Category Archives: Zeitgeist Movement

If you grew up listening to Tupac Shakur, youre going to be disappointed with the biopic All Eyez On Me. If you merely knew about Tupac but are generally unaware of his songs and what they stand for, youre going to be disappointed with this movie. If youre looking for a hip hop biography in the vein of Straight Outta Compton, youre still going to be disappointed. With no clear target audience that will be entertained, this is a difficult film to recommend.

Tupac is a giant name, and he deserved a film better than this one. Directed by Benny Boom, who is known for music videos for 50 Cent, David Guetta and other such big artists, the film never manages to engage on a level that Tupac did with his songs. In fact the film plays out like a string of music videos, with bits of story sprinkled, to no lasting effect.

A still from All Eyez on Me. Image from Facebook

A biography tends to chronicle familiar beats such as humble beginnings, an opportunity, a rise, the descent into sex, drugs and disillusionment and the eventual fall but a good biography transcends these cinematic clichs with either new ways to explore them, or pure cinematic heft. All Eyez On Me unfortunately tracks those familiar elements like a checklist, not revealing anything that wasnt already known about the legendary hip hop artist.

The biggest focus here is the frenemy relationships between Tupac, Suge Knight and Biggie Smalls but theres a lot of smoke and no fire the conflicts dont exude any power and the drama feels like something out of a bad TV movie than a motion picture. Even worse is the supposedly platonic friendship between Tupac and Jada Pinkett (who would later become a movie star and Will Smiths wife). The film tries to shoehorn a social issue with Tupacs mother being a blacktivist, and the internal conflict that Tupac has with whether to stand up for his community, but that too is weakly executed. The censorship by Mr Nihalani doesnt help matters with swear words muted listening to Tupacs songs feels like eating a burger without the patty.

A still from All Eyez on Me. Image from Facebook

Demetruis Shipp, who plays Tupac looks a lot like the guy hes playing, but falls completely flat during the dramatic moments and fares even worse in the sentimental ones. The few bits of entertainment come from the music montages where you see him belting out his legendary songs, but the film never manages to capture the infectious energy of better films of its genre.

The 90s captured a whole zeitgeist of music and the rivalry between the East and West coast rappers, theres a whole history behind the movement and the film wastes a huge opportunity to tap into a time so crucial to both America and music. Perhaps a Netflix mini series would be a better avenue to explore the chunk of time in greater detail. In fact the hologram of Tupac performing at Coachella a few years ago was farmore interesting than this film you could head over to YouTube to watch an icon digitally come back to life.

Go here to see the original:

All Eyez on Me movie review: This 2pac biopic is a compilation of videos with very little story - Firstpost

Chokwe Antar Lumumba, a human-rights lawyer, won the mayoralty of Jackson, Mississippi, in June with 93 percent of the vote. (Illustration by Louisa Bertman)

With a clenched fist held high and the promise of amovement of the people, Chokwe Antar Lumumba asked the voters of Jackson, Mississippi, to elect him as their mayor in a race he pledged would lead to the transformation of a Deep South city in a deep-red state. Victory for his civil-rights-inspired, labor-backed campaign for economic and social justice would send shock waves around the world, said the 34-year-old human-rights lawyer as he vowed to make Jackson the most progressive city in the country.1

Too radical? Too bold? Not at all. Backed by a coalition that included veteran activists who fought segregation, along with newcomers who got their first taste of politics in Bernie Sanderss 2016 presidential campaign, Lumumba won 55 percent of the vote in a May Democratic primary that saw him oust the centrist incumbent mayor and sweep past several other senior political figures in Mississippis largest city. A month later, he secured a stunning 93 percent of the vote in a general election that drew one of the highest turnouts the city has seen in years.2

That victory renewed a radical experiment in community-guided governance and cooperative economics that his father, the veteran radical activist Chokwe Lumumba Sr., began during a brief mayoral term that ended with the senior Lumumbas untimely death just eight months after his own 2013 election as mayor. Governing magazine speculates that the younger Lumumbas tenure may offer striking evidence of a nationwide trend: strongly progressive policies being pushed in big cities, even in deep red states. Thats true. Unfortunately, Lumumbas June 6 win didnt get anything close to the media attention accorded a handful of special elections for US House seats in districts that are so solidly Republican that Donald Trump was comfortable plucking congressmen from them to fill out his cabinet.3

This is the frustrating part of Lumumbas shock waves around the world calculus: His election should have sent a shock wave. The same holds true for the election of progressives in local races from Cincinnati to St. Louis to South Fulton, Georgia, in a season of resistance that began with the Womens March on Washington and mass protests against President Trumps Muslim ban but has quickly moved to polling places across the country.4

The list of victories thus far on this years long calendar of contestsmayoral, City Council, state legislative, and even statewideis striking. Many of them are unprecedented, and most are linked by a growing recognition on the part of national progressive groups and local activists that the greatest resistance not just to Trump and House Speaker Paul Ryan but to right-wing governors could well come from the cities and states where the day-to-day work of governing is done. Municipal resistance is crucial because these Republican governors often do the bidding of the Koch brothers and the corporate-sponsored American Legislative Exchange Council.5

Our nation will only change from the grassroots up. Dan Cantor, national director of the Working Families Party

Inspired not merely by their opposition to Trump but in many cases by the experience of the Sanders campaign, these next-generation progressive candidatesoften running with the backing of Our Revolution, the national group developed by Sanders backersshare a belief that effective opposition begins with saying no but never ends there. They recognize that an alternative vision can be proposed and put into practice in communities where taxes are levied, services are delivered, commitments to fight climate change are made, resolutions to establish sanctuary cities are adopted, and questions about poverty, privatization, and policing are addressed. Our nation will only change from the grassroots up, says Dan Cantor, national director of the Working Families Party, which backed Lumumba as well as the progressive winners of a hotly contested primary for Philadelphia district attorney, a statewide race for the top education post in Wisconsin, and a New York election that saw a Trump-backing GOP district pick a resistance-preaching union activist for an open legislative seat.6

Cantor is right to suggest that these victories make a powerful case that a new resistance-and-renewal politics is sending a signal to conservative Republicans and cautious Democrats alike about the ability of bold progressive populists to win in every part of the country. Thats why it is so worrisome that these electoral shock waves have been crashing against the wall of ignorance and indifference that surrounds a Trump-obsessed Washington media.7

Even before the 2016 elections, the national media were far too focused on Beltway intrigues. When the Trump-centric punditocracy hang on the 45th presidents every tweet, election results that cannot be tied directly to whats happening in Washington barely exist in their eyes. This is a damaging phenomenon: Even in an era of rapidly evolving social media, the validation that comes from traditional media coverage should not be underestimated. In the none-too-distant past, things changed because down-ballot races were closely monitored for evidence of the zeitgeist; the tangible signs of electoral progress for civil-rights campaigners in the late 1960s came initially in the form of election results for the mayoralties in places like Gary, Indiana, and Cleveland, and they inspired the next wave of campaigns in cities like Atlanta and New Orleans. City Council elections in Berkeley, Madison, and Ann Arbor in the early 1970s revealed the political potency of radical movements and lowered voting ages, just as Harvey Milks 1977 election to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors told us that LGBTQ Americans were transforming urban politics. And a remarkable series of election results in 1983, beginning with Harold Washingtons election as mayor of Chicago, signaled the rise of a rainbow coalition that would inspire not just the Reverend Jesse Jackson but a young community organizer named Barack Obama.8

