligned countries. We will need to accept we cannot help liberals and democrats in every country, and sometimes ally ourselves with countries that are neither liberal nor democratic. We will need to spend more on defence and security policy and use our combined aid budgets to rival Chinas belt and road initiative. At home, we will need to do more to heal the social and economic divides our enemies like to exploit.

There was nothing inevitable about the globalisation of the past three decades. Indeed, we are now approaching its end. But our security, prosperity and liberty depend on us shaping what follows.

Read the original:
Globalisation has run its sorry course. We must find a new model - The Telegraph

"Go back to your country," yelled a stubby, beet-red-faced Sox fan at a bar, located across from the Orioles stadium, at Camden Yards in downtown Baltimore. It was days after Freddie Gray, a 25-year-old unarmed Black man, was killed in police custody. As a result of the tragedy, a group of community members in combination with a few local activists, had organized a march to plea for justice and the arrests of Gray's uniformed killers.

I participated in that march, as an angry citizen, but more as a reporter. Things were 100% peaceful, until we intersected with the baseball crowd where, "Go back to your country," easily rolled off of the stubby guys tongue, as if he was more than sure we didn't belong in America, without question. As if we all weren't from east or west Baltimore. Needless to say, massive fights broke out shortly after the bigot's chant, and the rest is history.

"Go back to your country," is something that almost every person with Black or Brown skin living in America will hear at some point in their life. White people with heavy accents could yell, "I'm from Sweden, f**k America!" and still would probably never be told to go home. It's actually pretty funny, because the U.S. is always sold as this big ol' melting pot, until a POC pisses off the owners of that said pot and then it's no longer about "we" but more of an "us versus them" kind of thing.

Award-winning playwright Wajahat Ail brilliantly captures the "us versus them" feeling in his new memoir, "Go Back to Where You Came From: And Other Helpful Recommendations on How to Become American."

Ali, who is most known for his New York Times column, and CNN political commentary takes us to his early days of the deplorable nation where he emerged, the United States of America the suburbs of Fremont, California to be exact. There he learned the poison that race is in America at an early age, from how he was treated in school to his parents' unfair incarnation. Ali maintains humor and optimism while showing readers how the Liberals aren't even Liberal, and how nothing has changed, not even in the post-Obama era. Ali details why it's so necessary to find humor in the midst of the chaos that is politics, on a recent episode of "Salon Talks."

Watch my "Salon Talks" episode with Ali here or read a Q&A of our conversation below to learn more about how his family survived the rise of Islamophobia post 9/11, his non-traditional journey into becoming a writer and the hilarious way he demolishes trolls.

The following conversation has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

During the pandemic you got a chance to spend extra time at home with your kids. Are you still a child creation advocate?

My child, Nusayba, as you'll find out in the book is five years old. She's a cancer survivor and she's an immunosuppressed. And as we are recording this to my left she's doing her gym virtually, and my son who's seven is also in the other room doing virtual school. And then I got a baby running around and this wildling might crash through the door.

I hope we're over that pandemic, but 60,000 people died in January. An average of 1,700 deaths a day, just last week. And so, it's one of those situations where I would love for my kids to go to school. Trust me, I got two kids in virtual school. I got three kids running around. I'm exhausted. But at the same time, it's like, whatever keeps them healthy and whatever keeps people healthy. And the second thing I'll say is, I was just thinking about this right before we start recording is I'm like, "Man, I'm so tired. I'm so exhausted." But maybe if I look back on this moment I'm like, "I got to spend time with my kids at this really precious age. Who gets that?"

One of the things about your book "Go Back To Where You Came From" is you cover some very deep topics. Topics that can go dark pretty quickly, but it still has you maintain humor throughout the whole book. Is humor your main coping mechanism?

That's a good question. Is it coping or is it just how I process the world? Maybe it might be both because they often say if you're not laughing, you're crying and I'm not one to cry. My wife thinks I'm a cyborg. She goes, "I've never seen you cry before. What's wrong with you?" For those listening, it's okay to cry, cry. It's good. It's healthy, it's therapeutic. But I have like this, I'm this old antiquated Spartan male from this older generation. We just suffer quietly and suffer well even though I'm completely opposed to it that's how I'm built.

I think laughter and humor allows you catharsis, which is release. It allows you to kind of enjoy an absurdist view of the darkness that oftentimes accompanies life, the challenges, and the pain, and the sadness. And then also sometimes it's a good way just to feel better. I think in a way in conveying these stories and specifically some of the interesting challenges that my family and I went through, yeah, I could have cried about it, but I think processing it through humor gives me a vantage point and a perspective in a way that I could also communicate the story to the audience in an accessible way that allows you I hope to take it very seriously because it's serious stuff, but also find some of the absurd humor in this thing called life.

You're like Generation X, Millennial cusp.

That's right. That's exactly right.

Me too, and I feel like our generation wasn't really allowed to cry. Millennials have it good. They cry, they get awards and plaques and people giving them gifts, but we cry we kind of get ran out of society.

It's like because they got Brene Brown. So, you can Brene Brown your life if you're a Gen Z or a Millennial, like vulnerable. We didn't have these words. Vulnerable is the buzzword right now. Trauma is another buzzword. If you were a dude crying in front of your other boys, let's just be honest, they're like, "Yo, man up. What's wrong with you? You seem like a B." And then now it's like, "It's OK to get in touch with your feelings." We didn't even have the word self-care. That's something beautiful with Gen Z. Ours was suffer well, brush yourself off, man up, work hard, and then die at the age of 65.

Now self-care is get a massage and buy yourself something nice. And I think when we were kids self-care was like the crack era.

You got dudes our age getting pedicures. Get some bath salt and no one blinks, which is good. Look, I'm saying, this is good. You got to take care of yourself because oftentimes the Gen X and Millennial cusp that you and I are, we inherited some of the baggage, the trauma, and the bad behaviors of our elders who weren't given this language, right?

Absolutely.

What they were taught was man up, suffer well, suffer quietly, never talk about your emotions. Even if you got problems, mental health issues, financial issues, you just man up. Man up and stay quiet and grit it with your teeth. And if you're a model minority, smile your white teeth because you are so happy. You're the token, and what will people say? So just smile.

We're at that certain age where you get older and you listen to the older generation, right? The older men and women, they kind of open up to you, and you realized, "Oh, wow. That uncle suffered from depression. That person has anxiety. That person went to jail. That person has been sad for 20 years." All of a sudden you're like, "Oh, I understand this person," but they never had the ability or the permission to share the type of story that I was able to share in this book.

My experience is different from yours, which gave me the space to learn so much to feel more connected to your journey, to that immigrant experience, to the Muslim experience. I've learned so much and it got me thinking about audience because I felt like I'm definitely the audience, but then a part of it also frustrated me because I know that Brock Strong Balls is probably not going to pick up the book. Strong Balls is probably going to look at a tweet or look at a meme, even though that person or that prototype could learn so much and be able to connect with you.

In the opening of the book is I decided to experiment with how a memoir can be written. And so, instead of starting it with "once upon a time," I started with emails that I get. Lovely emails, emails that give me very unsolicited, helpful advice, such as, "Go back to where you came from," and "Go f**k a goat."

A lot of goat f**king.

Why are they so obsessed with goats and camels? These are actual emails that I got, so I just copy-pasted them. And then there's my response. With a book like this, or even most memoirs it's like walk a mile in my shoes type of book, right? So, I'm like, okay, let's just hit it right out of the gate. Let me punch you in the gut. If you were to walk a mile in my shoes and you open up your inbox, this is how you would be greeted by your many fans.

I didn't write the book for Brock Strong Balls. "Brock Strong Balls" is one of my haters who's a hateful missive I wrote in the book, but you'd be surprised because I got surprised that the stuff that you and I have to deal with on a daily basis, Black and brown folks, Muslim folks, women I would even see on the internet just in life, the macroaggressions. Many folks, especially white folks and these aren't the Brock Strong Balls we'll just say liberal center left, center right, they're like, "Wow, you have to deal with this every day? We had no idea." And so, the stuff that's common to you and me sometimes is like completely revelatory to other folks. They're like, and then they feel bad. Like, "We had no idea you had to go through this." And you're like, "Yeah, no s**t."

