Prufrock: How Brainwashing Works, Julian Assange’s Nihilism, and Emily Dickinson’s Hope – The Weekly Standard

Reviews and News:

How brainwashing works: I began my formal research in 1999, eight years after battling my way out of a secret, so-called Marxist-Leninist group whose leader controlled my life in its most intimate details. He determined what I wore: a version of the advice in John Molloys bestseller Dress for Success (1975), featuring tailored blue suits and floppy red silk bowties. More significantly, he decided when I could marry, and whether I might have children. The leaders decrees were passed down via memos typed on beige notepaper and hand-delivered to me by my contact. Because I was a low-ranked member, the leader remained unknown to me. I joined this Minneapolis-based group, called The Organization (The O) believing I was to contribute to their stated goal of social justice, a value instilled in me by my family.

* *

Julian Assange is a staunch supporter of free speech except when its about him: WikiLeakss young spokesperson in those early days, James Ball, has recounted how Assange tried to force him to sign a nondisclosure statement that would result in a 12 million penalty if it were breached. [I was] woken very early by Assange, sitting on my bed, prodding me in the face with a stuffed giraffe, immediately once again pressuring me to sign, Ball wrote. Assange continued to pester him like this for two hours. Assanges impulse towards free speech, according to Andrew OHagan, the erstwhile ghostwriter of Assanges failed autobiography, is only permissible if it adheres to his message. His pursuit of governments and corporations was a ghostly reverse of his own fears for himself. That was the big secret with him: he wanted to cover up everything about himself except his fame.

* *

Revisiting Richard Hoggart's The Uses of Literacy at 60: His working class world is one in which people may well be living intuitively, habitually, verbally, drawing on myth, aphorism and ritual which makes them sound practically Lawrentian yet are also prone to cruelty and dirt of a gratuitously debasing coarseness. That Hoggart can be so even-handed towards a social class that simultaneously entices and repels him is a mark of his inseparability from the things he is writing about and the moral attitudes at their core.

* *

Emily Dickinsons hope.

* *

Matisses objects.

* *

Chuck Palahniuks coloring books.

* *

Essay of the Day:

If you didnt read The New Atlantiss blockbuster report on gender and sexuality this past fall, you should. Theyve published a follow-up on the problems of treating gender dysphoria by suppressing puberty. Here are a couple of snippets:

In 2016, the Human Rights Campaign, an LGBT advocacy group, partnered with the American Academy of Pediatrics the nations most prominent professional organization for pediatricians and the American College of Osteopathic Pediatricians to publish a guide for families of transgender children. The guide says that to prevent the consequences of going through a puberty that doesnt match a transgender childs identity, healthcare providers may use fully reversible medications that put puberty on hold. Delaying puberty, according to the guide, gives the child and family time to explore gender-related feelings and options.

Reading these various guidelines gives the impression that there is a well-established scientific consensus about the safety and efficacy of the use of puberty-blocking agents for children with gender dysphoria, and that parents of such children should think of it as a prudent and scientifically proven treatment option. But whether blocking puberty is the best way to treat gender dysphoria in children remains far from settled and it should be considered not a prudent option with demonstrated effectiveness but a drastic and experimental measure.

* * *

The use of puberty suppression and cross-sex hormones for minors is a radical step that presumes a great deal of knowledge and competence on the part of the children assenting to these procedures, on the part of the parents or guardians being asked to give legal consent to them, and on the part of the scientists and physicians who are developing and administering them. We frequently hear from neuroscientists that the adolescent brain is too immature to make reliably rational decisions, but we are supposed to expect emotionally troubled adolescents to make decisions about their gender identities and about serious medical treatments at the age of 12 or younger. And we are supposed to expect parents and physicians to evaluate the risks and benefits of puberty suppression, despite the state of ignorance in the scientific community about the nature of gender identity.

The claim that puberty-blocking treatments are fully reversible makes them appear less drastic, but this claim is not supported by scientific evidence. It remains unknown whether or not ordinary sex-typical puberty will resume following the suppression of puberty in patients with gender dysphoria. It is also unclear whether children would be able to develop normal reproductive functions if they were to withdraw from puberty suppression. It likewise remains unclear whether bone and muscle development will proceed normally for these children if they resume puberty as their biological sex. Furthermore, we do not fully understand the psychological consequences of using puberty suppression to treat young people with gender dysphoria.

Read the rest.

* *

Photo: Kites

* *

Poem: Susan Donnelly: Mrs. Maher's Iron

Get Prufrock in your inbox every weekday morning. Subscribe here.

Go here to read the rest:

Prufrock: How Brainwashing Works, Julian Assange's Nihilism, and Emily Dickinson's Hope - The Weekly Standard

Atlanta’s Videodrome is the Last and Greatest Video Rental Store – Geek

Video rental stores are dead. Its sad from a nostalgic perspective, but it was inevitable once Netflix, Hulu, and other on-demand streaming services came out. In some parts of the country, you can still glimpse the desiccated husks of old Blockbusters, rustling with the whispers of dead business models.

Then, driving through Atlanta last week, I found the new flesh. There is one great video rental store out there, and its in Atlantas Little Five Points neighborhood. That store isVideodrome, and its fantastic.

You know its special from the title itself, referring to the David Cronenberg classic and one of James Woods best roles next to him playing a nihilism-fueled omnicidal parallel universe Batman. The logo of a head with tape reel glasses over the eyes is pretty strong, too. And once you walk in and see the shelves, you immediately understand how it still exists and why its great.

The new releases wall has some big blockbusters (which, after theyre taken off that shelf, get relegated to their own section with appropriate commercial reverence), but theyre surrounded by the obscure, indie, foreign and just plain weird. May 23rds new releases includeGet Out,Logan, andGreat Wall, alongside the all-female horror anthologyXX, a French drama about Tamil refugeesDheepan, and the new Blu-ray releases of the 1975 Yakuza filmCops Vs. Thugsand 1988 Frank Henenlotter comedy horrorBrain Damage.

Havent heard of those films? Neither have I, and thatsgreat. Its a taste of the full spectrum of art house and schlock that Videodrome offers. If you want the full meal, you need to dive into the different sections.

First, there are the Asian films. Its more than just Kung Fu movies (though there are plenty). There are Japanese, Chinese, and Korean comedies, dramas, and horror movies, both new and old. Do you want to binge on Kim Ki Duks classics? He has half a shelf. And dont worry, several-of-my-jaded-coworkers: Anime is in another section, along with kaiju films.

The international movies dont stop in Asia. Denmark, Finland, Holland, Ireland, Norway, and Serbia all have shelves. Yes, there are more Serbian films thanA Serbian Film, and theyre not all like that one.

If you have favorite directors, they probably have shelves, too. Carpenter, Cronenberg, Gondry, Jonze, Lynch, you name it. If they made something with a vision, especially if that vision was weird, theres a section in Videodrome.

Beyond the artsy, foreign, indie, and films made by filmmakers movies, theres the shlock. The delicious, delicious shlock. Videodrome lets you start atSweet Sweetbacks Baadasssss Song and work your waydown. You bet theres a Blaxploitation shelf. Its two shelves above the Ausploitation shelf. And its across from the really, really gross Italian horror movies. You can binge on Lucio Fulci and Dario Argentos films, and watch as manyZombi sequels as there are alternate titles on IMDB.

To enjoy this great wealth of esoteric cinema, you need to live in Atlanta or otherwise be staying there for a few days. Besides a small stack of DVDs and Blu-rays you can buy, Videodrome is rental-only. That means you pay a few dollars, take the video for a few days, then bring it back. Which seems like a really weird concept in 2017, but its the best way to find and enjoy new and obscure movies that youll never stumble upon with Netflix.

Videodrome is a marvel of weird movies of all stripes and from all ages. If you love foreign films, if you eat up obscure movies from the silent era to the 80s, if you have a favorite director who hasnt generated a billion dollars for his studio, or if you recognize the names Rich Evans, Diamanda Hagan, Brad Jones, or Kyle Kalgren. If you find yourself in Atlanta, you owe it to yourself to visit Videodrome.