Lumumbas big win in Jackson and similar breakthrough victories across the country are powerful indications of todays emerging resistance. His overwhelming primary victory occurred on the same day that progressive Cincinnati Councilwoman Yvette Simpson shocked even herself when her power of we campaign finished first (ahead of a conservative incumbent) in that citys mayoral primary. Annie Weinberg, electoral director of Democracy for America, which has waded into dozens of down-ballot contests, said the message is clear: In 2017, voters are ready to make cities everywhere into bastions of resistance to the Trump regime by electing bold progressive leaders who run on, and are committed to fighting for, racial and economic justice.9

Weinbergs point was confirmed on May 16, when Philadelphia Democrats nominated veteran civil-rights lawyer Lawrence Krasner for district attorney. Krasner, who had defended Occupy Philadelphia and Black Lives Matter protesters, beat a crowded field of contenders with a campaign that promised to make the City of Brotherly Love a model for criminal-justice reform. Along with victories last year by Cook County States Attorney Kim Foxx in Chicago and Orange-Osceola State Attorney Aramis Ayala in Orlando, Florida, Krasners win reflects the political appeal of new approaches to policingones first voiced by protesters on the streets of American cities, and that the Trump administration and too many politicians in both parties continue to callously dismiss. The headline of a Philadelphia Daily News column by Will Bunch announced: This wasnt just a primary victory. This was a revolution. The columnist saw in Krasners victory nothing less than the stirrings of a whole different kind of revolution from the city that gave America the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rightsa revolution aimed at finally undoing a draconian justice regime that had turned the Cradle of Liberty into a death-penalty capital and the poster child for mass incarceration.10

Many recent progressive victors were Bernie Sanders supporters or Sanders DNC delegates last year.

A similarly revolutionary result came in St. Louis on April 4, when Natalie Vowell won a citywide school-board seat with an intersectional campaign that focused not just on education policy but addressed the housing, employment, and criminal-justice issues that often determine whether students succeed. A Sanders delegate to the 2016 Democratic National Convention, Vowell promised to empower parents across the economic spectrum and stop equating poverty with apathy.11

Developing detailed platforms that recognize the links between local, state, and national issues has characterized these recent victories. Winning candidates have made opposing Trump a local issue, with commitments to defend immigrants and fill the void created by federal budget cuts; but they have also rejected the austerity, deregulation, privatization, and intolerance of statehouse Republicans. For example, Dylan Parker is a 28-year-old diesel mechanic and member of the Quad Cities chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America. In 2016, Parker was a Sanders delegate; in early April of this year, he was elected to the City Council of Rock Island, Illinois, with a campaign that updated the sewer socialist municipal politics of the 1930s by focusing on providing universal high-speed Internet access and expanding Rock Islands publicly owned hydroelectric power plant. Two weeks later, another DSA member, khalid kamau (who lowercases his name in the Yoruba tradition that emphasizes community over the individual), was elected to the City Council of South Fulton, Georgia. A Black Lives Matter and Fight for $15 organizer and also a Sanders delegate, kamau campaigned on a bold economic and social-justice vision that seeks to make the newly incorporated community of South Fulton the largest progressive city in the South.12

In Scott Walkers Wisconsin, April voting saw Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Evers win a statewide nonpartisan race after being targeted by conservative backers of the school choice schemes favored by Education Secretary Betsy DeVos. While his challenger embraced DeVos and called her selection a positive development for education, Evers challenged the Trump appointees promotion of taxpayer-subsidized parochial or private schools that are part of the choice program and said DeVos should be paying attention to public-school students. We need her to be an advocate for those kids, explained the teachers union ally, who calls for the increased funding of public education, especially for schools serving African-American, Latino, and rural students. Evers won 70 percent of the vote in a state that narrowly backed Trump last fall.13

While DC pundits have kept a reasonably close watch on congressional special elections in the districts won by Trumpand have seen signs of political movement some of the clearest signals are coming from special elections for seats in the state legislative chambers that will redraw congressional district lines after the 2020 Census. Progressive Democrats running in historically Republican districts in New Hampshire and New York won breakthrough victories in May. Republicans should absolutely be concerned: Two Republican canaries died in the coal mine yesterday, GOP political consultant William OReilly said after the results were announced. He explained that Trump voters and other Republicans simply didnt show up, and voters from the left did.14

THE STAKES ARE HIGHER NOW THAN EVER. GET THE NATION IN YOUR INBOX.

The New York special-election winner, elementary-school teacher and union activist Christine Pellegrino, described her victory as a thunderbolt of resistance. But it was also something else: Pellegrino, another 2016 Sanders delegate, wasnt the first choice of Democratic strategists and local party leaders. She gained the nomination with the help of the group Long Island Activists, which was born out of the Bernie Sanders movement, and she ran an edgy anticorruption campaign that recognized the mood among voters frustrated with both major parties. As observers hailed her victory in a district that gave Trump a 23-point edge last November, Pellegrino explained that her winning strategy wasnt all that complicated: A strong progressive agenda is the way forward.15

Pellegrino proved her point by taking 58 percent of the vote in one of the 710 legislative districts nationwide that have been identified by Ballotpedia as including all or part of the so-called Pivot Countiesthose that voted for Democrat Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012 and then voted for Republican Donald Trump in 2016. As the website explains: 477 state house districts and 233 state senate districts intersected with these Pivot Counties. These [districts comprise] approximately 10 percent of all state legislative districts in the country.16

For progressives, figuring out where to win and how to winnot merely to resist, but to set the agendais about more than positioning. This is the essential first step in breaking the grip of a politics that imagines large parts of the country will always be red, and that says the only real fights are over an elusive middle ground where campaigns are fought with lots of money but little substance. The resistance-and-renewal politics thats now gathering momentum rejects such empty politics and embraces what Chokwe Antar Lumumba identifies as the struggle [that] does not cease: to give people the jobs and freedom they need to shape their own destinies. That makes every election in every community matter, because the point isnt merely to resist one bad president; as Lumumba reminds us, it is to change the order of the world.17

View post:

A Progressive Electoral Wave Is Sweeping the Country | The Nation - The Nation.

Lewis Goodall, Political Correspondent

One of Jeremy Corbyn's biggest acolytes, Matt Zarb Cousin, wrote convincingly in the Guardian on Wednesday that one of the keys to the success of his former boss in last week's General Election was people recognising that he was a "different kind of politician, that he genuinely wanted to take on the establishment".

He's not wrong. I've clocked up over a thousand miles over the course of the election but not once did I meet a voter who thought that Mr Corbyn was a traditional politician. Along with the occasional salty remark, whatever most voters thought of his views, they were largely united in seeing him as different, a firebrand, a renegade even - a break with the past.