I'm not trying to get your sympathy, but I'm like, "All right, you want to walk a mile in my shoes? Here we go." Go f**k a goat. Go back to where you came from. Even though you're born and raised in the Bay Area, California. Do you want me to go back to the Bay Area? Okay, subsidize my rent because I can't afford it. You want me to go back to my mom's womb. Let's go Freud. Let's all go back to the womb.

When I think about those comments, the first thing that comes that I always think about is a Trump rally. When Trump was having those rallies it was like the comment section coming to life.

The comment section for my articles throughout my career, oftentimes, were filled with so much hate and anti-Muslim bigotry that the editor just shut down the comment section. And I went to a Trump rally a couple of weeks before the election. And it was every type of white you could meet under the sun. It was old whites, young whites, red-haired whites, brunette whites, blonde whites, biker whites, senior whites, all the whites. This was right after the Access Hollywood tape came out and he bragged about grabbing women by the p**sy. I even asked white women. I'm like, "Aren't you offended by this?" They're like, "Eh, locker room talk."

And then I said, "What about all the horrible vile things he's saying about every group?" And his voters loved it. What they said was, "This is why we like him. He's politically incorrect. He shoots from the hip. He takes on everyone. He doesn't care." The more vulgar he was, the more his base ate it up. It's the comment section come to life. And the comment section back in the day was filled with deplorables. Clinton was actually right in that categorization of the Trump voters, but because we infantilize and romanticize and cover up whiteness and white anxiety and white rage, it wasn't racism. No, no, it was economic anxiety, which is BS and disproven study after study.

RELATED:New research on Trump voters: They're not the sharpest tools in the box

It's sick. I have a friend who's from China. And he actually said that in his culture, "artist," where he's from, it means homeless. When did you first realize as a husky young man that writing was going to be your thing (as long as you're still going to be a doctor)? Can you take us to that moment?

In Pakistani culture, artist means dumb and poor. The kids who weren't smart enough to do engineering or business or law then became artists. I joke in the book that for many immigrant communities, there's a trinity of occupations: It's doctor, engineer, wealthy businessman and failure. So, you and me are basically failures. I always wanted to be storyteller. I always enjoyed making people laugh. But the back of my head I'm like, "How am I going to pull this all off when there's no models of success?" And you get handed down this checklist of immigrant success, kind of not actually handed out, but you hear the conversation you see what's valued. No one ever said writer.

And so, you're a brown kid, a Muslim kid growing up in the bay area. There was no Hasan Minhaj at that time. There was no Rizwan Ahmed. There was no Fareed Zakaria. There was no Mindy Kaling. And so, you're like, all right, I have this dream, but whatever. Maybe I'll just go do something else. And I remember the power of a mentor or a teacher just taking a shot at you, just believing in you. Ms. Peterson in fifth grade told us all to write a one-page short story. I wrote a 10-page short story on Robin Hood. And she gave me an A+++, and then she said, "Get up in front of the homeroom and recite the story." I'm like, "Ms. Peterson, please, I can't do it." She goes, "Shut up, fatty, get up." Maybe she didn't say that, but that's my recollection.

Shout out, Ms. Peterson.

I recited the story and the same kids in my fifth grade homeroom who used to bully me, for the first time ever they just sat there rapt with attention and they laughed at all the right parts. That's when I realized I might have something. A reason why I mention that is oftentimes when folks see this video, or they read this interview, and they see people like you and me they're like, "Who am I? I'm nobody. I can't do this." And I say, "Some of my favorite people are nobody. I'm also nobody." Great things have small beginnings. It's like planting a seed.

You get to the point [in the book] in college and 9/11 happens. A couple of weeks after 9/11, my teacher at that time, Ishmael Reed who's a MacArthur Genius winner, and a Pulitzer Prize-winning writer, African American literary giant, he says: My people, Black people have been fighting back for 400 years. They've been trying to erase us and suppress us. The way we fought back is through art and culture and storytelling. We need your story out there. Writing is fighting. You have to write a story about an American family that happens to be Pakistani and Muslim. Write a play. Dialogue and characters are your strengths. I'm like, "What are you talking about?" This is a short story writing class. He goes, "No, no, no, just do a play, and I'll see you in two months. All right. Bye."

Sometimes just having a writer, a mentor, a teacher, a family member, a friend say you got something, and to encourage that seed. Without that, that's a sliding door moment, man. Maybe I wouldn't be here. Maybe I'd be a miserable attorney right now taking Xanax, marrying the wrong woman.

It becomes real when somebody who has that success and they push you, then it goes beyond just a hobby and it becomes a real thing.

Then when someone pays you. When someone gives you a check and you cash the check and they gave you the check because you wrote something you're like, "What? Is this real?" And then when people start inviting you as a writer, this is the whole process. It took me a long time to really own the fact that I'm a writer.

How much was your first check the first time you cashed a check off writing, you remember? I know mine was $25.

That's not bad at all. Mine was $50. My director, Carla Blank told me, "You're a writer." I'm like, "I'm not a writer." She goes, "You wrote something. You gave it to an editor. They gave you a check. You cashed the check. You're a writer."

RELATED:"I'd play the s**t out of George Washington": Jimmy O. Yang talks representation

White privilege is also a recurring theme in the book, and my question for you is how can I actually get my hands on some of that?

You have to be an average American who's from the Rust Belt who drunk the real coffee, who has economic anxiety, who lives on Main Street, who's part of the mainstream. And then you too, sir, you can have white privilege.

You want to be blunt? Be a white European refugee. Don't be Haitian or Yemeni or Syrian. And by the way, when I say that comment, we have to help and we should help the one million Ukrainians who are fleeing, but I got this article coming out today with the title, "It's Good To Be a White Refugee" because there a whole bunch of other refugees, there are a whole bunch of other refugees right now who are suffering and the borders got closed and there were barriers and walls, but now blue-eyed, blonde-haired, Ukrainian refugees, and we've got many of our colleagues in the media saying, "They look just like us. We have to help them." That's white privilege also.

One of the things that you do in a brilliant way is point out how hypocritical this country is, and people who disagree it seems like they have a problem with understanding that, pointing out the flaws in the country, and then working towards fixing them actually makes the country into what you are trying to push it off as anyway. How do we get past that?

I get called this now. "You are a race-obsessed liberal because you talk about racism." Other stuff you get called is you're a race hustler. You are just sucking at the teat of white guilt and making white people feel bad and trading in that white guilt to create a career. And I'm like, I do suck at the teat of white guilt. It's delicious. Salty, but delicious. It's one of those situations that if you really think about the beating dark heart of America is white supremacy. It's part and parcel of the American nightmare, and oftentimes we never talk about it. We like to promote the fiction of the American dream. And unless you acknowledge it and diagnosis it and take a scalpel and remove it, it will poison everything.

The paradigm, the structures, the education, the housing, the lending, everything. It's like poison. And so, what happens in America instead is we don't want to acknowledge. It's like Voldemort. And if you acknowledge it, it makes people lose their effing mind. I'll give you one quick example. 1619 Project, just look at the freak out over the 1619 Project. How dare you challenge our notion of this myth of America where the white man came here and birthed this nation from nothing? That's the quote from Rick Santorum. Sure, there were some Indigenous folks, but we came here. We were good. Slaves were treated well. I mean, the slaves got . . . I'm not making that up. That's what Bill O'Reilly said, remember? The slaves were treated not too bad. And then, OK, fine. Nobody's perfect. But then we gave you Martin Luther King and Beyonce and Ta-Nehisi Coates.

Look, it's the American dream. And why can't you poor refugees and poor Blacks and poor browns be like the good model minorities who grit their teeth and have resilience and pull their selves up from the bootstraps and work hard and stop complaining. We gave you Obama. We live in a post-racial society. Get over it, darky. Don't mention it. Don't acknowledge it. And if you do mention it, you're extremist. You're hysterical. You're uppity. You're race-obsessed. You're divisive. These are the tricks that white privilege, the mental gymnastics, the type of defensive mechanisms to avoid talking about race because if you avoid talking about race, you don't have to confront racism and you don't have to confront and acknowledge your role in either being against it or perpetuating it. So, instead, keep that privilege because the system helps you, and instead blame the darkies for bringing it up.

Being a race hustler sounds like a pretty good profession. If I could sign up . . . I would rather be a race hustler than a cop.

You want some white privilege? You want some white guilt? I got everything. How much guilt you want today? I got you.

