A misguided article in the conservative magazine blames the concept for the powerful cultural transformations were seeing today. Thats about all it gets right.

By: David J. Gunkel

The monuments of Western literature came tumbling down long before confederate statues. In fact, a baffling article recently published in the National Review goes as far as to suggest that the root cause of cancel culture can be attributed to efforts to deconstruct the literary canon and its traditions. These efforts, argues the author, took up residence at elite institutions of higher education in the late 20th century and empowered generations of students to multiply, go forth, and make the world woke.

What the article gets right is that deconstruction was specifically formulated to confront the venerable monuments of Western thought with an explicit challenge and alternative way of thinking that contests the status quo. What it gets wrong, like so many other complaints before it, is the assumption that any challenge like this must be negative and the epitome of a youthful nihilism run amok. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I cant think of a better time to revisit and more accurately define the concept of deconstruction and its significance.

Deconstructing Deconstruction

The word deconstruction, despite initial appearances, does not indicate to take apart, to un-construct, or to disassemble. Despite this widespread and rather popular misconception, which has become something of an institutional (mal)practice in both the popular and academic press, deconstruction is not negative. As Jacques Derrida, the progenitor of the concept, emphasized on more than one occasion: Deconstruction, lets say it one more time, is not demolition or destruction.

Deconstruction is a kind of thinking outside the box that exceeds the grasp of the existing conceptual order.

But to declare that deconstruction is not negative does not mean that it is something positive either. The de- of deconstruction, Derrida explains, signifies not the demolition of what is constructing itself, but rather what remains to be thought beyond the constructionist or destructionist schema. Deconstruction, then, seeks to identify a third alternative. It is a kind of thinking outside the box that exceeds the grasp of the existing conceptual order.

This is because deconstruction works as a corrective to the binary oppositions that organize common ways of thinking; its a complex, rigorous approach to critical thinking that cant be reduced to a buzzword. We typically make sense of ourselves and our world by deploying sets of binary oppositions good/bad, white/black, right/left, male/female, mind/body, etc. The underlying logic of this way of thinking is the principle of non-contradiction. This principle, sometimes called the law of non-contradiction, has been, at least since the time of Aristotle, perhaps the defining condition of Western thought. As proof of this, we only need to consider what has already transpired here: We have employed the law of non-contradiction in the very process of characterizing deconstruction by way of distinguishing it from what it is not.

The Principle of Non-Contradiction

Binary oppositions are undoubtedly useful and expedient. They not only help us make sense of the world; they appear to be a fundamental principle of thought itself. Despite this, there are profound systemic problems.

On the one hand, binary oppositions restrict what is possible to know and to say about the world and our own experiences. Opposites push things toward the extremes. As the late literary critic Barbara Johnson insightfully wrote in her book A World of Difference, If not absolute, then relative; if not objective then subjective; if you are not for something; you are against it. Although this kind of exclusivity has a certain functionality and logical attraction, its often not entirely in touch with the complexity and exigency of things on the ground. Its for this reason that we are generally critical of false dichotomies the parsing of complex reality into a simple either/or distinction. The current political situation, which has been described as more polarized than ever, stands as just one instance or symptom of this problem.

On the other hand, these conceptual opposites arrange and exert power. For any logical opposition or binary pairing, the two items are not typically situated on a level playing field; one of the pair has already been determined to be the privileged term. Or as Derrida explains, we are not dealing with the peaceful coexistence of a vis--vis, but rather with a violent hierarchy. One of the two terms governs the other (axiologically, logically, etc.), or has the upper hand.

Rather than simply tearing down the monuments of the past and leaving them in ruins, deconstruction provides students with the tools for remixing the past for the sake of shaping the future.

Conceptual oppositions, then, are neither neutral nor objective. As the science and technology scholar Donna Haraway argues, certain dualisms have been persistent in Western traditions; they have been systemic to the logics and practices of domination of women, people of color, nature, workers, animals in short, domination of all constituted others, whose task it is to mirror the self. Dualisms, then, are expressions of power. They are always and already hierarchical arrangements that are structurally biased. And it is this skewed hierarchical order that installs, underwrites, and justifies systems of inequality, domination, and prejudice.

So what does this have to do with dismantling the monuments of Western literature and wokeness? The troubling dualisms that are the critical target of deconstruction do not just float around in the ether; they take form and are formalized in texts. The great books of Western philosophy, literature, and science utilize and codify these conceptual formations and therefore stand as solid monuments to a particular way of seeing, thinking, and acting in the world. Deconstruction empowers students to confront, question, and critically respond to these conceptual formations. Rather than simply tearing down the monuments of the past and leaving them in ruins, deconstruction provides students with the tools for remixing the past for the sake of shaping the future.

There are, then, good moral and political reasons to question the hegemony of conceptual oppositions and to challenge the usual and inherited structural arrangements. As Hannah Arendt writes, We all grow up and inherit a certain vocabulary. We then have got to examine this vocabulary. And deconstruction names not just the examination of vocabulary but a general strategy for seeing, thinking, and doing otherwise.

Two Steps to Deconstruction

The deconstructive effort begins by deliberately overturning the two terms that make up an existing conceptual order. This flipping of the script, or what Derrida also describes as bring low what was high is, quite literally, a revolutionary gesture. But inversion, in and by itself, is not sufficient. It is only half the story. Revolutionary inversion whether it be social, political, or philosophical actually does little or nothing to challenge or change the existing system of power. In merely exchanging the relative positions occupied by the two opposed terms, inversion still maintains the binary opposition in which and on which it operates albeit in reverse order or upside-down. Simply turning things around is necessary but not sufficient.

Deconstruction provides a way forward into possible futures that are not beholden to a repetition of what has gone before.

For this reason, deconstruction necessarily entails a second phase or operation. We must, as Derrida describes it, also mark the interval between inversion, which brings low what was high, and the irruptive emergence of a new concept, a concept that can no longer be, and never could be, included in the previous regime. This new concept that is the product of the second phase occupies a position that is in between or at the margins of a traditional, conceptual opposition or binary pair. It is simultaneously neither-nor and either-or.

Perhaps the best example and illustration of this two-step operation is available with the term deconstruction itself. In a first move, deconstruction flips the script by putting emphasis on the negative term destruction as opposed to construction. In fact, the apparent similitude between the two words, deconstruction and destruction, is a deliberate and calculated aspect of this effort. But this is only step one the phase of inversion. In the second phase of this double gesture, there is the emergence of a new concept. The novelty of this concept is marked, quite literally, in the material of the word itself. Deconstruction, which is fabricated by combining the de of destruction and attaching it to the opposite term construction, produces a strange and disorienting neologism that does not fit in the existing order of things. This new concept, despite first appearances, is not negative. It is not the mere opposite of construction; rather, it exceeds the conceptual order instituted and regulated by the opposition situated between construction and destruction. It is only on this condition, Derrida concludes, that deconstruction will provide itself the means with which to intervene in the field of oppositions that it criticizes.

Thinking Otherwise

I can already hear the complaints and moans of the skeptics skeptics like those given voice by the National Review: Whats the point? Why mess with the status quo when everything seems to be working just fine? Or perhaps even more critical: Isnt this kind of mental gymnastics just an exercise in navel contemplation reserved for privileged elites?

This last item is less a question and more of a containment strategy. What those in power want and need is for this kind of academic super-power to be restricted and locked-up in ivory towers. They know that problems begin when this stuff gets out in to the world and starts making trouble. And deconstruction is, if nothing else, another name for making trouble. Although informed by and made possible through a direct engagement with the literary monuments of the past a veritable whos who of dead white male authors deconstruction provides a way forward into possible futures that are not beholden to a repetition of what has gone before.

So go ahead, blame deconstruction for the social, political, and cultural transformations breaking out all over the place. Thats the point.

David J. Gunkel is Distinguished Teaching Professor of Communication Technology at Northern Illinois University and the author of, among other books, The Machine Question: Critical Perspectives on AI, Robots, and Ethics, Robot Rights, and the forthcoming (Fall 2021) Deconstruction, in the MIT Press Essential Knowledge series.

Continue reading here:

What the National Review Gets Wrong About Deconstruction - The MIT Press Reader

A great TV show stands on four steadfast and unchanging pillars: mystery, drama, comedy, and a good story the viewer can buy into. Russian Doll ticked all these boxes enthralling critics and fans alike with a compelling narrative that blended science fiction into reality as the show sought to explore multiple harrowing themes such as alcoholism, drug abuse, nihilism, and various topics that are considered to be an undercurrent in todays world.

While a time-loop is a fairly common concept for cinephiles, the Russian Doll takes it a bold step further not revealing the entire picture to the viewer at one go. We are forced to untangle a Gordian knot as the protagonist Nadia does so making it an exciting watch.

Russian Doll: Season 1 aired on Netflix in February last year. It was a tremendous success with viewers begging for more; naturally, Netflix renewed the popular show for another season making an announcement germane to the extension of the same on June 11, 2019. Unfortunately, Television Production is not immune to the effects of the ongoing pandemic and the shows sequel season has been delayed indefinitely for now.

Netflix has not given much information with regards to the second seasons official release date. Production was supposed to start in early May this year however plans have been put on hold considering the situation.

Russian Doll: Season 2

The plot of Russian Doll Season 2 hasnt been revealed to fans to avoid sparking theories and generating spoilers. Natasha Lyonne acts as the lynchpin holding the show together and does a fantastic job in bringing the character of Nadia Vulvokoc to life as she navigates the desolate path of alcohol /drug abuse and unravels the intricate puzzle she has been dropped into. None of this comes as a surprise considering her track record; case in point: her work as Nicky Nichols

If the first season is anything to go by, we expect a multitude of plot twists and brain-teasing plotlines bound to have fans on the edge of their seats. Natasha Lyonne has spoken about Season 2 in an interview connecting the show to a video game, an interesting dynamic to say the least considering Nadia is a computer programmer by profession.

The story starts on Nadias 36th birthday party as she battles a crippling existential crisis fueled by thoughts of her dead mother. Shades of nihilism come up in the show as Nadia dies time and again only to resurface at her friends loft. Nadia soon realizes that she is caught in a time-loop and tries to come to terms with her new circumstances whilst simultaneously eradicating theories about the same. The show picks up the pace when Nadia discovers that Alan is also suffering the same fate.

The trailer is not yet released you can check the season one trailer for reference.

See the rest here:

Russian Doll Season 2: Will Nadia unwrap the mystery? Click to know Release Date, Cast and More! - Next Alerts

By all account the summer's biggest blockbuster, "The Old Guard" plunges into questions of mortality, expectation and duty.

For how much the Marvel Cinematic Universe has come to be one of the last consistent channels of mass-consumed entertainment and how many billions of dollars its made at the box office (or, more accurately, because of it), weve gotten comfortable with how those spandex-wearing, one-liner-quipping heroes represent characters whose motivations have less to do with character and more to do with the unassailable appeal of altruistic duty. Even as Tony Stark and Steve Rogers bicker over the ethics of becoming bureaucratic pawns in Captain America: Civil War, what differentiates them isnt really a matter of I do or dont want this or that so much as whats the most sensible method of fighting the enemies that will continue to come their way. The foe is always as much a driving force, if not more, than the selfit wouldnt be an MCU movie otherwise, with the exception of the multilayered politics of Black Panther.

And thats all OKif only because thats what we want. Packed theaters (oh, how they are missed) and merchandise sales and Halloween costumes are more than enough to shield Kevin Feige and Co. against any other suggestion.

Leave it to Netflix, then, to bring us a comic book actioneer that shows us what the genre is missing, and in a year where weve reached July with nary a Wonder Woman or Black Widow to cheer on, no less. A movie about superpowered beings that was probably made for the cost of catering on the set of an Avengers movie, but exponentially more considered about the emotional and psychological toll of being a superpowered being, The Old Guard is the rare comic book adaptation (Id call it a superhero movie, but things are more complicated than that) where the quiet moments are more interesting than the loud ones.

Youll find all the familiar tropes the novice hero, the flying fists, the moustache-twirling villain, etc. to sustain you over the prolonged gap of time to the next Marvel or DC comics film, but Gina Prince-Bythewoods latest directorial effort prods deep enough to reset our expectations in the meantime. With its diverse cast and a fresh sprinkling of nihilism, The Old Guard puts character over spectacle, in the process asking questions the genre hasnt been all that interested in asking as of late.

The Old Guard opens on a small team of covert mercenaries led by Andy (Charlize Theron, subtly continuing a hot streak of performances after Tully, Long Shot and Bombshell). As she gazes at a news channel toggling between headlines of crisis in Syria and unrest in Haiti, her eyes betray weariness at a world that is decaying faster than they can smooth out the rough patches. Some good means nothing, she croaks out in one early scene, a line with more implications about the relationship between servitude and exhaustion than most superhero/comic book movies serve up in two-plus hours.