But for my money, the great secret of the Corbyn leadership is just how much of a traditional Labour party leader Jeremy Corbyn has become, at least in the domestic policy arena.

Through the development of his own political antenna and the Labour Party's structures slowly taming him, the man we think of as the most radical leader in the party's recent past has in deed if not in diction become reliably middle-of-the-road and represents continuity with the recent past.

Gone is the doctrinaire campaigner of old, to be replaced by a man who, yes, has principle, but chooses his battles.

He accepts policies he doesn't much care for because he knows what is politic and what isn't. He might occasionally say something he doesn't believe for party unity or to serve his wider political aims. He has become, in other words, a politician and a successful one at that.

The proof of this particular political pudding is in Labour's manifesto - the first since 1983 written with the Left broadly in control of the party's levers.

But few on any side of the party, even the Blairite right, had any complaint when it was published. Yes, the nationalisations might not have been every candidate's cup of tea but their implementation was so staggered and piecemeal that few bothered to care.

The policy on austerity, despite the fanfare, was much the same as Ed Miliband's, as were many other policies. Even tuition fees, perhaps the most striking inclusion, finished a journey which Mr Miliband had begun.

Most astoundingly, the Labour leadership quietly accepted the Government's changes to welfare benefits. The Labour manifesto didn't even mention the Government's welfare benefits freeze up to 2020 and the party seemed unclear as to whether to change it.

Much of the document was redolent of microwaved Millibandism or good old-fashioned bread and butter New Labourism: policies on school meals, 10,000 new police officers, more homes, childcare - put them on a pledgecard and any self-respecting New Labour apparatchik would have happily brandished it. The word "socialism" didn't appear once.

And whatever his reservations, this former vice chair of CND stood on a manifesto with a commitment to renew Trident at its centre. He may have squirmed when asked about the promise but the Labour Party hierarchy made sure it was there and, should another election come, it would be there again.

But something has changed. Because, unlike 2015, Labour is gaining seats. Uncomfortably for a man who values substance over style, I suspect it's more the latter which boosted Labour last Thursday.

After all, for the mansion tax alone, I think the 2015 manifesto has some claim to be at least as radical than its 2017 successor. But I don't think it would have made any difference to Ed Miliband if he had stood on every word of it two years ago.

It was actually Mr Corbyn's mix of meat and potato, moderate Labour policies with his personal brand of radicalism and rhetorical style which created an electoral sweet spot for Labour. It married traditional Labour voters with a burgeoning cultural, youth-led movement which taps into the zeitgeist.

You could walk down the streets of east London or hop on the tube and see people wear Jeremy Corbyn t-shirts or badges. In saying you're part of his tribe, you're saying something about yourself - an instant cultural signifier.

You couldn't say that of Ed Miliband.

Mr Corbyn is a vinyl politician who reeks of authenticity, even if the end result isn't pitch perfect. Redolent of a different age, a slither of an imagined more authentically Labour past. He is therefore perfectly placed for a generation who crave "authenticity" above all else.

And here's the rub: neither part of this Labour 2017 jigsaw would have worked without the other.

Mr Corbyn unbound and unrestrained would have been anathema to the electorate and a traditional stack of Labour bread and butter middle-of-the-road policies presented by a traditional middle-of-the-road Labour politician like Owen Smith wouldn't have worked either without Mr Corbyn's personal zeal.

Ironically for someone who so eschews free markets, Mr Corbyn has a brand. And this, mixed with a traditional retail, not especially radical Labour offer, made a potent cocktail.

Mr Corbyn called the 2017 manifesto "radical but responsible". Not half. We didn't know it then but it beats "strong and stable" every time.

Previously on Sky Views: Sam Kiley - Cutting immigration may crash economy

Original post:

Sky Views: Rebel Corbyn has become traditional - Sky News

He wore bright colored capri pants, telling all that capri stands for capricious rather than the Italian isle. He extolled the usefulness of little black dresses to women and was described as a gifted and imaginary actor with jazz hands.

Leonard, the lead character in The Absolute Brightness of Leonard Pelkey, also expressed an idiosyncratic fashion sense by gluing layers of rainbow colored flip-flops onto the soles of black Converse athletic shoes, turning them into platform booties.

He was 14 and, given the stuffy Jersey Shore where he lived, a loner.

And, one day he went missing.

The one-act, one-man play Absolute Brightness of Leonard Pelkey, written and performed by James Lecesne, is on the Laguna Playhouse stage through June 25.

The one-act, one-man play written and performed by James Lecesne and in performance this month at Laguna Playhouse is based on his young adult novel Absolute Brightness.

As a one-man performer, Lecesne is brilliant and completely believable, affecting variants of a New Jersey accent while impersonating a cop, a beauty parlor patron or a teen-age girl.

Working against an elegantly spare stage set designed by Jo Winarski, he keeps his audience on edge for roughly 80 minutes with nary a pause for breath. He nimbly pivots between Chuck DeSantis, a Shakespeare quoting, old-school detective; Ellen Hertle, the self-described aunt Leonard lived with; her introverted teen daughter, Phoebe; and the effete British owner of a local drama school.

He also becomes Gloria Salzano, a mobsters widow who finds one of Leonards signature platforms floating on the lake. Adept at fishing, she also distinguishes a variety of knots, a crucial skill, it turns out.

Humor emerges when she lectures DeSantis on the real persona of a mobsters wife, grills him on matters of faith and so gives the audience insight into the rough-edged cop who ultimately becomes as moved by Leonard as the people he queries.

The story begins when Ellen comes to the police station reporting Leonard missing for 24 hours, actually 19 hours and 47 minutes, and wants DeSantis to do something immediately.

Through his investigation, including interviews with the aforementioned characters, we find out who Leonard is or was. The missing youth meanwhile remains wordless, a shadow on a screen or represented by symbols such as a set of fairy wings.

Lecesne lets everyone describe Leonard, sometimes humorously, sometimes baffling, but always with affection and respect.

Its noteworthy that all descriptions of Leonard, save for those by Phoebe, come from adults who marvel at his persona while also cautioning against excessive flamboyance. Tone it down, honey, says Marion, the salon patron, but Leonard counters that if he stopped being himself, the terrorists would win. And, he does not own a cellphone but carries a pocket watch.

Affected by Leonards vibe as well, DeSantis nonetheless dryly describes the video-game addled bullies who lure him into a wooded area and ultimately kill him.

He also has scant words for the lawyers who defend the louts who claim gay panic, meaning that Leonard may have made a pass at one of them.

Disaffected, alienated and bullied teens, some gay, some not, have driven a plethora of story lines, with the latest being Dear Evan Hansen. The musical revolves around a teenager with social anxiety and a schoolmates suicide. Written and composed by Benj Pasek and Justin Paul, the production premiered in 2015 and received six Tony Awards this past Sunday, June 11. One reviewer called the storys moral ambiguity a sign of the current zeitgeist.

There is no such ambiguity in Brightness. Leonard is a good-natured, gifted kid who only transgressed by being himself. How everyone whose life he touched came to appreciate this and change their own entrenched ways will not be revealed here.