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

We spoke earlier about how even though you didn't write the book with the intentions of certain demographics trying to learn and connect, but you also didn't write 10 chapters saying my parents did everything perfect. You mentioned the good, the bad, and the ugly because that is how we heal.

The book has a plot twist in the middle where you're living this model minority myth a suburban kid, 20 years old going to UC Berkeley. My parents, Pakistani Muslim immigrants, like many immigrant parents, worked hard. Middle class, upper-middle class. Mervyn's not Bloomingdales, sometimes Macy's. That's how I describe them. That was my parents. Immigrant parents who looked out for a good deal, but when they had the savings or the money, they spent it, and we went on vacation, but we didn't have F-U money. I was the only kid and I lived a comfortable suburban life. You kind of achieved the American dream, upper-middle class, maybe, that's about it, and my parents were happy.

We had two crisis points in my senior year of college. Number one, 9/11. Overnight everything changed in the perpetual war on terror. And then overnight, you're a model minority. You're now the enemy. You're now them. You're now a suspect. You are now a dirty Muslim. I went from Gandhi, which was what I was called when I was a kid, to Osama overnight. And not just me, but all my people. And then a few months after that in the aftermath of 9/11 when this country went insane, they banned, they canceled Susan Sontag. They banned "Imagine" by John Lennon and the Rage Against the Machine catalog. People forget that. They banned French fries. They banned Dixie Chicks. Dixie Chicks were the whitest women on earth. They canceled the Dixie Chicks for the most benign comment. Muslims were hazed, surveillance, FBI just showing up at your home.

A couple months later, my parents were arrested in part of this operation Cyber Storm where Microsoft and the FBI teamed up and Robert Mueller then the head of the FBI comes to San Jose and says this the biggest piracy crackdown and two dozen people have been arrested. And my parents' luck was they worked in the same office complex as these other folks. They didn't have a single piracy complaint, but Microsoft got them on a licensing charge from a business they did two years ago. So, it doesn't matter a headline as you know flattens everything, and who's on the front page of the FBI? My parents. And what happens overnight is then I experience the American nightmare as experienced by so many communities. You lose the house, you lose the credit, you lose the community, you get hazed, you need money to take care of your family.

Now I leave school and I got both parents in prison, and now you experience the criminal justice system, which like I mentioned in the book and my experience flattens not only the individual who is incarcerated, but people sometimes forget it flattens the families and the communities. It flattens generations. I tried my best to really articulate that to an audience that otherwise was not expecting that story, and also to an audience that oftentimes sees prison and Black, prison and poor. And I'm like, no, no, no. Our prison system incarcerates two million people more than any other country on earth. We talk about rehabilitation in this country and redemption and everyone has a shot, but what about people who went to prison? What about people who just happen to be poor and Black and were using drugs? How come they don't get a slap on the wrist? So, I think this story and that chapter, I hope illuminates also.

I really wish as a collective we would rally around these different narratives and stories so that we can move forward.

A part of me says, "White people, you figure this out. We've had to survive on our own, we'll survive, maybe. Many of us won't, but guys figure this out. You're having a moment." And so, I'm going to live in a bluish state and I'm going to make my money and I'm going to have my community, inshallah, I'll just try to protect myself." That's one instinct.

Another instinct says we have to do everything within our power as usual to save this country from itself. And oftentimes we've been Black folks leading the way, but more and more, there's a multiracial coalition that gets it, and enough whites. This is the key thing. You're not going to get the majority of whites. You're just not. But if we can get enough whites to realize that we have to fight for a multiracial democracy, maybe we have a shot. Maybe we have a shot. Some people say it has to get worse before it gets better. But what I say is sometimes when it gets worse, it just gets worse. And so, we got to do what we always have to do, man. We have to fight for a country that doesn't love us back.

Absolutely.

We have to do our best to protect our communities. And unfortunately through our pain and suffering, this country eventually learns of this thing called white supremacy and the American nightmare. And maybe enough people wake up and realize maybe we can work together to create the American dream for everyone.

Watch more memoir interviews with D. Watkins:

Read more:
The "race-obsessed liberal" nightmare: "We have to fight for a country that doesn't love us back" - Salon

By Sam Moore | Film | March 22, 2022 |

By Sam Moore | Film | March 22, 2022 |

From the very beginning, The Worst Person in the World knows what it wants to be; with twelve chapters, a prologue, and an epilogue, Joachim Trier is setting out to explore coming of age in a way thats explicitly novelistic. The films chapter-driven structure takes the narrative thrust of coming of age films that a chapter in someones life is ending and another is beginning and brings it crashing together with the structure of a novel. The formal choices in Worst Person also lean into the relationship between novel and film that Trier at once embraces and challenges, thanks to a heavy dose of narration from Julie (a revelatory Renate Reinsve) that feels like the prosaic voice of a novel. But what Trier does with his novelistic form and narrative digressions is set out to craft something that could only ever exist as a film. While it might be tempting to look at Worst Person and think of it as a kind of Nordic answer to Sally Rooney, the more the film goes on, the more it evolves into something both singular and cinematic.

The prologue sees Julie changing potential career paths and romantic partners at breakneck speed, and while there are moments where the film embraces this kind of rapid, chaotic uncertainty, it refuses to show coming-of-age as something thats simply a mess of mistakes. The moments where it slows down capture whats both most beautiful, and tragic, about the act of growing up: the road(s) not taken. Every change that Julie makes, from the prologue on, essentially means discarding a version of herself and trying to (re)create a new one, whether its bailing on surgery at med school to study psychology instead because the interior, rather than the exterior, is what interests her, or the tension drawing her away from one boyfriend and towards another, Worst Person allows Julie and everyone around her to exist in multitudes, as people still trying to work out who they are and what they want, as opposed to simply becoming set in stone by the time they hit 30. In Worst Person, the world itself is constantly changing there are references to the #MeToo movement, heated debates about cancel culture, and anxiety around climate change and the characters are changing, or at least trying to, with it. When comic book artist Aksel (Trier mainstay Anders Danielsen Lie, brooding and combative but hilarious throughout) is accused of sexism in his art, the defence he attempts to mount for it feels like a painfully familiar echo of so many cultural debates on both the airwaves and the internet; this is the man who spends an impassioned monologue complaining about the fact that his politically incorrect Bobcat has become the face of a family-friendly Christmas film, and even compares his work to depictions of Muhammad. Aksel insists that everyone becoming unnecessarily offended by Bobcat is generational hes over a decade older than Julie and the generational tension here instead seems to be about those who are able to change, and those who arent. Worst Person is all about this kind of change, both the possibility that it offers, and the sadness that comes from leaving something, or someone, behind.

One of the most breathtaking moments in the film is driven by this desire for change. As her relationship with Aksel begins to decline, Julie imagines herself dating, and falling in love with Eivind (Herbert Nordrum, a charmingly grounded foil to both the shapeshifting Julie, and his ex-girlfriend who becomes overwhelmed with anxiety for the climate after discovering shes 3.1% Sami). In this sequence, everything in the world stands completely still apart from Julie and Elvind. She darts out of her shared apartment with Aksel, meets Elvind, kisses him, and they fall wildly in love its swooningly romantic and breathtakingly cinematic. Watching Julie run through otherwise static streets, smile growing broader the faster her own pace becomes, it shows that the world really is her oyster. What might feel like a cliche of the genre becomes something unexpected, written in a language thats novelistic and cinematic all at once. But even this sequence, defined by movement, has moments of stillness. When Julie and Elvind kiss in the park, their own movement slows down, they get lost in each other as the camera zooms out. The world of Worst Person is sometimes overwhelmingly vast, but the intimate focus on Julie and her inner life reveals beauty in both the possibility of upheaval and also the stillness that comes with making peace with not only all we can do but what we cant. The imagery of stillness has a mournful coda in one of the films final chapters, but one that exists alongside the possibility that comes from a new dawn, watched with slow reverence by Julie.

Its these moments of visual ingenuity that capture the thematic depth of Worst Person, a film that like a lot of romantic, or coming-of-age films is relatively light when it comes to narrative incident. When Julie and Elvind take mushrooms together, Worst Person reinvents itself yet again, taking a strange, psychedelic trip through Julies inner life thats filled with bizarre imagery and moments of strange beauty. It allows the film to dive into its themes in ways that are both abstract and explicit all at once its these kind of tensions between what seem like contradictions that animate Worst Person the most posing more questions than its willing to answer about Julies relationship with Elvind; how she relates to her father; whether or not she wants to be a mother. Films that pose more questions than answers can often feel frustrating, but Worst Person finds joy in unanswered questions; its easy to say that coming of age films are about the journey rather than the destination, and theres truth in that. But what makes Worst Person so striking - and ultimately so moving is the fact that its about more than one destination and more than one journey.