Original post:

Atlanta's Videodrome is the Last and Greatest Video Rental Store - Geek

Why Prodigy Was A Once-In-A-Generation Rapper – Complex

The most violent of the violentest crimes we give life to If these Queensbridge kids dont like you We bring drama of the worst kind to enemies Your first time will be your last Earth memories Its only your own fault, I gave you fair warning: Beware Of killer kids who dont careShook Ones Pt. 1

He put his lifetime in between the papers lines, but not autobiographically, as most rappers of renown do. Instead, Albert Prodigy Johnson pioneered an extraordinary rap flow full of cold-eyed nihilism that presented death as the only meaningful framework for life.

Prodigywho passed away in Las Vegas this week at age 42was one of hip-hops Three Ps. Along with the late Sean Price (who died in his sleep at 43 in 2015) and Pharrell Williams, he was one of few rappers whose name could be filed down to a single letter. Butunlike Price, who needed his first name to accentuate himself, or Williams, who characterized his name with modifiers (like Skateboard P)Prodigy was simply P. And with good reason. Even as half of one of the genres most vaunted duos (along with Kejuan Havoc Muchita), P was a singular character in hip-hop, a rule-breaker and world-creator, weary and grounded even as he threatened to stab your brain with your nose bone.

The legacy of Prodigyand by extension Mobb Deepmay be a hip-hop case of Seinfeld is Unfunny; an act whose ethos has been so influential that looking back in an archival sense robs listeners of the first night chills that came in on those Queensbridge winds.

Its almost impossible to recapture the impact of Prodigy and Havoc, donned in Hennessy football jerseys, without realizing that less than a decade earlier, at a a time when professionally recorded rap was still novel and change was slow, Heavy D & The Boyz were dancing in Coca-Cola sweatshirts as a representation of an affront to the status quo. But Mobb Deep werent dancingthey were the stone-faced super-predators that First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton would decry the next year: They are not just gangs of kids anymore, shed say at Keene State College in New Hampshire. They are often the kinds of kids that are called super-predatorsno conscience, no empathy.

I got you stuck off the realness; we be the Infamous. You heard of us: Official Queensbridge murderersShook Ones, Pt. II

Ps opening lines were things of depraved beauty. Take the start of Shook Ones, or the beginning of its more well-known sibling, Shook Ones, Pt. II, both quoted above. These are not threats, but declarations of self as fair warning from real n-ggas who aint got no feelings. These words represent what was important to him; this is how he wanted to introduce himself as a greeting: Hello, my name is P. I am only 19, but my mind is old. I represent death, violence, and the Queensbridge Houses, the largest public housing development in North America. This is the start of your ending.

It was as if he was saying to other rappers what Bane said to Batman in The Dark Knight Rises: Oh, you think darkness is your ally? But your merely adopted the dark. I was born in it, molded by itI didnt see the light until I was already a man. By then it was nothing to me but blinding. He was Nietzsche in construction Timberlands and an Army-certified suit; New Yorks harshest Darwinist.

Ps bleakness wasnt just depressed ghetto existentialism expressed via hyperbole, but something in his bloodliterally. His lifelong war against sickle cell disease made death a more pressing inevitability for him than most and rooted his worldview that only the strong survive, but also that the strong would also perish. (See: Infamous Prelude.) He would drink away his pain with Ease-Us Jesus (E&J brandy) or Dainy (thats St. Ides and Pina Colada champales in dunn language), but not without pouring some out for the fallen and sharing the bottle with the standing. In his early rhymes as part of Mobb Deepwhich were separate from his Michael Jackson dancing days, his stint as Jive Records artist LordT (The Golden Child), or his time as part of Poetical Prophetstheres nary a verse without the mention of the tightly wrought struggle between living and dying. Beyond simply detailing crime, Prodigy showcased depression, dysfunction, and self-medication.

You just complain cause you stressed N-gga, my pains in the flesh And through the years, that pain became my friend, sedated With morphine as a little kid I built a tolerance for drugs Addicted to the medicine You Can Never Feel My Pain

No one did more to present NYC housing projects as a world within in a world than Mobb Deepnot the Wu-Tang Clan, not M.O.P., not the Boot Camp Clik. And no one did as much to present the Queensbridge as a land of its own rules and morality as Hempstead, Long Islands Prodigy. Not even Nas with his clear-eyed insight, Tragedy with his hard-earned wisdom, nor Capone with his in-the-trenches war reportage ever came close depicting the defeatist maladjustment borne of poverty and closed quarters the way that P did. Not even Havoc, with his trife life and times and proximity to his partner, could capture the front lines of hell on Earth like Prodigy. There are no bars to depict thisone simply has to give over to the experience of listening to the H.N.I.C.s bleak worldview at length.

If there was joy to be found in Ps music, it was in his literary specificity and the way he viewed the world as an enemy and other rappers as nuisances. His appearance on Hell On Earths Nightttime Vultures exemplifies both strengths. He begins by awakening and recounting the prior nights violence: Bullets flew, I had to drag my man behind a wall/Left a wet trail, delivered these slugs like air mail/Directly at the cat that made my man blood spill. But then hes quickly on to stoically boasting about his rap prowess:

I kick that '98 shit for your ears to list N-gga P way ahead of his time, surpass kids Kickin' rhymes that's true lies Let me break 'em down to size, minimize they air time After this you never will go back to that which Sit back an' write half-ass shit At last, the official taking out the artificial Let me relieve you, replace that shit with some lethal Mobb, remember the name it's been along Yall n-gga's shook to death from the first fuckin song

Beef with other rappers seemed to be in Prodigys DNAfrom Keith Murray to 2Pac to Saigon and Jay-Z, to spats with Noreagea, Nas, and eventually Havoc, Prodigy spent his careers enmeshed in conflicts that often turned bloody and felt more dangerous than garden variety hip-hop squabbles. Though he often emerged from the losing end of these disputes, there remained a sense of unbeatability about him. Through it all, he stood tall at five feet and six inches, resolute in himself, if nothing else.

Battle-scarred and wizened, Prodigy lived long enough to see himself become a grand antihero of sorts. Following his deal with 50 Cents G Unit and a three-year prison bid, he came back to rap in 2011 more as a solo act than group member. He embraced his veteran status, co-authoring an autobiography and a prison-centered cookbook, and focused on his physical health in the way the Black men need to as they approach their 40seating better, working out, moving away from alcohol. He became a working rapper, leaning on his legacy without resting on his laurels or reliving his glory dayshe pushed forward and kept himself current by acknowledging ascendant talents, releasing songs with Troy Ave and Buffalos Conway. Right up to his death, he was workingcreating new music and touring.

At the same time, he could be a bit of a drunk uncle. He released a classic blog rant demanding homage (to be fair, shook would not be a colloquialism without Mobb Deep) and delved deeper into his arcane fascinations (his latest album, released this past January was titled Hegelian Dialectic (The Book of Revelation) as part of trilogy that was set to include The Book of Heroine and The Book of the Dead). His belief that the Illuminatia secret society that wanted his mind, soul, and his bodywas actually a thing became more pronounced.

In 2011, he appeared on Alex Joness Infowars, claiming that President Barack Obama was part of a bloodline that made him cousins with the Bushes and Dick Cheney. Whether he knows it or not, hes down with this whole conspiracy to rule the world, Prodigy asserted of Obama. Basically, hes a part of itto brainwash people and to kill people, genocide. Everything thats going on out there that is just so fantastic [that] you really dont want to believe it, Obama is down with it.

To his credit, he knew how he sounded: This [is] what I was promoting to people and they tried to, like, almost demonize me or say, Oh, Prodigys crazy. Whats wrong with this guy? Hes just ranting and he doesnt know what hes talking about. Hes a conspiracy theorist and he does this and he does that. Im like, Wow. Theres that many crazy people in this world, for real.