In 1994, Lecesne had created Trevor as part of the award winning show Word of Mouth, which he later adapted into a screenplay for a short film. After winning an Oscar for best live action short film, Trevor grew into a national movement initiated by Lecesne and the films producers Randy Stone and Peggy Rajski.

The project is a lifeline for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning youths in crises between age 13 and 24. The Trevor Life Line at 1-866-488-7386 is available daily. TrevorSpace connects LGBTQ youths world wide.

See the rest here:

One-Man Play Shines Brightly - Laguna Beach Independent Newspaper

There is no fitting tribute to the sacrifices of the youth of 1976 than implementing fully policies aimed at transforming our education system. We have the means, the tools, and significantly, political will backed by a popular mandate.

When chronicling milestones towards the fall of apartheid, an odious system declared a crime against humanity by the United Nations, 16 June 1976 takes pride of place. Not least because this political development changed our history forever by not only universalising our experience in graphic fashion but also because it set in motion the liberatory impulse in the soil of our nation across generations.

The calamity witnessed on this day exceeded what befell people in the Bulhoek massacre, the Bhambatha Rebellion and the Sharpeville Massacre. Not so much in terms of numbers but more for the systematic and vicious nature of violence against unarmed teenagers. June 16 is significant because the apartheid regime actively and knowingly butchered school children with modern weaponry in broad daylight.

Yes, massacres by their nature contain no mercy. In neo-Nazi states like apartheid South Africa, it would be unreasonable to expect mercy, more so because the victims were regarded as sub-human. Yet such brutality as witnessed in the June 76 uprising was enough to convince even the doubting Thomas' that South Africa had a paranoid regime married to fascist ideals of controlling all aspects of Africans lives, with nothing but cheap labour to offer. They were systematically removed from the countrys body politic.

It is a matter of historical record that the 16 June uprising was not a spontaneous act of rebellion by young people against a sudden introduction of Afrikaans as a medium of instruction. The root cause goes as far back as 1948 when the National Party won elections (although already immediately after the formation of the Union of South Africa in 1910 successive efforts were made by the union government to provide inferior education to black people).

As leader of the new racially-based state, Dr DF Malan appointed Dr HF Verwoerd as Minister of Native Affairs whose main purpose was to implement a policy of separate development, or more appropriately, to ensure that Africans stood no chance of development.

In dealing with the native question, Verwoerd crafted the Bantu Education system based on his conviction that there is no place for the native in the European community and that Africans were incapable of rising above the level of certain forms of labour. The native, he continued, has been subjected to a school system which drew him away from his own community and misled him by showing him the green pastures of European society in which he was not allowed to graze.

And so the Bantu Education Act 47 of 1953 was passed to drive Africans from the green pastures of white civilisation. To ensure total onslaught, Verwoerd went as far as starving mission schools of subsidies since they had no obligation to implement Bantu Education. Given miniscule per-capita spend on the education of black children, depriving independent schools of funds squeezed out possible quality learning opportunities for non-Europeans.

But the most important components of Bantu Education was governments takeover of teacher training colleges and the introduction of Afrikaans as a medium of instruction for at least half of the school subjects. The two are not mutually exclusive. If every black child had to learn half the subjects in Afrikaans, every teacher had to learn the same and acquire the ability to use it in class. And so the policy was rolled out in 1953 for Coloureds and 1965 for Indians.

It was only in 1974/75 that the 50/50 English/Afrikaans rule was strictly applied to Africans, starting in the Transvaal. Reasons given for this gradualism were that teachers had to master the art of teaching maths and social sciences in Afrikaans and learning material had to be available. And sure teachers did learn the language since the system used its control of colleges to prepare them for the ultimate roll-out of the project.

Whereas some elements of flexibility existed in the policy African schools could choose the main language of instruction in practice, the exemption principle was ignored and administrators of the southern Transvaal education directorate forcibly introduced Afrikaans.

All this happened in a context where a plethora of repressive laws were robustly implemented while draconian measures were employed to stifle any form of resistance to the apartheid system. Pass laws were enforced. The Group Areas Act was in place. The Sharpeville Massacre had taken place along with the Langa Massacre and other atrocities. The Rivonia Trial had ended, sending many in the leadership of the liberation movement to prison. Others were tortured, killed or exiled.

The 1973 Coronation Strike, a labour uprising in a bricks factory (KwaMagenqe) in Avoca interrupted the post-Sharpeville hiatus. Historical records say the regime tried to end the strike by asking the new King Zwelithini KaBhekuzulu and Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi to intervene. The strike eventually ended but the spirit of resistance was reawakened nationally, building on the agitation of young students like Bantu Biko. In less than 24 months after this strike, government announced that it was ready to implement the Afrikaans medium policy universally. And sure it did.

This signalled total control of Bantu Affairs. Land had been taken; Bantustans created as enclaves along tribal lines; further industrial laws passed to restrict and control movement of African labour; townships and hostels created for urban reserve labour force; every political activity was banned and penalties went as far as capital punishment. Every social and economic space had been colonised, now it was the mind.

Why is all of this important for the public sector mandarins in post-apartheid South Africa?

First, we learn that the Bantu Education policy succeeded because of the confluence of policy and praxis. Apartheid architects made sure that once the policy was in place, all layers of the state machinery (especially public sector managers) were ready to implement it. This applied to national, provincial and Bantustan government officials, teacher training colleges, school inspectors and district officials as well as school administrators. Where necessary, even the police were ready to enforce the implementation of this policy.

This account of history demands of us as bureaucrats in a democratic dispensation to devote ourselves to the efforts of creating a quality education system that empowers young people to fully participate in all aspects of economic, political and social life of South Africa; an education system that remembers Africans for the dismemberment of apartheid colonialism eroded their ontological density, their being, their agency.

We are called to action to actualise the imperative of having learners and teachers in school, on time, teaching. It is us who must ensure that learner support materials are procured and delivered to all schools on time; we must ensure that indigent learners are fed and offered safe transport. Money allocated to upgrade school facilities must be applied for that purpose. Squandering monies aimed at improving the quality of education of a black child is the highest act of dishonour to the service.

There is no fitting tribute to the sacrifices of the youth of 1976 than implementing fully policies aimed at transforming our education system. We have the means, the tools, and significantly, political will backed by a popular mandate.

Second, no society changes without decisive interventions in education. This reminds one of a debate with Prince Mashele who wrongly attributed poor education outcomes to public policy. Employing caricature, he contrasted apples and oranges: Japan and South Africa at different historical epochs between 1868 and 2010.

Betraying his own reminder that the weight of history influences current conditions, he drew inconsequential parallels between education outcomes of the two countries without due consideration of the conditions that influenced such outcomes.

A word of caution I offered to Mashele ought to have been obvious: the corresponding period of the Meiji dynasty of Japan (1868 1912) was a time of colonial wars and internal displacement that produced devastating results for the indigenous people. Boer Republics were starving-off British advance which intensified in pursuit of control of the newly discovered precious metals.