The uninitiated to The Old Guard may wonder how long, exactly, Andy and her team have devoted their lives and bodies to the pursuit of heroic ends. Youll get your answer about 15 minutes in, when an ostensible mission to save some kidnapped girls is revealed to be a trap, and rifle-toting goonies make swiss cheese out of Andy and her co-warriors. Its a grisly scene (the movie makes good on its R rating).

But moments later, the bullets pop out. Their wounds are healed. The squad stands up, and swiftly proceeds to turn the tables on their ambushers. Andy, Booker (Matthias Schoenaerts), Joe (Marwan Kenzari) and Nicky (Luca Marinelli) are immortal, it turns outand theyve been at this for decades. Or, in the case of Andy (full name: Andromache the Scythian), for centuries.

The premise is one that The Old Guard fascinatingly explores in shades of grey, contextualizing Andys world-weariness with seeds of reservation that have been festering over time. While the traditional contemporary comic book movie expends minimal energy contemplating what heroes think what they actuallythink about the emotional fallout of fighting new menace day after day after day, The Old Guard plunges into those questions as forcefully as Andy plunges her battle ax into an enemys neck. And she does so in the shadow of secrecy, with no one to acknowledge her but the creeping suspicion that if the world hasnt gotten any better, perhaps she shouldnt waste her time (the film can certainly be read as a commentary on gender expectation).

Its a startlingly human moment when she admits that none of it means anything anyway, and makes one consider the numerous kinds of stories comic book movies refuse to tell, in favor of destroying made-up European countries and fighting giant purple aliens. The Old Guard provides first-person perspective at a time when the genre is viewed increasingly through the lens of corporatism, both in the context of the actual stories and of those who make them. Ironically, or intentionally, that same profits-driven corporatism proves adversarial when a big pharma bro-preneur, Merrick (Harry Melling, a seeming representation of Mark Zuckerberg with his curly hair and ego), seeks to capture and harvest the team of whatever in their biology makes them immune to bullets and stabs. Were morally obliged to take it, Merrick says, a sentiment that is more fully realized in the conflicted CIA agent anxiously helping him, Chiwetel Ejiofors Copley.

The film also represents a landmark moment for Black filmmakers; Prince-Bythewood, who previously made Love & Basketball and The Secret Life of Bees, is now the first Black woman to helm a comic book movie. Its an overdue deviation from an unfortunate norm, a change in perspective thats striking to see play out in the films astute observations of what one owes the world when one gets nothing in return. It certainly helps that The Old Guard was penned by the same writer of the source material, Greg Rucka, who restrains himself from getting too muddled in lore (although one particular backstory is haunting) for the sake of providing an audience proxy in KiKi Laynes Nilea Marine who discovers her own immortality while on duty, and is soon gathered by the team after a psychic episode alerts them to another of their kind.

The parallels to X-Men are obviousand that superhuman family certainly makes sense as a thematic overlap, not to mention the Wolverine-like abilities of the titular old guard. But unlike that Marvel gang, theres no School for Gifted Youngsters here, and no William Stryker to direct their rage at. Theyre constantly on the run, only relying on each other. Theyre not outfitted in brightly colored costumes, dont come equipped with adamantium shields or the ability to shoot deadly beams of light from their hands or the support of national security budgets. The result is a careful and legitimate humanizing of the movies diverse characters, a sneaky achievement of drama that far outweighs forgettable action sequences and the occasionally bland aesthetic (the movies song choices are legitimately baffling). Ive got people that love mepeople that are going to worry, Nile responds when Andy encourages her to follow their path. The Old Guard isnt particularly subtle, but that opens up avenues to explore the painful implications of mortality through a moral lens.

As long as the movie interrogates the genre confines its operating within, we can, of course, interrogate the moments when it deviates into familiar territory. While the stakes thankfully remain grounded in the final act actively subverting heroes-save-the-world expectations in the process theres a cognitive dissonance thats hard to shake when the bodies of faceless goons start piling up. One of my favorite scenes in a film whose characters constantly converse about inevitable endings comes earlier as Niles confesses that, while the military has trained her to subdue her foes, it cant prepare her for living with what comes after the blood-letting. Its slightly jarring, then, to remember that position when shes mowing down enemies with seemingly no misgivings and no remorse in the climactic shoot-em-up, beat-um-up sequence.

At the same time, its refreshing as hell to see a young Black woman with real agency making major life-or-death decisions in a movie of this caliber. And Prince-Bythewood knows it; the movie is punctuated by an act of coming into ones own that absolutely brims with catharsis for us as movie-watchers and for Nile herself that brings the films message about self-fulfillment to the fore.

The world of The Old Guard by all indications, its ourworld is one that doesnt deserve the heroism of those whose selfless efforts it cant recognize. That alone feels like a novel idea teeming with possibility for the genre, let alone a timely sentiment in the age of COVID-19. As we argue consequentially about the simple issue of wearing a mask, an individual act thats been proven to be able to save lives, The Old Guard confronts the notion that the work of the individual can never be enough to cause vital change. Perhaps not.

But heroism goes far beyond putting in the work and waiting to be praised when the meteor has been stopped, the villain extinguished, the virus mitigated. True heroism is as much about the subdued commitments we make in the face of cataclysmic uncertaintywhen intention outweighs expectation.

"The Old Guard" is rated R for sequences of graphic violence, and language. It's streaming on Netflix now.

Starring: Charlize Theron, KiKi Layne, Matthias Schoenaerts, Marwan Kenzari

Directed by Gina Prince-Bythewood

OTHER SCREEN TEST REVIEWS:

Go here to see the original:

The Old Guard Review: Netflixs comic book action-drama is a character study that shows what weve been missing - KENS5.com

Two political science students at the University of Alberta have written a background report to help social workers, psychologists and other practitioners prevent involuntary celibates, or incels, from turning to violence.

The report was released this month by theOrganization for the Prevention of Violence, an Edmonton-based think tank that aims to counter violent extremism in Canada through psychosocial intervention. It is funded by Public Safety Canada and co-founded by the organizations executive director and U of A adjunct political science professor John McCoy.

A lot of times there's a tendency to paint the whole community of incels as violent, or like some variant of white supremacists, said masters student David Jones, who was co-author of the guide with Zoe Hastings, a recent political science graduate.

I think we have enough data to challenge those two assertions and approach it in a more nuanced way, said Jones.

Those identifying as incels tend to be young men who feel victimized by feminism and their own unattractiveness, blaming both for their inability to form relationships with women, said the reports authors.

From this grievance, they have developed an ideology that encompasses anti-feminism, misogyny, nihilism and self-abasement, they wrote.

Since 2009, there have been at least 13 public attacks by incels in North America. In Canada four resulted in deaththree in Ontario and one in Alberta.

Last February a 17-year-old male armed with a machete stabbed two women and a man at a massage parlour in Toronto, killing 24-year-old Ashley Noell Arzaga. The police later declared it anact of terrorism, because it was inspired by an identifiable ideology.

Despite these high-profile cases, however, the vast majority of incels are not violent, said Jones and Hastings, but could become so without intervention from psychologists or social workers.

This is a very isolated group of individuals, especially outside of their online community, said McCoy, who supervised Jones and Hastings in the writing of Involuntary Celibates: Background for Practitioners.

For them, building awareness of the availability of social servicesin a way that is anonymous, accessible and as free from stigma as possibleis an important first step, he said.

The goal of practitioners is to understand the perspective of incels, to address it in a way that is not confrontational or dismissive of their views, but slowly pursues disengagement from the ideology and builds pro-social connections.

Jones and Hastings culled their data from online incel platforms that conduct their own surveys, posting the information online.

The results debunk the common assumption in media reports that incels are closely allied with far-right, white-supremacist ideology, said Jones. While there is indeed some overlap and sharing of anti-feminist and misogynistic narratives, one poll revealed that only 55 per cent of incels were white.

The authors also found 64 per cent of those using online incel platforms were under 25 and 100 per cent identified as male.

A majority reported very high levels of negative mental health, according to Jones and Hastings. About 71 per cent reported being bullied as a child, and 74 per cent said they suffer from long-lasting anxiety, stress or emotional distress.

Eighty-eight per cent said they were unhappy and 77 per cent expressed pessimism about the future.

In an October 2019 poll, 68 per cent said they had seriously considered suicide, and 72 per cent reported they were on the autism spectrum.

These data suggest incels constitute a community with an apparent set of needs who can benefit from the support of human service and mental health practitioners, wrote Jones and Hastings.

They offer a number of suggestions to help practitioners build trust with incels and provide social support, such as seeking to understand their underlying mental health issues without rejecting their belief system.

Those on the autism spectrum, for example, given their struggles with social competency, may be easier to manipulate online, rendering them more susceptible to ideology.

The authors urge practitioners to help their clients engage in offline, healthy self-improvement activities that naturally align with their own goals and strengths.

Encouraging the development of natural community connections may also serve to create feelings of acceptance and self-worth outside of the incel ideology and community.

McCoy stressed that the overall intention of his organization is to design practical intervention programming rigorously informed by evidence.

We want to make sure it translates into the real world and aids practitioners who are on the front line, he said.

Continued here:

New report aims to help prevent incels from turning to violence - Folio - University of Alberta

LOS ANGELES: Netflix is keeping the spirit of the summer blockbuster alive amidst a sea of delays with their new action movie, The Old Guard. Arab News joined actors Charlize Theron and Marwan Kenzari to find out more about the film via video call. Despite only seeing each other through a computer screen, the cast remained in good spirits.

Its a good development; at least you know in this lockdown phase that were all experiencing that there is still an opportunity for us to do this, Kenzari said of the new industry trend of video conferences. You kind of get used to it quickly, but obviously you will always have the uncomfortableness of not being able to pick up on the smallest details in someones answer or question.

The Old Guard marks another leading action role for Theron who, after doing many of her own stunts in Mad Max: Fury Road and Atomic Blonde, has garnered a reputation for playing characters who fight as much as they speak. According to Theron, she finds bridging the gap comes naturally.

The cast of The Old Guard. Supplied

I started my storytelling career as a ballerina, and so physical storytelling was how I told stories for the first part of my life, said Theron. Theres a gratifying nature in going back to that kind of storytelling that I really appreciate.

To Therons point, between and during action scenes, The Old Guard keeps its focus on the inner lives of its characters. Theron plays the role of Andy, short for Andromache of Scythia, a centuries-old immortal soldier who has all but given up on humanity. Providing contrast is fellow immortal and member of Andys mercenary team, Yusuf Al-Kaysani, played by the Dutch-Tunisian actor Kenzari.

Al-Kaysani, now going by the name Joe, has weathered eternity by finding and committing to love, avoiding the nihilism that is consuming Andy. This borderline character-study is a refreshing addition to the action movie landscape.

I always look at my movies and go If we watch this in ten years will it feel modern? Will it hold up? Theron said. I think thats a good way to look at films. You want to stay in that world where you dont date a film, but still you still want it to be interesting.

The Old Guard marks another leading action role for Theron. Supplied

Theron credits the success of The Old Guards characters to screenwriter Greg Rucka, who, alongside artist Leandro Fernndez, created the graphic novel from which the film is adapted.I felt like the story really informed what she would look like and feel like. I cant take any credit for creating her, Theron said about Andy. Greg really wrote a character that to me felt of this world and felt timeless.

Recognition is also owed to director Gina Prince-Bythewood, whose previous films consist mostly of dramas such as The Secret Life of Bees. Between and during the action scenes of the mercenaries struggling to avoid capture by the corrupt head of a pharmaceutical company and discovering a new immortal born in the modern day, Prince-Bythewood is able to bring grounded emotional performances out of her actors, particularly Theron and co-star Kiki Layne.

I see so much potential for women in the genre because its not as compartmentalized as I think people want to make it, Theron said of the action movie world.With exciting action and complex characters, The Old Guard is a film that the cast and crew deserve to celebrate. However, just as we were forced to conduct the interview via video chat, the cast has been unable to see each other in months.

Weve worked together so intensely for a while and then we havent seen each other for a couple of months, almost a year actually so you kind of miss that, said Kenzari. You want to see each other. You want to celebrate the work that youve done together.

Until they are able to hold an in person premiere party, Theron, Kenzari, Layne and the other minds behind The Old Guard have to be content with seeing their film and each other via computer screen.

The Old Guard came out Friday, July 10, on Netflix.

Read more here:

Charlize Theron And Marwan Kenzari Talk 'The Old Guard' - Arab News

The internet followers of the black pill believe that the only inherent value left in the world is what can be achieved through acts of extreme violence.

Understanding what it means to be blacked pilled is best understood through the lens of what it means to be red pilled.The red pill has morphed several times in terms of what its meaning in purpose. What once represented an awakening akin to that undergone by Neo inThe Matrixturned into an embrace of closed-minded worship of white Westernism.

The black pill represents much more sinister urges that have risen from the collective consciousness that is pooled in various spaces on the Internet. Instead of awakening to support the resistance against a towering machine of capitalism and corrupt governance, or arising from slumber to defend it, some now choose to hasten the fates ultimate decisionan ending to what has long stood erect and resolute, for good or ill. Accelerationists, as theyre called, want to push everyone over the edge and then build something better in the ashes. How exactly the construction of a new society occurs is where things become fuzzy, not that a whole lot of what they believe is crystalline.