Spaghetti-head Mobb n-ggas is full-bred Fully-blown melanin tone I rock skeleton bone shirts and verses But thirst for worse beats So I can put more product out on the street Get respect and love all across the board We've been adored for keepin' it raw Nothin' less or more I score every time for sure While the rest of y'all n-ggas just nil Quiet Storm

It may be impossible to overstate Mobb Deeps importance to hip-hop as a whole, and to New York hip-hop in particular. Theyalong with the Wu-Tang Clan and Boot Camp Clik were responsible to defining what is now undeniably referred to as an East Coast sound: chopped dusty jazz and soul samples over big drums, accompanied by gritty and grimy rhymes about urban despair. Mobb Deep created headphone musicengrossing and encompassing analog mood music thats sonically distinct from pristine, dignified earbud sounds of today. Its the banner carried by acts like Roc Marciano, Ka, Westside Gunn, and Conwayand the reason why those artists exist at all.

As conversations about these things go, its become a shortcut to a point to describe Mobb Deep as a duo where Prodigy was the rappers rapper and Havoc was the producers producer, but the truth is more intertwined than that. Prodigy constructed bars of theretofore unforeseen formation that remain some of raps most iconic verses. And its true the Havocaided by the tutelage and assistance of A Tribe Called Quests Q-Tip on The Infamousbuilt incomparably dour grooves of head-nodding moodiness. But, when I was interviewing the group shortly after the release of The Infamous, two things stood out to me that I have thought about often in the 20-plus years since.

The first was when I commented on the groups vocabulary. They seemed to not know what I was talking about as I was telling them about the way they used wordsnot just slang, but terms like butter-soft leather upholstery, their internal rhymes, their novel ending couplets. I asked them if there was something in the water in Queensbridge. Havoc doubled-over cackling and P, sunken on a couch giggled and smirked to himself as they both repeated: He said something in the water

Theres no replacement for Prodigy.

At that early stage, there was no narrative that said that P was the rapper of the group. He was undoubtedly the stronger and more gripping writer of the two, but Havoc wasnt just there for dressing. Especially on the first two Mobb Deep albums, he more than holds his own.

The other thing I think about gives lie to the idea that Havoc was the lone architect of the groups sound. As we spoke during that interview, there wasnt any indication that the musical process was anything but a joint affair. At one point, P was talking about how they had to rework some samples due to clearance issues and he played an invisible keyboard in the air. It never left me how nimble and articulate his fingers wereit was the movement of someone familiar with keys, not a haphazard plunking of digits. Its something that makes sense in the face of Prodigys lineagehis mother was a member of the 60s girls group The Crystals, his father was part of a doo-wop act, his grandfather was a jazz musician. Not only was P the driving force between many of the Mobbs narrative ideas, he was instrumental in charting the course for their sound, and his solo albums revealed his ear was as crucial and influential as Q-Tips fifth Beatle role on The Infamous.

Mobb Deeptitans of rap with a decades-long career that few could have predictedwas a coming of two halves to create a whole. Its doubtful that either member would have reached the rarified heights that they had without the other, or had the confidence to place their big pre-release single as the next-to-last cut on their debut album. And its without question that Mobb Deepafter all of the internal and external dramais over. Theres no replacement for Prodigy.

For most acts that debuted in 1995, this would be a career retrospective with no thought of future endeavors. But Mobb Deep was just not any act. They may have peaked a handful of projects ago, but there was always the possibility of new greatness. Unlike rapping, production is not necessarily a young mans game and Havoc still has the potential to create transformative soundscapes. And Prodigy was in continued development as a writer; he still had interesting things to say. Its not a stretch to believe he could have further spearheaded into old-head chronicles, filled with rewarding revelations.

But, with his death, the books are closed on the Official Queensbridge Murderers. While they were here, they put their lifetimes in between the papers line and into our ears, minds, and souls. And rap was never the same.

Original post:

Why Prodigy Was A Once-In-A-Generation Rapper - Complex

Visions of Sodom: Religion, Homoerotic Desire, and the End of the World in England, c.1550-1850, by HG Cocks – Times Higher Education (THE)

At the time of writing, a rainbow flag hangs over Tate Britain. The gallerys current exhibition, Queer British Art, celebrates the creativity of the closet between 1861 (the year that execution was replaced by life imprisonment for a conviction of sodomy) and 1967, the year of the Sexual Offences Act, which partially decriminalised sex between consenting men. Have we come a long way in the past 50 years? A recent news report in The Guardian stated: A spokesman for [Ramzan] Kadyrov [Chechnyas leader] has previously denied their existence, saying if there were gay people in Chechnya, their families would have killed them. It seems not.

In Visions of Sodom, H. G. Cocks examines the relationship between homoerotic desire and the various anxieties about social, religious, cultural and even apocalyptic collapse. He demonstrates how the contemporary Christian Right (especially in America) has hijacked the discourse of Sodom for a homophobic cause. But this is a comparatively recent association. From the early modern period and through to the 19th century, Cocks shows, the homoerotic was understood in relation to broader categories of behavior such as fornication, uncleanness, or atheism.

Some of the most virulently anti-Sodomitical propaganda was, unsurprisingly, that of the early modern Protestants accusing the Papacy of religio-sexual turpitude. Chief here was John Bale, employed by Thomas Cromwell to denigrate the Roman Church from which Henry VIIIs new religious splinter group had departed so acrimoniously. William Tyndale as well as Bale insisted on the perversion of clerical celibacy that flew in the face of scriptural evidence as well as the practice of the early church. This could lead only to sodomy and whoredom as the Antichrist established increasing dominance over the institutions of Catholicism both in Rome and in the remnants of the Roman faith closer to home.

In a fascinating chapter, Cocks demonstrates how the discourses of lewdness and urban growth were entwined: the city made material the overlapping connection between apparent prosperity, economic iniquities, luxury and sexual excess. This led (from about the 1680s) to the emergence of the many societies for the reformation of manners of which by 1699 there were eight such societies in London, along with others in nineteen English towns. The apparent deathbed conversion of the periods libertine par excellence, the Earl of Rochester, was held to prove conclusively that sin was contrary to reason and nature.

This shift in emphasis was intensified by Louis-Flicien de Sauleys claim (in 1851) to have located the historical city of Sodom in the area of the Dead Sea. While Darwinism and geology had served to undermine scriptural literalism in an age of creeping religious rationalism and historicism, de Sauleys sensational discovery electrified evangelicals and anti-Catholic writers as well as appealing to political radicals such as the Chartists.

This is a powerful and important book. As St Paul insisted, sodomy was a crime not to be named and so homoerotic desire quickly became screened by hyperbolic accusations of all kinds of iniquity. In disentangling these complexities, Cocks demonstrates not only how the story of Sodoms destruction is central to the history of homoerotic desire, but how its various inflections have been shaped by religious, political and cultural contingencies.

Peter J. Smith is reader in Renaissance literature at Nottingham Trent University, and co-editor (with Deborah Cartmell) of Much Ado About Nothing: A Critical Reader in Ardens Early Modern Drama Guides (forthcoming).

Visions of Sodom: Religion, Homoerotic Desire, and the End of the World in England, c.1550-1850 By H. G. Cocks University of Chicago Press, 352pp, 41.50 ISBN 9780226438665 and 8832 (e-book) Published 24 April 2017

Read more from the original source:

Visions of Sodom: Religion, Homoerotic Desire, and the End of the World in England, c.1550-1850, by HG Cocks - Times Higher Education (THE)

Slavs and Tatars come to SALT Galata – Daily Sabah

After Warsaw and Tehran, art collective Slavs and Tatars' "Mouth to Mouth" will be on show at Istanbul's SALT Galata until 10 p.m. tonight.

Taking place across three floors of the building, the exhibition will offer a tour in English earlier in the evening at 6 p.m.

"Mouth to Mouth" is Berlin-based collective Slavs and Tatars' first mid-career survey. It brings together the collective's works addressing cultural translation, shared linguistic heritage, and mysticism in contemporary societies.

