Category Archives: Zeitgeist Movement

By David Closson, Voices Contributor | Tuesday, June 23, 2020 Protesters gather in front of the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., as it hears arguments on gender identity and workplace discrimination on October 08, 2019. | Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

Our rapidly changing moral landscape presents a daunting challenge for Christians committed to biblical sexual ethics. The LGBT movement continues to challenge centuries of norms concerning the family, marriage, and human sexuality. And a recent Supreme Court decision means legal definitions and understanding regarding human sexuality are changing, too.

The top 7 stories of the day, curated just for you!Delivery: Weekdays

Secular progressives often criticize conservative Christians for their alleged obsession with sexual ethics. But secular and progressive elites are increasingly forcing the issue, insisting everyone embrace their worldview and the full spectrum of LGBT policy positions or face social ostracizing, public shaming, loss of jobs, or other increasingly dire consequences. Those in positions of cultural and political influence are willing to use the coercive power of government to accomplish their political objectives. This was evident this week in the U.S. Senate as Democrats argued for the immediate passage of the Equality Act, legislation that represents one of the greatest threats to religious liberty ever introduced in Congress. It would gut our nations flagship religious liberty law, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which was passed nearly unanimously by Democrats and Republicans alike.

Earlier this week, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a 6-3 decision inBostock v. Clayton County. The majority ruled that employment discrimination on the basis of sex prohibited by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 should be understood to include actions based on sexual orientation and gender identity. By reinterpreting the statue in this way, the Court essentially rewrote civil rights law.

Many conservatives were surprised by the decision and considered Justice Neil Gorsuchs majority opinion to be a betrayal of the originalist and textualist approach he had previously insisted guided his judicial philosophy. As both Justices Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh pointed out in their respective dissents, the majority opinion authored by Gorsuch imposed a meaning that would have been foreign to those who authored the Civil Rights Act and ignored the plain meaning of the statute.

The consequences of theBostockdecision will play out for many years. In the immediate future, there are significant questions about how the ruling will affect religious liberty. Can religious institutions such as colleges and seminaries continue to have have sex-separated dormitories and housing? Are sex separated private spaces like bathrooms, locker rooms, and changing facilities now discriminatory? Will women athletes be forced to compete against biological males in both scholastic and professional sports? Will employers be forced to cover treatments and surgeries that are not medically necessary and that are in opposition to their religious beliefs on human embodiment?

Originalism and textualism are methods of interpreting the law. But as theologically conservative Christians, we hold to a form of originalism and textualism when reading and interpreting Scripture the historical grammatical method. In other words, we believe Gods Word is authoritative, infallible, and inerrant. Because the Bible is breathed out by God, followers of Christ are called to obey and align their lives with it (2 Tim. 3:16). In order to obey and align our lives with the Bible, we must read and interpret it.

The historical grammatical method of interpretation means we take seriously the grammar and syntax of the words and phrases that appear in the Bible because we want to know what the text says and what it means. We also want to place the text in its historical context. The Bible was written in a culture that is very different than our own. To understand many of the stories, we need some understanding of the ancient world in which it took place. Although this process of reading the Bible takes effort, there is no other faithful way to read Scripture.

As theologically conservative Christians, we know our views on marriage and sexuality are increasingly unfashionable and go against the cultural zeitgeist. But we hold to these views anyway, because we believe the Bibles teachings about marriage and human sexuality are clear.

Transgender activists posit a distinction between the biological reality of sex and the subjective, internal feeling of gender identity. The biblical worldview, however, affirms the goodness of the material creation and the human body. In fact, the doctrines of creation, incarnation, and bodily resurrection provide strong theological affirmation of our physical bodies. Genesis 1:31 says that everything God created, including the human body, is very good. In other words, our bodies (including our maleness or femaleness) are essential, integral components of who we are.

In a world disordered by the fall, the goodness of the body may be difficult for many to affirm, and the church should show grace to those who struggle with accepting their bodies. But Christians must also speak the truth in love and stand on our convictions, which biology and anatomy support.

Christians cannot and should not compromise their Bible-informed beliefs about human sexuality. Why? Because we believe in the authority of Gods Word. And because we believe the Bibles teachings are what is best for society and individual flourishing.

The real reason theologically conservative Christians disapprove of the LGBT movement has nothing to do with wanting to deny people rights or oppressing a group of people. Our convictions come from our compassion for them and our concern about the consequences of certain chosen behaviors. Both the Old and New Testaments prohibit homosexual conduct, and since God created us male and female (Gen. 1:27), we have no right to recreate ourselves any more than the clay has the right to tell the potter what to do (Is. 45:9).

As evidenced by the muted outcry to the Supreme Courts decision on Monday even among many conservative groups conservative Christians are increasingly on the periphery when it comes to our convictions on human sexuality. Christians, especially pastors, will continue to face mounting pressure to compromise or at least downplay the Bibles teaching on marriage and sexuality. However, we cannot compromise our beliefs because we are committed to Scripture. While the Courts decision is deeply discouraging, we do not give up. We know that we are advocating and fighting for timeless truths revealed to us in Scripture.

So, let us continue to articulate a biblically robust, theologically informed perspective on how Christians think about the major issues facing our nation in order to promote the true flourishing of individuals and of society.

David Closson is the Director of Christian Ethics and Biblical Worldview at Family Research Council.

Read the original post:

Why Bostock will never have the final word on human sexuality - Christian Post

Statues are falling, conversations are changing. Were in the middle of a much anticipated cultural revolution and its becoming clear that our perception of the world is beyond faulty. Amid those changes, even the ostensibly progressive creative industries are finally recognising their roles in building a flawed system. The Grammys have finally renamed their Urban Contemporary category in an attempt to stop the racial profiling of artists, and even Anna Wintour herself has apologised for the lack of support she has given to Black voices over her 32-year tenure at Vogue.

In place of London Fashion Week Mens, which was supposed to take place this past weekend, the British Fashion Council organised a three-day digital residency programme which saw designers being given a timeslot to showcase their creative output. Some hosted panel discussions, others streamed films, VR presentations and even live gigs. Keeping the conversation relevant to whats happening in the real world, many responded to the Black Lives Matter movement, with the BFCs own programming for #LFWReset focused on amplifying BAME voices.

Joe Casely-Hayford AW95

These are all important gestures of support to creatives that have so often been overlooked, but the obvious question is -- what about those that have already fallen victim to a corrupt system? Just like in general educational curricula, the presence of Black folk in fashion literature is sparse and ambiguous, to say the least. At the Royal College of Art, when we had a brief introduction to the history of fashion, Black designers contributions to history were never really mentioned, remembers Saul Nash, the Hackney-born designer and dancer, and current Fashion East recipient.

One name that may not have made it onto RCAs fashion history reading list, but has played a definitive role in establishing London as a major fashion capital is Joe Casely-Hayford. Born in Kent in 1956 into a line of influential Ghanaian creative polymaths, Joe was one of the first Black British fashion designers to attain mainstream success. After graduating from Saint Martin's School of Art in 1979, he started his career in the early 80s by upcycling surplus military tents into garments, before teaming up with his wife Maria to launch a namesake brand which originally specialised in shirting. His work in both menswear and womenswear earned him multiple nominations at the British Fashion Awards, as well as a broad fanbase that included everyone from Princess Diana to Lou Reed. A lot of people had the issue that they couldnt pigeon-hole him, everyone was always quite quick to make assumptions because of the colour of his skin. But his breadth of talent, which extended in so many different ways, made it impossible to define him as just one thing, explains Charlie Casely-Hayford, Joes son who took over their joint business upon his fathers passing in 2019.