The accelerationists want to cause not just destruction, but dissent and unrest through government crackdowns and social isolation of those who already feel disenfranchised. The censorship of online forums by New Zealand is what the killer wanted, just as the social witch hunt across social networking and streaming sites pushes their narrative in the desired direction. The killer wants their brothers in arms to activate and commit similar acts of inhumanity.

If this becomes a trend, even a smaller one like the incel movement, the acts will only increase in severity. The killer is an eco-fascist who seems to most closely identify with Chinas flavour of tyrannical government, where the military plants trees and journalists are jailed for doing their jobs. However, even in these identifications, the amorphous nature of fascism remains as fluid and shifting as the people they hate so much.

Internet culture is the area most grounded for many of these types who have learned little from books but have read much from behind the glow of their computer monitors. They will continue to go for the high score and tomorrows atrocities may very well involve todays politicians. The heritage of reactionary hate these people draw from includes wide swaths of Nazism, paganism and antagonistic nihilism.Although many come from the internet, their ideologies dont have much to do with cyberspace or memes, beyond what would be considered by most a free but highly influenced market of ideas that usually never face any sort of real accountability.

The mainstream media and those who serve as its mouthpieces are wary of a deep dive into these specifics the same way theyve avoided any sort of due diligence in pursuing the Vegas shooters story. It just seems not to matter to them, theyd rather wallow in the all too common, and now widely recognised, tropes of crazed racists inflicting pain on the world.

I believe its worth examining the specific urges that amalgamate into driving motivations and intentions. In the case of the New Zealand mass murderer, its eco-fascist accelerationismimagine the American prepper movement, but much further right and harbouring malevolence to the very existence of society. Instead of simply preparing for society to fall, the eco-fascists, who are also accelerationists, actively work toward toppling the established governance by ripping society apart at the seams.

They dont want a race war; they want total war. And if there are more attacks like those in New Zealand, expect the worst.

Jason Arment is the author ofMusalaheen, a war memoir published byUniversity of Hell Press.

See the rest here:

The internet's black pill is an evil we all have to swallow - The Big Smoke Australia

Health workers may be experiencing challenges as they fight Covid-19, but there are also positive developments happening in the field that need to be celebrated, writesMarc Mendelson.

The pandemic of novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, which causes Covid-19, has now claimed over half a million lives and close to 11 million confirmed infections worldwide.1 At home, the seriousness of the situation has required a state of national disaster to be declared, with all the health, social, and economic consequences that it brings.

Lifting of the lockdown brings with it its own challenges for how we, as a society, embrace the new norm of how we live our daily lives and prevent the transmission of the virus to our family, friends and within our communities and at work. There is no getting away from the seriousness of the situation, nor can any broadening of the narrative belittle its gravity.

However, it is time that a modicum of balance is brought to the sense of helplessness and nihilism that is becoming entrenched in society. There are success stories out there, that need to be heard.

Scientific tools

We have remarkable scientific tools at our disposal, that have allowed us to isolate, diagnose, monitor and treat the virus, at a pace not seen with even modern epidemics of Ebola, HIV or previous coronaviruses.

From the start of this epidemic, we were faced with a rapidly evolving field. The last decade has seen quantum leaps in scientific advances that we are now benefitting from, especially in the field of emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases; the identification of SARS-CoV-2 only days after the announcement of atypical pneumonia cases in Wuhan occurred at unprecedented speed, closely followed by a diagnostic test for the virus that allowed outbreak investigations and accelerated understanding of the rapidly expanding global pandemic.

South African expertise in outbreak control, including listeria and drug resistant TB, along with public health expertise in HIV, have allowed for rapid in-depth analysis in a way that rivals many European countries and certainly the US.

In addition, new ways in which we perform clinical trials with "adaptive" designs means that medicines that may be of benefit in treating an emerging infection can be studied rapidly, and a "go-no go" given much earlier than previously possible.

Again, South Africa's rich research community, largely having cut its teeth on infectious diseases and vaccine research during the last 20 years, has swiftly pivoted and begun evaluating a large number of prevention and treatment options. In South Africa, and across the globe, our management of this pandemic has been greatly improved by these advances.

In just a few months, we have acquired enough knowledge to return most people to health, with increasing success in people with severe disease. The pandemic has transfixed society on macro-level numbers, chief among which are the number of cases and the number of deaths. Little attention is given to the number of persons who have recovered.

While about half of the people infected by SARS-CoV-2 will have no symptoms at all (asymptomatic), most of those that do develop symptoms (~80%) will have mild disease, which can be managed at home.

What about outcomes of those that have the most severe disease and require admission to hospital? The most recent DATCOV report from the National Institute for Communicable Diseases (NICD 28th June 2020) tells of 14 555 people admitted to 278 public and private hospitals, countrywide.2

Advances

Although 2 115 (15%) persons had died, 8 189 (56%) had been discharged alive or transferred out, and 4 250 (29%) were still in hospital. Every death is a tragedy, but every person who survives is equally a triumph.

Those successes have been aided by advances in our knowledge of how we treat the sickest patients who are admitted to hospital. Two main advances are the use of the steroid dexamethasone, and alternative ways of delivering more oxygen to patients, short of intubation and mechanically aiding their breathing in the intensive care unit.

Dexamethasone is a commonly used corticosteroid (steroid) available in South Africa and across the world. Recently, results of its use in hospitalised patients with severe Covid-19 were announced by investigators of the UK RECOVERY trial, that set out to study six different possible treatments for Covid-19 at the same time, an example of an adaptive clinical trial alluded to above3.

They found that people admitted to hospital, who needed oxygen support, had a reduction in death of one fifth, and for those on a ventilator in ICU, the reduction in death was one third if they took dexamethasone daily for 10 days. There was no effect for patients who did not require oxygen. This is a major advance as it is the first medicine to show an effect on death rate in severely ill patients with Covid-19.

Another medicine, remdesivir, has been shown in a trial in the US to reduce the duration of symptoms, but did not affect the mortality. Since the publication of these results, doctors in South African hospitals have rapidly started to use these approaches, treating patients with Covid-19 who require oxygen by giving dexamethasone or an equivalent steroid to benefit the patient.

Covid-19 is first and foremost an infection of the lungs, and we are also advancing the way in which we support the sickest patients by giving greater amounts of oxygen in an attempt to reduce the need for people to be ventilated on the ICU.

Like dexamethasone, treating critically ill patients with humidified high flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) is not new, but the global experience, and now ours in South Africa, has taught us that using HFNO in the general wards as well as in the ICU, can improve survival of some patients.

Added to this, the incredibly simple understanding that nursing patients with them lying on their front (proning) also improves oxygen supply to the body. This, too, has been previously used in ICUs, but is now being employed in the wards. Some patients will still need to be ventilated on the ICU.

Despite these sickest patients having the highest risk of dying, we are seeing some patients survive and come off the ventilators to be discharged. The public perception that going into hospital invariably results in death is not the case, despite the very high numbers that do sadly succumb.

This balance in narrative that healthcare workers can provide needs to be matched with the stories of survivors of Covid-19 in South Africa. We need to hear and learn from the experiences of patients, relatives, and staff in our health services, if we are to make further improvements and gain greater insight into how best to manage Covid-19, and its place in society.

Equally, it is absolutely critical that clinical trials of new medicines and vaccines can take place in our country, so that we can ensure that they work in our setting, which is unique in so many ways.

Physical distancing and masks

We welcome the vaccine trials that are under way4, and clinical trials, such as the international World Health Organisation SOLIDARITY trial5among others, that will start shortly in South Africa, looking at new treatment options for Covid-19.

Lastly, the positive benefits of reducing coronavirus transmission by following the simple public health measures of social distancing, universal masking, hand hygiene, regular decontaminating of often-used surfaces, and isolating if symptoms develop, cannot be stressed enough.

These are truly positive rather than negative narratives, in so much as they protect our most vulnerable older populations and those with comorbid medical conditions.

An understandably nihilistic viewpoint of Covid-19, especially for the sickest of our population, needs to be balanced with the positive developments that are happening in the field.

This, coupled with the outstanding ability and dedication of the South African health workforce, gives hope for the coming months, despite the incredible challenges that we face from Covid-19.

-Marc Mendelson isProfessor of Infectious Diseases, Head of Division of Infectious Diseases & HIV Medicine atGroote Schuur Hospital,University of Cape Town and a member of the Ministerial Advisory Committee on Covid-19.

References

1. Johns Hopkins University. Covid-19 Dashboard by the Centre for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE). Available at https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6 (Accessed on 3rd July 2020)

2. National Institute for Communicable Diseases. Covid-19 Surveillance Reports. Available at https://www.nicd.ac.za/diseases-a-z-index/covid-19/surveillance-reports/ (Accessed on 3rd July 2020)

Randomised Evaluation of Covid-19 Therapy (RECOVERY): Low-cost dexamethasone reduces death by up to one third in hospitalised patients with severe respiratory complications of Covid-19. Availablehttps://www.recoverytrial.net/files/recovery_dexamethasone_statement_160620_v2final.pdf (Accessed on 3rd July 2020)

3. University of Witwatersrand. The first Covid-19 vaccine trial is South Africa begins. Available at http://www.wits.ac.za/covid19vaccine/ (Accessed on 3rd July 2020)

4. World Health Organisation. "Solidarity" clinical trial for Covid-19 treatments. Available at https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/global-research-on-novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov/solidarity-clinical-trial-for-covid-19-treatments (Accessed on 3rd July 2020)

Original post:

OPINION | 100 days of lockdown: Success stories need to bring some balance to Covid-19 narrative - News24

(RNS) It was only a matter of time before masks became a battleground of the culture wars. Once upon a time in late May, Doug Burgum, governor of North Dakota, pleaded with his constituents not to make wearing a mask out-of-doors a political thing. "I would really love to see in North Dakota that we could just skip this thing that other parts of the nation are going through, where they're creating a divide either it's ideological or political or something around mask versus no mask."

Four days later, Jerry Falwell Jr., president of Liberty University in Virginia and an ardent Trump supporter, tweeted that he would comply with his state's mandate only if his mask bore an image, which had caused a scandal last year, of Falwell's governor, Democrat Ralph Northam, in blackface as a young medical student.

By late June, 63% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents said masks should regularly be worn, compared with just 29% of their Republican side counterparts, according to Pew Research Center.

There are many factors that seem to go into the decision to wear a mask: trust in government, the risk an individual feels from the coronavirus, how much we feel our actions can control the disease at all.

But central to the politicization of mask wearing seems to be the issue of masculinity. Men are much less prone to don a mask, Pew's data showed, and opponents of mask-wearing largely code their decision in terms of bravery and risk-taking and, by implication, brand mask wearers as effete, or cowards. A study from Middlesex University in the United Kingdom found that men were significantly less likely than women to wear masks, in part because they thought it was a sign of weakness or femininity.

Some of the most robust arguments against masks have also come from some of the political and religious right's paragons of performative masculinity. About the time the Middlesex University study appeared, Rusty Reno, editor of the conservative journal First Things, tweeted "Masks = enforced cowardice. It was a mindset he'd already laid out in a May 12 "Coronavirus Diary" on the First Things website, in which he boasted of going unmasked while on a weekend cycling jaunt.

"Providentially," he wrote, "I found a mask in a gutter just before reaching the Staten Island Ferry, allowing me to board and steam back to Manhattan."

Reno later tested positive on an antibody test, making it possible that he had been unwittingly spreading the coronavirus; he has since deleted his tweets and issued a brief apology for "over-heated rhetoric and false analogies."

Reno has long made a personal brand out of an atavistic pursuit of primal strength quite literally: Reno's latest book is called, "Return of the Strong Gods." Mask-wearing like meat-eating, weightlifting and other shibboleths of masculinity has entered into the discourse of a kind of nominally Christian traditionalism that opposes neoliberal modernity as the agent of the sissification of civilization.

Often coded as inextricable from urbanization and multiculturalism, neoliberal modernity embraces nontraditional gender roles, female equality and LGBTQ people. In answer, Reno's brand of Christian traditionalism deploys a kind of cultural hand grenade blowing things up real good often for the purpose of owning the libs or beating the system, but as often to deconstruct that system to reveal purportedly primal human values beneath: Reno bemoans our mask-minded culture that, on the same quarantining impulse, allows our elderly to die of COVID-19 alone.

This is why the traditionalist indulges in acts that manage to be individualistic and transgressive at once. Putting the lives of other people at risk is in this mindset dangerous, sexy" and all the more authentic for opposing the advice of sclerotic or faceless institutions (such as, say, the coronavirus guidance of the CDC).

But the traditionalism of Reno is a thoroughly unsatisfactory salvo against modernity. As a critique of our culture, it doesn't afford any avenue to revolution or change, offering instead what looks on the surface like an inward-looking nihilism. (In fact, Reno is a Catholic who sneaks off to an undisclosed church, he confesses in his First Things post, to be "cared for" by a priest who leaves the doors unlocked as he celebrates the Eucharist.)