The epilogue sees Julie returning to one of the versions of herself that she initially tried out during the prologue, but this doesnt mean that her journey or the journey of those around her is over. She sees a former boyfriend through a window; he has a new girlfriend and a baby. This scene doesnt offer any final answers about Julies relationship to the possibility of parenthood, but instead, it silently asks questions about why the two of them didnt have a child together, or if Julie wants a child now understanding that, even as the credits roll, and another chapter of Julies life is coming to a close, the world remains vast and full of possibility. The professional stability she feels, coupled with that personal nostalgia, feels like Worst Person in miniature: all the beauty of whats to come, and the ghostly hand of the past, serving as a reminder of what was, and what might have been.

Sam is a writer and editor based in London; you can follow them on Twitter and Instagram, where they talk about monsters, reality TV, and why you should buy their books.

Review: 'Big Mouth' Meets 'The Office' in 'Human Resources,' a Hilarious but Uneven Spin-Off |Stephanie Beatriz's 'Twin Flames' Is Essentially 'Restraining Order: The Podcast'

Header Image Source: Oslo Pictures

Read more:
'The Worst Person in the World' Is About the Beauty and Tragedy of the Possible - Pajiba Entertainment News

We publish the speech that the Member of the Finnish Parliament Pivi Rsnen gave at the General Assembly of the Spanish Evangelical Alliance (Idea 2022) on 19 February 2022. The Christian politician is awaiting the sentence of the Helsinki District Court, which is expected to be made public on 30 March 2022.

Watch the video of her speech below.

Ladies and gentlemen, Dear friends,

Thank you so much for inviting me to participate this event. It is always a joy to be together with Christian brothers and sisters.

I have been member of the parliament for 27 years and all the time open of my faith and Christian values. Since June 2011 to 2015, I held the office of the Minister of the Interior of Finland. As a minister, I was responsible for police force (internal security and migration in addition to church affairs). I am currently the chair of the Christian Democratic Parliamentary Group. From 2004 to 2015, I was the chair of our party, Christian Democrats of Finland.

I studied medicine at the University of Helsinki and worked as a medical doctor until 1995 when I was elected to the Parliament of Finland. As a physician, the ethical questions I came across, especially related to abortions, aroused my interest in politics. Already as medical student I decided not to end a life though abortion. As a young doctor, I took part in the public debates about abortion, wrote books, gave lectures, and organized panels. Defending the life of unborn children has been my top priority as an MP. It was the reason I went to politics.

A five-year-old girl, on her way to Sunday school, stopped a prison deputy director on his bike. She asked the following question: Do you love Jesus? You cannot get to heaven if you do not believe in Jesus. The confused man contacted the girls mother and asked her to consider taking the girl out of the Sunday school, so that she would not totally lose her mind. The mother was not startled but led the Sunday school continue.

My own mother has told me this story from my childhood. We lived near a prison because my father worked there. I remember all the impressive moments at the Sunday school and me praying that Jesus would enter my heart and take me as his own. Jesus heard my prayer and has been faithful.

In my childhood, the Sunday schools were common and in my village all children used to attend it. In only few decades the faith of the Finns in basic Christian beliefs has dramatically collapsed. In a recently published inquiry, only four per cent of women under 35-year-old answered having a personal belief in Jesus. I have been MP for 27 years and if someone would have asked then when I started, how many genders a person has, people would have considered the questioner quite stupid.

Now, both in Finland and Europe, we are living at a stage of history when the pressure to stay away from the influence of Christian faith is strongly growing. That is visible both in the political discussions and in the decision making, whether we think of the protection of life at the very beginning or at the end of life. Expressing opinions about marriage belonging between one man and one woman, or the sinfulness of homosexual acts, has become politically incorrect. The attempt to break down the gender system based on two different genders hurts especially the children.

The battle between values is largely fought with language, by capturing the concepts like love, freedom, equality and even rainbow into new interpretations. Concepts such as man and woman, father and mother, are dearly loved and as old as the history of humanity. We Christians and our values are unfamiliar to everyday life or even considered to be dangerous. When people do not know the loving and merciful God, what is left, is a punishing and a very limited picture of the Christian faith.

Personally, the last couple of years have been surprising and heavy. During the summer 2019 started a process resulting in me being prosecuted of three crimes. I am accused of criminal agitation against a minority group, and this crime carries the sentence of a fine or imprisonment for a maximum of two years. Even more alarming than the punishments is the possible demand for censorship: an order to remove my Bible related social media postings or a ban on the publication of my writings. A true problem is that already the whole process, even without any punishments yet, has caused self-censorship among the Bible-believing Christians.

The first trial of my case was on 24th January and the trial will continue on February 14th. After that, the decision of the court comes approximately in one month. I wait for it with a calm and hopeful mind. I am hopeful to win the case. But even if I do not win, I think this whole chain of events is part of my calling as a Christian influencer.

So, the process started in June 2019, when I posted a tweet addressing a question to the leadership of my church that had signed up to support Helsinki Pride. The main content of my post was a screenshot of verses 24-27 from the book of Romans chapter 1 from the New Testament. The aim of my criticism was the leadership of my own church, not any minority. I myself considered even resigning from the majority church at the time it announced its support of Helsinki lgbt events. When praying, I was however convinced that it was better to try to wake up the sleeping ones, not to jump out of a sinking boat, and that is why I wrote the tweet for which I am prosecuted. According to the Church Act, approved by our Parliament, all doctrine must be examined and evaluated according to Gods Holy Word.

Following a preliminary investigation launched because of a citizen's complaint, a total of five criminal complaints were filed. On April 2021, the Prosecutor General brought three separate charges against me for the tweet, a pamphlet I had written in 2004, Male and female He created them - Homosexual relationships challenge the Christian concept of humanity and a radio interview with Ruben Stiller, What would Jesus think about homosexuals?.

The police did not consider any crime to have been committed in these two latter cases, but the Prosecutor General nevertheless ordered preliminary investigations to be carried out.

Being criminally charged for voicing my deeply held beliefs in a country that has such deep roots in freedom of speech and religion feels unreal. The decision of the court has consequences not only to Christians freedom to express their conviction, but to everyone elses also. In court, I appealed to the Constitution of Finland and to international conventions that guarantee freedom of speech and religion.

The points of view for which I am accused do not deviate from the classical Christianity. Since Christianity is the dominant state religion in Finland, it is reasonable to assume that views such as these are widely disseminated in religious communities in Finland.

In all the charges, I have denied any wrongdoing. My writings and statements under investigation are linked to the Bible's teachings on marriage, living as a man and a woman, as well as the Apostle Paul's teaching on homosexual acts. The teachings concerning marriage and sexuality in the Bible arise from love to ones neighbor, not from hate towards a group of people. I have always stressed that all human beings are created in the image of God and have equal dignity and human rights. All human beings are sinners and are forgiven of their sins by recourse to the atoning work of Jesus. Ultimately, the question in my case is about the core of Christian faith; how a person gets saved into unity with God and into everlasting life though the redemptive sacrifice of Jesus.

The prosecutor has presented many false claims about my speech and writing, which were all easily refuted.

At the trial, the prosecutor targeted the core doctrine of Christianity. She claimed that my views are known as fundamentalist doctrine, which she summarized as love the sinner, hate the sin. This doctrine she regarded as insulting and defaming, because according to her, you cannot make a distinction between the persons identity and his or her action. If you condemn the act, you also condemn the human being and regard him or her as inferior.

Here, the prosecutor tries to deny the core message of the Bible: the teaching of law and gospel. God has created all human beings as His own image and we all have equal value, but we all are also sinners. No-ones human dignity decreases because of sin. God still loves the person but hates the sin. God so loved all the people, that He gave His only Son to die on the cross to suffer the punishment that belonged to us because of our sins. Jesus condemned the sin but loved the sinners.