Joe Casely Hayford SS99

Joe was the first-ever designer to design a capsule collection for Topshop back in 1995, and was involved in a whole range of creative ventures including the design of The Barbicans seminal exhibition on the art of African textiles that same year. A decade later, he became the creative director of the heritage Savile Row tailoring brand Gieves & Hawkes, and in 2009, joined arms with his stylist-designer-model son to launch Casely-Hayford. This new brand brought together Joes decades of experience and trailblazing with Charlies new perspective, creating a cross-generational approach to a refined wardrobe. Our collections were an extension of conversations weve been having for years, and thats how we would always design, says Charlie, whose parents never really encouraged him to work in fashion. A large part of that was down to the struggles that he had in the industry, he didnt want his kids to go through the same thing. Still, both my sister [Alice Casely-Hayford, Net-A-Porter & Porter Magazine Content Director] and I ended up in fashion.

When Louis Vuitton first announced Virgil Abloh as its menswear artistic director, he became the first African-American man to head an LVMH-backed brand. Last year, Rihanna was named the Black woman to launch her own brand with the support of the French conglomerate. But before Virgil and Riri, there was Ozwald Boateng. Appointed as the artistic director of Givenchys men's division in 2003, the London-native self-taught designer of Ghanaian descent became the first-ever Black person to head the design team of a French Maison. His appointment didnt come out of nowhere, though -- for two decades beforehand, Ozwald has steadily built a tailoring empire with his signature vivid colours and decorative fabrics, often paying homage to his heritage by elevating classic tailoring with elements of traditional dress.

Oswald Boateng AW96

He created bespoke costumes for some legendary films and TV show -- including some of those outrageous suits Carries BFF Stanford Blatch wore on Sex and The City. Ozwald was a fixture of 00s zeitgeist, but just as he was preparing to take over America, the atmosphere shifted. His vibrant hues and boxy cuts went out of style, swapped out for the outr sex-appeal of exposed chests and slim-fit shirts. The industry quickly forgot about all the barriers he broke. Business declined, global stores were closed, and magazines and newspapers decided to exchange the figure of a confident party boy for an arrogant, out-of-touch man. The Guardian gave his self-produced documentary, A Mans Story, one star, while GQ put him top of their 2014 Worst Dressed list. Thats nine places above Nigel Farage. Long before the overflowing of kindness, the industrys message was clear [read in Heidi Klums voice] one day youre in and the next day youre out.

While he may have been absent from recent fashion week schedules, Ozwalds influence is everywhere. He remains the only Black-owned business on Savile Row, and last year, he hosted a show in New Yorks Apollo Theatre in honour of the 100th Anniversary of the Harlem Renaissance.

Indeed, a key issue in the industry remains the lack of a visible presence of Back folk in both business and creative positions in the industry, showing the next generation they too can one day take the helm. This has, however, slowly changed in recent years, as designers like Martine Rose, Nicholas Daley, Wales Bonner and Samuel Ross have picked up the torch and run full-speed ahead into creating successful businesses.

Martine Rose AW20

A South Londoner with her HQ in Tottenham, Martine launched her much-loved eponymous label in 2009 and has regularly collaborated with brands like Napapijri and Nike. Over the past decade, she has been a defining figure in developing what some might define as streetwear but is in fact just a resolutely contemporary take on ready-to-wear. Proving her influence beyond her own brand, Martine became a menswear consultant for Balenciaga when Demna Gvasalia took over the creative direction, a stint she recently finished after three years.

While the consultant role is one that has increasingly been offered to Black figures in fashion whether as collaborative artists or members of diversity panels rarely have they been offered the most lucrative roles.

Diors Resort 2020 show in Morocco came under plenty of criticism when they revealed its theme to be common ground, presenting luxury interpretations of elements of traditional garments from across the African continent. To justify the move, Maria Grazia Chiuri surrounded herself with collaborators who had authority on the subject, including anthropologists, African artists and textile specialists, as well as London-born Grace Wales Bonner. She began her career in 2014 with her CSM graduate collection titled Afrique. An intellectual approach to exploring Black identity in the context of contemporary menswear was quickly defined as her brands core and her immaculate execution made her an industry favourite. Since then, she has won just about every fashion prize out there, curated her own exhibition at the Serpentine Gallery, and had Meghan Markle wear a custom Grace Wales Bonner design. PS. Shes 29.

A-COLD-WALL* AW20

Her fellow fashion award darling is Samuel Ross who has had quite an unorthodox experience of getting to the turnover of 12m his brand A-COLD-WALL* hit last year. Originally from Northamptonshire, he studied graphic design and illustration at De Montfort University in Leicester before being taken under Virgil Ablohs wing, assisting him on Off-White as well as on Kanye Wests Yeezy line. In 2015, he finally launched a brand of his own. Fortunately, my home fostered an incredibly creative environment, with memories such as building cameras with my father, discussing architecture, Apple products and visiting computer fairs, Samuel shares.

His conceptual approach to garments as design objects was routinely labelled as streetwear from the beginning. While this term first entered the mainstream fashion vernacular in the 90s, its overuse can almost exclusively be traced to Louis Vuittons AW17 menswear show which debuted Kim Jones infamous Supreme collaboration. In some ways, streetwear has become fashions version of urban -- a catch-all term for all non-white style identities. It's a coded term, a lazy term. Its quite tiresome, and illogical too. To be direct, it often reflects a lack of sensitivity and understanding displayed by the author, Samuel says.

Nicholas Daley SS20. Photography Piczo

Another designer using their platform to spotlight other Black creatives is Nicholas Daley, who established the multi-sensory potential of garments at his CSM graduate show in 2013. Bringing together the influences his Jamaican father and Scottish mother instilled in him growing up, Nicholas asked legendary musician and artist Don Letts to walk in his graduate show. He was really interesting, because of the way he blended punk-rock with reggae music, he says. His shows blend together fashion with live music by performers from Nicholas own creative community. I see fashion as a vehicle for saying so much more. Its the three Cs -- community, craftsmanship and culture -- that are the backbone of what my brand is about.

Proof of recent progress in terms of the representation of Black voices on the fashion week schedule comes in the new wave of emerging menswear designers exploring their multi-cultural backgrounds and complex definitions of British-ness. Priya Ahluwalia consistently merges her dual Indian and Nigerian heritage in both the techniques employed in the production of the garments and their presentation. With a sustainable outlook which includes reworking existing garments and textiles that would otherwise end up in landfill, Priya continues to build the puzzle of her past by creating the fashion of the future. Ahluwalias most recent project is a Jalebi, a photography book which captures Britains first Punjabi community in Southall through the lens of Laurence Ellis. The best thing about London is the accessibility there are so many talented people, as well as suppliers and manufacturers which helps with the process of collaboration, says Priya.

Bianca Saunders SS20. Photography Ronan McKenzie

Also based in South London, Bianca Saunders work focuses on introducing subtly feminine elements to templates of Black masculinity, a theme she originally found by looking at yardie dancehall culture during her MA at RCA. It was about the way some Jamaican men choose to groom from shaping their eyebrows to the upkeep of hair, she explains. Appearance was key to presenting themselves. For Black History Month in November 2019, Bianca curated a show in the stalls of Brixton Village, with some of the photographs by Ronan McKenzie starring her own family wearing Bianca Saunders SS20. Her latest presentation was one of the standout moments of London Fashion Week Mens AW20, as she staged a presentation in which models danced in her fluid, modern tailoring at 9:30am.