Slavs and Tatars will have a lecture-performance titled "Al-Isnad or Chains We Can Believe In," where they trace complex genealogies of cultural slippages, religious traditions, and linguistic affinities. In Al-Isnad or Chains We Can Believe In, the Berlin-based collective invites the audience to look beyond the world order shaped by what priest and translator Charles de Foucauld called "secular rage."

A Franco-American oil dynasty in Houston, the Catholic Renewal, a Sufi mosque in Manhattan, and the Russian literary avantgarde all figure in the Slavs and Tatars' dense narrative around modernity, mysticism and the rise of site-specific art in the United States. Unexpected connections among them suggest that an alternative understanding of modernism is possible - one that can overthrow established institutional accounts and dare to operate beyond the framework of rationalism. The program will be held in English.

Read the original post:

Slavs and Tatars come to SALT Galata - Daily Sabah

‘The Gospel According to Thomas Jefferson, Charles Dickens and … – Main Line

So youve worked closely with Americas most famous atheist for two decades and decide to write a play. What would you choose to dramatize?

Well, how about imagining three other equally famous men a deist, a Christian anarchist and a skeptic who leaned strongly towards Unitarianism who are locked in a room thats not Hell but is definitely on the Other Side and have them try to figure out why theyre there? Oh, and make the title really long so people will remember it!

After a life-threatening illness, Scott Carter (longtime producer and writer for the acerbic Bill Maher) started working on a play about spirituality and chose these men: Declaration of Independence author and former President Thomas Jefferson, Victorian literary superstar Charles Dickens and the passionate, irascible author of War and Peace Leo Tolstoy. In The Gospel According to Thomas Jefferson, Charles Dickens and Count Leo Tolstoy: Discord (hereafter referred to as The Gospel) we are treated to a delightful character study of three extraordinary men thinly disguised as a philosophical debate about faith.

The play begins as the three men are thrust into a white walled room with a door that locks behind them, a table, three chairs and a mirror (the audience) as the fourth wall, a room that could easily be in the same neighborhood as the purgatorial bus stop C.S. Lewis created in his novel The Great Divorce. In Lewis book the recently deceased jostle and snarl at each other waiting for a celestial bus to take them to Heaven.

But in this room, where Leo (Dont call me Count) Tolstoy says the free thinkers are trapped like three Jonahs in a whales belly the disputes are mostly intellectual. Naturally, they dont like being locked up and want to find a way out and on. As the three captives exchange their stories it becomes clear they all were drawn to the original teachings of Jesus, to the point where each man developed his own version of the Gospel.

In the table drawer they find blank journals and pens Someone obviously wants them to use. So they get to work creating a new Gospel and quickly discover that they cant agree on much of anything.

Jefferson was the rational deist who famously wrote, it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg reason and free enquiry are the only effectual agents against error. He believed in a Supreme Being but not in the Trinity. Dickens was a publicly devout skeptic who often criticized what he saw as religious extremism in Britain. Tolstoy in his later years became an unorthodox Christian who based his beliefs in Christs message of nonviolence.

Can the three geniuses work together to get out of their impasse? Remember that they are all writers. Carter ensures its great fun to watch them try by having each man reveal contradictions in his spirituality. Jefferson was the defender of rationalism and moral sense who couldnt give up the six hundred slaves that ran his beloved home Monticello, even after death. Dickens and Tolstoys ambivalence about the class system in their countries was reflected in their own shaky marriages.

Gregory Isaacs cool veneer of self-confidence and unquestioned leadership as Jefferson keeps the more emotional outbursts of Dickens (Brian McCann) and Tolstoy (Andrew Criss) in check (at least for a while). McCann, who was the conniving Roman tribune Menenius in Lanterns splendid production of Coriolanus this season pushes hard on Carters view of Dickens as a clever, conceited self-promoter. Hes the spark of the production and fun to watch but Dickens was surely a more complex character than this preening egomaniac who spends much of his time trying to get a reaction from the tightly wound and self-righteous Tolstoy.

Director James Ljames, ubiquitous on the local theater scene as playwright, director and actor has the latters appreciation for giving each character a chance for big and small moments that resonate. Despite the seemingly cramped conditions of this small room packed with so much self-regard, Ljames has choreographed the actors well and they parade around and onto the table and chairs in a small but boisterous ballet of braggadocio and big ideas.

IF YOU GO

The Gospel According to Thomas Jefferson, Charles Dickens & Count Leo Tolstoy: Discord runs through July 9 at Lantern Theater, 10th and Ludlow streets in Philadelphia. For tickets call 215-829-0395 or go to http://www.lanterntheater.org

Read the original here:

'The Gospel According to Thomas Jefferson, Charles Dickens and ... - Main Line

Iran: Missile strike in Syria ‘just a small slap’ – Press TV

Iran says its Sundaymissile attack against Takfiri targets in Syria in retaliation for terror attacks against Tehran was just a small slap in the face of the terrorists and their patrons.

Bahram Qassemi, Foreign Ministrys spokesman, made the remarks on Monday following theIslamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC)'s launch ofsix medium-range ballistic missiles at Daesh bases inDayr al-Zawr.

Read more:

The retaliation was just a wake-up warning to those who still cannot or have not managed to decently comprehend the realities of the region and their own limits, he said.

The strike, which took place with Syrias consent, delivered fatal blows to terror outfits and their central command post in Dayr al-Zawr, he added.

Qassemi said the Islamic Republic believesterrorism is condemned in whatever form or place or under whatever pretext.

Iran does not take lightly the issue of defending its security and stability," the spokesman said, adding the Islamic Republic willexert utmost effort in fighting terrorism, insecurity, and instability.

He also advised regional supporters of Takfiri terror outfits to abandon their vendetta against the Muslims of the region and the Islamic Republic and return to the path of rationalism, fraternity, Islamic solidarity, and reinforcement of the unitedfront against Zionism.

Some powers, he said, use security and terrorism as ameans forbusiness, selling billions of dollars in arms to the main supporters of Takfiri terrorists while laying claim to an anti-terror fight at the same time.

The spokesman was apparently referring to US sales of $110 billion worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia during President Donald Trump's visit to the kingdom last month.

The Islamic Republic, however, would keep up its real and consistent battle towards the eradication of terror groups, he asserted.

Also, Ali Akbar Velayati, a senior adviser to Leader of the Islamic Revolution, said, The worlds most independent country will authoritatively respond to the ill-wishers, terrorists, and theenemies wherever they might be.

He said the IRGC's missile strike on Sunday night just displayed a fraction of Iran'sdeterrence power.

Read more:

Iran: Missile strike in Syria 'just a small slap' - Press TV

Human Geography Master’s celebrates 25 years – University of Bristol

2017 marks a quarter century for one of the UKs leading Masters programs in Human Geography at the University of Bristol.

To celebrate, the School is launching a newly designed information booklet that features the art and images from past and present staff and postgraduate students.

Well known and respected within the field, the Masters in Human Geography: Society and Space programme in the School of Geographical Sciences has been at the forefront of contemporary human geographical postgraduate research and education since its inception in 1992.

The programme began as a collaboration between the Department of Geography (as it was called then) and the then School of Advanced Urban Studies (now part of the School of Policy Studies). It was started under the leadership of Professor Sir Nigel Thrift, then a professor of Human Geography at Bristol, and today an Honorary Doctorate and Emeritus Professor with the School of Geographical Studies.

Under Sir Nigel, the Society and Space program rapidly became a world leader in delivering innovative and cutting edge theoretical and critical research in contemporary human geography. The programme aimed to provide then, and continues to do so today, a thorough understanding of the theoretical debates around issues of society and space, and how these translate into practical research agendas and the formation of critical politics and policy. Teaching continues to be based around topic specific modules, seminars, and research dissertations, some of which, every year, go on to be published in leading academic journals.

Famously, the Society and Space programme, as it is known throughout the discipline of human geography, became associated with the development of non-representational theory. Non-representational theory (NRT) has transformed, sometimes controversially, many conceptual and empirical landscapes within cultural and political human geography, and is now almost indelibly associated with human geography research at Bristol. So strong has been the legacy of the course with NRT that the programme will also be the subject of analysis in a forthcoming book on non-representational theory (with Routledges Key Ideas in Geography series) by 2006 graduate of the program, Paul Simpson.