The thought that you could not make a distinction between the persons deeds and his or her identity or human dignity, is unfamiliar to life. As I was raising my children, I loved them all equally, but I still had to at times criticize their actions quite harshly. The prosecutors thought is also unfamiliar to the rule of law. Even the most notorious criminals do not lose their human rights or human dignity if they get a punishment for their deeds.

I have sat hours in police interrogations, and the questions have mainly focused on the Bible and its interpretation. I was asked what the message of the Letter to the Romans is and what is its first chapter about. What do I mean by the words sin and shame? I said that all of us have sinned, but the sinfulness of homosexual acts is denied. People, however, do not determine what is against Gods will, but God himself does that.

The police asked if I agree to delete within two weeks my writings. I answered that I stand behind these teachings of the Bible, whatever the consequences are. For the Christians, the Bible is the Word of God, and we must have the possibility to agree with it. Everyone should be free to express their deeply held beliefs about important issues without fear of censorship or criminal sanction. Especially important this is for Christians, who are called to lift up Jesus and His word.

It is likely that this will be a process of several years. I expect this case to go even to the European Court of Human Rights and I am ready to defend free speech and freedom of religion as far as it needs.

The three charges brought against me have to do with whether it is allowed in Finland to express a conviction that is based on the traditional teaching of the Bible and to agree with it. It is absolutely vital that Christians have the liberty to teach and speak about Gods Holy Word also at those times when Christianity and the values that derive from it go against the tide and challenge the current ethos and thinking.

A conviction based on the Christian faith is more than a surficial opinion. The early Christians did not renounce their faith in lions caves, why should I then renounce my faith in a court room. I believe it is my calling and honor to defend the foundational rights and freedoms at this point of my life.

Queen Esther was encouraged to speak up and act on behalf of Gods people, the Jews, with the question: And who knows, you may have been chosen to your royal position for just such a time as this. The same question can be asked from us today, whatever your position might be. We have not ourselves chosen the time in which we live. But exactly for just this time you were meant to live, for such a time as this you were born to love your neighbors, to act on behalf of Gods people and to hold up the Gospel.

Dear friends, the inner experience of man has become the indicator for reality. The hearts voice would function as the indicator of right and wrong if we forgot one key fact of mankind the Fall. We are valuable created in the image of God, but also evil and sinful. That is the biggest marketing problem of the Christian view of man.

I want to share with you a very peculiar experience of a panel discussion on prostitution many years ago. The discussion was led by a famous media-persona and the other panelists were supporters of legal prostitution. Many media representatives were present. The star of the panel was supposed to be woman of whom a book had just been written with the title Prostitution is my calling. I understood that I was going to a tough situation and asked my friends to pray for me. The prayers were answered in a surprising way. When I entered the pub where the panel was taking place, there was confusion.

The professional in the field did not get vacation from prison on time, and she was quickly filled in by her colleague. Iiris astounded the audience and the panelists.

She did not defend the prostitutes right to their profession, but instead told us she had quit because of finding Jesus. She told us she had from the beginning understood it as violating the will of God but said that I could not come out of prostitution with the Law of Moses, but by the blood of Jesus.

Tears in her eyes, she summarized her message: The only right place for sex is marriage between a man and a woman, where one goes as a virgin and where one stays faithful until death. She even added that if there was anyone who knows to have broken Gods commandment, the person can show up after the event, so she can pray with Pivi for the person and the person can have sins forgiven by Jesus.

Silence came and the chairman of the panel stated that nothing else can be added to this except amen. Spoken by Iiris, the ethics of marriage from a Christian perspective was hundred times more convincing than coming from my mouth. She revealed the fact that in the end, each persons conscience bears witness to the Christian view of man. When we break against Gods good commandments, we know deep down in our hearts the wrongfulness of our actions. But it is only because of the grace of the Cross that we have courage to face and confess our sinfulness.

In Romans 12:2, Apostle Paul exhorts: And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God. It is good to examine and be aware of which values at any given time are contrary to the Word of God, because too easily we just go with the flow. The Christian church has at all times been forced to live contrary to the spirit of the time in one way or another.

Helsinki News, which is the largest subscription newspaper in Finland, published an interview of Mrs. Raija Toiviainen, the Prosecutor General, in which she stated that although Pivi Rsnen would be convicted, it is not necessary to remove the Bibles from libraries and it is allowed to have discussions about it, but what is crucial is whether one agrees with the Bible. She deletes the whole right to hold opinions. For the Christians, the Bible is the Word of God, and we have to have the possibility to agree with it.

If we neglect the right to speak up and publicly confess our faith, the space for speaking will eventually get smaller. The more we keep silent about the teachings of the Bible on the painful issues of our time, the more powerful is the rejection. Our time challenges us to commit to the Word of God. We are especially called to stand firm in those parts of the Scriptures that contradict the spirit of the time.

I have been thankful for the huge international and national support I have received. People have told how God has through my case encouraged them to pray and trust Gods word. Many Christians in Finland have wakened up to defend faith and religious freedom. In July, over one thousand people gathered in front of our Parliament building and concretely raised up in their hands their Bibles to collectively show strong support for the freedom of Gods Word. The Finnish Association for Freedom of Speech and Religion was founded in June to support the case and possibly similar cases in the future.

Many churches and leading figures from different Christian organizations from Finland and abroad have shown their strong support for my case for which I am grateful.

I hope that that Christians would not be afraid of speaking up during these challenging times and that my case would set a positive precedent for the future regarding Christians and their right to express their faith in the public. According to my knowledge, the court has to for the first time take a stand on whether it is legal or not to cite the Bible and agree with it.

The judges have to weigh the relations between the foundational rights and the criminal law and the interrelationship between different foundational laws. The decision of the court will be a significant precedent that will have an impact on the legislation in Europe.

The late President Kysti Kallio called our whole nation to pray in Christmas 1939, during a difficult time in the history of Finland. He stated: Our ancestors have over the centuries, in tribulations, persecutions and in the days of peace, drawn life, strength and comfort from the Bible. At the present time our nation needs the creative power of the Word of God. Let us adopt with a humble faith the blessings of it. Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people. This same challenge, dear friends, is topical to us even today, in Finland or elsewhere in Europe.

I wish you all courage and wisdom to uphold the unchangeable message of Jesus Christ, who influences and changes the lives of individual persons, communities, and whole nations. Thank you so much for your attention and God bless you all!

Pivi Rsnen

19 Februrary 2022 (Spanish Evangelical Alliance General Assembly).

Published in: Evangelical Focus - Features - For Christians, the Bible is the Word of God. We must have the possibility to agree with it

More:
For Christians, the Bible is the Word of God. We must have the possibility to agree with it - Evangelical Focus

BATON ROUGE, La. Kim Mulkey got right to the point. In the first few days after her hire, she hosted a series of small dinners, often at Mansurs on the Boulevard. Shed invite some of the major money people around Louisiana, the movers and shakers of LSU athletics, and she didnt worry about pleasantries yet. Shed built an elite program before. She knew where to begin.

I want to get to know all of you, shed say, but for now, Im gonna ask you for some money.

She needed new offices so they wouldnt be embarrassed when they walked recruits through. They needed a new training room. A weight room, too. LSU womens basketball needed a facelift, to say the least, and thats what Mulkey was hired to do.

Before we get to Mulkeys ability as a coach, which you already know, you should know her ability to work a room. She thrives in a booster club luncheon. She cracks jokes others wont which people like around these parts and the Tickfaw, La., native makes people feel at home.

So when she had demands for how to rebuild this program, she was also going to earn them herself. One source told The Athletic when she was hired, Nobody raises money like her. And she got to work immediately.

Shes not afraid to ask for what she needs, Tiger Athletic Foundation president and CEO Matt Borman said, laughing.

Within 10 days, Mulkey raised roughly $1.3 million, a source said. They moved into the new training room last week. The new offices will be ready next season. The weight room is likely coming soon.

Eleven months after those dinners, Mulkeys shocking 26-6 season ended Monday in a nearly packed Pete Maravich Assembly Center that was almost empty for LSU womens basketball games a year ago.

Link:
'She's going to build a monster here': LSU's Kim Mulkey found surprising success in Year 1. But is this just the start? - The Athletic

Childhood years in a joint family home unlock abiding interests and lifelong loves

Four generations of babies have used this jhablu stitched from a gara saree and rocked to sleep on the chair

It's 11 years since I announced my publishing imprint. 49/50 Books. Readers to retailers, left a bit baffled by the name, still ask: Why?