The person behind the choreography was Saul Nash, a close friend of Biancas, who himself also creates garments that blend performance and fashion and focuses on the way clothes move. He recognises the big shift in the mentality of the designers which has helped create this network: Were now entering a generation where its not about elbowing each other to get to the top, but its about understanding that were all different and trying to understand how we can work together to get through it.

According to a 2018 report by University of the Arts London, 47% of the students across their five universities (London College of Fashion, Central Saint Martins, Camberwell College of Arts, London College of Communications and Chelsea College of Arts) come from BAME backgrounds. Among them is Cameron Williams, a graduate of this years CSM MA class whose final collection stood out for its explicit yet subversive interpretation of his familys West African heritage. He titled both the outing and his new-found brand Nuba, after a somewhat derogatory name, given to generalise the Nilotic tribes of the Nuba Mountains of Sudan by Arab traders and settlers throughout history.

Cameron Williams AW20. Photography Sharmaarke Ali Adan. Direction Jebi Labembika

For his graduate collection Cameron drew influence from his ancestry by combining the indigenous influences of sculptural wrapping and frugal functionality, with the urban streetwear influences of my surroundings. Its what he defines as an ideal of survival fashion. His plans for the years to come? Funding is also an important factor for me, which I see becoming more accessible as Black-owned businesses within art and fashion are providing financial grants to others, endorsing the progress of upcoming Black professionals. The aim for the near future is to develop into a cultural entity that promotes a world without tokenism, fetishism or colourism, and changes our approach to the understanding of indigenous cultures.

Clearly, there are so many changes that still need to be made, but the sole responsibility [shouldnt] be on Black-owned brands to make these changes, Charlie Casely-Hayford says. Instead, we need to look at structures and how to create a culture of belonging, which means integrating a deeper understanding through the corporate structure -- this includes looking at executive boards and people behind the scenes. The idea of just having a Black model just isnt enough anymore as that wont make a difference on a deeper level.

One thing I have realised recently is how closely my following watches me and absorbs everything I do and say, Bianca adds. As designers, we have this platform to reach a very engaged audience of young fans coming through, we have the power to influence for the better. Hopefully, some of that power will in the future be amplified by those that are already on the top of the pyramid. Whats indisputable in our industry today is the imbalance between the contribution Black fashion designers have made to building contemporary fashion and the attention their work has been given. Instead of just sitting on advisory boards and offering their experiences as consultants, there need to be more Black voices guiding the industry from its highest seats. If it werent for those that came before, the fashion landscape we so deeply cherish would be a pale imitation of what it is today.

Joe Casely-Hayford SS01

Credits

All imagery courtesy of the credited designers

Link:

Where would menswear be without Black British designers? - i-D

Sky Movies placed a warning on the Disney remake letting viewers know that they might be offended by a childrens film. If I had three wishes for corporate wokeness they would be stop, stop and please, please, please stop.

Life comes at you fast, as the kids say, but it apparently hurtles towards you at the speed of sound, if youre Sky Movies. The entertainment provider has taken to putting warnings on films that display outdated attitudes and cultural depictions which may cause offence today and this apparently includes the Aladdin adaptation that came out last year.

Im just about old enough to remember the dim and distant days of May 2019, when the Guy Ritchie offering received its cinematic release. A very dark time for the movie industry, replete with hideous racism. I mean how could anyone watching this remake of the 1992 animation, with its virtually entirely ethnic-minority casting, not conclude it was an obvious racist dog whistle?

Will Smith can only have taken the role of the genie because he wanted to mock the Middle East. Ritchie himself was clearly trying to sneak his deep-seated contempt for Arabs into the cultural zeitgeist by implying they all ride magic carpets, believe in jinn, and frequently and spontaneously burst into song. Frankly, how Disney ever signed off on the project is staggering, now we view it through the enlightened eyes of 2020. How anyone can look back on what we thought was acceptable 13 months ago with anything but a mixture of horror and disgust is beyond me.

Personally, Im shocked that it got away with a PG (Parental Guidance) rating at the time. How on earth could the British Board of Film Classification possibly have thought it acceptable for children to watch a blue Will Smith dance around in a spangly turban? Those poor kids must either have been scarred for life or will have to undergo extensive re-education. I mean, the only appropriate solution for any child whose parents took them to the cinema to see Aladdin is that they should be immediately taken into care to stop them from growing up to be white supremacists.

And Aladdin isnt the only movie that Sky is warning us has outdated attitudes. Aliens obviously does (though those views are presumably outdated because its set in the future, so humanity hasnt had a chance to develop them yet), and The Jungle Book remake from 2016 carries the warning, too, as do Flash Gordon and Trading Places. Tropic Thunder and White Chicks also both bear the advisory, perhaps for more obvious reasons, but both of those movies are still less than 20 years old and stirred up no controversy at the time, being widely praised as great comedies.

Obviously, this all started with the Gone with the Wind debacle, which also fell foul of the outdated attitudes warning on Sky, having been pulled altogether by HBO last week for the same reason. But while that movie which, incidentally, provided the role that earned the first Oscar for a black actress, in the shape of Hattie McDaniel was made in 1939, whereas Aladdin was made last year. Woke madness is currently rocketing through time at a rate previously achieved only by Marty McFly.

Bizarrely, neither 12 Years a Slave nor Django Unchained have been slapped with this warning, despite literally being about slavery and both containing dialogue that virtually uses the n-word as a form of punctuation.

This nonsense needs to stop. It makes the entire woke brigade look ridiculous. How can you expect anyone to believe your movement isnt operating some kind of year zero approach to the world when its terrifying corporations into slapping outdated attitudes trigger warnings on childrens films from the previous calendar year? Aladdin is a light-hearted Disney musical, not Birth of a Nation or Triumph of the Will, and even if it were, watching movies doesnt make someone a racist. Erasing the past is bad enough erasing yesterday is completely insane.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Read more:

A woke new world: Who deemed the outdated attitudes on display in 2019s Aladdin movie unacceptable in 2020? - RT

Over the weekend, social media feeds in India were flooded with illustrated quotes of Desmond Tutu that declared If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor, poignant protest signs that declared I cant breathe, and the quintessential hashtag #BlackLivesMatter. The posts expressed solidarity with George Floyd, a Black man who died after a police officer kneeled on his neck for 8 minutes and 46 seconds. The incident has sparked demonstrations against police brutality and racism around the world.

This outpouring of support in India would have ordinarily been touching. Yet many couldn't help but notice that the very voices who now claim to be infuriated by police brutality, systematic oppression and murder on the basis of arbitrary factors like skin colour were the same ones who were blissfully silent when similar human rights violations happened in the country. Many feigned ignorance and apathy when critics pointed out that police forces in India target university students and Dalit rights activists. Others stand in solidarity with an American-born movement against oppression, while choosing to overlook the all too frequent religion-based violence and riots that have taken place in India.

Enraged citizens were quick to call out this selective outrage and question the influencers and celebrities expressing outrage as being performative woke and hypocritical. These accusations were then immediately dismissed with: You cant tell me what to care about.

But the incident begs the question: Why dont Indians care about the same struggles so many of their countrymen are facing? Why do Indians, who are infuriated with racism and police brutality in the U.S., not feel that kind of rage for the same issues in their own country?

We have a deep-seated history of slavery, thousands of years of caste-based differentiation and several decades of violent Hindu-Muslim rivalry that arent easy to unlearn, said Vikram Patel, a psychiatrist, social researcher and founder of Sangath, an organisation dedicated to child development and mental health in low-resource settings. Theres still a lot of social engineering required to make our society more inclusive of its diversity. This has a direct impact on childrens views while growing up when their families, which might be biased (by historical context that is casteist or anti-Muslim), impose unacceptable and inhumane prejudice on impressionable minds.