It's also a distinctively modern form of traditionalism. Its "nostalgia" for a time when gender was binary and politics were incorrect is not just an affect, but an element of a personal brand, a stake in the digital marketplace.

So while Reno and his ilk use the refusal to wear masks as a shibboleth for those who aestheticize rugged individualism, or pious authenticity, their death worship is disguised as bravery. That, for all its claims to reject and overthrow the Modern Age, is thoroughly and completely of its time.

Add to Favorite Articles

Go here to see the original:

How wearing masks and masculinity got confused - Religion News Service

The Old Guard fails to capture the appeal the novel had for readers to the uninitiated viewers.

With Marvel'sBlack Widowand DC'sWonder Woman 1984delayed, Netflix bringsThe Old Guard, a new superhero film to fill the blockbuster void left by closed theatres this summer. While seeing the spectacle may impress some, seeing through it, they may find it curiously empty. Adapted from the graphic novel by Greg Rucka and Leandro Fernndez,The Old Guardfeatures Charlize Theron as Andy, a millennias-old warrior who leads a quartet of immortal mercenaries.

Andy is short for Andromache of Scythia, but the film glosses over her Scythian origins and Amazon warrior queen past. What little backstory we get is this: the death of her first immortal companion, which reveals their immortality is more quasi than absolute; the sadistic confinement of her second companion after being accused of witchcraft, which serves as a hook for a potential sequel; and her brief love affair with Auguste Rodin, namedropped as a joke. Her brothers-in-arms include Crusades rivals-turned lovers Joe (Marwan Kenzari) and Nicky (Luca Marinelli), and Napoleonic War veteran Booker (Matthias Schoenaerts). If this were aBill & Tedfilm, these interesting backstories could have been used to take the viewer on excellent adventures through history. But this is not that kind of a movie.

Charlize Theron as Andy in The Old Guard

Sporting short hair and dark clothes, Andy is a superhero tormented by the tragedy of living forever and watching loved ones die, one by one. Even though they have been alive for centuries, the Old Guard have still not figured out why they have been chosen and their roles throughout history. Accustomed to suicide missions, they have been covertly protecting humanity from self-destruction, without being discovered until their identities are discovered by an ex-CIA agent named Copley (Chiwetel Ejiofor), hired by a corporation that aims to market eternal life to the masses. The bad guys personify Big Pharma and all the ambitious billionaires with messiah complex. The Old Guard are pitted against Merrick (Harry Melling), head of a pharmaceutical company trying to use his unfettered power to do as he pleases, hiding under the excuse of scientific advancement and the good of humanity.

Serving as the audience surrogate in the film is Nile (Kiki Layne), a US Marine killed in action in Afghanistan only to wake up to immortality. Going through the usual stages of disbelief to eventual acceptance, her initiation provides necessary exposition to establish the Old Guard's battle-weary bonafides. She introduces a sense of renewed optimism that counters the nihilism that has crept into their judgment of humanity. Even Theron cannot make us warm up to a character designed to be a little cold. So Nile becomes the emotional glue that binds us to the plot.

Charlize Theron and Kiki Layne as Andy and Nile, respectively.

The Old Guardis most compelling when its story focuses on Andy and Nile, who gain narrative texture with each conversation.

For director Gina Prince-Bythewood, it is not just about representation in a genre formerly devoted to men. Sure, the movie passes the Bechdel and Vito Russo Tests. But she wants to do more than just correct some statistical parity.

She empowers Andy and Nile, and Joe and Nicky, with the same agency and dimensionality that are granted to their straight male counterparts.

A still from The Old Guard

The combat sequences are filmed with thrilling immediacy, likeJohn Wick-lite battles that rack up a sizeable body count by the end. With immortals as heroes, you however might not get the same level of tension you do with mortals (not Keanu Reeves) aware of the fatal consequences of living every moment in danger. While their age and ever-healing bodies might hide the physical toil of every injury sustained over centuries of killing, the psychological toll is plainly visible.

The tragedy of living forever carries with it the immortality of all things: war, disease, poverty, death, and the endless losses that the Old Guard have had to face since time immemorial. So nihilism manifests itself as a loss of idealism and disillusionment with humanity, symptoms that arise from a loss of time's meaning. This explains their cynicism and feeling of nothingness even as they dish out violence. The endless cycle of violence repeats itself, and they are forced to re-watch humanity doomed to repeat the same mistakes.

The Old Guardhighlights the dilemma with fidelity being considered a merit in adaptations. The key challenge is to transpose the appeal of the source material faithfully on screen, without delivering a mere cinematic facsimile. This was the issue with Zack Snyder'sWatchmen. By contrast, in therecent HBO adaptation, Damon Lindelof consciously updated the graphic novel, re-embodying it as a contemporary cinematic work that was as creative and daring as the source material. ThoughThe Old Guarddoes not favour one audience over the other, it still fails to capture the appeal the novel had for readers to the uninitiated viewers. What it does succeed in doing is bring an alt-superhero film as a substitute to the usual Marvel and DC fare. Of course, it is more a fresh symptom than a solution to superhero saturation. For if you stick around for the credits, you will know Netflix is planning a whole new franchise.

The Old Guard is now streaming on Netflix.

Rating: **1/2

Find latest and upcoming tech gadgets online on Tech2 Gadgets. Get technology news, gadgets reviews & ratings. Popular gadgets including laptop, tablet and mobile specifications, features, prices, comparison.

See original here:

The Old Guard movie review: Charlize Therons Netflix film about ageless warriors gets old real fast - Firstpost

EUROVISION SONG CONTEST: THE STORY OF FIRE SAGA (NETFLIX)If you've never heard of the Eurovision Song Contest, stop reading right now and go fall down a YouTube rabbit hole of its most famous televised performances. It's been an annual tradition since the 1950s and has produced superstars like ABBA and Celine Dion. It's one of those long-standing cultural traditions that has, over the decades, settled into the perfect blend of earnestness and goofiness that would seem ideal for a movie parody.

But a new Netflix film with the ungainly title Eurovision Song Contest: The Story of Fire Saga is a mostly laugh-free farce about a couple of idiots who bumble their way into Eurovision and surprise, surprise become unlikely favorites in the competition. They're played by Will Ferrell and Rachel McAdams, lifelong friends who have started a terrible band called Fire Saga and who dream of representing their native Iceland in Eurovision.

There's no way they'd make the cut in a normal year, but a series of bizarre circumstances (including a yacht explosion) lands them a spot as Iceland's representative musicians. Soon they're in Scotland for the big show, rubbing elbows with a flamboyant Russian pop star played by Dan Stevens (the brightest spot in the film) and desperate to prove their critics wrong.

All of this sounds funnier than it actually is: Somehow the idea of Will Ferrell singing a dance-pop song while running inside a giant hamster wheel isn't as amusing in practice as it probably seemed on paper. The already thin premise is stretched out to two hours, so that it drags on and on and on, repeating a lot of jokes that weren't all that hilarious the first time.

Director David Dobkin is best known for comedies like Wedding Crashers, but he's also got a background in music videos, and Eurovision Song Contest works best when it becomes a full-blown musical extravaganza. The only really good sequence in the movie comes about an hour in, when our heroes go to a party with past Eurovision contestants and perform a mashup of songs while the camera swirls around them. The fake songs, meanwhile, are pretty believable: A '90s house-inspired song called "Double Trouble" is genuinely catchy, as is the barroom sing-along "Ja Ja Ding-Dong," an incessant earworm built on childish double entendres.

But goofy songs only get you so far. The film was made with the cooperation of Eurovision, and maybe that's the problem. There's almost too much reverence here and not enough bite. It has apparently already found a devoted following in the two weeks it's been on Netflix, so maybe you'll find it funnier than I did.

IRRESISTIBLE (DIGITAL RENTAL)Irresistible purports to be a satire of our current political climate, and yet it somehow seems completely unmoored not only from contemporary politics but from the real world and normal human behavior. What's most surprising about it is that it was written and directed by Jon Stewart, who hasn't been a regular TV presence since 2015, which may explain why his satirical muscles have apparently atrophied.

The movie stars Steve Carell as a Democratic strategist and Clinton family confidante named Gary Zimmer, still licking his wounds from losing the 2016 election. He sees his possible redemption in a popular YouTube clip that shows a farmer and former Marine in rural Wisconsin defending the rights of his immigrant neighbors. Zimmer thinks he can transform that virality into political success, so he hops on a private jet and heads to the Midwest.

What he finds is like the Twilight Zone as directed by Frank Capra, a small town so hospitable that it's almost creepy. But Zimmer successfully convinces that farmer (Chris Cooper) to run for mayor as a Democrat, and it causes enough of a ruckus in the media that Zimmer's right-wing counterpart (Rose Byrne) shows up to throw her weight behind the sitting mayor.

Now, I'm willing to grant the film its premise of the entire country turning its attention to a measly mayoral election, but did we really need tired jokes about how people from big cities like organic food while people from small towns like burgers and beer, or dated references to people like Joe the Plumber? Stewart never settles on a tone, either, and he often lets Carell mug in ways that feel less like character choices and more like, well, an actor mugging in front of a camera. A third-act plot development sort of explains away some of the movie's weirdest choices, but it also reverses the entire purpose of the story and then cuts to black.

I came of age when Stewart was the sharpest voice in political comedy, when he took to Comedy Central every night to point out the hypocrisy on both sides of the ideological aisle. He now seems as out-of-touch as the elitists he's lampooning: There are times when he appears to be aiming for the caustic, all-sides-are-bad nihilism of Alexander Payne, or the bombast of Sidney Lumet's all-time great media satire Network (the latter's most famous line gets a shoutout here), but he's too glib and didactic to nail either one.

See the rest here:

Will Ferrell and Jon Stewart drop dated comedy bombs onto streaming platforms - Pacific Northwest Inlander

By: Jason D. Hill

Much has already been written on the horrific and tragic killing of George Floyd, and much has been written and debated about the existence or non-existence of systemic racism in our society and in the police departments of the United States of America. I submit that reasonable people can have reasonable disagreements about that issue; they can offer reasonable counterfactuals and equally compelling rejoinders. I am a philosopher by training, and one possessed of a cold, unsentimental mind by temperament. Therefore, I take it that an absence of a consensus about issues that are far from unassailable truths can exist without civic life and social trust and cohesion falling into total disarray.

What bothers me about the culture wars taking place in the streets of American cities as I listen (not unsympathetically to the cries of the hearts of people who have genuinely suffered from prejudice and brutality in their lives) is a number of things. First and foremost is the unchanneled rage and directionless anger that is harming not just innocent citizens of all races, but also the very people in whose names the protests and riots are offered up as a form of both restorative and retributive justice, and as invisible victims in systemically corrupt institutions: black people.

When black and white protestors indiscriminately tear down or deface the statues of slaves traders and white abolitionists with equal abandon; when Winston Churchill, a gallant war hero and indisputable defender of Western civilization who, along with the United States, saved the West from the rapacious ravages of Hitlers expansionist design for racially-dominated Aryan rule, is considered morally indistinguishable from racial separatists; and when the latter are lumped with white abolitionists who gave their lives for black emancipation, there is no lower place to sink in terms of both cognitive dissonance and moral depravity. In an imperfect world, moral and conceptual distinctions must be made. In London, the statue of Abraham Lincoln was vandalized at a Black Lives Matter protest.

Lincoln was the heroic president who went to war to free the American slaves and who was killed for it. In Washington D.C., protestors raged against Admiral David Farragut, who went against the separatists in his own state of Tennessee and joined the Union. Today he is widely known as the hero of the Battle of Mobile Bay which dealt a major blow to the Confederate States. Murderer and colonizer were also spray-painted near the name of abolitionist advocate Mattias Baldwin in Philadelphia. Here is a man who was a champion of black voting rights, who paid for and championed the education of black children before the Civil War, and who was known to pay for teachers out of his own money. To show the rampant ignorance at work here, in Boston, protestors vandalized a monument to the 54th Massachusetts regiment. This was the second all-black volunteer regiment of the Union. The list could go on of black and white fighters who fought against the oppression of blacks, and whose symbolic representations are the targets of indiscriminate attacks.

I leave aside the ethicality and appropriateness of removing historical symbols associated with racial oppression for the moment. When looters see a white statue and tear it down because it bears the representation of a white figureregardless of the moral values such a person whom the statue represents actually stood for, we have resorted to a dangerous form of inverted racism and biological collectivism; the logical corollary of the latter is an insidious form of determinism: the idea that a persons racial ascriptive identity can be used to ascribe moral, social or political significance to a persons genetic lineage.

This is the old-school type of racism that informed racial supremacy by whites over blacks in segregated America, and over Jews in NAZI Germany. One would expect the opponents of any kind of racial supremacy to recognize, in principle, the dangers of fighting one form of racism one believes one is fighting against with another: when you kill a person because he is black or Asian or white and for that reason only, you adhere to a principle of chemical predestination: the idea that characterological traits are produced by some form of racial internal body chemistry and, that for such a reason, you must rid the person of those traits by killing him or her.