The serial numbers spell my childhood address. Our two-storey Art Deco home was nameless. Letters and parcels for the Dastoors reached them simply at "49 Hill Road, Bandra, Bombay 50".

Mine is an expression of gratitude. Everything I enjoy doing, both personally and professionally, stems from a multitude of amazing family influences. Sharing the same roof with an extended entourage of spirited aunts significantly shaped my worldview. Early exposure to their wide tastes in literature, music, film, theatre and art, assured my brother and me an enriching onward journey.

The 1956 postcard from aboard the passenger liner Caledonia, which Piloo Vajifdar wrote her Bombay sisters en route England

Each of the fuis, our father's sisters, was a true bon vivant. Together they were magnificent. Almost like doting grandmothers (age disparity pegged them two generations older, not one, as aunts are), they provided us a warm, constant, loving presence. Tough on our Mum, contending with three very elderly sisters-in-law already set in their ways, from the start of her marriage. Remarkably good-natured, she deflected and minimised friction.

Our building, transformed to Trios Mall today, brushed the porch of Boman House, where Ardeshir Boman's clan from Yazd laid roots in the 1940s. He and his wife Khorshed Hormazdi considered us more family than tenants. We were invited to a bountiful Navroze table each March 21st, greeting Spring Equinox with fruit and flowers festooning their elegant dining room.

The Iranis were extremely fond of the fuis too. In fact, it was mainly on their account that Ardeshirji discerningly chose our parents over a string of previous applicants keen to rent the apartment. He was impressed with Homai and Homi moving from their Dadar homes to a new life with the unmarried sisters.

MGM Studios virtuosos Edward Nugent, Douglas Fairbanks, Jr and Josephine Dunn; autographed poster of actor John Boles

Dhunmai led the eight sibling-pack by a wide margin. She was 1900-born and the youngest, our dad Homi, 1924. Our paternal grandfather, Nusserwanji Dastur from Navsari, was manager of the Empress Mills and Ahmedabad Advance Mills. Cross-country postings with children in tow helped seed diverse interests in his six daughters (soon to be introduced) and sons, Rusi and Homi.

Forever fragrant with 4711 eau de cologne, the fuis' cupboards offered unlimited treasures. Peppermint sweets, pretty lace kerchiefs, a cocktail ring, little jhablas stitched from hand-embroidered gara sarees ("Keep for your babies," they said, which I did), a fun compilation of fables narrated by the witty-wise goat Bakor Patel and my best find - TS Eliot's own taped recitation of his Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats.

The aunts bustled between rooms in pursuit of their passions. We followed faithfully.

Dhunmai adored old Hindi film songs. Hobbling to the hall, she heard New Theatres ballads of Saigal and Pankaj Mullick blaring from the giant Bush radio on a carved wood tepoy reserved to balance its breadth.

Self-contained Jer cultivated quieter pastimes. Happiest engrossed in solitary card rounds of Patience, she spent hours dealing an assortment of chintzy-patterned decks spread on a four-poster. She cheerfully paused her game for as long as I wanted to chat, each time I toddled in. That was often. Because Jer loved us kids with blind devotion. I would climb onto her lap to reveal the hidden surprises of Clock Patience, which particularly delighted me. The background drone of cricket broadcasts claimed half her attention. That gently wizened face flickered to full sparkle when card or cricket score settled satisfactorily.

The living room was a sync station of sounds and varied cultural genres. Care was taken that none overlapped within minutes of the other. From a Garrard record cabinet Dad blared his beloved Beethoven symphonies and sonatas on returning from Bombay House where he worked in Tata Textiles sales. Dhunmai switched off Vividh Bharati programmes and retired to her room for pre-dinner chivda nibbles or wafers from Blue Circle, the snack haven beside New Talkies, now Marks & Spencer. Mummy listened to soulful ghazals on the kitchen transistor as she cooked for the large brood.

Only on ascertaining that his senior sister-in-law was done with the Bush booming sonorous sur and taal, did Phiroze Uncle (who outlived our aunt Dina) switch to BBC for a fascinating fix of news and radio plays. The drama of Rhinoceros unfolding orally was wonderfully stimulating for the imagination. Unusual though it felt, to hear Ionesco and Ibsen before discovering their scripts or watching them performed, I rarely missed the audio plays. Professor PE Dustoor, as academia knew him, headed the English department at Allahabad University and authored The Poet's Pen and American Days: A Traveller's Diary. Blind in his autumnal years, he relied on Mummy and me to read aloud tracts of text to him.

Aunts who didn't stay with us breezed in with welcome regularity. Daulat (Dolly) visited from next-door West View, its garden lush with palms and kadi patta we picked fresh from bushes for Saturday curry lunch. Dolly arrived armed with murder mysteries and Woman's Weekly. The sisters huddled over the magazine's knitting patterns. I devoured its Robin Family illustrated adventures.

Dolly collected posters of Hollywood stars and reviews of their hits. From the stacks amassed it was a big deal indeed to clutch close John Boles' mugshot, curtly signed "Regards". She explained how brilliantly he essayed Victor Moritz in Frankenstein. We were equally perplexed to figure Tyrone Power was Mummy's top hero. That overly slicked-back hair was demanded by the swashbuckler sagas he apparently aced.

The sole aunt settling abroad, Piloo in London, was close to all her sisters here, especially Dolly. Piloo's son, our cousin Farrokh Vajifdar, became an internationally reputed scholar of Zoroastrianism and authority on Western Classical music.

The fuis possessed a great sense of humour, albeit occasionally exasperating. They swooped to see me unwrap a Penguin copy of PG Wodehouse's Aunts Aren't Gentlemen. With indignant eye rolls they questioned, "Amaari maskeri toh nathi karto taro maanito author - Hope your favourite author isn't poking fun at us?"

How they craved to be in on things as they happened. Unlucky for them to be weekending in Panchgani precisely when family friend Mina Kava (short for Minoo Kavarana, suggested by HMV publicists commissioning him to compose a paean to the city), rehearsed the first strains of zingy "Bombay meri hai" in our living room. "Couldn't he wait with it till we returned," they pouted unreasonably, FOMO-stricken from the '60s.

Naresh Fernandes' chapter, "Attaining Hindustanese", in Taj Mahal Foxtrot: The Story of Bombay's Jazz Age, restores forgotten snatches of the song, Bengalee Baboo, for me. On hindsight, its phrases seem preposterous. In those innocent times, people revelled in their catchy staccato cadence. Dave Carson's bestselling tune regaled Bombay a century ago with his troupe, the Original San Francisco Minstrels. The aunts warbled slightly differently from the standard version. Theirs went: "I am very good Bengalee Baboo/In Calcutta I long time stop Very good Hindu, smoke my hookah/Eat my dal bhaat every day/Night come I make plenty pooja/In Calcutta I long time stop."

The ladies sang another politically incorrect ditty with gusto. A third sister from Madras added to the household in the 1970s. Kindness personified, the parents invited her into our space once she was widowed, after losing twins and then a son to terminal illness. Khorshed, who painted evocatively, brought framed landscapes to hang on our walls alongside portraits of musicians like Dad's violinist idol Jascha Heifetz.

Khorshed also taught Dhun and Jer to belt out a song so blithely repetitive, we begged they stop. They'd zip lips for a moment, before bursting again into: "My name is Jeejeebhoy Jamshedji/Parsi driver of GIP/Engine number 63/From Byculla to Chinchpokli..." They quibbled whether the second line was "Parsi driver of GIP" (Great Indian Peninsula Railway, predecessor to Central Railway) or "Pocket full of VIP". Further conjecture ensued. Was it Engine number 420? Wasn't it Borivli to Chinchpokli? The lyrics were accompanied by a twirly jig they broke into, with puckering steam engine poofs. All that puffing plus dancing was ill-advised for Dhunmai who nursed chronic asthma.

To our combined consternation and amusement, she popped pills with aplomb while watching Parsi naataks which got her heavily wheezing with mirth. I recall soothing some paroxysms during Lafra Sadan, a caper adapted from Alistair Foot and Anthony Marriott's play, Uproar in the House. Dismissing alarmed audience advice to take it easy, she gasped, "Goli garvaanu neh paachhu hasvaanu - swallow the pill and laugh on."

Not a bad life motto, thank you Dhunmai.