What we now call the South African War (formerly Anglo-Boer War) in recognition of the role played by Africans and other racial groups shaped internal conditions and resulted in public policies that systematically excluded the majority from meaningful participation in the economic and political life of the country. The formation of the Union of South Africa in 1910 gave the trusteeship of the country to a minority settler group. The Bantu Education policy of 1953 sealed the fate of Africans, intellectually and culturally.

From this short history we deduce that many of the problems facing our society today emanate from the racially inspired successive laws of the illegitimate minority government. Many historians and educationist have made correct attributions in this regard.

What I affirmed though from Prince Masheles then Sunday Independent treatise was the assertion that often, the weight of history does impose itself on generations far beyond the immediacy of an historic moment.

It goes without saying therefore that by identifying education as priority number one, government aimed to alter the weight of history of colonialism and apartheid that imposed itself on successive generations. Once again, ours in the public service is a basic yet revolutionary task: to ensure that learners and teachers are at school, on time, learning, teaching; to deliver books on time; to enrol teachers in further training programmes; to disburse financial aid to all needy students, especially those in scarce skills professions like education, engineering, science, accounting, etc.

In an accountable, professional and conscientious civil service that we aspire for, we ought to regard these as non-negotiables, and go on to build a peer pressure mechanism to the extent of shaming our colleagues who undermine efforts to intensify the delivery of quality education from early childhood education to higher education.

In short, it is to ensure that the doors of learning and culture are open for all. Ultimately, true to the statement that education is the greatest equaliser, the challenge of youth unemployment will be undermined if we all did what we have to do to actualise this government priority.

Along this important task of delivering quality education, public-service mandarins are expected to accelerate the implementation of other state-led youth development programmes. Moreover, youth development does not happen in a vacuum. It occurs in each and every state intervention implemented by public servants. Young people need water, shelter, economic infrastructure and quality healthcare. They need funds for their businesses. They need access to value chains to supply their products. As the Freedom Charter declares, they need to access affordable and decolonised higher education the doors of education and culture shall be open. Therefore, every state policy implemented by public sector managers is vital for youth development.

Finally, if we all accept that Bantu Education was the most perverted form of colonial education systems globally, it stands to reason therefore that national calls for decolonised education are beyond legitimate, if not overdue. We need to continue searching for innovative ways of making our system responsive, informed by the pedagogy of total liberation (not just liberal democracy) to the extent that through education, black people can reclaim their ontological density, their being, their agency.

So, as we remember those who perished in June 1976, we should also remember the potency of our action in building the democratic developmental state where education policies (and all other social and economic development programmes) seek to unleash the potential of young people to fully participate in all activities of the evolving national democratic society which must ultimately be characterised by non-racialism, non-sexism, democracy and prosperity for all.

Becoming a professional, responsive, prudent and efficient civil service would be a fitting tribute to the youth of 1976, the martyrs of our freedom who sacrificed their future in the service of the greater ideal: liberation. That spirit of sacrifice should be our zeitgeist, an antidote to the now creeping democratic indifference. DM

*Ngcaweni works in The Presidency. Views contained here are private. His books are available on amazon.com

See the article here:

Dear Mandarins in the Public Service, Let's Recall 16 June 1976 - Daily Maverick

The human mind is already pretty open to manipulationjust ask anyone who works in advertising. But neural implant technology could potentially open up a direct digital link to our innermost thoughts that could be exploited by hackers.

In recent months, companies like Elon Musks Neuralink, Kernel, and Facebook have unveiled plans to create devices that will provide a two-way interface between human brains and machines.

While these devices could undoubtedly bring many benefits, they would be networked to computers and therefore essentially part of the Internet of Things. That should immediately set off alarm bells for anyone paying attention to cybersecurity news.

There have been repeated warnings in recent years about the huge number of vulnerabilities in smart devices designed by consumer goods companies with little experience of or consideration for cybersecurity.

One would expect that the added sensitivity of a device set to be integrated into peoples bodies would warrant more caution. But it has already been demonstrated that it is possible tohack medical implants to harm patients,and there seems to be no reason the same wouldn't be true of neural implants.

In a paper in World Neurosurgery last year, Oxford PhD student Laurie Pycroft warned about the possibility of 'brainjacking'hackers exerting unauthorized control of brain implants.

Deep brain stimulation implants are already being used to treat diseases like Parkinsons and chronic pain, but he warned that hackers could gain control of the device and alter stimulation settings to cause pain or inhibit movement.

Even with these comparatively simple devices, a determined and technically competent attacker could carry out more advanced attacks that could alter the victims behavior in crude ways, Pycroft said.

Future neural implants designed from the bottom up to interface with our cognitive processes may make far more nuanced and sophisticated hacks possible. Earlier this month it was shown that aneural headset could be used to guess someone's PIN. How much more intimate would the access be if we were talking about an invasive neural implant like the one Elon Musk has proposed?

While a targeted attack on a neural implant designed to manipulate someones behavior is unlikely to be worth the effort for most hackers,a bigger threat may be dumb malwarethat spreads to thousands of devices. Spyware could be used to access highly sensitive personal information, and a neural implant locked by ransomware is not as easy to replace as a laptop.

Perhaps, though, its not hackers we should be worrying about. Edward Snowdens revelations about the NSAs PRISM surveillance program in 2013 demonstrated wide-ranging collusion between the security services and technology companies to intercept the supposedly secure communications of innocent citizens.

Its hard to imagine the spooks would pass up the opportunity to do the same with neural implants, and once that threshold has been crossed, it would likely be a short leap to taking advantage of the two-way nature of these future devices to subtly influence peoples behavior.

Even if you trust your government not to abuse these capabilities, the leak of a massive cache of hacking tools stockpiled by the NSA suggests they may not be the only ones with access.

And its hard to imagine that the tech companies not building these devices dont know where the back doors are. Facebook, one of the companies developing neural technology, has already been caught carrying out questionable psychological experiments that altered users emotions without their permission.

However, this example also highlights that it may not be necessary for us to install neural implants to make our brains susceptible to hacking. The mediabe that newspapers, advertisers or Hollywoodhave long been accused of manipulating the way we think.

With the rise of social media there are now a host of new tools for those looking to influence the zeitgeist:fake news websites, swarms of Twitter bots, and targeted advertising based on psychological profiles drawn from our internet behavior.

One researcher recently showed they couldread neural responses to subliminal images embedded in a game. The information is crude, but they said it could be scaled up to mind-reading level capabilities if combined with other technology, like VR or wearable devices.

So, whether its through neural implants or clever social engineering, it seems technology is already challenging the sanctity of our mental processes. Just last month I reported on calls from neuroethicists to introduce new human rights designed to protect our mental privacy.

While new rights would be welcome, more pressing is the need to ensure that cybersecurity is built into future neural devices from the outset, and from the bottom up.

Image Credit: Shutterstock

Continue reading here:

Neural Implant Tech Raises the Specter of Brainjacking - Singularity Hub

Seoul has a new horizontal landmark -- "Seoullo 7017," an overpass-turned-park opened last month. While many think a landmark is a high rise, a low-rise horizontal landmark with an easy access to people is getting attention.