Given its history, the MSc programme is known for training a very high number of students who go on to study PhDs at Bristol and elsewhere. Early graduates of the course, and critical exponents of NRT, have made their names and careers from research inaugurated on the program. Leaders in the field of Human Geography like John Wylie, Beth Greenough, Emma Roe, James Ash, and Nick Gill are all alumni of the MSc.

Owain Jones, an early graduate, and now Professor of Environmental Humanities at Bath Spa, commented on his experience with Society and Space: I can say without any exaggeration that doing the course was a life transforming and enhancing experience (as university postgraduate education should be). I did not do an academic degree [prior to Society and Space] but an arts practice based degree, so the MSc really marked my conversion to academia and to geography.

Today, the focus on non-representational theory has morphed and matured into a demanding, deep curriculum that encompasses topics ranging from affect, technology, and biopolitics, to posthumanism and experimental methodologies, to decolonial and postcolonial geographies, to post-development, political ecology, and hermeneutics. ESRC accredited, the course offers qualitative and quantitative training, and is also a regular contributor to the SWDTP and the University of Bristols Doctoral College. Every year we are pleased to welcome ESRC funded 1+3 students keen to study contemporary issues of society and space as they translate into practical research agendas and critical, innovative analyses of the present.

2016 saw the launch of a course blog which features articles written by current students and staff. As part of their course, all students contribute accessible synopses of their research dissertation ideas to the blog.

If you would like to learn more about Society and Space, please do visit our blog, download the web ready booklet, send enquiries to geog-pgadmis@bristol.ac.uk or feel free to contact the course director, Naomi Millner, herself a graduate of the program.

Read the rest here:

Human Geography Master's celebrates 25 years - University of Bristol

Moves against Polish museum and Hungarian university stir fears of … – Christian Science Monitor

June 21, 2017 GDANSK, POLAND Housed in a $134-million, state-of-the-art building, Polands Museum of the Second World War opened early this spring. The museum, which took more than five years to construct, tells the story of Polands war experiences, which given the way the country is sandwiched between Germany and Russia are among the most tragic of all the conflict.

But even before the museum opened, it was already mired in controversy. The museums acting director, Karol Nawrocki hired when former director Pawel Machcewicz was fired, two weeks after the museum opened has complained that the exhibits about the rise of communism are too light, and the music is too happy, underplaying how deeply the political ideology inflicted damage on the Polish people.He has already indicated that he will be making changes to some exhibits.

In Hungary, meanwhile, it is a university that is in the sights of the government.Last week, students were busy finishing their spring term classes at Central European University, founded by American philanthropist George Soros. But even as faculty and students swarmed through the CEU buildings, clustered in the elegant heart of Budapest, a new law was taking aim at the Hungarian- and American-accredited university.

Both Polands Museum of the Second World War and Hungarys CEU one brand new, the other formed at the fall of communism have been seen as symbols of the advances in free thought and open societies in post-Soviet Europe. And the fact that both have become targets of their ruling governments is a sign, some critics say, of government attempts to control cultural and historic narratives and undermine academic freedom to consolidate political control.

The moves in central Europe hark back to an earlier era, in contrast to the anti-immigrant, anti-globalist nationalism taking root in western Europe, says Anton Pelinka, a professor of nationalism studies at CEU. The French nationalistic renaissance or German nationalistic renaissance is not about Alsace-Lorraine, says Professor Pelinka, referring to the historical land dispute. But Hungarian and Polish nationalism is very old fashioned. Taboos were perpetuated under communist rule, he says.But now, post-communist nationalistic regimes have created new taboos.

The war museum opened in March in the center of Gdansk, near a post office that was one of the first places Germans attacked the country during the war.It was commissioned in 2008 by then-Prime Minister Donald Tusk, today president of the European Council, and was intended to look at the war through an international lens. But the museum was barely open before the ultraconservative Law and Justice party (PiS) firedMr. Machcewicz and announced that some of the exhibits would change.

Mr. Nawrocki, the current director, says the museum the most expensive ever built in Poland has great potential. But I don't get [from the current exhibitions] the answer to a basic question what we Poles want to tell the world about our war experience, he says.

Poland suffered enormously in World War II, with 20 percent or more of its population killed,borders redrawn, and the war ending in communist rule. The new museum was not intended to diminish the Polish experience, says Machcewicz.But part of its purpose, he says, to tell a fuller story about the war, which may break ground for Poles, who havetended to cling to black-and-white ideas about victims and perpetrators.

One of the exhibits includes house keys that belonged to Jews in the village of Jedwabne, who were killed by their Polish neighbors with help from Nazis soldiers. The exhibits also spend time on atrocitiesperpetrated by the Soviet Union, as well ason the 3 million Russian soldiers who suffered in German captivity. The museum pushes Poles from the comfort zone, Machcewicz says, because we show how other nations suffered during the war.

Poles views are mixed, with some welcoming a new perspective, and others rejecting it. Kazimierz Burzynski, a retiree from Gdansk, says he is disappointed that there is not more about Poland in an educational center at the museum.But he also faults PiS opponents for politicizing the issue for political gain. [They are] discussing our issues abroad, involving foreigners in our discussion.

Internationally, the debate in Hungary has resonated even more widely.The Hungarian parliament passed a higher education law in April that effectively singles out the CEU, as it would require the school to open a campus in New York, where it is registered, or cease operations in Budapest.The university has announced that it will continue to operate in academic year 2017-2018, but its long-term future is now unclear. Negotiations between Hungary and the state of New York are expected later this month in an effort to find a solution before October, when the schools license to operate can be withdrawn under the new law.

The university was founded by Mr. Soros who was born in Hungary in 1991, with the stated intent of helping to usher in democracy in post-Soviet Europe. It has been operating in Budapest since 1993. Today CEU has over 1,400 students, including many who are seen as leaders in the region,and it is considered a major center of independent scholarship. But Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban who has said that he sees illiberal democracy as the right path for Hungary says that the university has cheated by violating Hungarian rules, and that no institution should enjoy an unfair advantage.

For many observers, the new law has more to do with Mr. Soros as symbol of liberalism than with academic censorship.It is not about attacking academic freedom, its more like generating a conflict between the government and more pro-Western organizations or figures like George Soros,says Dniel Mikecz, an expert on social movements at the Republikon Institute. It is much easier to campaign with a scapegoat as enemy of the state. You dont have to raise the salaries of public servants, or introduce such benefits for the people.

Whatever Orbans motivations for moving against CEU, many observers fear its an open Hungarian society that is at stake. Orban has also clamped down on funding for NGOs and independent media, and rolled back checks and balances on the Hungarian constitution.

Globally, the fight over the CEU has stirred a firm response.

Two dozen Nobel laureates and academics and institutions around the world have declared support for the university. The law threatening its existence has been rebuked by the European Parliament, which started infringement proceedings against Hungary, prompting tens of thousands of protestors to the streets.I think free institutions and academic freedom strike a chord with a lot of people. It is a core democratic value. It is a core European value, says Michael Ignatieff, the president and rector of CEU.

For many of todays Europeans, its discomfiting to see politicians fighting for control of higher education and other cultural institutions. Machcewicz, a historian, says PiS views historic policy as one of its main pillars. He says the Polish government has set out to achieve control in ways that range from censuring art to announcing plans for new historic museums.

In rejecting our exhibition I see a growing anti-EU and xenophobic atmosphere, a rejection of Europe and multiculturalism, he says. While he says he sees a comparison between the Hungarian government's move against the CEU and the Polish government's decisions about his former museum, he characterizes Orbans move as a cynical power grab, while in Poland he suggests that something deeper is stirring. The Polish right wants power, too, but it is more ideological and radical, he says. The current government is striving for a cultural revolution in Poland.

Its not a direction that sits well with some Polish citizens. Sabina Woch is visiting the Gdansk museum with her 10-month-old son and her in-laws, eager to see the museums exhibits before the government makes any changes. World War II did not take place only in Poland or Europe, and its important to know what was happening in other continents, she says. Politicians should not decide who should run such institutions like a museum; its not their role.