Patel points out that like most societies that have a colonial history, Indians tend to have this fascination with the West and model their societies around it, without taking into account cultural differences. A simple example of this is with lockdowns. We saw many countries in the West doing it, so we decided to adapt that model without implementing social security systems and giving cash payments to the struggling sections of society, or analysing how dependent our people are on public transportation, said Patel.

Patel pointed out an interesting dichotomy between this skewed way of viewing the West. Indians like to blame Western values for acts of cruelty, but when someone in the U.S. questions problematic behaviour in India, citizens become nationalistic and try to justify their actions, instead of realising that they must fix the problems in their homes before trying to do so globally.

Many experts also highlight the power of mainstream media in influencing such movements, and how they sometimes set narratives that work more like propaganda.

Mainstream media, including Bollywood and pop culture, mostly glorifies upper-caste Hindu culture, and rarely explores themes of violence against Muslims or casteism, said Paras Sharma, a psychologist, social development expert and co-founder and director of mental health organisation The Alternative Story.

Sharma cited what many other critics do: that the portrayal of police in films and popular shows like Crime Patrol or Savdhaan India (which dramatise real-life crime cases) also tends to glorify cops as the ultimate good guys, making it harder for people to understand the severity of living in a police state. Meanwhile, theres an invisibilisation of caste and religion, sometimes even a vilification propagated by biased news channels. This creates a negative image of left-oriented organisations and student protests, he said.

He explained that biased media portrayals can then convert images of injustice into separatist movements that target the oppressed and make them out to be terrorists. The problem is that this popular media sets the narrative that is replicated and regurgitated by people on platforms like Twitter and WhatsApp. He also stressed how this can spill over into elections of public officials, and eliminate any options that dont take populist or extremist stands that reflect sentiments of the majority.

Sharma said that the populist narrative then affects the topics that celebrities speak up about. Its much easier for a celebrity to speak out against white supremacy than against Hindu supremacy, because you cant call out the very people your career and social status is dependent on, he said. He gave the examples of Indian actors like Aamir Khan, Shah Rukh Khan and Deepika Padukone having had to face social boycotts after speaking out on sensitive topics that criticised the right-wing.

"Its not hypocrisy as much as it is marketing. They (celebrities who were silent but are now speaking up in solidarity with the Black Lives Matters movement) are looking at who constitutes the majority or who has the zeitgeist right now. Currently, the zeitgeist around the world is anti-government and anti-police, so they are swayed by it because it sells their personal brand.

While celebrities actions can be attributed to a desire for public validation, a different kind of attitude defines the actions of ordinary citizens who display the same apathy. Sharma believes that a layperson who has raised their voice against racism and police brutality in the U.S. but has stayed silent when the same issues have permeated Indian society is probably driven by a kind of superiority complex.

He explained how this creates a chasm defined by the ingroup, which is the social group these people relate to, and an outgroup, which is a group they arent a part of. In this case, the American government is viewed as an outgroup, and the same actions are criticised to make people feel like they are better off in their own country. It helps us reduce some of the dissonance we feel about some of our actions, said Sharma.

According to him, citizens who want to justify why they have voted for an ineffective government or the problematic things their ministers say, will do so by criticising another government. Were basically saying, look, we might have it bad but you have it worse. And when we criticise somebody who is not from our cultural context, we are essentially saying the ingroup is better than the outgroup.

Indeed, there's value in questioning the origins of anti-Blackness, as it can lead to the application of those politics to Indian narratives. "For South Asians specifically, challenging anti-Blackness cannot be discussed without examining casteism in our communities," said Sharmin Hossain, the political director at Equality Labs.

"Although caste and race are distinct and separate social categories, caste has divided South Asian society into units of graded inequality. By examining caste privilege, South Asians can interrogate the underlying logic of anti-Blackness, and find new language to raise the consciousness of our communities," Hossain said.

"We also have to reframe the conversation around police brutality and take it beyond anti-Blackness. The Movement for Black Lives struggle is not only about the end to police brutality, it is a multi-faceted strategy to change our communities - from divesting in police and military, to safer communities nourished with resources and social safety nets.

Follow Shamani Joshi on Instagram.

This article originally appeared on VICE IN.

More:

Why Indians Angered by the Racism and Police Brutality in the US Dont Care About the Same Issues in Their Own Country - VICE

Throughout the coronavirus pandemic, weve been eagerly awaiting a return to normal. We want to be able to go out again, see our friends, and be in public places without feeling like were risking our health or that of others.

Now that Covid-19 case counts have gone down and restrictions are starting to lift, it seems were at last on the path back to some semblance of normalcy. But as recent events have shown, the status quo before the pandemic wasnt all that great for large swathes of the population, both in the US and around the world.

Do we really want to get back to normal, or should we be focusing on building a more just and inclusive future?

Last week at Singularity Universitys digital summit on the future of work, SU chair of Future Studies Paul Saffo and chair for the Future of Work Gary Bolles discussed a piece of the old normal they think needs to change: the structure of the economy.

Over the last few decades, weve increasingly distanced ourselves from the values our ancestors built into post-World War II society, and it appears that in many ways, were worse off for it. Rather than sticking to the winner-take-all capitalism thats gotten us where we are, Bolles and Saffo believe, the future will be far more promisingfor everyoneif we re-orient towards a moral economy.

A simple definition of a moral economy is an economy thats based on justice and fairness.

The term, Saffo said, is almost two centuries old. James C. Scott was one of the preeminent thinkers in this area, and he framed the concept of a moral economy like this: imagine youre a farmer in a small agrarian village. Youve had a bad year, but your neighbor is also a farmer and hes had a good year. So you go to your neighbor and he freely shares some of his surplus with you, not because hes just being nice, but rather because next year he may be the one who needs help, and you can be the one to help him then.

Essentially, a moral economy respects interdependence and relationships rather than leaving everyone to fend for his or herself with no regard for how others are faring. The other standout expert on this topic is E.P. Thompson, and he wrote about the moral economy in England before and after the Industrial Revolution. Moral contracts existed between landlord and peasants before the Industrial Revolution; but the rise of free-market thinking did away with putting these moral concepts first, and the long-standing contracts between people and groups were broken.

The important thing about the concept of a moral economy today is that whenever theres a big idea in the zeitgeist, we usually ask ourselves the wrong question, Saffo said. Back in 2009 everyone was asking will robots steal our jobs?, but then people realized that that was the wrong question, and we should be thinking about the future of work. Now that weve shifted to focusing on that topic, the way to tie in the myriad issues around itincluding the environment, equity, diversity, and technologyis to discuss the future of work within the context of a moral economy.

When looking at big disruptions to the economy, we tend to focus on the technologies that brought about massive change; the steam engine, nitrogen-based fertilizer, the incandescent light bulb, etc.but its equally significant to examine the laws and norms that went into place during these historical shifts.

In England before the Industrial Revolution, Bolles said, there were a lot of small farms, and in between the farms there was a common space where the farmers are allowed to graze their animals. When the Industrial Revolution and mass production techniques came along, the farms started to get bigger, and laws called the Enclosure Acts were created to hand the common areas over to large landholders; they unsurprisingly ended up having the most land and the most money.

A lot of the interconnections of those economies were lost, and they rewarded more bigger faster stronger, and that echoes down to today, Bolles said. Giant tech companies have created platforms, and weve rewarded them by putting more and more content and information and data on their platforms. The big get bigger, which ultimately leads to the small being forced out.

Today, we should ask ourselves what the new Enclosure Acts are, said Saffo. There are always forces trying to do enclosures, and moral economies dont appear by accident. People fight for them.