Seoullo 7017 seems to have demonstrated the zeitgeist of urban regeneration in that it is not about removal but regeneration, not a street but a pedestrian road, and not vertical but horizontal. It remains doubtful, however, whether it will give an impression other than curiosity to visitors because it has no story with it.

New Yorks High Line Park, which Seoullo 7017 modelled after, has a dramatic story behind it. It was originally a nine-meter high railroad for cargo trains running through Manhattan. The New York City decided to remove the hideous structure, and held a public hearing in 1999. Unexpectedly, some wanted to keep it at the hearing where two young men decided to preserve the facility, objecting to the idea to remove it.

They held many gatherings to increase supporters and raised funds. They filed a lawsuit to nullify the citys decision for removal and garnered support from officials based on the study that making it into a park is more profitable than removing it. They persuaded people who opposed the idea due to their property near the railroad by offering them a right to develop other area. The 9/11 attack in 2001 threw a curve ball to the movement. New Yorkers healed the sense of loss by joining the movement instead. Ten years later, the High Line Park finally opened in June 2009 despite many twists and turns. With a pin reading I saved the High Line, some 1,000 New Yorkers were pleased about the opening, saying, Dreams come true in New York.

If the High Line is made bottom-up, Seoullo 7017 is a top-down development project led by the government. The High Line movement was the result of a series of discussions Is it worth keeping it? If so, how can we use it? How can we cover the expenses and who will operate this? The 60 billion won (53 million dollars) Seoullo project was announced by Seoul Mayor Park Won-soon in September 2014 and completed in less than three years.

Winy Mass, a Dutch architect who designed the overpass park, said to Korean media, (Mayor Park said) he couldnt wait for a long time. He stressed the importance of execution. I was really surprised at the unimaginable speed. He added, It would have taken about a decade in other countries. Many things have been missed out to meet the deadline."

What the Dutch architect felt missing pale comparison to what Seoul citizens missed at the expense of the surprising speed. How many people would feel proud that they saved the overpass, watching Seoullo 7017? People would rather be curious about Mayor Parks plan for presidential election, saying former Seoul Mayor and former President Lee Myung-bak restored Chunggyecheon Stream and (incumbent Seoul Mayor) Park Won-soon Seoullo. Regeneration is more difficult than creating a new thing because it involves more stakeholders. Seoul citizens lost a chance to learn from how to reach an agreement by coordinating different views.

A good-looking landmark structure does not make a city competitive. The process makes the city more attractive when it becomes part of the lives of people and the completion of the landmark gives a sense of accomplishment to people. I would like to deliver a message from the High Line movement to Korean politicians who want to become famous by building a landmark within their term while not caring about taxpayers money. (A public project) can become more successful by giving credit to more people for the success.

Continued here:

A heartfelt and valuable -

Monterey Pop Festival 1967 Movie Part 1

Even more than Woodstock, the Monterey Pop Festival which took place in California almost fifty years ago to the day reflected the themes of freedom, consciousness, and experimentation that defined the Summer of Love in 1967 and the countercultural movement from which it sprung. Moments like Jimi Hendrix lighting his guitar on fire while frying on acid, Otis Redding introducing Motown to a captivated, white audience, or The Grateful Dead jamming out for thirty minutes over their set limit in protest, will forever be hallmarks of rock and roll history, even Americana itself. The Monterey Pop Festival is the event that brought together disconnected communities from San Francisco, London, and Los Angeles, and crystallized them into a movement, launched the careers of legends, and captured the cultural zeitgeist.

Now, in 2017, the Monterey (International) Pop Festival has been revived. Taking place June 16-18, 2017, on the very fairgrounds where it made history fifty years ago, the fest features new names like Jack Johnson, Father John, Misty, and Jim James, alongside a smattering of holdovers from the original including Eric Burdon & The Animals, Booker T., and Phil Lesh of the Grateful Dead. The return of Monterey Pop, this time as a branded modern festival enterprise, provides a poignant moment to look back at the human experiences of San Francisco and the Summer of Love, to see what it felt like to be in the midst of such a powerful movement, and ask if that energy can ever be recaptured. After all, its original incarnation harnessed a moment in time so perfectly that it pioneered the "you had to be there" vibe modern music festivals now strive to embody. That's a difficult je ne sais quoi to replicate.

We spoke with four people who were in the thick of Monterey Pop Festival in 1976: Elaine Mayes, a photographer whose pictures of the festival feature in her book It Happened in Monterey , Joel Selvin, who wrote extensively on the movement in his book Monterey Pop , Paul Ryan, a cinematographer who went on to capture footage for the seminal Maysles Brothers' documentary Gimme Shelter, and Marty Pinsker, for whom that weekend was a coming of age. What follows chronicles the legacies of The Summer of Love and the Monterey Pop Festival, in their own words.

San Francisco in the 1960s was very experimental. Not self-consciously so, but the rules of life had been suspended. People felt free to try things they never had before in terms of relationships, where they could go, what was possible. Paul Ryan

1966 was a very different world than 1967. One of the main elements was psychedelic drugs. It had an impact first with the musicians, and then with the audience. January of 1967, they had the Human Be-In in Golden Gate Park. Nobody took tickets, so nobody can say how many people were there, but probably between 60,000 and 100,000. The Human Be-In marked the beginning of national media exposure and the whole 'hippie scourge' being broadcast. One hundred thousand people showed up in Golden Gate Park...and they picked up after themselves! Nobody was arrested! Couldn't do that at a football game. It really sent a message. Joel Selvin

As a photographer in that era, the access to the music was extraordinary. Any Sunday in Golden Gate Park, you could walk out to find Jefferson Airplane playing, The Grateful Dead, Steve Miller. You could just walk up to the stage, there were no barriers, no police. It was just like your friends playing in the park. Paul Ryan

We all knew each other. There weren't any cell phones. There was barely even television! We didn't have any encumberments. That made a big difference. I lived in the neighborhood with Janis [Joplin]. We knew her, and we knew she was amazing before she happened outside of San Francisco. Jimi Hendrix was the same thing! Nobody knew who he was! Elaine Mayes

You walked into those concerts at The Fillmore or The Avalon it cost $3 to get in you went up the stairs, and it felt like entering a new realm. You felt that bond walking in the room. You knew how special it was, you knew that everybody else there knew it was that special. And you were all joined in that knowledge. The music was captivating and imaginative. Every week or two, there'd be some new band playing at a club, and you'd go over there on Tuesday night and there'd be 75 people and the band is Creedence Clearwater Revival. The weekend of the Monterey Pop Festival, The Who played The Fillmore the week before. The opening act, a group so new they didn't get their name on the poster...The Santana Blues Band. Even by June of 1967, there is no underground rock establishment. There's one tiny FM station in the country playing new music. The San Francisco bands never really performed outside of the Bay Area, and the bands from London were largely unknown outside of small scale in the U.S. Joel Selvin

The backdrop to Monterey was The Beatles putting out this album, Sgt. Peppers [Lonely Hearts Club Band], that really reeked of San Francisco. Everything was pointing to San Francisco in June of 1967. It was a summit meeting of immense proportions. Joel Selvin