Sara Miller Llana contributed reporting to this story from Paris.

The rest is here:

Moves against Polish museum and Hungarian university stir fears of ... - Christian Science Monitor

EXCLUSIVE: Judd Apatow on ‘The Big Sick’ and Clean Movies Censorship: ‘It’s Pretty Sleazy’ – 9NEWS.com

John Boone , ET 10:00 AM. MDT June 21, 2017

Mentorship is not a new hat for Judd Apatow -- after all, he's the guy who helped guide a then-unknown Lena Dunham and Girls to success. Lately though, he's only increased his efforts, with Pete Holmes on Crashing, Paul Rust on Love and now Kumail Nanjiani's first feature film, The Big Sick.

"I think it's among the best movies we've ever been a part of," Apatow says of The Big Sick, out June 23. "It's scary to come out in the summer against all these behemoths, but there's always room for one movie that people go see just because it's awesome. We're hoping that there's a little sleeper appeal."

I sat down with Apatow at the Four Seasons in Beverly Hills, along with fellow producer Barry Mendel (who produced Apatow's Funny People, This Is 40 and Trainwreck, as well as Oscar-nominated films The Sixth Sense and Munich), to discuss their movie and Sony's now-scuttled "clean" movies initiative, which Apatow denounced on Twitter, saying, "Shove the clean versions up your a**es!"

RELATED: How Kumail Nanjiani and Emily V. Gordon Turned Their Heartbreak and Happiness Into 'The Big Sick'

ET: You both have had long careers, including numerous movies you've worked on together. In terms of looking for projects, what do you find inspires you these days?

Judd Apatow: I like human comedies -- or dramedies. More than anything, I'm interested in people just dealing with everyday things that are difficult, and there is more than enough comedy and drama in that. Every once in a while it's fun to do something big and silly, so I also really enjoy when I get a chance to work with Will Ferrell and Adam McKay or with the Lonely Island guys. But I'm always fascinated by people dealing with the everyday difficult stuff in life.

Barry Mendel: For me, it's like, I forgot who said it -- it was maybe Jesse Helms? -- about pornography: "I don't how I describe it, but I know it when I see it." [Laughs] I'm more that way. I don't really have a philosophy about it. In this case, when Kumail came in and told us the story of what happened with Emily, it was just like, "Wow." Just, like, the light goes on.

Do you think a project can ever be too autobiographical?

Apatow: I think the key is that you have to always be aware that it's a movie. The audience doesn't care that most of this happened. They just want a good movie. During development, we definitely said, "Well, that's what happened, but it's kind of boring. So, maybe we could spice that up a little bit." [Laughs] We're not presenting this as an 100 percent accurate story. It's just the inspiration for our movie.

Many of your movies also draw inspiration from your life. Is that something you had to wrestle with in your writing, writing what you know but not being confined by the historical details?

Apatow: I just never thought anything about me was interesting, so I didn't think about writing from my personal experience.

Mendel: It's almost like the opposite journey, of writing about things that were fantastical and moving towards the personal.

Apatow: Yeah, and I think a lot of people do that! It's why people like Louis [C.K.], after decades of work as he got more and more personal, people connected with it more. It's always a big mix between fabricated and real things, as it should be. I mean, it's the only fodder you have to create with.

You are both known for nurturing young talent. And obviously that talent is what catches your eye, but what does someone like Kumail do to keep you invested?

Apatow: I think that he works so hard. I like working with people on their first movies. I think that you never get that level of effort again. And I think that most people only have a couple of amazing stories from their lives, so you're getting the best of them. And I like the passion that people have when they're trying to prove they can make a movie or be a movie star. Later in your career, you just get offered a script and maybe you get a week or two to punch it up, and maybe they rehearse it for a day before they shoot, and that's why a lot of movies don't come out well. But when you do something like this, where we developed it for three or four years before we shoot it, there's so much love and care that goes into it. That's what I like! I like being at the moment of inception for people.

Mendel: I would say Kristen [Wiig on Bridesmaids], Amy [Schumer] and Kumail had never written a script before, so they're panicked every night. They're waking up in the middle of the night with ideas and writing them down. It's like they can't believe they're getting paid to do it. It's not a job. It's the greatest thing that ever happened to them. So, it's so great for us to get to work with people who have that vibe about what we're doing. It refreshes our experience of what we do.

Apatow: Because when you're making your 20th movie, it might be the 20th most incredible thing that's ever happened to you! [Laughs]

Judd, how do you balance producing those projects with writing and directing your own?

Apatow: It always energizes me with my own work. It's always a reminder how much I should care and how truthful I can be. I think in the last few years, I haven't been able to write as much, because I've been working on the TV show with Pete Holmes, Crashing, and Love on Netflix. But that's OK, because I think the world is changing and all that matters is that I'm creating things.

Mendel: You're also working on your third documentary.

Apatow: Yes. I'm working on a documentary about Garry Shandling right now and we have a documentary about the Avett Brothers that's going to be on HBO in January. So, I've been enjoying that format. I'm just happy to make stuff. Ultimately, I don't think it matters what the frequency is of me writing or directing a movie. It doesn't really matter to anybody else. I'm just trying to put good things out there.

You recently called Sony Pictures' clean movies initiative "absolute bullsh*t." What would something like that mean for your movies? [Two films that Apatow produced, Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby and Step Brothers, were of the first films Sony made clean versions of.]

Apatow: Well, it goes against everything you want in your relationship with a studio. The most important agreement you have is that they will not f**k with your movie once it's done. And so it's pretty sleazy to say, "We're going to take the version of the movie you like the least and try to distribute it to even more people." When you edit a movie for television or for an airline, you're doing it very reluctantly. And you don't want people to watch it that way! But it is part of the business that you can't prevent. It preceded you. But they're trying to create a new initiative, and we're allowed to say, "No. We've agreed to ruin our movies for television and airlines and we're hopeful that due to streaming, most people aren't watching it in those formats. We do not want to spread it." And our movies were not built to be made for children. That's the other weird part about it is, Now I can show it to six year olds! Well, even the essence of it isn't meant for six year olds, or whoever you're marketing it to. But it's a real violation of the spirit of our creative relationship, and I'm assuming that they will quickly realize it and not do it.

That basically answers my last question, which was you have the theatrical release and then sometimes an extended or unrated cut. Is there a way to make a PG or PG-13 version of your movie that you'd be happy with?

Apatow: That's not even the question. The question is, Whose decision is it? I could edit it to, like, a six minute short if I want to! But that becomes the decision of the filmmaker. If Martin Scorsese wants to do a 14-minute, clean Wolf of Wall Street for kindergarteners, I guess he should be allowed to do it. But certainly the head of the studio shouldn't be allowed to do that without his approval. That's the issue. And I do think it will get quickly resolved.

Mendel: In France they call it, Le Droit Moral.

Apatow: What does that mean?

Mendel: The moral rights. Of the artist. The artist is implied in the French version.

I kind of want to see that Wolf of Wall Street for kindergarteners. I think if you edited out any scene with swearing or nudity, it would only be 14 minutes anyway.

Apatow: [Laughs] Exactly. I remember watching Goodfellas on a plane once, and every time they said the C-word, instead they would say "Bundt cake." And you could tell it was kind of an eff you from someone in the Scorsese world. Actually, you know what it was? It was Glengarry Glen Ross. [Directed by James Foley.]

Mendel: We did it on Rushmore, too. We did "foot rub" for "handjob." Every time it said "handjob," we just said "foot rub."

Apatow: I think we had one where we were trying to replace every curse in the entire movie with the word "tomato."

[Note: As Apatow predicted, Sony Pictures Home Entertainment soon after announced they would no longer release the "clean version" of a film if the director objected, claiming, "We believed we had obtained approvals from the filmmakers involved for use of their previously supervised television versions as a value added extra on sales of the full version."]