In the calls to decolonize course syllabi on campus colleges we see a perversion of any fight against legitimate racism. There is now momentum on college campuses to decolonize the syllabi of courses populated with canonical texts written by white (usually) male scholars, writers and thinkers. If one can indiscriminately attack and vandalize the statues of slave abolitionists, cultural heroes and fighters for racial equality like Winston Churchill, David Farragut, Matthias Baldwin, and Abraham Lincoln, then one can equally imagine the deranged amoral imagination of educators calling for course syllabi to be expunged of male white canonical figures. Nowhere can it be imagined that the moral and emancipatory vocabularies for oppression could ever have arisen from some of these canonical figures such as John Stuart Mill, Immanuel Kant, John Locke, Thomas Paine, Hugo Grotius, Charles Dickens, and even Aristotle.

I myself was shocked when I received an email from my home institution apprising me of a workshop that had as one of many programs on its agenda the business of decolonize that syllabus. The reasoning is predicated on misguided social engineering. This is not a matter of diversifying the syllabus. It means literally divesting it of all white canonical figures who are presumed to be racist because they are white and who wrote during particular historical epochs that did not celebrate black agency. I leave aside the obvious malarkey of such reasoning which is putatively obvious and emphasize a point I have made in previous essays: our universities have ceased to be bastions of learning and have become national security threats, purveyors themselves not just of inverse racism, but educational tropes of cultural Marxism where hatred of America and the most ameliorative aspects of Americas civilization are presented as part of the systemic and endemic problem.

What we are witnessing in the ascendancy of the culture wars whether in certain segments in the streets, or, in virtually all domains of our educational systems is virulent nihilism predicated on an axis of moral and cultural relativism.

Moral relativism advances the idea that there are no objective criteria to adjudicate among competing truth claims. Its ruling principle is subjectivism. What one feels is the truth constitutes the truth. Logic and reason according to the more radical school of subjectivism, is the creation of racist and imperialist white constructs. But if nihilism is the logical concomitant of relativism, one must now ask: what is the school and the philosophical foundation of relativism? What first foundational principles underscore the relativism that gives rise to the nihilism in the streets and in our educational systems? (Front Page Mag)

Jason D. Hill is professor of philosophy at DePaul University in Chicago, and a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. His areas of specialization include ethics, social and political philosophy, American foreign policy and American politics. He is the author of several books, including We Have Overcome: An Immigrants Letter to the American People (Bombardier Books/Post Hill Press). Follow him on Twitter @JasonDhill6.

See the original post:

The Advancing Nihilism and the Rot of Post-Modernism in the West - The Jewish Voice

(Gamma-Keystone via Getty Images)

In this 2014 book, he would define conservatism asamong other thingsa sentiment and one that all mature people can readily share: the sentiment that good things are easily destroyed, but not easily created.'

Following his death in January, Sir Roger Scruton was lauded by many commentators as one of the most important thinkers of our era. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson called himthe greatest modern conservative, while others mourned the empty space left behind by the great mans passing. And this was deservedly so; Scrutons many achievements were nothing short of remarkable. His lifes work was extensive and contained manifest variety, and his intellectual legacy will remain for years to come.

Yet six months later, we are forced to witness in horror the aftermath of George Floyds death at the hands of an American police officer. The riots and destructive movements that have followedand which hijacked the outrage from the very starthave led many writers to wonder if we are now witnessing the downfall of Western Civilization. As such, it is perhaps worthwhile to revisit Scrutons origins as a conservative thinker.

Known for his prolific writing, his long-lasting opposition to Communism, and for his graceful and frequent endorsements of high culture and its aesthetic potency, Scrutons intellectual breakthrough came about in Paris as he watched the riots of May 1968 from the window of his student apartment.He would later recall in The New Criterion in 2003: it was when witnessing what this meant, in May 1968 in Paris, that I discovered my vocation. In this 2003 essay entitled Why I became a conservative, Scruton described the riots as a kind of adolescent insouciance, a throwing away of all customs, institutions, and achievements, for the sake of momentary exultation which could have no lasting sense save anarchy.

And upon returning to his home-country of the United Kingdom, Scruton began diving into the great traditional thinkers, reading Edmund Burke, Leo Strauss, T.S. Eliot, as well as various libertarian economists. From there, he would begin his journey into an academic climate that was already hostile to perspectives such as his.

Many years later, in one of the last of his many books,How to Be a Conservative, Scruton undertook the task of compilingdecades of philosophical meditations into one comprehensive manual. In this 2014 book, he would define conservatism asamong other thingsa sentiment and one that all mature people can readily share: the sentiment that good things are easily destroyed, but not easily created.

Then cancer came for Scruton. And, in his final days, he reflected on the aftermath of the previous years controversy (that saw his reputation unfairly damaged in the conservative movement), his sudden illness, and the magnificent journey that life had handed him. His final published words still reflected the unique style and aura that his readers loved him for. In The Spectator,he wrote of 2019, During this year much was taken from meBut much more was given backComing close to death you begin to know what life means, and what it means is gratitude.

As I re-read these words, I cannot help but think that perhaps it was a good thing that Sir Roger Scruton was spared the horror of witnessing the events of these past few weeks. The feeling of anger and resentment across the West, the destruction of property, the violence, the looting, the buildings ablaze, the hate-filled mobs, and the desecrated memorials might have been a spectacle too much to bear for the honorable man from Lincolnshire. This was the man, after all, who had spent so much of his life emphasizing the significance of beauty and its ability to transcend destruction.

But Scruton was alive when the critical social justice lie slowly invaded the rhetoric of American universities, spreading throughout the West like an unstoppable disease. He was as prominent as ever in the prelude to the events that are now unfolding. Todays political correctness, which was disguised as a just and mighty undertaking on behalf of the downtrodden, was as tainted with hypocrisy as the May 68 riots. What he said of the riots, referring to them as the self-scripted drama of the baby boomers vanity could have been said much the same of critical social justice. They are both, in Scrutons words, Childish disobedience amplified into anarchy.

For Scruton, what is currently unfolding must be the legacy of Soixante-Huitards, and nowby the looks of it this was likely the end-goal of postcolonial theory. We now witness the opportunistic, ideological, and racial narrative of Black Lives Matter, the tyrannical nature of organizations such as Antifa, and the mind-boggling inconsistencies and unapologetic hypocrisy of some of their advocates. Much has been written already about the far-lefts role in the ongoing American riots, and Scruton would likely agree with much of it. However, many of the far-lefts practices are now so pervasive in the political sphere that sober-minded observers and, especially, modern conservatives risk overlooking one of the most crucial underlying issues: the lack of belonging apparent in our society. Scruton was as vocal on the necessity of a transcendent purpose in ones life as he was in critiquing Marx and Foucault.

With the decline of religion and family formation, the lonely existences of so many in the West crave for spirituality. Unfortunately, for many,politics has offered itself as the antidote. Activism, after all, offers a sense of community, the feeling of purpose that comes with being in a mob, along with blind faith to the cause. For many conservatives, this activism screams of hedonic nihilism. And, in turn, it raises a question: Can spiritual yearning lead to nihilism? The question, indeed, might appear paradoxical. Yet, in light of widespread destruction and years of ideological fanaticism (with their attendant instances of quasi-religious displays of self-abasement and full-blown nihilistic rage), it is a question that cannot be ignored.

All the while, chaos is emerging faster than expected, and it is constantly recruiting agents. It comes under different names, but, without a doubt, it has found its way into our societies. Now, it is pounding at the gates. In the meantime, as American cities burn and British historical sites and monumentsincluding one to Sir Winston Churchillare targeted, slightly optimistic conservatives find comfort in the knowledge thatrioting, historically, has made public opinion move their way. However, will that be enough? Sir Roger Scrutons legacy, if anything, reminds us that philosophy is much more than an opinion. As the English writer Ben Sixsmith puts it, If we look to faith simply for what it can do for us and how it can make us feel, the chances are well be disappointed when we hit hard times. Conservatism is, above all, a commitment, a way of looking at life. It is, as Roger Scruton saw it, a lasting vision of human society. What we hold dear cannot simply be preserved by a name cast upon a ballot at election time.

Unfortunately, that is precisely the message being echoed throughout the Westand on both sides of the political aisle. Make sure youre registered to vote in November, instead!, cried one black woman two weeks ago in New York City, passionately addressing the crowd and visibly enraged by the destruction left in the wake of the rioters gleeful nihilism. At the same time, on the other side of the political spectrum, conservatives suggest basically the same: that this all can be resolved by supporting Republican candidates come November.

Sadly, we may truly be witnessing the end of Western Civilization. But if that is the case, the key to its survival lies not only within our capacity to make the right decision. It lies not merely within our rights and libertiesand certainly not in our almost indistinguishable political candidates. Rather, it rests in our willingness to communicate with one another, to think, learn, and believe. That is what it is to step away from the shuttered windows concealing the violence in the street with a renowned sense of gratitude for our heritage and a responsibility towards our culture. This was, after all, what a young, bright, British student did in the French summer of 68, and he continued to do this until the very day he took his final breath.

Mark Granza is a freelance writer in Italy.

See original here:

The Key to the West Lies Within Sir Roger Scruton's Life - Merion West

This was what alto saxophonist Lakecia Benjamin heard as a student, courtesy of her mentor, the incendiary alto player Gary Bartz. Discovering the music of both Coltrane and his wife, Alice, probably began Benjamin's own journey into the "why?" of making art, rather than the "how?". She came to play in the band of Rashied Ali, the last of Coltrane's drummers, and now has made her own ambitious statement, Pursuance: The Coltranes, cannily eschewing any tenor saxophones.

Like the road from Methodist orthodoxy to a more all-encompassing spirituality, that from gifted musician to inspirational genius reflected Coltrane's commitment to excavating universal truths, and revealing them through music of equally universal reach. In intent he resembled an artist of the Enlightenment more than of his own time, when the smattering of other genuine geniuses Picasso, Beckett could not hold back the tide of nihilism that was drowning hope. Coltrane was almost a lone beacon, which is why his ultimate masterpiece, A Love Supreme, is as monumental and timeless as anything created last century. When he came downstairs having finished composing it prior to its recording, he quietly told Alice, "It's the first time I have everything ready."

Lakecia Benjamin's tribute album.

Regardless of its sometimes hurtling velocity, cyclonic energy or exultant ecstasy, Coltrane's music was always trance-like in effect, as though not just time had slowed, but the speed of light, itself. His brilliant pianist, McCoy Tyner, said, "John felt that music was like the universe You look up and see the stars, but beyond them are many other stars. He was looking for the stars you can't see." As his wife and final pianist, Alice had a front-row seat at Coltrane's inner wrestle with such profundity, and after his death in 1967 she went on to make her own near-transcendental music.

Tribute albums are inherently dodgy. So you have heroes? Get over them, and build something of your own that's more than a house of cards. Benjamin has elevated Pursuance: The Coltranes beyond mere tribute status in many ways, including by uniting multigenerational players, among them bassist Reggie Workman, a revered Coltrane alumnus. Others spinning through the firmament include violinist Regina Carter, singers Dee Dee Bridgewater and Jazzmeia Horn, bassist Ron Carter and saxophonists Bartz, Steve Wilson and Greg Osby. She also intermingles Alice's compositions with John's, thereby highlighting not just the depth and power of Alice's own work, but its kinship with the mysticism of her husband's. Alice's Prema is a highlight, the mesmeric melody carried by alto, flute, viola and cello, and laced with Brandee Younger's harp. Benjamin's piquant alto reaches its own ecstasy, including on a piece by neither Coltrane, the hymn Walk with Me, which, perhaps, most liberated her from their giant shadows and dazzling light.

"I really feel like the world we live in now is kind of like a 'me, me, me' show-off world," Benjamin told me last year, "so people need to take the time to contribute to things feeling good. And once you can do that, then you can move to the next level." She has. Coltrane would have nodded and smiled.

Pursuance: The Coltranes streams on Spotify & Apple Music; on disc from Birdland Records.

Read the rest here:

Reflecting the light across space and time - Sydney Morning Herald

One of the defining features of the reactionary outlook is how thin its conception of lifes meaning is, and this, in turn, explains why reactionaries tend to be so anxious about it all falling apart

Introduction

It is not I who will die; it is the world that will end.

Ayn Rand, citing one of her favorite expressions

Rarely have so many concerned themselves with the politics of meaning. This is particularly true of the many reactionary figures who have emerged in our time, particularly post-modern conservatives. As far back as 2016a lifetime ago, it seemsthe conservative essayist Michael Anton described the culture war in the United States as being caught in an endless cycle of decline and fall brought about by progressive forces. So pervasive had progressives influence become, Anton argued, that even conservatives were increasingly willing to go quietly into the night. This he described as the mark of a party, a society, a country, a people, a civilization that wants to die. More recently, R.R Reno, the editor of First Things, condemned the strict measures in place to moderate the Coronavirus (COVID-19), describing them as symptomatic of a culture that places fear of death at the center of life. And, of course, there are the endless complaints about dangerous academics at elite universities propagating nihilistic, post-modern philosophies.