After the Great Depression, American workers unionized and organized to demand a moral economy. World War II prompted the creation of one that lasted for several decades, until, Saffo said, the early 1980s, when laws were passed that began systematically dismantling it. The Gini coefficient measures how far a countrys income distribution deviates from being perfectly equal, and in the US this number has steadily risen since the 1980s. In 2015, the top 1 percent of earners in the US averaged 40 times more income than the bottom 90 percent.

In the 1980s everybody took the order that had been created in the previous decades so much for granted that they didnt fight to preserve it, Saffo said. In my opinion, were at the breaking point today.

The world has changed dramatically since the 1980s (not to mention since January). Technological advancement has brought abundant food, resources, and income to many more people than ever before, but its also made us value independence (that is, a movement towards an individualistic society that de-emphasizes depending on and helping others) at the expense of interdependence, and now were seeing the fallout.

Were in the middle of this independence bubble, and independence has become a very dangerous myth, Saffo said. Granted, in a small agrarian community its easier to make a moral economy work, because people see the consequences of their actions and get feedback from other parties. The massive global economy were living in, on the other hand, is a society of strangers, with little to no feedback and consequences that are invisibleuntil theyre not.

How, then, can we use technology to foster social solidarity and interdependence? How do we encourage the balancing of economies to benefit the most people possible? How would the world look different if it was built on these precepts?

Digital technology has done its share of harm to democracy and to social cohesionhow do we turn it around and harness it for good? Its not going to come down from the top, Saffo said. Its going to have to come up from the bottom, with individual communities leading by example.

Our current economic structure and reward system doesnt take into account the most important factors for our collective well-being, like justice, equality, the environment, and our physical and mental health. We need to trade in our defunct system for one that pulls these things into the equation in a meaningful way.

As sci-fi writer William Gibson famously said, The future is already here; its just not evenly distributed. Building a moral economy may be the first step towards righting that imbalance.

Image Credit: joko narimo from Pixabay

More:

Fixing What's Broken: If We Build a Moral Economy, the Future Will Be Better - Singularity Hub

EXCITING TIMES By Naoise Dolan

Already drawing comparisons to Sally Rooneys work, Exciting Times, by Naoise Dolan, has many of the familiar tropes of the millennial novel covered: Jealousy and obsession, love and late capitalism, sex and the internet all come whirling together in a wry and bracing tale of class and privilege.

The protagonist, Ava, is an intelligent, 22-year-old loner who moves from her native Dublin to Hong Kong to teach English, with no discernible qualifications other than being white. Not long after her arrival, she finds herself on a lunch date with Julian, an Oxford-educated British banker in his late 20s. She hopes hell be as impressed by her youth and attractiveness as she is by his salary, which she has Googled, thoroughly. I wasnt good at most things but I was good at men, Ava confides in the reader, and Julian was the richest man Id ever been good at.

Soon they are sleeping together, and Ava moves into Julians flat. She is highly attuned both to the power dynamics at play (do you want me to depend on you? she asks him) and to her moral predicament, as she adds up how much money she is saving on rent, as well as on the clothes and meals Julian pays for with the funds he doesnt know what to do with.

Ava admires how Julian handles his advantages, how he could calmly note where he benefited from unfairness not self-indulgently like I often did, but factually. As their undefined relationship goes on, she begins to develop her own brand of romantic longing, which begins with a desire for his life of privilege. I loved him potentially, she thinks. That, or I wanted to be him.

Ava is hyper-verbal and exacting, and Dolans writing excels when Ava turns her analytical eye on the intersections between English syntax, zeitgeist technology and interpersonal relationships: Because I lacked warmth, I was mainly assigned grammar classes, where children not liking you was a positive performance indicator. I found this an invigorating respite from how people usually assessed women.

By contrast, Avas written correspondences social media posts and emails she labors over, analyzes, doesnt send or sends by accident become increasingly vulnerable in their disclosures as the book moves along. They form a digital counterbalance to Avas aloof and guarded in-person presence, and through this duality Dolan captures perfectly the nauseating insecurity of growing up today.

Yet like many millennials, Ava exhausts the bulk of her mental energy on her bank account. Youre not easily pleased with how other people put sentences together, Julian accuses, but when it comes to money, youve got no taste. And no squeamishness about asking for it, discussing it, hoarding it. Ava doesnt flinch. The novel is shot through with moments of such startling self-awareness as this.

While Julian is back in London for six months, Ava meets Mei Ling Edith Zhang, a corporate lawyer from a well-off Hong Kong family. Edith has much in common with Julian: an Oxbridge pedigree and a high-powered, high-paying job. I wanted her life, Ava thinks. I worried this might endanger our friendship, but so far it seemed to be facilitating it.

Their friendship eventually moves through phases of awkward flirtation into a romantic affair, taking place mostly in Julians apartment, and in secret, as Edith is not out to her parents. But Julians impending return means Ava must decide not so much between her lovers as between Edith and the expensive flat that she doesnt pay for. Sure, her salary is good compared to the locals, but ending things with Julian would mean shed have to, gasp, live like they do, in coffin homes.

The novel takes place a few years after the 2014 Umbrella Movement, peaceful demonstrations that galvanized Hong Kongs youth, who were demanding open elections, in a renewed spirit of protest. Unfortunately, Dolans superficial evocation of the island is conjured mostly through Instagram latte art geotagged on fashionable streets. The actual experiences of local people her age have no effect whatsoever on Ava, the details of their lives mentioned, by the author, only in passing. Absent the textures of a real city that is sharply divided along generational, ideological and class lines, Dolans novel could have taken place in any other major Asian metropolis. None of the English-speaking characters seek to venture beyond their established social circles, where even brief references to elections or the conditions of domestic workers are dismissed as white savior-ish. They barely notice the Chinese characters on street signs, let alone try to understand them.

Those whove spent time in Hong Kong cant help wondering what its like to be among the Anglophone transplants who work and party there. Are they as insensitive and indifferent as they seem to the foreign city they call home? The answer Exciting Times seems to offer is yes, in this case they are just as shallow and myopic as one would assume. After a local waiter replies to her English greeting in Cantonese, an irritated Edith points out one of Avas blind spots: Youre not noticing because youre white, she says, people see me and assume Im from here. Edith might let Ava off the hook, but why should todays reader do the same?

Here is the original post:

In Exciting Times, Echoes of Sally Rooney, but With a Queer Twist - The New York Times

Culture Movies

Netflixs Jeffrey Epstein: Filthy Rich is about the life of a billionaire and his obscene legacytold in all its ugly detail. By JAM PASCUAL

As soon as you think youve gotten used to all the ways the world can go wrong, the obscenely rich find a new way to stupefy you. This was pretty much how it went down last year when financier Jeffrey Epstein was arrested on federal charges for the sex trafficking of minors, as we around the world watched a web of lies and deception come undone, as the #MeToo movement gained more steam.

Epsteins molestation pyramid scheme (three words which should never be beside each other) was a zeitgeist-defining crisis, its twists and turns faithfully documented. Its hard to imagine anyone being in the dark about the subject, but considering the terrible wealth of problems happening around the world, its feasible that one simply did not give the issue due attention. Jeffrey Epstein: Filthy Rich is a documentary on one of the vilest men of our time, meant for those who perhaps couldnt stomach reading about Epsteins vile exploits while the news cycle was churning the story out.