My cousin was in town from L.A. and I traded him a tab of acid for a ride, even though we didnt have tickets. So we go over there in his beat up old Buick, just having the time of our lives. We get there, and its just a sea of people spilling out of the grounds thousands and thousands camping in the parking lot, having their own party. It was chaos, but we were loving it. We knew we had to get in somehow. Marty Pinsker

I was in the press pit taking photos. I had a magazine assignment. I didn't dare leave, even to go to the bathroom, because if you left, it was so crowded that you couldn't get back in! Elaine Mayes

I got a job shooting for Newsweek shooting stills. I was very close to the stage. They had these lights that were around the edge of the stage, bulbs. They were in the way of my photograph, so I unscrewed one. All of the sudden, one of the guys from the Pennebaker film ran over to yell at me about ruining their cues! Paul Ryan

The band everyone wanted to see was Jefferson Airplane. A couple weeks before the festival, they sprung 'Somebody to Love.' It was in the Top 5 the week of the festival. Me and my pal drove down on Saturday night and crashed the festival when people were leaving Jefferson Airplane. It was our intention to see Otis Redding. Joel Selvin

Otis Redding, without a doubt, struck me the most. That was true for everybody. He was just incredible. White people didn't know Motown then, not really. When he hit that stage, they couldn't keep people in their seats. Someone came out and said that if the audience didn't calm down they would have to close the concert down! It was quite a moment! Elaine Mayes

Everybody was impacted by Otis Redding. When he came on, with his bright green suit, and said Well, I guess this is a love crowd, huh? and then opened up with I've Been Loving You Too Long.' I don't think the crowd was prepared for the impact of his performance. And then there was Jimi Hendrix burning his guitar, which has become so iconic. On Sunday afternoon, while Ravi Shankar was playing, I walked out into the crowd and it was amazing to see that many people enjoying Indian music. They were totally transfixed. Paul Ryan

I remember the festival sent Peter Tork of the Monkees out to make a stage announcement in the middle of The Grateful Dead set. The announcement was: We hear rumors that The Beatles are gonna be here tonight. They're not! And Phil Lesh just took one look at that, just disgusted as he could have been, and then invited all the people who didn't have seats and were outside of the arena to come on in. And then they played one song for the rest of their set! Joel Selvin

I lost my cousin after we snuck in. He had found some girl and they were making out in the crowd. Somewhere between The Grateful Dead and Jimi Hendrix, it think I lost myself, man. I have a fuzzy memory of the whole thing. I just remember looking at peoples faces, looking around, it felt like something very special was happening, like it was an important moment. Eventually I hitched a ride back to the Bay. I didnt see my cousin again until two Christmases later! Marty Pinsker

From the perspective of the mainstream media, it wasn't a big thing. As it turned out, it was a much bigger thing than anybody anticipated. The people at the core of San Francisco started to realize their impact on the world in general. In that sense, there was a big change afterwards. Grace Slick was a friend of mine. We all knew each other and they had a little band, Great Society. Suddenly, there we were at Monterey, and Grace Slick is with Jefferson Airplane! What was just somebody around the corner [turned out to be] a superstar. Things grew from very humble beginnings. Nobody had any anticipation of it being that big. Paul Ryan

Monterey Pop Festival was a watershed moment in the whole rock culture movement. Although it had this outsized historical influence, it really was a small-scale event. The arena sat 8,500 people. There were another 5,000-8,000 people admitted to the festival grounds, and possibly as many as 15,000 hanging out outside the fences. The groups that came into that weekend on topThe Mamas and Papas, Jonny Rivers, The Associationthey were done by the end of the weekend. The ascendance of Big Brother and the Holding Company, Jimi Hendrix, Otis Redding, was assured. Joel Selvin

The Fantasy Fair was a watershed. Having a bunch of people smoking pot was a watershed. The Human Be-In was a watershed. All of it added up. And Monterey was probably the last time that it all seemed to work well. The East Coast was not part of this. When 1969 came along and people went to Woodstock, they had learned about it because of what happened in 1967, but by then, it was not the same anymore. Elaine Mayes

We knew [the original festival] was special. There was never anything like it before. But when you're in it, you're in it. You're not thinking about what's gonna happen in 50 years. Who even knew 50 years ago that what we were doing was going to matter later on? Elaine Mayes

Rock is an art form in decline. That's in the nature of art movements. You have an avant-garde that seeps ideas into the mainstream. Then you get this bell curve where people keep repeating ideas until you get diminishing returns. And it's been a long time since there were any important popular new ideas in music. I guess hip-hop was the last one, but even that has become formalized. And when an art form becomes formalized, it will no longer innovate. Joel Selvin

I went to the opening at the de Young Museum in San Francisco. They tried to put Haight-Ashbury and 1967 into a museum. But the idea of putting your experience into a museum is a tough call! As far as the new Monterey Festival: I think it's totally impossible to catch that moment again. It's not the same culture! You can't go back. There's always a thread, but you cant bring back the same moment. When I see things revived, I don't think they're the same. Elaine Mayes

There is no evidence that there's some creative renaissance that's going on in pop music reflected in the stage right now, or a popular groundswell that would take those tickets. The original was a really incredible convergence of history and place and personalities. I don't see that happening next month in Monterey. I have no doubt that it will be a pleasant jaunt, but I don't think any history will be made this time. They couldn't even do a second Monterey the year after the original...And they tried! Joel Selvin

Link:

Monterey Pop: The Event That Pioneered the Power of Music Festivals - Everfest

In a celebration of independent theater, a collective of Philadelphia's most imaginative theater-makers bring audiences a double feature of The Jaws Project and The It Girl at Plays and the Players Theater. Premiering in Philadelphia's 2016 season, both pieces explored the stories behind cinematic juggernauts, Jaws and Clara Bow. Back by popular demand, these darkly comic pieces will open on July 4th at 3pm, followed by performances on July 5th, 6th, and 7th at 8pm.

Hollywood has dominated the American imagination, from its inception as a silent art form through the Golden Age of the 1970s to the current day deluge of caped crusaders. But as powerful as the stories on the screen have been, the magic and mayhem behind the scenes have equally hypnotized our collective conscious. The Jaws Project and The It Girl both open a portal into the inner workings of the Hollywood machine. Audiences are transported to studio backlots and film locations to witness the birth of two of the most iconic personas in the history of filmmaking; the shark and the starlet.

To celebrate the spirit of independent artists, the cast and crew of both productions will host a 4th of July Party before and after the performance on July 4th. Inspired by the holiday weekend that the story of Jaws takes place during, audiences will be treated to cold beer, hot dogs, potato salads, and other fare both carnivorous and vegan. The party will end in time for audiences to catch the fireworks. The creating artists will also host a Special Features Night on July 6th with a talk-back about how these Hollywood stories came to life and how they still haunt our zeitgeist.