Upon reviewing these often shrill polemics, one might expect that reactionaries would be acutely sensitive to the politics of meaning, and that they would be leading the struggle against cultural nihilism. However, in fact, I believe the opposite to be true. One of the defining features of the reactionary outlook is how thin its conception of lifes meaning is, and this, in turn, explains why reactionaries tend to be so anxious about it all falling apart, an idea I will explore in this brief essay.

The Reactionary Outlook

It is important, first and foremost, to stress that the reactionary impulse is an outlook, rather than a developed political philosophy. Consequently, reactionaries can be found to hold a mishmash of metaphysical and historical views. Some reactionaries are devoutly religious traditionalists, while others are militant atheists. Reactionaries such as Nietzsche might heap scorn upon vulgar economic reasoning, while others like Ayn Rand may romantically praise capitalists as creators and producers. However, all reactionaries dispositionally share much in common. The reactionary sees existence as a fundamentally threatening place, with meaningless chaos being the norm rather than the exception. For reactionaries, existence is an anorexic god, endlessly hungry and always on the verge of imploding from its own lack of substance. This god can only be preserved by applying great strength. This gloomy outlook also extends to the vast majority of humankind, who lacks the strength to bring much of value into the world. This is the herd in Nietzsches terminology, second handers in Rands, and the inferior as Ludwig von Mises put it. This reduction of most people to beings of minuscule worth implies that a majority in a society cannotand should notbe given a great deal of power over the direction the society takes. Those who should have such power are the so-called superior men: individuals who possess the character and strength to create an enduring and stable order, which provides the herd with a sense of purpose while also keeping them in line.

Each reactionary has a different conception of what the superior man is, though there are many commonalities. The most important is that the superior man is not a figure of Aristotelian moderationlet alone a humble and self-sacrificing Christian. Indeed, one of the great ironies of traditionalist reactionaries is their tendency to invoke fear of a declining homogenous Christian order, while talking a great deal about war and enforcing order. This, after all, is not exactly following in the footsteps of the lamb of God. The superior man is also typically just that: a man. The reactionary imagination is typically parasitic on the culture it reacts against, which, invariably, means drawing liberally from the clichs and prejudices of the time. This means that many reactionaries, including women, tend to be misogynists. They castigate so called effeminate qualities like compassion and empathy, while still insisting that most men are not stereotypically masculine enough. In a more crude form, reactionaries may decry that a culture has become too dominated by feelings, rather than reason. But this always excludes the emotions reactionaries cherish. These emotions include anger, competitiveness, pride, etc. And emotions such as these are usually associated with a particularly repressed form of masculinity. Finally, reactionaries tend to revere strength, though not necessarily of character or virtue.

The strength reactionaries admire is the capacity to impose ones will upon the world, which, at its zenith, refers to the ability to compel or dominate others to bring them in line with the necessary order. This means that reactionaries tend to support hierarchical forms of political organization, with the exact form depending on whom the reactionary reveres as strong and who they castigate as unworthy. For early modern defenders of absolutism such as Robert Filmer and Joseph de Maistre, God had dictated that the aristocracy be in charge. With declining faith in theological arguments in the 19th century, reactionaries began to cherry pick more rationalistic sounding arguments about the superiority of their chosen culture. Or, at worst, they sought to develop scientific explanations for racial prejudice. In our day, many reactionaries insist that the secularized theological power of the invisible hand operates across the market to sort worthy creators from unworthy second handers. In doing so, the invisible hand bestows wealth and power on the former, while the latter is left to do the mundane work needed to keep the world turning. In each instance, it is only a small elite with the strength to maintain order that prevents the world from slipping into the vulgarity and chaos that would be associated with rule by the unworthy masses.

Conclusion: The Anorexic God

This brings me to the paradoxical approach to meaning at the center of the reactionary outlook. Reactionaries position themselves as opposed to the nihilism of the modern world, which has, without exception, decayed from some nostalgic ideal lost to history. One might respond to this by observing thateven if this ideal time did existit must not have been as spectacular as the reactionary supposes. Otherwise, it would not have been abandoned. If traditionalist Christian civilizationor unbridled 19th century capitalismwere such meaning saturated societies, then why did people rebel against them en masse, demanding dramatic changes? But this possibility is never entertained, with reactionaries much preferring vague but affective narratives of decadence, vulgarity, and a steep decline from greatness. More importantly, the often shrill denouncements of modern nihilism display how little meaning many reactionaries think the world actually has.

For the reactionary, the modern world is portrayed as dramatically fallen and drained of meaning. This is becauseunless the superior men and the right hierarchy are in placethe omnipresent threat of chaos and decline is all that can take their place. Modernity is damned precisely because it has ceded too much to the unworthy. The remarkable thing about this is just how fragile the reactionarys sense of the worlds meaning is. The reactionarys tremendous emphasis on strength and accomplishment displays an impotent fascination with bigness and grandeur that ignores the small but divine ways in which many ordinary people struggle to make life better for themselves and others. One of the reasons reactionaries despise the democratic culture of the masses is precisely because it directs our attention to the mundane needs that actually make up our lives. This often takes the form of a cooperative effort at gradually improving our communities and the world around us. The reactionary has no interest in that, solipsistically believing that unless the truly worthy are in charge (and the right order enforced), existence is leeched of significance.

This simplistic retreat from the complexity of the world demonstrates the existentially thin quality of the reactionary outlook. When commenting on Ayn Rand, Corey Robin, the Brooklyn College political scientist, observed that her bastardization of Aristotelian syllogisms such as A=Acombined with her relentless self-promotionrevealed more than she may have intended. Rand was attracted to a world where everything simply was what it was. She focused relentlessly on herself, while expressing scorn and disdain for the vast majority of people who came before and after her. She was convinced that when she diedfor all intents and purposesthe world ceased to exist. The only meaning that one could find in life came from oneself, paired with the private aspiration for romantic greatness as a heroic figure raised above the masses. This nihilistic outlook, along with its reactionary kin, worship an anorexic God, and we should reject their idolatries.

Matt McManus is Professor of Politics and International Relations at Tec de Monterrey, and the author of Making Human Dignity Central to International Human Rights Law and The Rise of Post-Modern Conservatism. His new projects include co-authoring a critical monograph on Jordan Peterson and a book on liberal rights for Palgrave MacMillan. Matt can be reached atmattmcmanus300@gmail.comor added on twitter vie@mattpolprof

Continued here:

Understanding the Reactionary Outlook - Merion West

- Advertisement -

Joker 2 is an upcoming American supervillain film directed and produced and by Todd Phillips. The movie takes its inspiration from the DC Comics character of the same name.

It revolves around our male protagonist Arthur Fleck a failed stand up comedian who later descent into insanity. However, his acts give rise to nihilism and set out riot in the entire Gotham city.

- Advertisement -

The first part of the movie titled Joker was first released on 4th October 2019. The movie was initially going to be standalone.

But its massive success led, and appreciation led the makers to think about a sequel. And finally, sometime in the year 2019, the makers did confirm a sequel, i.e. Joker 2.

- Advertisement -

For now, we do not have confirmation about the release date of the show. And the entire Coronavirus Pandemic situation has put the entire release situation of the movie in doubt.

But rumours are going around and about on the internet that the movie might release sometime late in the year 2021 or early in the year 2022.

For now, we do not have the entire cast list for the movie. But we can expect the Oscar-winning actor Joaquin Phenoix to resume his iconic role as The Joker.

But as soon as we do get some information about the actors and which roles will they will be playing in the upcoming movie we will let you guys know soon.

For now, due to the outbreak of the deadly Coronavirus Pandemic, the entire entertainment industry is on complete shutdown. This has affected the production process of various filming projects.

And the Joker 2 is no less exceptional. The movie wasnt even in the production mode when the lockdown was announced the makers were discussing its possibilities and storyline.

- Advertisement -

See the original post:

Joker 2 Expected Release Date, What Will Be Cast? And How Is Productiom - Pop Culture Times

WhatsAppFacebook Twitter Email3Shares

Prof. Mohi ud Din Hajini (1917-1993)

PROFESSORMohi-ud-Din Hajinis collection of research papers titled, Discourses of Prof. Mohi-ud-Din Hajini compiled by Dr Ameen Fayaz, is the best illustration of Prof. Hajinis multi-dimensional personality. The book comprises three parts and carries three vibrant themes. The third and the last part of the book carry two papers, including Philosophy and Education: A Review.

The work is divided into two parts covering thirteen chapters, each one a comprehensive unit in itself, surveying various theories interconnecting Philosophy and Education. The contents are coherently interwoven and logically presented; and it appears very difficult to discover a striking incongruity in the thought-process of the author.

He forewarns the reader in the introductory note that anyone who makes broad statement about Education is philosophizing and on that account everyone has his own philosophy. Such a philosophy is prune to discuss Philosophy rather than education. He confesses that he himself does not belong to this category. For, according to his approach to the subject Education is a purposive activity, the direction and shape of which are determined by human beliefs most of them culturally and religiously quite deep rooted in human psyche.

A teacher with no belief or with no personal assumption is a blind teacher, and unfit for the job. To illustrate this theme, he delves deep into modern trends of thought gleaning upto-date information on the subject, re-evaluating contending theories, and subsequently sifting out the practicable from the impracticable in modern Education. He is conscientious enough to admit that in our bewildering era when secular humanism (in contrast to religious humanism) actually makes man the measure of all things, we need philosophy of life not for the chosen few but for an ordinary man as well, otherwise the mass-conditioning tendencies in politics shall choke up the roots of man as a living organism. Arguments in such a philosophy and thence in Education, may not prove or demonstrate anything to an average student, nevertheless if these help him to see afresh or rejuvenate interest towards a new vista of thought, the teacher has achieved his aim. How is that possible? Professor Reid begins the reply from the very definition of Philosophy and says that a philosopher, being presumably the lover of wisdom, it is the wisdom that we need, therefore it is not the technique of teaching that should come first, for even an efficient teacher can miseducate; it is the teachers personal acumen, culture and innate tendencies that keep, to use the authors simile, the wheels of education oiled.

Postulating these qualities in a teacher, we have further to admit that it is not he alone who guides the immature mind: infact, the society in modern age is equipped with dozens of mechanical devices that contribute towards making or marring the students career and these agencies commence impressing the mind long before he is admitted in the school. Thus we see that on the one hand, the assimilative nature of each mind grasps something which just happens to a person, while, on the other hand, it is quite possible that the set pattern of Education in each country may not be conducive to the imprints left on the mind in social contact. The worst situation will spring up when the society, the curriculum and the teacher are at variance with one another, regarding their respective assumptions in Education. To overcome such a triangular tension, it is the teacher who should come down to the students mental level till the student is imperceptibly extricated from an unhealthy environment, organized by the society or the state. In this enterprise, says the author, the teacher must be free as is the case in Great Britain; but the author appears to be quite ignorant of the teachers position in numerous Asian countries, where he has often to sell his soul to the devil for placating an officer, or for getting his book prescribed as a text..

The author clearly distinguishes between Personality and Personal Self, and says that the former, though altogether of a different kind and differentiated in numerous ways, is actually transcended by the Personal Self. The innate and inherited characteristics sub-consciously operating upon personality should be accepted as subjectively given, whereas the objective part of the Personal Self will come under Biology and Empirical Psychology. The chief aim of philosophical analysis should be to harmonize the subjective and objective constituents of the Personal Self, and to remove the confusion with least possible irritation, suppression or coercion. The compromising teacher can thus let the children go further in the direction which he believes to be right. As for the definition of rightness, the author says that the question of the rightness of an act arises through its relation to a larger situation in an indefinitely stretching context of life. This definition being too elastic for application, he later amends it, and says rightness as experienced is felt by each teacher as part of a larger good to probably a larger number of people. This is tantamount to saying that it is not necessary that the teachers conception of goodness will be ideally good; it may frequently be the least harmful from amongst the evil ones. This type of exposition gives rise to the relativity of rightness that has confused the European Educationists from Michaeveli to Marx. If the author had access to Imam-i-Ghazallis religious humanism or Vina Baves Sarodaya , he would be spared a lot of his theorizing. Nevertheless, the striking note of the book is that it does asseverate that evil is let loose by the purely materialistic pattern of education in Europe, and on this observation, the author has independently come to some conclusions (especially in Ethics) that can retard the crisis in faith generated by pure science in our curriculumn.

As for the concordance of social ideals within the frame work of education, the author has rightly pointed out that either the teachers beliefs must be sublime enough to reflect the societys ideals or the state should couch him before he begins his teaching; of course, without chaining his mind for all times, because extreme and perennial form of states directives can often re-emerge in the behavourist assumption that Education is entirely dependent on conditioning, wherein the child (or even the teacher) is presumed to be more as an object than as a person. The idea of shaping and moulding a child strictly according to totalitarian, Nazi or, I should add, extremely nationalistic, patterm, is an idea, which leaves out what may be the most important fact about human nature.