It is an accomplishment that this documentary is able to do what it does, considering the fact that we know how the story ends. Epstein dies, and a million memes about Epstein not killing himself are born. Its an amusing meme, one whose tone of tin foil hat hysteria matches the absurdity of the events that preceded it and their illuminati proportions. And yet Filthy Rich manages to surprise. It does this deftly, setting up the image that Epstein aims to projecta wealthy, international man of mysterythrough an anecdote of a Vanity Fair profile that, had Epstein and his lawyers not threatened and manipulated the magazine, couldve published testimonies from two of his victims.

And then the documentary spends the rest of its running time tearing it all apart. An island nicknamed Pedophile Island. Underage girls flown in from France. Buying off the FBI. Its good nonfiction, but even the organising of facts and real anecdotes needs good pacing, which Filthy Rich has a lot of.

The four part docu rightfully places its attention first, and for a majority of the series, on the women that Epstein trafficked, making this as much a story of survivorship as it is a story of power. It takes time to unpack the extreme class difference between Epsteins El Brillo Way neighbourhood in Palm Beach, and the nearby low-income neighbourhoods from which many of the girls he exploited came from. Epsteins friends are cut zero slackthe likes of Woody Allen, Harvey Weinstein, Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew are some of the many names dropped to demonstrate Epsteins proximity to power, and the dubious company he kept as a financier. Its a shame that Epsteins main accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, could not be reached, but her absence speaks volumes. The blatant flaws of the justice and incarceration system are put on blast. To the credit of Filthy Rich, it makes these effortful attempts to call the conditions that allow Jeffrey Epstein to thrive, a systemic problem.

But the docu is kind of a redundant project. While the documentary is a harrowing, suspenseful watch that gives a Netflix-sized platform to women whose testimonies were ignored for years and not given nearly enough time in court, it is more emotionally taxing than insightful. In a world where there is just so much bedlam happening at any given moment, it is hard to give this film the emotional bandwidth required to stomach its story. Maybe thats the fault of its release date.

Plus, Filthy Rich doesnt really offer new information other than what was bombarded upon us through the news cycles unrelenting reportage. I believe any investigative piece should be able to strike a balance between educational and cinematic. Filthy Rich doesnt do that. It tells us things that we already know, through cinematic beats were familiar with if weve consumed literally any true crime media. Its painful to watchand not always in a good waysurvivors reopen old wounds. That sort of research is always a difficult undertaking, and Im certain director Lisa Bryant handled the stories of her subjects with as much delicacy and care as she could. But the vindication of these women could have been given better treatment in this narrative, instead of having their healing treated as a neat conclusion to what was essentially a true crime drama.

This is a documentary for viewers who wants to educate themselves, need a refresher, or just never got around to reading the articles and think pieces they left as open tabs on their browsers. But even then Filthy Rich couldve stepped it up in that aspect. Part of what makes the story of Epstein so compelling is the tracing of disparate threads to the places of power that impact the world today, and have impacted the world for a long time. Alexander Acosta, who approved a plea deal to basically soften Epsteins sentence from 2007-2008, would eventually come to be nominated Labor Secretary by Donald Trump. Alan Dershowitz, one of Epsteins lawyers, turns out to also be connected with Trump, Harvey Weinstein, and O.J. Simpson.

Here is an investigative piece that couldve used some more thread-tracing, more undone spiderwebsnot just for dramatic effect, but also to drive home the fact that the Epstein issue is a social issue.

You know that thing many documentaries do thats like a supercut of a bunch of news anchors all saying connected things? Imagine this. Clips of the Occupy movement and protestors chanting we are the 99 percent! as they march through Wall Street, the locus of big money and home to many of Epsteins old associates. Reports on the Panama Papers, which Epstein is also connected to. Clips of the FBI doing stuff. More clips: the trials and arrest of Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinsten, the latter a friend of Epstein. The election of Donald Trump, the 2017 Womens March, the Stormy Daniels scandal. From there, zoom out to reveal Epsteins face as a mosaic of screens. Or cut to black then come in with an anecdote by a survivor. This might seem a little hammy, but Filthy Rich already does a lot of work exposing networks of power and the big names therein.

In any case, I can only recommend watching Filthy Rich as much as I recommend reading up on the story, whether its the James Patterson book from which this movie was roughly adapted, or articles from a trusted news outlet. I suppose its just a matter of whichever medium you prefer. Either way, it wont hurt less.

You can watch Jeffrey Epstein: Filthy Rich on Netflix.

Read the original here:

This docu on Jeffrey Epstein is a harrowing watchalmost too harrowing, in fact, to stomach - ABS-CBN News

Associate professor of literature Sandy Alexandres research spans late-19th century to present-day black American literature and culture. In 2019, Alexandre was awarded a prestigious Bose Research Grant, which supports her study of the under-explored phenomenon of ideas that first appear in speculative fiction becoming technological and social reality. SHASS Communications spoke to Alexandre recently about her project to illuminate the literary, humanistic sources of many technological innovations and advancements.

Q: Literature as a source for technological innovation is under-explored territory. What directions are you most excited about in your current research? What are some historic examples of tech inspired by literature?

A: In asking participants in my study to read specifically for a work of speculative fiction's imaginary inventions, I am effectively asking them to read with a one-track mind. Needless to say, this approach to teaching literature is not characteristic of my usual or preferred modus operandi. So, besides a very extensive list of imaginary inventions, I'm curious to know what else that very particular way of reading might yield.

Could it help us understand how to factor imaginary inventions into a work of fiction's overall design, meaning, and significance, for example? Why is a particular category of imaginary invention, rather than another one, necessary to the particular story a work of speculative fiction wants to tell?

Overall, I hope that being able to survey speculative fiction's various and sundry imaginary inventionsmore systematicallywill not only illuminate the answers to these questions, but also generate new ones. My sense is that the larger the sample size of imaginary inventions we can collect, the better and more precise will be the kinds of questions we can ask of it. The world needs good question-askers as much as it needs good problem-solvers, and this research project aspires to produce some very good askers.

The World Wide Web is famously said to have been inspired by Arthur C. Clarke's short story Dial F For Frankenstein (1964). Whatever the truth is, I'm not surprised that a writer's process of meticulously crafting creative ways of communicating with readers would inevitably lead to the creation of imaginary inventions that foresee entirely new forms of communication. It's more than a little reasonable to assume that we can trace the lineage of communication platforms and devices back to well-crafted works of the language arts. Literature, its readers, and the inventors who are inspired by it are all a part of STEM history.

Q: Is the influence of literary texts on the development of technology an instance of one way literature functions in culture more broadlyoften as a harbinger, articulating new realities and possibilities? How does this research highlight how literature looks forward both technologically and socially?

A: Absolutely! My research will highlight how literature is inherently an imaginative and inventive enterprise. Putting words together in ways that are oft-thought but never so well-expressedis an exercise in prescience and trendsetting. A writer's constant tweaking and manipulation of words constitute atinkering the kind of tinkering one might associate with the makings of an engineer.

Literature is famously good for synthesizing a zeitgeist and distilling it into a cultural product. That ability, at the macro level, to compress a whole climate into a novel-length or short story-length work is not at all far from what writers do, at the micro level, when they harness their abstract ideas by transforming them into imagined physical objects. And frankly, who best to anticipate the needs of a society than writers who are deeply familiar with and who regularly immerse themselves in the countless narrative and life scenarios made available to them in the works of literature they read?

In other words, the sum of their many reading experiences is, to a great degree, encyclopedic in a way that necessarily makes their knowledge predictive. That such knowledge would endow writers with the ability to dream up inventions that should or could exist in the service of making our lives better and easier strikes me as the most logical progression. Avid readers who constantly encounter plot lines in manifold permutations and who write from that well-read positionality have a distinct advantage certainly over nonreaders in their ability to predict the future, to some extent, by virtue of being well-versed on past and current events.