See original here:

EXCLUSIVE: Judd Apatow on 'The Big Sick' and Clean Movies Censorship: 'It's Pretty Sleazy' - 9NEWS.com

The Slants show full meaning of free speech – CNN

Some musicians might have just shrugged at this point and changed their name to something innocuous (" ... and here they are ... from Portland, Oregon ... THE PLANTS!")

The decision has led some so-called anti-PC crusaders to claim vindication, calling the ruling a mighty blow against those who believe that institutions have not just the right, but the responsibility to provide protections against hateful speech. They're wrongly using a case of a specific victory to make a general -- and ultimately, untenable -- claim.

Yes, the Lanham Act is archaic and poorly written. The definition of "scandalous, immoral or disparaging" is subjective to the point of absurdity, and government institutions should be extremely wary of being put in the position of determining the meaning and application of any of these adjectives. What's a "scandal" in an era where we wake up cringing at presidential tweets every morning? Whose standards should be used to define "immoral"? And especially, what constitutes "disparaging" when the user of a term is also its typical target?

The fact is, the context in which Tam and his bandmates are using Slant, as a conscious commentary on its legacy of harm, as a way of reclaiming it from that legacy, is not scandalous, nor immoral, nor disparaging. Yes, it challenges those who hear it, demanding awareness of the term's ugly roots and history. But the band is perfectly willing to provide the resources needed to share in that awareness. It's what they do: The band goes out of its way to play college campus and Asian-American festival gigs and is deeply involved in supporting and promoting social justice-related causes.

Blanket rejection of the dirty laundry in our history is cultural erasure. Refusal to acknowledge that it's dirty, by claiming that all speech is the same, regardless of who's speaking and with what intent, is tantamount to declaring open season on marginalized groups and individuals. All Tam has ever asked is for the Patent and Trademark Organization to bring a "culturally competent" approach to their decision-making, and frankly, that's what we should ask of every government institution.

The bottom line: Freedom of expression and protection of the oppressed can coexist, if people take the example set by The Slants and do the work to defend them both.

Originally posted here:

The Slants show full meaning of free speech - CNN

Even Bernie Sanders wants the fight against free speech on campus to stop – TheBlaze.com

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders appeared on Face the Nation Sunday to denounce efforts by studentsat various universities to shut down free speech, and the violence some have resorted to in order to silence others.

Sanders has been outspoken on the issue of free speech in the wake of the attempted June 14 shooting of GOP legislators in Alexandria, Virginia, that wounded five, includingRepublican House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (La.).

The shooter,James Hodgkinson, was a die-hard Sanders supporter who had volunteered for Sanders campaign during the 2016 election before he was killed by police during the shooting. Hodgkinsons cover photo was a picture of Sanders, and was later found to have social media postsexcoriating Republicans, and belonged to Facebook groups such asTerminate the Republican Party, The Road To Hell Is Paved With Republicans, and Donald Trump is not my President.

On the day the shootingoccurred, Sanders said he was sickened by the fact that someone who participated in his campaign attempted to murder his colleagues. Hecondemned the shooting during a speech on the House floor, saying real change can only come about through non-violent action, and anything else runs against our most deeply held American values.

Sunday, Sanders voiced his support for free speech to Face the Nation host John Dickerson, and encouraged Americans to stand up against violence.

Look, freedom of speech, the right to dissent, the right to protest, that is what America is about, Sanders said. And, politically, every leader in this country, every American has got to stand up against any form of violence. That is unacceptable. And I certainly hope and pray that Representative Scalise has a full recovery from the tragedy that took place.

Dickerson asked Sanders where he comes down on the issue of campus free speech, noting the various recent protests and attempts to silence speakers students do not agree with. Sanders shook his head in disagreement before Dickerson finished asking the question.

I think people have a right to speak, Sanders said, and you have a right, if you are on a college campus, not to attend. You have a right to ask hard questions about the speaker if you disagree with him or her.

But what why should we be afraid of somebody coming on a campus or anyplace else and speaking? Sanders continued. You have a right to protest. But I dont quite understand why anybody thinks it is a good idea to deny somebody else the right to express his or her point of view.

Sanders told Dickerson that we are in a contentious and difficult political moment in our country, and expressed his grave concerns about the Trump agenda. The Vermont senator surmised that the vast majority of Americans disagreed with the approach, but stated that you dont have to be violent about it.

Lets disagree openly and honestly, but violence is not acceptable, Sanders said.

Read more from the original source:

Even Bernie Sanders wants the fight against free speech on campus to stop - TheBlaze.com

Harvard’s decision to rescind admissions over social media violates free speech, professor says – Fox News

Harvards decision to rescind admissions over social media violates free speech, professor says

For many, it's a dream come true. Acceptance into the oldest institution of higher education in the United States, Harvard.

But for at least 10 incoming freshmen, the dream was dashed after they were caught participating in an exchange of images, or 'memes', in a private Facebook messaging group.

Many of the posts were described as racist, homophobic and anti-Semitic. Some mocked sexual assault or violence.

HARVARD UNIVERSITY REPORTEDLY PULLS 10 STUDENT OFFERS OVER ONLINE COMMENTS

The prestigious school rescinded admission, a move Harvard's own professor of law, Alan Dershowitz, described as over-punishment and draconian.

"Harvard is a private university, technically not bound by the First Amendment, but since I got to Harvard 53 years ago, Harvard has committed itself to following the First Amendment and I think this violates the spirit and the letter of the First Amendment," said Dershowitz.

Harvard officials declined Fox News request for an interview, stating: "We do not comment publicly on the admissions status of individual applicants."

However, the school reserves the right to withdraw an offer of admission for many reasons, including student behavior that "brings into question their honesty, maturity, or moral character."

THINK BEFORE YOU POST: ADMISSIONS EXPERTS' SOCIAL MEDIA TIPS

Rachel Blankstein, the co-founder of Spark Admissions, a Massachusetts-based consulting business that helps students gain admission to top U.S. colleges and universities, said Harvard's move did not shock her.

"They also have a highly selective admissions process in which they're looking for students with strong moral character," said Blankstein. "It's really not about free speech, it's about character."

Blankstein noted that all elite institutions have a code of conduct, adding "I would not be surprised if other schools would have made the same decision."

Harvard's call may well serve as a cautionary tale for hopeful college applicants and those who have already gained admittance.

"My first day teaching students both at Harvard College and Harvard Law School, I warn them about the social media, Dershowitz said. I warn them about putting things on Facebook that will come back to haunt them and they just don't seem to get it."

Molly Line joined Fox News Channel as a Boston-based correspondent in January 2006.

Go here to read the rest:

Harvard's decision to rescind admissions over social media violates free speech, professor says - Fox News

Goldberg: Free speech not always tool of virtue – Peoria Journal Star

Jonah Goldberg

Theres a tension so deep in how we think about free expression, it should rightly be called a paradox.

On the one hand, regardless of ideology, artists and writers almost unanimously insist that they do what they do to change minds. But the same artistes, auteurs and opiners recoil in horror when anyone suggests that they might be responsible for inspiring bad deeds.

Hollywood, the music industry, journalism, political ideologies, even the Confederate flag: Each takes its turn in the dock when some madman or fool does something terrible.

The arguments against free speech are stacked and waiting for these moments like weapons in a gladiatorial armory. Theres no philosophical consistency to when they get picked up and deployed, beyond the unimpeachable consistency of opportunism.

Hollywood activists blame the toxic rhetoric of right-wing talk radio or the tea party for this crime, the National Rifle Association blames Hollywood for that atrocity. Liberals decry the toxic rhetoric of the right, conservatives blame the toxic rhetoric of the left.

When attacked again heedless of ideology or consistency the gladiators instantly trade weapons. The finger-pointers of five minutes ago suddenly wax righteous in their indignation that mere expression rather, their expression should be blamed. Many of the same liberals who pounded soapboxes into pulp at the very thought of labeling record albums with violent-lyrics warnings instantly insisted that Sarah Palin had Rep. Gabby Giffords blood on her hands. Many of the conservatives who spewed hot fire at the suggestion that they had any culpability in an abortion clinic bombing gleefully insisted that Sen. Bernie Sanders is partially to blame for Rep. Steve Scalises fight with death.