The author has lucidly and thoroughly discussed the topic in the ninth chapter of the book under the title The Need for Rootsin Humanities and Science. Pragmatism, with all its dollar-infection, has been subjected to rational criticism; and contemplative and meditative aspects of education are brought forth into a broader perspective. Ethical values which till recent times were deemed only as social demands are now re-evaluated, and admitted to be not only the powerful integrating factors in society, but real deterrents to fiendish tendencies especially in psychotic, neurotic and depressive states of a student. The author classifies value into three categories: (1)those which are ethically good or bad ; (2)those which are intrinsically higher or lower; and (3) those values that merely satisfy desires or give pleasure technically called fact-value. In this last category, there is not distinction of good or bad, higher or lower. The teacher has to see that more satisfaction of desire does not evolve into Epicureanism or Nihilism, nor does this recoil round a perversion that is likely to lead to sadism, or can accelerate the split of personality. In this delicate situation, if the teacher is expected to start, say, with only two maxims, i.e. that moral character is indispensable, and that a sense of responsibility must be developed from the elementary stage of education, he can really be a philosopher, provided he can satisfy all the heterogeneous temperaments in a class; otherwise the conflicting responses to a single stimulus from students will surely distort his appeal and disfigure his image of character and responsibility.

The most unpleasant exigency will crop up when an extroverted teacher may have to couch the majority of students with an introverted bent of mind or vice-versa. Similarly, the contradictory output of educational theories, simultaneously believed by the teacher as apt, can surely disintegrate the personality of the student-class, e.g; one school of educationists believes the moral imperatives are socially derived, and related to social needs, while another school asserts that these are underivative and final. The teacher shall have to find out a via media that can stimulate the inquisitive nature of the student rather than block his independent judgement. In effect, the teacher has to harmonize the contending elements by impressing upon the pupil that it takes all sorts, to make a world. We may differ here with the author when he feels reluctant to admit some supreme ordering principle behind absolute values. It is because of this innate attitude that he seldom makes any reference to the best teachers of the world, i.e, the Founders of all world religions. It is really a pity that European writers on education are often too sluggish to realize that those very precepts which have since time immemorial been taught by Prophets in the east, are now not only hinted at as principles of education but taken for guide lines in human behaviour, of course under a new name and after too long an exploration! That is why we find our author too, on the one hand, asserting a statement that does not straightaway fall under analytical or empirical classification and does not deserve to be taken seriously, while, on the other hand, imperceptibly proposing a shift from mechanistic to ethical mode of teaching, besides pinning for such a UNESCO that would regulate teaching on an ideal pattern.

The book makes a good reading despite a bit of dryness in style, generated by the authors too much love for analytic exposition of the subject.

Be Part of Quality Journalism

Quality journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce and despite all the hardships we still do it. Our reporters and editors are working overtime in Kashmir and beyond to cover what you care about, break big stories, and expose injustices that can change lives. Today more people are reading Kashmir Observer than ever, but only a handful are paying while advertising revenues are falling fast.

CLICK FOR DETAILS

Related

Follow this link:

Philosophy and Education: A Review By Prof Mohi ud Din Hajini - Kashmir Observer

22 June 2020, 21:10

Songwriter Jerry Dammers summed up the mood of the nation in the early 1980s... but what were the events that inspired this classic song?

"This town is coming like a ghost town / All the clubs have been closed down"

An eerie flute, a set of mournful voices and a beat that wouldn't be out of place at a funeral march... The Specials' Ghost Town hit the top of the UK charts in the summer of 1981, marking the collapse of a country under strain and flagging frustrations and injustices that burn on to this day.

The song was born out of an attempt to encapsulate the life of a young person living in inner city Britain, and particularly the experiences of the black community, who were frustrated at the lack of opportunities afforded to them. Could music hold up a mirror to what society had become?

The Specials had formed in Coventry 1977 as the perfect mult-racial band: founder and keyboardist Jerry Dammers, singer Terry Hall, bassist Horace Panter, guitarist Roddy Byers and drummer John Bradbury were white; guitarist Lynval Golding and vocalist Neville Staple were both Jamaican born and part of the Windrush generation that moved to the UK when they were children.

Immigration into the UK had increased throughout the 1960s and early 1970s, due to the independence of many former British colonies. The Empire Windrush was one ship that stopped off in Jamaica, allowing many residents to take advantage of their newly acquired British citizenship and re-settle in the UK. The same thing happened across Commonwealth countries in Asia and Africa - all of whom were invited to Britain to contribute to the post-war economy.

However, the increase in immigration saw the rise of the National Front, the right-wing party that opposed the influx of people from the Commonwealth. In 1977, the NF saw gains in the Greater London Council elections, causing protests and violent clashes. The Rock Against Racism campaign was founded in 1976 as a reaction to the increasing support for right wing causes and held their first gig in London's Victoria Park in April 1978.

Into this came The Specials. Jerry Dammers formed the group with the express intention of bringing together the black and white communities that lived in his hometown of Coventry. He told The Guardian in 2008: "It was all part of the same thing and for me it was no good being anti-racist if you didn't involve black people, so what The Specials tried to do was create something that was more integrated."

The Specials embraced ska: the Jamaican dancehall music of the 50s and 60s was mixed with the energy of punk and created a stylish, positive sound, light years away from the nihilism of the Sex Pistols. Even the label Dammers set up to release his music hinted at the integration he was aiming for - it was to be called Two Tone.

While The Specials hit the ground running with a number of hits - Gangsters and A Message To You Rudy were Top 10 and Too Much Too Young hit the top spot in January 1980 - by the making of their second album, More Specials, tensions were beginning to form within the band. The tour to support the record was blighted by violence among the crowds.

As The Specials made their way around the UK in October 1980, Jerry Dammers could see the cracks beginning to appear both within the group and within the country. "You travelled from town to town and what was happening was terrible," he told The Guardian in 2002. "The country was falling apart. In Liverpool, all the shops were shuttered up, everything was closing down. Margaret Thatcher had apparently gone mad, she was closing down all the industries, throwing millions of people on the dole. You could see that frustration and anger in the audience. It was clear that something was very, very wrong."

The animosity in the air worked its way into a song. Dammers had been working on what would become Ghost Town for the best part of a year, "trying out every conceivable chord".

The recording of what was to become one of the most memorable songs of the 1980s was not smooth sailing. "Everybody was stood in different parts of this huge room with their equipment, no one talking," Horace Panter remembered of the studio session. "I can remember walking out of a rehearsal in total despair because Neville would not try the ideas," recalled Dammers. When guitarist Roddy Byers started kicking a hole in the studio wall, the engineer threatened to throw them out. Dammers panicked, crying: "No! No! This is the greatest record that's ever been made in the history of anything! You can't stop now!"

The song Dammers had written encapsulated the despair within the band and within Britain. The "ghost town" of the title could have been anywhere in the country as unemployment rose to over 2 million and industry collapsed.

"Bands won't play no more..." the vocals chime. "Too much fighting on the dancelfoor".

After a disastrous show in Cambridge that saw singers Terry Hall and Neville Staple arrested for "inciting a riot" - they were actually trying to stop one - The Specials decided to quit touring.

As 1981 ground on, Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's new "stop and search" policy meant police were targeting black youths more than ever. In April, disturbances began in Brixton over the police's heavy-handed tactics - but that was only the beginning.

Ghost Town was released on 12 June 1981 just as a series of riots began around the UK: Brixton and other parts of London, Liverpool's Toxteth area, Moss Side in Manchester, Chapeltown in Leeds. Birmingham, Wolverhampton, Sheffield, Nottingham, Newcastle-upon-Tyne and Hull were all among the towns that experienced disturbances.

As Ghost Town climbed the charts, the protests increased. The single made Number One in the UK on 7 July, just as the unrest reached its peak. The Specials had summed up the angry mood of the nation.

Jerry Dammers felt vindicated: "It's hard to explain how powerful it sounded. We had almost been written off and then Ghost Town'came out of the blue."

However, his triumph was to be short-lived. Backstage at the BBC's Top Of The Pops show as The Specials were recording a performance of Ghost Town, Terry Hall, Neville Staple and Lynval Golding broke the news to the rest of the band that they were leaving. The trio went on to have pop success in the early 1980s as Fun Boy Three. Dammers continued with a band known as Special AKA with their memorable protest song Free Nelson Mandela. Various line-ups continued to record under the name throughout the 1980s.

The Specials reformed in 2008 for a show at Bestival, although without Dammers who claimed he'd been forced out. In 2019, the eighth Specials album, Encore, was released attracting good reviews. The core of the band is now Terry Hall, Lynval Golding and Horace Panter.

See the article here:

Why The Specials recorded Ghost Town - Radio X

It's time to admit that the entire spectrum of daily newspapers is controlled by the right and that we need to do something about it.

The resignation of Alex Lavelle, editor of The Age, comes as a mild shock but no great surprise. A week after management and staff of that once great newspaper protested about both de facto control from Sydney over content, and directions to slant news in a rightwards direction, Lavelle has gone. Ahead of being pushed? Because there was no movement on managements part? Well find out, I guess, but it amounts to the same thing.

Both The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald are being pushed in a rightward political direction, after the abolition of Fairfax by Greg Hywood, and the folding of the papers into an outfit founded by Frank Packer and currently chaired by Peter Costello.

The sole aim of this process is to destroy a base of left-liberal, or even liberal-centrist, thought, for political purposes. This process was underway in the final decades of Fairfax. It was steered by no commercial decision.

There was a huge audience base for a pluralist centre-left daily publication in both cities and especially in Melbourne, Stockholm-on-the-Yarra. The papers were steered towards a centre-right perspective precisely to destroy the power of that social-political formation.

The destruction of The Age, once rated as one of the 10 great newspapers of the world, is a testament to the nihilism of capitalism, and the deep and complacent intellectual mediocrity of many of the people who led Fairfax in past decades, and who lead Nine now.

Well, look, save what can be saved, and support the staff in their struggle, but as a base for a left-liberal perspective, The Age is gone. Its simply over. We have to be clear-eyed about this and admit that the entire spectrum of daily newspapers/news sites is controlled by the right.

Those who want a left-liberal daily news centre are going to have to establish one. And realistically, the only body with the clout, cash and audience to do that is the union movement.

Yes, the ACTU needs to establish a daily newspaper. This is something the union movement should have done many decades ago, but the need now is urgent. They need to put very serious money into a daily that has both an online publication, and a tabloid paper publication.

They need to create a paper/site that can be read by anyone with an average high school education, that has good comprehensive coverage of news, sport, celeb stuff, without being dominated by it, but with a core section on politics, economics and social and global affairs that gives a range of left and centre-left views on the issues of that day.

We need a large-scale, hugely backed paper/site that can attack head on the de facto right-wing way in which all industrial relations is discussed currently as to how much union power should be restrained the bias towards privatisation, market solutions, an export culture which has seen us destroy our national manufacturing plant as a sacrifice to the gods of ideology, and much much more.

Would there be difficulties with this? You bet. The stab at a daily backed by super funds, The New Daily, appears to have lost some of its leftist zeal. But this is once again a case of the wider movement not seeing how much needs to be sunk in to such a thing, and how essential it has now become (something quite different to, and complementary of, the mission of this excellent publication, I should add).

How is it that a movement with millions of members and billions under command in super funds, is content to have no large-scale media of its own? That has a long history. For decades the union movement could rely on its role as a quasi-state apparatus to maintain its power, and the close communal relations of the working-class to form networks of political transmission. City-based tabloids werent right-wing pamphlets, because they had a left-wing working-class audience they didnt want to alienate. Indeed, until the 1960s, the main enemies were The Age and the SMH, the Liberal partys ideological wing.

That all switched pretty fast, as society changed its composition. From the 60s onwards both broadsheets became reliably left-liberal, and even if the middle-class more than the working-class read them, they were a crucial place to argue left political and economic policies toe-to-toe with the right. That reliance encouraged complacency, and now, here we are.

So, if we cant get an alternative voice, and I dont see who else can provide its core (even if a few liberal multimilli/billionaires are added on the top), then were finished. Presumably, with todays announcement on higher education, that point becomes obvious. Its going to be onslaught after onslaught from here on, with no large-scale base from which to mount a sustained alternative argument to a broad audience.

This country is then just Alabama on the Pacific, in which the left, even the centre-left, is a permanent oppositional presence, nothing more, and quietly abandons any notion of winning power, or even setting an agenda, which then becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The leadership of the union movement needs to shake itself out of its modest expectations, its long-learnt petitioning, protesting role, its cultivated lack of audacity, its narcissistic pursuit of internal divisions, and acquire the ambition to set the agenda, and become a full countervailing force to what is now a large-scale right totality.

Like many people raised on The Age, Ill still glance at it in the morning. It still does great stuff investigation-wise. I still trust its core journos and editors to stand up to undisguised political heavying. But if management wants to go a certain way, it will eventually get its way. As something that it was, The Age and the SMH are gone. Mourn them and move on. Or stick around for the next funeral, which is ours.