Q:Why do you think these imagined innovations make the jump from page to the world we live in? Are there some new technologies you can imagine that you'd like to see become reality? What technology in modern speculative literature has the potential to become reality?

A: When these jumps from the page to reality in the world happen, they do so because the imagined innovations are utterly impressive, inspiring, and daring. Their kinetic energy is infectious inspiring inventors and technologists to attempt to reify them in the world. Offered up as plausible and attainable by how they're described (and the very fact that they are describable in the first place), it is no surprise that imaginary inventions would find their match in the ever-curious makers and would-be makers of the world.

These jumps also happen because, for the most part, readers know that speculative fiction writers have honed a knack for foresight. And many readers rely on this quality to become more prescient global citizens in an ever-changing world. Our speculative fiction writers are the unsung prophets among us.

As for new technologies that I can imagine and would like to see in reality well, I would like to see what Ill call intermediation technologies, which could be used, for example, between doctors and patients to create better communication and understanding. Too often, doctors make inaccurate diagnoses based on how patients answer questions, and whether the doctor believes those answers. Intermediation technologies would reconcile the fact that, while patients are, usually, laypersons in the medical field, they are also experts about certain aspects oftheir own bodies.

Say a patient comes in describing a nebulous abdominal pain using vocabulary that does not align with the doctors more specialized terminology and the doctor is not adept at translating the patient's vocabulary into medical terms. For that situation, Id like to see a visually compelling, user-friendly, hand-held digital device that presents a repertoire of diagnostic possibilities that the doctor and patient can consult and discuss together. Think of it as the medical version ofthe Shazam app that identifies music. But even beyond identification, this medical intermediation device would also further better communication, respect, and trust between doctors and patients.

Finally, thinking about imaginative tech with the potential to become reality, the 3D holographic human form that the Star Trek television series popularized is actually becoming reality, albeit still very costly at this stage. The recent transition to digital teaching and learning makes me wonder how much better "virtual" education would be if it was on a holographic platform one that enables more interaction, more eye movement, body language, and sense of presence in other words, more of the kind of holistic learning opportunities we experience in face-to-face environments.

Go here to read the rest:

3 Questions: Sandy Alexandre on the literary roots of technological innovations - MIT News

The death of George Floyd by police in Minneapolis last week has caused an immediate response of grief and anger, as well as the examination by individuals and organisations across the world about how we respond to such deaths and the racism that they expose in Western society. Across the creative industries urgent questions have been asked about the slow response to calls for diversity and change, and what needs to happen now.

The instinctive initial response by many to Floyds death is to take to the streets and protest. Events are happening around the world, across America but also in London, Paris, Amsterdam and Berlin.

Photographers and filmmakers have been out capturing powerful scenes from the protests across the world:

PROTESTING FROM HOME

Yet during the pandemic, it can be difficult for people to protest physically. Mona Chalabi has been once again demonstrating the power that data can have to get to the heart of the matter in visuals online:

There are numerous petitions that can be signed, including the Justice for George Floyd petition. D&AD has put together a very useful resource list which includes other petitions as well as fundraising endeavours and wider reading. This can be found here.

And gal-dem has published a thoughtful piece on other ways to protest if you cant go out physically due to coronavirus. Protest has the function of agitating the state, though I believe its more moving function is one of collective catharsis, writes Melz. It allows us to come together as a collective and share in the grief and pain that we are all feeling. It gives us a place to channel and externalise the rage and hurt that runs through our veins each day in this white supremacist world. Still, the conflict remains how many more lives may we put at risk by taking to the streets during a pandemic? The piece then lists the many ways that people can channel grief and anger when physical protesting is not an option.

RESPONSES FROM BRANDS

As this New York Times piece points out, brands have begun responding to the cause, if somewhat warily. Theres a general trend toward executives in the C-suite being called out and pressure-tested by consumers who want to know where they stand theres an opportunity to differentiate not just on function, on whats a better mousetrap, but on values, says Americus Reed, a marketing professor at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania in the piece. Its smart theyre taking a stand, hopefully, because its moral, but also because they understand the long-term economic game.

And for brands that borrow heavily from black culture, the topic cannot be ignored, states influencer Jackie Aina in the piece. When it comes to relevant things happening, things you cant ignore like the Black Life Matters movement, police brutality or murders in our community, its crickets, and thats unacceptable, she said. If you are capitalising off of a culture, youre morally obligated to help them.

THE NEED FOR WIDER CHANGE

This moment is seeing a call for wider change across society, but also specifically in the creative industries with artists such as Campbell Addy, and Emmazed founder, Mo Mfinanga, calling for systemic change in how black creatives are treated in the industry.

In Vogue, UK editor Edward Enninful calls for recognition of the importance of cultivating an anti-racist agenda. This is an evolving conversation, writes Enninful, and it requires evolving education. We have to keep educating ourselves and our neighbours, or the atrocities wont stop. I do not condone the violence that is breaking out across America and other cities. I am not condoning the lootings. I support free speech, and the rights of people to protest, though I would caution that people make adequate safety arrangements in the light of the pandemic. I am convinced that we need to fight racism, to convert knowledge into anti-racism. And we need to do it together.

Fashion has a part to play in this, he continues. It occupies a unique place in the zeitgeist, and it has a singular ability to shift mindsets. I implore fashion brands, publications and retailers to employ more people from diverse backgrounds I truly believe this is the only way to effect real change. We need black people ingrained within the infrastructure of the fashion industry, not just on the other side of the camera or appearing on an Instagram feed. People need a seat at the table.

This is a viewpoint echoed in a recent piece in CR by Stormzy collaborator and writer Jude Yawson about racism in the UK. There is a grave and systematic error that pits people against each other, which has become the mainstay of the country, writes Yawson. If we want to reach a state of equality, the experiences of black and ethnic minorities must be recognised alongside wider Britishness. Whether its politically, or in the media, or in social media and its algorithms, creating our echo chambers of people this society as a whole needs to do better.

Diversity in the creative industries has been talked about for years, but, as is clear in the responses to Floyds death, change has not happened fast enough and there is a need for action as well as conversation. There is an opportunity here for the creative industries to respond to these terrible events by using its skills, talents and power to bring about real change and create a better world for us all.

Here is the original post:

Black Lives Matter: Resources and Responses - Creative Review

Update 3 June 2020

After about 14 hours above $10,000, Bitcoin crashed back down to $9,500 as quickly as it went up.

It appears to have been for the same reason it rose in the first place: whales traded big against the prevailing futures positions, triggering a squeeze. Basically, a big price movement starts liquidating futures contracts, which adds fuel to whatever direction the market is already moving.

The whales giveth, the whales taketh.

Michael Novogratz's prediction: "When 10k goes it will move fast" ended up being correct twice in one day, on both the way up and the way down.

The article below has been left as it was originally published, way back in the heady days of 2 June 2020.

Bitcoin is finally back above US$10,000, for the first time since February 2020, shortly before the massive crash of March. It was straining mightily and unsuccessfully to get past $10,000 a couple of weeks ago, but today it just abruptly pinged from around $9,700 to $10,200 in an hour flat.

Seeing Bitcoin back above that psychological five-digit mark is a heartwarming thing. It feels like Bitcoin is back where it belongs now and that everything is all right in the world once again.

Of course, given the actual state of the world right now that just goes to show why the number one rule of trading is to not trust your feelings.

In that vein, let's look at several different analysts who felt like Bitcoin was going to break $10,000 before it happened, and why they felt that way.