Author-publisher Meher Marfatia writes fortnightly on everything that makes her love Mumbai and adore Bombay. You can reach her at meher.marfatia@mid-day.com/www.meher marfatia.com

See the rest here:
A world in every room - mid-day.com

Mike Tomlin no doubt knows all the tangible, Xs and Os-related benefits newly hired Brian Flores will bring to the Pittsburgh Steelers. Flores is a bright defensive mind who helped devised a plan to shut down Lamar Jackson and the Ravens offense last year, something teams including the Steelers began to copy.

But expanding on all the reasons why he hired Flores, Tomlin said the decisions ran deeper than just football. Heres what he said according to ESPNs Brooke Pryor, who was on a Q&A call with Tomlin Sunday afternoon.

Heres Tomlins full commentary on what led to the hire, per Steelers.coms Teresa Varley.

I wanted to stay close to Brian when his legal issues started, he said. I just didnt want him to feel like he was on an island. I think from a coaching fraternity standpoint I owed him that. I was in a position to provide that. I think that started our interactions and conversations. Over the course of those discussions, particularly when it became evident that he was not going to get a head job, I think the natural discussion began and it really ran its course rather quickly to be quite honest with you. It doesnt require a lot of time to come to the realization that you could use a Brian Flores on your staff. I was so excited that he shared the same level of enthusiasm about being a part of us as we were about potentially acquiring him. Its been really good.

Flores appeared to be on his way to being out of the league this year. The Miami Dolphins somewhat surprisingly fired him shortly after the season ended. Flores in turn filed suit against Miami, two other teams, and the NFL for racial discrimination in their hiring practices along with the heavy allegation that Dolphins owner Stephen Ross offered him $100,000 per loss during the 2019 season in an effort to gain the #1 pick. The teams and leagues have disputed all those claims with the court battle ongoing.

With an opening on the coaching staff following Teryl Austins promotion to DC, Tomlin said he jumped at the chance to give Flores a job. As he notes, the coaching fraternity isnt an incredibly large one and frankly, if Tomlin wasnt going to hire him, no one would.

Doubling back to Flores role, while he carries the title of defensive assistant/linebackers coach, Tomlin indicated Flores will serve plenty of roles on the team.

If Flores role is similar to what Austin had done the last three seasons, Flores will be an asset on gameday as another pair or eyes for Tomlin up in the booth, assisting with in-game decisions like coaches challenges and other game management. Pittsburgh has one of the smallest coaching staffs in the league (look for an article on the topic later this offseason) but saw the value in adding Flores to the team. Flores has joined Tomlin and Colbert on at least two Pro Day trips this year to Georgia and Clemson. Flores was also spotted at Penn States workout earlier in the week.

While his legal situation is unpredictable, odds are Flores time with the Steelers will be short. Hes certainly overqualified to be just the teams assistant. Hes worthy to become a defensive coordinator and probably a head coach again. But until his legal battles are resolved, no team will hire him.

In this overly politically-charged world, some will take issue with Tomlins decision to hire Flores. But Tomlin, like any coach, knows the value of a helping hand and an opportunity. Throughout his career, Tomlin has mentioned his gratitude towards the late Bill Stewart, who gave him his first coaching job at VMI in 1995. Two years later, Tomlin become a positional coach, four years after that he broke into the NFL (hired by Tony Dungy, one of only three black head coaches at the time), and six years later, Tomlin was an NFL head coach.

Tomlin was so grateful to Bill Stewart that he hired his son, Blaine Stewart, for his first NFL job, where he remains on-staff as the teams assistant wide receivers coach. Now, Tomlin is lending a hand to Flores to keep him engaged in the game during an otherwise difficult year.

View post:
Mike Tomlin Reached Out To Brian Flores So He 'Wouldn't Be On An Island' During Legal Battle - Steelers Depot

BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) Former U.S. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke misused his position to advance a development project in his Montana hometown and lied to an agency ethics official about his involvement, according to a report from federal investigators released Wednesday.

The investigation by the Interior Departments inspector general found that Zinke continued working with a foundation on the commercial project in the community of Whitefish, Montana even after he committed upon taking office to breaking ties with the foundation.

READ MORE: Outgoing Interior secretary Ryan Zinke defends legacy as he leaves

The report also said that Zinke gave incorrect and incomplete information to an Interior Department ethics official who confronted him over his involvement and that Zinke directed his staff to assist him with the project in a misuse of his position.

The Great Northern Veterans Peace Park Foundation was established by Zinke and others in 2007. Zinke and his wife were in negotiations with private developers for the use of foundation land for a commercial development project that included a microbrewery.

Zinke is a candidate in the June Republican primary for an open Montana Congressional seat, a position he held prior to joining Trumps cabinet.

Zinkes campaign called the report a political hit job and said his familys involvement in the foundation had led to the restoration of land that was made into a park where children can sled.

Investigators referred the matter to the Department of Justice for potential prosecution but it declined to pursue a criminal case, according to the report.

The investigation into the land deal was one of numerous probes of Zinke that began when he was in Trumps cabinet.

In another case, investigators found that he violated a policy that prohibits non-government employees from riding in government cars after his wife traveled with him, but he said ethics officials approved it.

Zinke was cleared of wrongdoing following a complaint that he redrew the boundaries of a national monument in Utah to benefit a state lawmaker and political ally.

During almost two years overseeing the agency responsible for managing 781,000 square miles (2 million square kilometers) of public lands, Zinkes broad rollbacks of restrictions on oil and gas drilling were cheered by industry.

But they brought a scathing backlash from environmental groups and Democratic lawmakers who accused him of putting corporate profits ahead of preservation.

When he resigned, Zinke said it was because of politically motivated attacks that had created a distraction from his duties.

View original post here:
Zinke misused position, lied to ethics official, according to federal investigators - PBS NewsHour

Text size

About the author: Ian Chaffee is a technology and startup media relations consultant based in Los Angeles.

When Spotify signed a reported $100 million multiyear deal in 2020 for the privilege of exclusively streaming Joe Rogans popular podcast, it was only a matter of time before people started firing at the massive target the company put on its own back. Rogans lucrative all sides approach to booking guests and producing content made it easy.

Also unfortunately for Spotify, the controversy is tailor-made for generational division. The all-ages battle royale kicked off with Boomers Neil Young and Joni Mitchell utilizing that most 1960s form of mobilization and persuasionboycott and protestto try and get Spotify to deplatform Rogan. Rogan himself comes from Generation X. He comes off as an inquisitive and nonconfrontational, but also politically incorrect, slacker-wing personality involuntarily thrust into the role of culture warrior when he would rather be doing MMA, DMT, or some other acronymic pursuit. Powerful millennials Daniel Ek and Taylor Swift, despite pleas from all corners, have opted for nonintervention when either could end the business scandal of the day whenever they wanted. The Zoomers dont care and are scrolling through TikTok.

The pressure on Rogan and Spotify intensified last weekend over Rogans repeated use of a racial slur, along with a few other inflammatory statements that cannot simply be dismissed with the counterargument of context. If that isnt enough for Spotify to eat whatever money is needed to ditch Rogan, then surely the risk that other offensive material will be found in the archives of Rogans podcast or comedic output should be. The man was a stand-up comedian first, after all, a line of work that lends itself to easy cancellation (as witnessed by fellow tradeswoman Whoopi Goldberg).

Caught up in its ambitious and now possibly tragic goal of becoming, with apologies to pre-Rogan lightning rod Howard Stern, the king of all audio media, Spotifys biggest mistake was going all-in on podcasts and chasing a market it apparently didnt yet fully understand. It wasnt enough that Spotify changed how we listen to music, it had to change how we consume everything audio. Now it has flown a bit too close to the sun. It chased what must have seemed like an easy user acquisition play in the highly lucrative bro market at the cost of not only cultural blowback, but also neglect of its primary value proposition.

Maybe this is an opportunity for Spotify to reclaim that value proposition. Lost in this debate heated by the flame of its own dumpster fire is that no one, Spotify included, is talking about the companys killer feature, what made it so popular in the first place: leveraging the cloud and the information listeners put into that cloud to create a better and more specialized music-listening experience for its users.