Save up to 50% on a year of Crikey, or, dig deeper so that we can dig deeper.

Crikey may be small but our goal has always been to focus on the why, not the what of public life to explain how power is used and abused in Australia, and the systems and people who facilitate it.

But to do that effectively, we need subscribers. Lots of them.

Join Crikey now, and for the first time ever, choose what you pay.

Peter FrayEditor-In-Chief of Crikey

View original post here:

The ACTU needs to start a daily paper. There's nothing else left - Crikey

When I decided to major in English, my parents thought I might use this highly versatile degree to pursue law or medicine. Little did they know that Id end up applying that (much too) expensive education to analyzing a television show about a drunken, sociopathic mad scientist with a flying space car. Rick and Morty, created by Justin Roiland and Dan Harmon, is pretty much an instant cult classic. Kayla Cobb calls it a never-ending fart joke wrapped around a studied look into nihilism, and personally I think she hits the nail on the head with that description. There are probably a thousand different philosophical lenses through which you could study this show and never get bored. And probably someone who is better versed in philosophy should do just that (because yes please!)

The best I can do is follow my own laymans curiosity down the rabbit hole. What exactly is it about this shows gleeful nihilism that appeals to so many fans, the vast majority of which would not consider themselves nihilists in any sense of the word? The draw of the show is strong for Millennials in particular, which is odd, since were the ones who obsess over Queer Eyes unbridled optimism, Marie Kondos blissful joy, and Steven Universes wide-eyed hopefulness in equal measure. In a society enamored by the concept of self (self-care, self-responsibility, self-love), what is so fascinating about a fantasy world that revolves around the destruction of any sense of individual importance? As Morty so succinctly tells his sister, Nobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybodys gonna dieCome watch TV.

Rick Sanchez, the aforementioned mad scientist, is the lynchpin of the show in that all of the zany plots and fart jokes are his doing, directly or indirectly. Rick is an anarchist of the highest degree, vocally disgusted by any sort of rules or law, including those of decency and familial obligation. So I think its fair that a dive into the shows nihilistic philosophy should center on him. Im sure he wouldnt have it any other way.

In Rick theres no doubt an element of the (toxic) masculine archetype: Tortured Genius Who Is Lonely and Doesnt Care Because Feelings Are Overrated. Hes a character of frustrating paradoxes. Every act of debauchery or callousness is tempered by a glimpse of grudging generosity or heroism. He relentlessly mocks his grandchildren, using every possible opportunity to convince them how little they matter to him, but anytime someone else tries to take advantage of Morty or Summer, hes quick to avenge. In season one, after a chaotic nightmare of an adventure, Morty leads Rick on an ill-fated quest, determined to prove that adventures should be simple and fun. Mortys fantastical adventure takes a nightmarish turn when hes assaulted in a bathroom by an alien named Mr. Jellybean. Traumatized, Morty is ready to bail, but Rick, clearly intuiting whats happened, helps Morty to bring their adventure to a satisfying conclusionand then hops back through the portal to execute the alien pervert, for good measure.

In a later episode, Summer starts her first job in a shop run by Mr. Needful, aka the actual Devil (voiced by Alfred Molina) selling cursed artifactsyou know, typical high school job. Jealous of his granddaughters admiration for Mr. Needful, though he refuses to admit it, Rick starts a successful campaign to run the shop out of business, much to Summers dismay. But when the Devil pulls a Zuckerberg and screws Summer out of her share of the business empire she helped him build from the ground up, Rick joins her in a plot to get ripped and beat the shit out of her former boss during a TED Talk. Sweet revenge.

In Auto Erotic Assimilation, which is arguably one of the most emotionally fraught episodes of the series, Ricks oscillating character arc reveals a poignant, unexpected moment of the ordinary humanity he despises so much. After a run-in with an ex, a hive mind named Unity (voiced mainly by Christina Hendrix) who has plans to assimilate the entire universe, Rick goes on a debauched, sex- and drug-fueled bender that eventually causes Unitys control over the planet to falter. When Morty and Summer express concern, Rick dismisses them out of hand, explaining to Unity, Theyre no different from any of the aimless chumps that you occupy. They just put you at the center of their lives because youre powerful, and then because they put you there, they expect you to be less powerful.

Rick remains oblivious to the full impact of his words (His next order of business is: Im not looking for judgement, just a yes or no: Can you assimilate a giraffe?), but shortly thereafter Unity dumps him, leaving behind a series of breakup notes telling Rick that its too easy for Unity to lose itself in him, because in a strange way, youre better at what I do without even trying.

Rick pretends to be nonchalant and indifferent, but that night he attempts suicide with a death ray that only narrowly misses the mark. It is without doubt one of the darkest momentsif not the darkest momentof the series thus far, and in my opinion lays bare the crux of Ricks character. With infinite intelligence comes an infinite loneliness that makes you wonder if his borderline sociopathy is cause or effect. Maybe a little of both. The show certainly gives no clear answer.

In fact, if anything, the writers spend a great deal of time building up the trope of the lonely genius, only to poke fun at it every chance they get. In the season three premiere, we get a look into Ricks tragic and somewhat clich backstory, in which a young Rick is visited by an alternate version of himself and doesnt like the lonely, narcissistic future he sees. He announces to his wife that hes giving up science, only for the alternate Rick to toss a bomb through the portal, destroying both his wife and young daughter. After losing his family, Rick throws himself back into science and discovers interdimensional travel. Its another moment of humanity for the otherwise emotionally inscrutable Rick. Or it would be, except that its a totally fabricated origin story that Rick uses to trick Galactic Federation agent Cornvelious Daniel (voiced by Nathan Fillion) and escape the Series 9000 Brainalyzer in which he is imprisoned.

Theres never any solid footing when it comes to Rick Sanchez. Hes impossible to pin down. As Morty tells his sister, Hes not a villain, Summer, but he shouldnt be your hero. Hes more like a demon. Or a super fucked-up god. The show repeatedly suggests that we shouldnt admire Rick, but also constantly undermines itself with evidence to the contraryhe always comes out on top, hes always one step ahead, he always manages to protect his family (except for that one time he and Morty transformed the earth into a Cronenberg-style hellscape and then bailed into a new reality, but alls well that ends well, I suppose).

Screenshot: Cartoon Network

Ricks character is distinctly problematic, which is really a nicely academic way of saying that hes a piece of shit and if he somehow existed in real life I would hate him on principle. But in the fictional world he inhabits, hes a reflection of the darkest part of the human psyche. A safe, harmless way to embrace the shadowy corners of our minds that we otherwise avoid. We can find escapism in the romanticizing of life, the universe, and everything (through shows like Queer Eye or Steven Universe, for example) or in the oppositein the offhand dismissal of all we hold to be true and right. Im no psychologist, but I do think theres an element of cognitive dissonance that is key to our survival, if not as a species then as individuals. We need to be able to lose ourselves in nihilistic shows about demons and super fucked-up gods on occasion without losing who we are or what we believe in.

No disrespect to Nietzsche and his bros, but IRL we truly care about friends and family and cat videos and injustice and global warming. We have to. Its what makes us human, and I wouldnt have it any other way. There are many who would argue that all the fiction we consume must reflect the values we aspire to in our everyday lives, lest we lose sight of our own morality, and I get that. I really do. I try my best to support media that supports a better world, but Im not going to pretend to be a hero, here. As Rick proves time and time again, the universe is a chaotic and crazy place, and sometimes I need a break from the fraught emotional tangle of reality. And for that, I find my escape in shows like Rick and Morty, which are complex enough to analyze for layers of meaning, to study the problematic tropes that get dismantled and the ones that get reinforced. But its also fun and simple enough to kick back with an adult beverage, too much pizza, and just not think about it. Its less of a guilty pleasure and more of a release valve. Watching a show that cares about nothing is a way to siphon off the pressure of caring so damn much about everything.

And at the root of it all, I think its that pure escapism that attracts us most to Rick and Morty and their misadventures (aside from clever writing, complex emotional payoffs, and a character literally named Mr. Poopy Butthole, but I digress). The characters inhabit infinite realities where actions have virtually no consequences. Accidentally ruin this world? No problem. All you have to do is find a new reality, bury your own corpse, and youre back in business. Easy peasy.

I will gladly lose myself (and my clutter) in Maries joyful world, and I love to eat candy and dream big with Steven and the Gems. But some days require an escapism of a different caliber. We are burdened with the not-so-glorious purpose of surviving in a world where even an errant tweet can bear the most devastating of fruit, where assholes who think theyre smarter than everyone else are just assholes (no genius involved), where once we destroy the planet with global warming, there is no portal gun we can use to hop neatly into a new reality.

Rick and Morty doesnt give a shit about Twitter, or feelings, or this universe, or anything at all. And while youre watching it, you dont have to either. Sometimes thats exactly what you need, at least until the next season of Queer Eye drops.

Originally published in August 2019.

Destiny Soria lives and works in the shadow of the mighty Vulcan statue in Birmingham, Alabama. Destinys first book, Iron Cast, was published in 2016 to critical acclaim. Her second, Beneath the Citadel, is available now.

Read the original here:

Rick and Morty and Nihilism: Embracing a Show That Cares About Nothing - tor.com

Theres not going to be any desire on the Republican side to bail out state pensions by borrowing money from future generations, McConnell was quoted telling conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt.

The effort to so clearly and ostentatiously turn a national tragedy into yet another partisan issue was met with an immediate and sharp backlash. Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York pointed out that states like Kentucky, which McConnell represents, take in far more federal spending than they return in taxes the opposite of states like New York, which pays more in taxes to the federal government than it receives. But in a plea for decency, Cuomo said, "If there was ever a time for humanity . . . and a time to stop your obsessive political bias and anger, now is the time.

But were talking about Mitch McConnell. This is the man who mobilized his Republican caucus to prevent witnesses from being called in President Trumps impeachment trial; who rammed through, on a partisan vote, Brett Kavanaughs ascendancy to the Supreme Court; and who has shut down the Senate from crucial business except for the confirmation of conservative federal judges. He also strongly resisted efforts to expose Russias interference in the 2016 election on behalf of Trump. I have little doubt he did so because such exposure would have undermined Trumps White House bid and, in turn, possibly eroded McConnells Senate majority.

And if we want to go further back, this is the same senator who in 2009 and 2010 did exactly what hes doing now. In the midst of the most severe economic crisis since the Great Depression, he used his 41-seat Senate minority to shoot down virtually every effort to pass stimulus measures that would have lessened the toll, because prolonging the countrys economic pain was in the political interests of the Republican Party.

Were seeing a variation of such political nihilism now.

There are lots of theories on why McConnell is resisting money for state and local governments now. Hes trying to cripple Democratic state governments by forcing them to cut basic services, goes one argument. Declaring bankruptcy might force states to default on their pension obligations, which would cripple public-sector unions (which strongly support Democratic candidates).

As President Trump hinted at Tuesday, when he said that payments to states would be contingent on the removal of laws creating sanctuary cities, perhaps McConnell is using the desperate fiscal situation as leverage. Indeed, his new-found focus on granting liability protection to businesses that force employees back to work and his concession earlier this week that state and local funds will probably be included in the next stimulus package suggests that might be what hes thinking.

But with McConnell, the best explanation for his behavior usually comes back to politics. As I wrote last year, For McConnell, politics is fundamentally about accruing political power for the sole purpose of accruing more political power.

Sure, squeezing Democratic states will boomerang against red states too. Not only will it make the economic downturn worse, which would further undercut Trumps reelection chances, but it will hurt red-state governors in Florida, Georgia, Texas, and Ohio too.

But from McConnells perspective, it will have the useful political effect of making the coronavirus pandemic a partisan issue. Already, Republicans have portrayed COVID-19 as a problem that is afflicting blue states more than red ones. Why should the country suffer because of New York City? one insidious line of argument goes. Blue state governors in swing states like Michigan and Wisconsin are enduring the brunt of partisan attacks for their tough line on strict social distancing rules. Why not up the ante?

The specifics of the bailouts matter less than the opportunity to find political advantage and activate Republican animosity toward liberals. Sure, if you can undercut public sector unions or maybe squeeze out some legal protections for Republican donors, all the better.

Its a troubling conclusion, but its also one that those who look closely at McConnells career generally arrive at. As Jane Mayer wrote in a recent profile of McConnell for The New Yorker, For months, I searched for the larger principles or sense of purpose that animates McConnell. . . . Finally, someone who knows him very well told me, 'Give up. You can look and look for something more in him, but it isnt there. I wish I could tell you that there is some secret thing that he really believes in, but he doesnt.

Politics has long been the only motivating factor for McConnell: the explanation for everything that he has done over the past several decades to undercut democracy and enable an authoritarian president, dangerously unqualified for the awesome power he wields.

Why should a deadly pandemic and an economic catastrophe be any different?

Michael A. Cohens column appears regularly in the Globe. Follow him on Twitter @speechboy71.

Original post:

The nihilism of Mitch McConnell - The Boston Globe