Some analysts are feeling the wind in their hair as they ride the Bitcoin rollercoaster out of the channel set following the 2017 highs, suggesting that Bitcoin may be on track to fundamentally shift out of its current price range.

Source

The timing is impeccable, because it lines up uncannily with the predictions laid out by the stock to flow model of Bitcoin valuation.

More specifically, we hit the "red dot" phase of the model on 1/2 June (depending on timezone), as laid out by pseudonymous analyst PlanB, just hours before Bitcoin pumped above $10,000. So, quite a few of the "red dot" crowd were celebrating this price rise before it even happened.

"The red dot" refers to the period immediately after the Bitcoin halving. It's called "the red dot" because improvised symbolism is the cornerstone of all faiths including the Bitcoin religion, and because red is the colour of certain dots on the chart below.

Source

The coloured dots on this chart are monthly Bitcoin prices, with the colour indicating how long until the next halving, and how long since the last halving.

The darkest blue dots are Bitcoin prices the month before each halving, while the darkest red dots (of the kind that popped out today) come out in the month after each halving. So, wherever the blue flips to red, that indicates a halving. As you can see, red dots have very consistently predicted a major Bitcoin price run since as far back as 2012.

In short, the red dot says that if history repeats itself, Bitcoin should see a major ascent this year to break $100,000 sometime next year. And now Bitcoin popped up above $10,000 just hours after the first dark red dot since 2016.

The thing about the red dot idea is that it simply says market forces will ineffably propel Bitcoin to higher price tiers, and that the power of maths means Bitcoin is simply destined to rise. That theory existed long before the Federal Reserve overclocked its printing presses in response to everything that's happening in 2020.

This poses something of a philosophical dilemma for anyone who wants to believe that the stock to flow theory predicts Bitcoin prices, while also attributing its price rises to other factors like quantitative easing or the White House's reaction to the ongoing protests, because it suggests Bitcoin prices would be doing the same thing regardless of what's going on in the world.

Other experts successfully called the rise before it happened by looking at more earthly factors, citing the general state of the world as a driver of Bitcoin prices, just generally feeling the vibe in the air and presumably tasting Bitcoin trading volume on the wind.

The tightest prediction around probably belongs to Galaxy Digital's Michael Novogratz, who pulled off this call about an hour before Bitcoin prices jumped above $10,000.

Source

Bitcoin's "coiling" was pointed out by others, who noted that Bitcoin had been settling into a tighter price range over time, which usually heralds a sudden, big move in one direction or the other.

The tension in the air may have given it the push it needed to go up instead of down when the time came. It's worth noting that the exact timing of the rise lines up closely with some of the US president's more fiery statements of the day.

"There was a sharp spike in the price this morning as US President Trump spoke to the press regarding the ongoing protests, which have been unfolding in cities across America. In the speech, he proclaimed that he would mobilise all available federal resources civilian and military. This quickly made headlines around the world as the mobilisation of the military in the United States is a rare occurrence," points out eToro analyst Matthew de Corrado. "For cryptoasset investors, this may have signified an escalation in the tension, and has no doubt caused some uncertainty over what could transpire in the coming few days."

Novogratz's first prediction ("Bitcoin will rise to $10k") has come to fruition, but the second ("Bitcoin will rise even faster after $10k") is still in the making and may hinge on current affairs, de Corrado said.

"In my opinion, Bitcoin, typically responds to depreciation of currency, global uncertainty and governmental instability. As weve seen this morning, the threat of using military action may have had a bullish effect on the asset. Any further instability in the US could put further upward pressure on Bitcoin," he said.

Craig "TraderCobb" Cobb also felt the move coming a full day in advance, as foretold in the charts. Some pretty high cap altcoins have been making major gains lately, he noted, and when people take profit against them they'll be trading back into Bitcoin.

"People trading the Cardano bitcoin cross will be taking profits back to Bitcoin when they do. Cardano/Bitcoin added 50% in 2 weeks. Due to the relative size of Cardano market cap wise with a 1.9 billion token value, the recent move higher is a lot of money to potentially flow back to Bitcoin," he wrote roughly 24 hours before Bitcoin made its move.

"Another example is Ethereum over the same 2 week period which has put on an impressive 14.85% against Bitcoin. Ethereum is the second highest by market cap behind bitcoin with $25 billion to its name which is another large amount of money if profits were to be taken and put into Bitcoin."

"So here we have 2 of the big market cap players both having added impressive gains against Bitcoin recently. These moves will account for a large portion of the possible money flow back to Bitcoin," he predicted.

That's exactly what happened. Bitcoin's sudden ascent initially dragged altcoins up with it, but then after Bitcoin crested $10,000 a lot of money bailed from altcoins back to Bitcoin, pouring gasoline on the fire and giving Bitcoin the cash infusion it needed to convincingly stay above $10,000.

The gold line is Bitcoin, the light blue is ADA/BTC, the purple is ADA/USD.

ADABTC chart by TradingView

Here we have three completely very different predictive methods, all of which looked at completely different things but somehow managed to paint the same picture, flagging down a price rise hours before it happened.

Something else they all have in common is that they're all expecting further rises.

The stock to flow model, or "the red dot" if you're feeling symbolic, predicts future rises because the unstoppable weight of sheer maths says Bitcoin prices should go up, and that's what the most consistent trend in Bitcoin says will happen.

Meanwhile, Novogratz is predicting a further rise because that's where the zeitgeist is leading us, and Cobb suggests that Bitcoin at $10,000 could reawaken wider media interest and bring some new money in.

"We really need to see Bitcoin above $10,000 to get the media back and new money flowing in," he wrote. "So, the question for bitcoin is how can the current market players get us above $10,000 to get the media chirping and the new money in?"

"Bitcoin is the headline grabber, you wont see anything in the news about the recent move of Cardano. Bitcoin needs to break above $10,000 for the media to come back to it."

The Bitcoin world appears to be feeling about as bullish as it ever has. But on the other hand, past performance does not guarantee future results, no matter how much it feels like it should.

It's also possible that whales deliberately orchestrated this rise specifically hoping that a break above $10,000, in conjunction with the red dot and the general vibes of the times, would be enough to spur some retail FOMO. There are enough mysterious whales in Bitcoin's ocean to move prices in all kinds of strange ways.

Plus, when we're asking whether Bitcoin is going to go up or down right now, the wisdom of the red dot is quite limited. It's all about tracing movements across years (with a yet-unknown degree of accuracy), rather than the day-to-day and week-to-week here. No matter how compelling or historically accurate it is, it can't indicate short, sharp moves of the kind we saw today.

"While the stock-to-flow analysis produced by PlanB has done very well to date in tracking the price of Bitcoin and predicting its future movements, my immediate concern would be correlating intraday movements in relation to a model that looks at data spanning multiple years," de Corrado said. "Investors should also remember that any historical data is not an indicator of future performance."

In the end, it seems the most accurate way of predicting the future is to wait until it happens.

Disclosure: The author holds BNB, BTC at the time of writing.

Disclaimer: This information should not be interpreted as an endorsement of cryptocurrency or any specific provider, service or offering. It is not a recommendation to trade. Cryptocurrencies are speculative, complex and involve significant risks they are highly volatile and sensitive to secondary activity. Performance is unpredictable and past performance is no guarantee of future performance. Consider your own circumstances, and obtain your own advice, before relying on this information. You should also verify the nature of any product or service (including its legal status and relevant regulatory requirements) and consult the relevant Regulators' websites before making any decision. Finder, or the author, may have holdings in the cryptocurrencies discussed.

Picture: Getty Images

Read the original post:

3 people who correctly predicted $10,000 Bitcoin (and how) - finder.com.au