THE JAWS PROJECT:The Jaws Project is part origin myth, part homage, part invasion narrative, part love story rooted in the cinematic classic, Jaws. Stephen Spielberg's blockbuster was shot on location at Martha's Vineyard, MA in 1974. It was a legendarily disastrous production that resulted in one of the greatest movies of all time and an unprecedented financial success that set a new bar for the Hollywood box office. The Jaws Project imagines, as film crews swarm the Vineyard and islanders bristle, an unlikely romance sparks between a Production Assistant and the bartender at the Black Dog Tavern. Their connection becomes the vehicle for exploring the stark differences between invader and invaded, Hollywood and clannish New England. Devised by Philadelphia theatre artists Robert Daponte, Mary Tuomanen, and Sam Henderson, the Jaws Project is a wicked rude comedy, an unlikely love story, an unflinching examination of a turning point in American culture.

THE IT GIRL: The It Girl uses dance, mime, theatricality and brutal stage combat to bring to life the rise and fall of the iconic It Girl. Silent Movie Star Clara Bow was the first actress to be dubbed with having "It" and her tumultuous life of struggle, success, and scandal is the jumping-off point for this wild ride. Beginning in an imaginary award ceremony and quickly descending into the Actress's Nightmare, The It Girl is a living silent film where music and movement tell us what words cannot. From the movie lots to the parties and crashing into mental institutions, an It Girl's rise is as bright as her fall is dark. Created by performers Amanda Schoonover and Anthony Crosby as well as director/designer Brenna Geffers, The It Girl will have finished performances in Hollywood before returning to open at Plays and players.

Creative Artists: Mary Tuomanen, Robert Daponte and Sam Henderson are three very familiar faces to the Philadelphia theater scene. Mary Tuomanen and Sam Henderson (costars in Lantern Theatre's New Jerusalem, Azuka's Local Girls and the Arden's Three Sisters) are both playwrights with Orbiter 3 Playwright's Collective, a Production Company dedicated to championing local writers. They are also members of the Foundry and Interact Core Writers Group. Robert Daponte is an actor/devisor who has collaborated with The Berserker Residents (The Giant Squid), EgoPo Classic Theatre (The Life and Death of Harry Houdini) and Swim Pony (The Ballad of Joe Hill).

Amanda Schoonover is a two-time Barrymore Award recipient, having received a total of 7 nominations as well as being an F. Otto Haas Emerging Artist Finalist. She has performed with Philadelphia Theater Company; Arden; Theatre Exile; Azuka; People's Light; Theatre Horizon; Bristol Riverside; New City; Iron Age; Lantern; The Eagle Theatre and Simpatico. Anthony Crosby is a Barrymore-nominated performer who has performed with Simpatico Theater Project, Scranton Shakespeare Festival, EgoPo Classic Theater and is a member of the Philadelphia Opera Collective where he has created and performed two world premiere opera events. Brenna Geffers is a Barrymore-nominated director and theater-maker based in Philadelphia. She has directed and created work for Theatre Exile, Flashpoint Theatre, Simpatico, Revolution Shakespeare, The Scranton Shakespeare Festival, New City Stage, and EgoPo Classic Theater; her most recent piece is an original adaptation of Anna Karenina called Anna.

Read more:

Plays and the Players Theater Presents Double Feature: THE JAWS PROJECT and THE IT GIRL - Broadway World

When Ukip's vote tallies were read out at electoral counts up and down the country, the muted applause said it all.

Just weeks after losing all but one of their councillors in the local elections, the party that pushed Britain to Brexit drew less than two per cent of the vote on election night.

Ukip failed to gain a single MP. Even in uber-eurosceptic Boston and Skegness, party leader Paul Nuttall ended up in third place with 7.7 per cent of the vote. Hours later, he resigned.

It's easy to forget that two years ago Ukip were the third-largest party in the country they pulled in almost 13 per cent of the vote in 2015.

In the weeks and months following the Brexit vote, the party has been beset with both internal strife and an existential crisis that no one has been able to solve.

The EU referendum result a year ago was the culmination of a 20-year fight that saw Ukip rise from a fringe group to a game-changing political force.

But before the celebration champagne had gone flat, Ukip had an urgent challenge to solve finding a leader.

Having achieved his Brexit goal, Nigel Farage, the face of the Leave campaign, announced he was stepping down.

With their only household name out of the picture, Ukip needed a new leader who could help the party capitalise on the eurosceptic zeitgeist before it was too late.

First there was Diane James, who won the party's leadership contest on 16 September. Eighteen days later she handed in her notice, saying she did not have the "full support" of the party.

Another leadership campaign then got underway, but the contest was overshadowed by a bizarre incident in which one of the frontrunners was hospitalised after an altercation with a fellow Ukip MEP in the European Parliament in Strasbourg.

The exact circumstances surrounding the clash between Steven Woolfe, who later resigned from the party, and defence spokesman Mike Hookem are still a matter of dispute, but either way it was an excruciating moment for a party desperately trying to display a united front.

In November 2016, the party finally settled on a leader in the shape of Merseyside MEP Paul Nuttall, but his short tenure in the job has been far from smooth.

Among other things, Nuttall has been accused of incorrectly claiming to have a PhD and lying about being present at the Hillsborough disaster in 1989.

On 8 June 2017, as the extent of Ukip's dire performance at the polls became clear, Nuttall tendered his resignation, leaving the party leaderless once again.

When the initial elation over the referendum result died down, Ukip were left contemplating a hard truth. The Brexit vote "has turned Ukip into a single-issue party without an issue," says the New Statesman.

Without their anti-EU rallying cry, the party leadership has been searching for another issue which can band the fractured movement together without much success.

Under Nuttall, Ukip has attempted to rebrand as the party that is unafraid to stand up to radical Islam. However, policies like a burka ban and mandatory medical inspections of girls thought to be at risk of FGM have not proven the vote winners Nuttall had hoped. They even sit uneasily with some of the party.

In March, Ukip's only MP, Douglas Carswell resigned from the party after a public feud over its direction. He said Ukip was becoming increasingly anti-immigrant.

Even as the votes were being counted on Thursday night, there was another defection. Tim Matthews, the candidate for Devon Central, said that Ukip had originally been "a libertarian party campaigning for Brexit" but had since "veered into extremism and racism", the BBC reports.

Could there still be a second act in Ukip's political life? Nuttall certainly thinks so. "The new rebranded Ukip must be launched and a new era must begin with a new leader," he said as he announced his own resignation.

Enter Nigel Farage. As it became clear that Britain was heading for a hung parliament, the former leader told the BBC he had "absolutely no choice" but to end his self-imposed exile from Westminster to ensure that Brexit would not be thrown off course.

Farage did not say whether such a comeback would be at the head of a new political movement or a return to his old party, but he acknowledged that "Ukip voters want someone who speaks for them".

Even if Farage were back at the helm, there is the lingering question of who the party now speaks for.

Many analysts predicted that Ukip had acted as a "gateway drug", luring one-time Labour voters to the right, and that the Tories would therefore reap the benefits of Ukip's falling star but it didn't pan out that way on the night, says the Financial Times.

In fact, in many seats, former Ukip voters "seemed to divide fairly evenly between Labour and the Conservatives", suggesting that beyond a shared euroscepticism, their political views were more diverse than the party had hoped.

Continued here:

Is this the death of Ukip? - The Week UK