Spotify effectively married the appeal of a voluminous (albeit often pirated) peer-to-peer music library like Napster with the mixtape culture that has been a part of music fandom back to the cassette. While artists may not have been uniformly thrilled with those streaming royalties, whatever Spotify offered was better than nothing, and the end result for the audience was like nothing they had experienced before. If someone wanted to listen to the music from the year 1975 and only 1975 (and not the band The 1975), boom, they could find at least 10 different playlists for precisely that curated by actual human beings, with interesting and unique choices made by those playlist curators.

It might have been tougher for those who virtue-signaled their way out of their Spotify Premium subscriptions over the last week or two if Spotify had shown the same attention to their music product in the last few years that it did to someone like Rogan. A user exodus combined with Spotifys inattention reduces the future potential of the kind of music discovery that made Spotify so special in the first place. It wont be easy for Spotify simply to play Facebooks game of Well, Where Else Are You Going to Go? Competitors like Apple Music are champing at the bit to pick up those cancelers. Spotify handed them a new bit of leverage in positioning themselves as the exciting new streaming-music frontier that can do right by both their artists and listeners.

I dont doubt that Spotify is seriously considering the gravity of this stress test for its platform, its disaffected staff, disappearing subscribers, and strong competitors who now smell blood in the water. But I do wonder if the company has put itself in the best position to make the necessary choice to continue surviving and thriving. That will require much more than just joining the Joe Rogan cancel parade.

Guest commentaries like this one are written by authors outside the Barrons and MarketWatch newsroom. They reflect the perspective and opinions of the authors. Submit commentary proposals and other feedback toideas@barrons.com.

View post:
Spotify Removed Joe Rogan Episodes. It Has Strayed Far from Its Greatest Value - Barron's

It seems that the past couple of years has been dominated by this idea of being canceled. From reality stars to musicians, political figures, authors, corporate leaders, and everything in between, cancel culture is a reality for celebrities in modern times.

One offensive tweet from 8 years ago or a heated social media conversation from your teenage years could lead you to be instantly abandoned in the public eye. Or perhaps its a more recent exchange or offensive comment that has certain celebs in hot water. Just ask Chrissy Teigen, Ellen DeGeneres, or JK Rowling.

Many celebrities have paid the price for past mistakes and inappropriate comments that live forever online (thank you, Internet). Yes, their inappropriate words and offensive actions triggered these casualties of cancel culture, but what happens next?

What even is cancel culture? Is there redemption after being canceled? Can a public figure really come back from the public declaration that they are over, and how?

The phrase canceled is a buzzword taking the world by storm, reaching into virtually all industries, social media platforms, and cultural worlds. Think of it as the public saying Im done with you to a public figure or business and rejecting them personally and professionally. That might mean abandoning their work, unfollowing them on social media, and taking away their platform to be influential because of something they said or did.

This cancel culture is the phenomenon of eliminating support for these people who have done something offensive or whose ideologies are inappropriate in the public eye.

While this phenomenon is far from new people have been punishing those in positions of fame or power for decades its taken off in recent years. Social media has put the power in the hands and actions of everyday people who can now express their disapproval over behavior that they deem politically incorrect or offensive.

According to Dr. Jill McCorkel, a professor of sociology and criminology at Villanova University, cancel culture is an extension of or a contemporary evolution of a much bolder set of social processes that we can see in the form of banishment. While the methodology of cancel culture may have evolved, what remains consistent is that these steps of canceling someone are designed to reinforce the set of norms, she told the NY Post.

While being canceled might seem pretty final, its not necessarily a death wish to a persons reputation, social influence, or career. It is possible to achieve redemption after being canceled, but it is by no means a simple process or an overnight fix. For most celebrities or public figures battling the dark side of cancel culture, its a long, painful process. Just ask Chrissy Teigen. After being canceled for online bullying via insulting tweets from years ago, it took Teigen a long time and a lot of reflection and isolation just to begin to process her lousy behavior and reconcile what happens next when youre canceled.

Going outside sucks and doesnt feel right; being at home alone with my mind makes my depressed head race, Teigen wrote on her Instagram page after a long social media hiatus. Cancel club is a fascinating thing, and I have learned a whole lot. Only a few understand it, and its impossible to know till youre in it. And its hard to talk about it in that sense because obviously, you sound whiney when youve clearly done something wrong, she continued. It just sucks. There is no winning.

While it may seem as if everyone is either canceling someone else or is being canceled for inappropriate words or actions, the reality is that many Americans are truly confused by cancel culture. Many people dont fully understand what it means, and even if they do, theyre not exactly sure how they feel about the act of calling out others for poor past behavior.

In the fall of 2020, the Pew Research Center asked Americans to share if they are familiar with the term cancel culture and to explain what they think the term means in their own words.

According to their findings, 44% of Americans say they have heard at least a fair amount about the phrase, including 22% who have heard a great deal. That said, an even larger share (56%) say theyve heard nothing or not too much about it, and 38% who responded have heard nothing at all about cancel culture.

Theres also a generational divide, with most adults under 30 being very familiar with the concept. Still, only 34 percent of adults over 50 hear a great deal or fair amount about the phrase.

Clearly, cancel culture is everywhere, and its a genuine issue for celebrities who are being held accountable for their behavior in new and damaging ways. But its also causing a lot of confusion for Americans, especially older adults, who just dont quite get it.

In terms of the purpose of cancel culture, 58% of U.S. adults say that generally speaking, calling out others on social media is more likely to hold people accountable. 17% of respondents believe that calling out others can be a teaching moment that helps people learn from their mistakes and do better in the future, according to the Pew research.

So, for the million-dollar question, is there, in fact, redemption after being canceled? Experts, and the American public, seem to say yes.

If you ask Nathan Miller, founder, and CEO of MillerInk, which helps celebrities and brands navigate crisis, the key to surviving being canceled is about overcoming a large social, personal or professional cost that is imposed on you because of something youve said or done. Its important that you clearly pay for your mistakes, he suggested to CNN.

But how?

The very first step has to be a break a break from social media, from the public eye, from the toxic environments and exchanges that triggered the distasteful behavior in the first place.

A digital detox is a good place to start. Give yourself a break from public appearances, and dont open yourself up to online exchanges just yet. Dont read the insults and criticism right away. Take a step back and just breathe. Take it one day at a time.

Telling a client to drop out of the public eye for a few months isnt a bad idea. Right now, the world is moving so fast, and most people have a very short attention span, explains Ryan McCormick, Co-Founder and Media Relations Specialist at Goldman McCormick, an experienced crisis PR firm based in New York. The likelihood of a global event or national scandal eclipsing what your client had been involved in is reasonably high. Let time heal, he told CNN.

Redemption starts with an apology. You need to own up to what you did wrong, and that means more than just reciting words you dont mean it requires whole-heartedly accepting what you did wrong and saying (and truly meaning) you are sorry.

According to Lori Levine, founder and CEO of Flying Television, a company that forges partnerships between brands and celebrities, celebrities can come back from cancellation. Here in the United States, an apology tour is usually whats needed, she explained to CNN.

After taking time away from the spotlight, these public figures must re-enter the public eye explaining what they have done to work on themselves, rectify their mistakes, and explain why they feel remorseful. And they should be prepared to answer tough questions if they want to redeem themselves.

At the heart of cancel culture is the fact that the public feels betrayed by a celebritys behavior. Someone we thought we supported and whose values we believed in suddenly did something or said something to lose our trust and negate those beliefs.

Its a similar scenario when a trusted loved one does something to betray you or let you down. And as with any mistake in life, if you want to regain peoples trust, you need to be genuine. When you apologize, do it with authenticity.

Be honest about your shortcomings, where you messed up, what led you to those inexcusable actions, and how you plan to make it right and then actually make it right. Put your money where your mouth is. If your plan is to learn, grow and become educated (about whatever topic you are seemingly ignorant or confused about) so that you do not make the same mistakes, then actually embrace opportunities to learn. Reflect. Evolve. Find the silver linings.

As you take a step back, focus on your mental health and your own wellness. Only if you feel good inside and out will you be in any position to bounce back after being canceled. If you really want to right the wrongs your harsh words may have caused, you need to gain some perspective. Remember that while it seems like Americans are quick to cancel others and are eager to see others fail, our culture is even more driven by the comeback. In order to find redemption and move on, you need to do it with a renewed sense of purpose personally, professionally, and publicly.

See original here:
Cancel Culture: Is There an Opportunity for Redemption After Being Canceled? - BELatina