And this is where the paradox starts to come into view: Everyone has a point.

The blame for violent acts lies with the people who commit them, and with those who explicitly and seriously call for violence, Dan McLaughlin, my National Review colleague, wrote in the Los Angeles Times last week. People who just use overheated political rhetoric, or who happen to share the gunmans opinions, should be nowhere on the list.

As a matter of law, I agree with this entirely. But as a matter of culture, its more complicated.

I have always thought it absurd to claim that expression cannot lead people to do bad things, precisely because it is so obvious that expression can lead people to do good things. According to legend, Abraham Lincoln told Harriet Beecher Stowe, So youre the little woman who wrote the book that started this great war. Should we mock Lincoln for saying something ridiculous?

As Irving Kristol once put it, If you believe that no one was ever corrupted by a book, you have also to believe that no one was ever improved by a book. You have to believe, in other words, that art is morally trivial and that education is morally irrelevant.

If words dont matter, then democracy is a joke, because democracy depends entirely on making arguments not for killing, but for voting. Only a fool would argue that words can move people to vote but not to kill.

Ironically, free speech was born in an attempt to stop killing. It has its roots in freedom of conscience. Before the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, the common practice was that the rulers religion determined their subjects faith too. Religious dissent was not only heresy but a kind of treason. After Westphalia, exhaustion with religion-motivated bloodshed created space for toleration. As the historian C.V. Wedgwood put it, the West had begun to understand the essential futility of putting the beliefs of the mind to the judgment of the sword.

This didnt mean that Protestants instantly stopped hating Catholics or vice versa. Nor did it mean that the more ecumenical hatred of Jews vanished. What it did mean is that it was no longer acceptable to kill people simply for what they believed or said.

But words still mattered. Art still moved people. And the law is not the full and final measure of morality. Hence the paradox: In a free society, people have a moral responsibility for what they say, while at the same time a free society requires legal responsibility only for what they actually do.

Jonah Goldberg is an editor-at-large of National Review Online. Contact him at JonahsColumn@aol.com.

View original post here:

Goldberg: Free speech not always tool of virtue - Peoria Journal Star

Sen. Dianne Feinstein Defends Campus Fascists Instead of Free … – Heat Street

The Senate Judiciary Committee is holding hearings this week on legal issues related to campus free speech. On Tuesday, the panel delved into incidents that took place at the University of California, Berkeleywhere students have lit fires and ravaged their own campus in order to avoid hearing from right-leaning speakers like Ann Coulter and Milo Yiannopoulos.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who hails from California where the worst incidents have happened, seemed unable to fully grasp the idea that there is no hecklers veto on speech.

No matter how radical, offensive, biased, prejudiced, fascist the program is, you should find a way to accommodate it? Feinstein asked those called to testify. They included several First Amendment scholars and students who had been muzzled by their own colleges for inviting controversial speakers.

Feinstein went on to suggest that it was nearly impossible to expect students to embrace a full, diverse spectrum of opinion, and handle their disagreements like the mature, educated adults they are.

No matter who comes, no matter what disturbance, the university has to be prepared to handle it. Its the problem for the university, she went on.Youre making the argument that a speaker that might fulminate a big problem should never be refused.

She claimed that a university could stop a conservative speaker from taking the stage just to protect students general welfare.

I think particularly in view of the divisions within this nation at this time which are extraordinary from my experience, I think we all have to protect the general welfare too. And I appreciate free speech but its another thing to agitate, its another thing to foment, and its another thing to attack.

Constitutional scholar and law professor Eugene Volokh, was forced to explain, slowly and in terms Feinstein could understand, that its the governments responsibility to protect Constitutional guarantees of free speech. A simple difference of ideas is not fomenting an attackstudents have a choice on how to behave.

If they cant control themselves, and serious measures are required, the problem is endemicand its not the speakers problem.

If we are in a position where our police departments are unable to protect free speech, whether its universities or otherwise, then yes, indeed, we are in a very bad position, Volokh told Feinstein.

He went on to lecture Feinstein that First Amendment considerations should be paramount, correcting her idea that a university can step in to stop a speaker merely to protect the student body from unrest.

The potential for violence, Volokh said, cannot be enough to justify suppression of those they tried to suppress.

Read the original post:

Sen. Dianne Feinstein Defends Campus Fascists Instead of Free ... - Heat Street

The Tyranny Of A Tiny State: Connecticut Against Free Speech – The Daily Caller

Connecticut is taken with an authoritarian mood. The Constitution StateI deferentially refer to it as The Eminent Domainis in the beginning stages of passing hate crime legislation that lords the authority of correct thinking cognoscenti over the states subjects. Or, using the linguistic benignity of legislators, organizations committed to decreasing hate crimes and improving diversity awareness.

The blue blood branch of the northeast states aims to institute aHate Crimes Advisory Council committed to decreasing hate crimes and improving diversity awareness by coordinat[ing] programs to increase community awareness and reporting of crimes motivated by bigotry or bias.

Delegation is a funny thing. Before you know it, quasi-governmental councils and independent agents transform to monsters. Theres the special prosecutor who bites the hand that feeds, the government agents accountable to no one who shut down the simple toymaker, and Claire Guadiani, the Christina-Kirscher-esque supervillain of Kelo v. New Londonall of them and their commissions and councils simply contemporary star chambers run by power-graspers.

All you need to know about the direction Hate Crime Councils will take is in the history of similar bias patrols, informer networks, and homogeneous political climates structured throughout America. More specifically, we can look to the universities. Thats where diversity councils draft their first-round picks.

At Suffolk University, micro-aggression training was mandated after a sociology professor questioned a young Latina womans use of the word hence. (Cry out a hysteria hosanna for hence!)

If tenured professors at universities arent shielded from the petty rebukes of infant tyrants, what makes you think that lone, powerless adults facing the full power of the state will?

Maybe youre shopping for a subtler orthodoxy. In that case, I offer to you Old Dominion University, which has instituted a Safe Space Committee, reserving housing specifically for students who are of a progressive/multi-sexual orientation. Irish Republicans Need Not Apply. But its not discrimination. Its inclusiveness.

Go look at any of FIREs cases and see whether you like the result of universal progressive hegemony. FIRE, that laudable center of First Amendment fervor, has ventured into film in its efforts to expose higher educations collective farcical take on free speech, helping to produce the tragicomic documentary Can We Take a Joke? But if I were to chronicle Connecticuts high-handed hijinks on celluloid, Id call it The Day the Government Finally Told You to Shut Up (coming soon to a Theatre of the Absurd, check local listings for movie times).

But what about hate speech?! Ah, that old chestnut.

One of the tricks progressives use to define hate speech upmeaning they use hyperbolic language to describe what would otherwise be recognized as impolitic gaffing or uncouth mannersis by referring to hate incidents. Hate crimes are actionsbomb threats aimed at synagogues, epithet-layered graffitiwhile hate incidents involve sending messages that are objectionable but protected by the First Amendment.

There are many problems with the proposed Connecticut legislation, not least that its unclear whether simply saying stupid Jew or black sonofabitchor whatever elsewould render those utterances criminal in character. (This, of course, would ruin my annual Nubians v. Jewbians Passover Seder in New Haven.) The statute appears to cover hate incidents, too.

Remember, though, the truism that objectionable free speech is really the only kind that needs First Amendment protection. If youre a man (or a woman, or whatever) of the left, consider what one of your luminous lords, Noam Chomsky, said about free speech in Manufacturing Consent: Goebbelswas in favor of freedom of speech for views he liked. So wasStalin. If youre in favor of freedom of speech, that means youre in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise.

Normally when I find myself agreeing with Noam Chomsky, I do a thousand jumping jacks, take a freezing cold shower, and then ask a friend to hit me in the face with a pan. (A jarring physical reset helps clear the brain.) And yet, still, Im in agreement with Brother Noam of the Hater of All-Americana Congregation.

Theres a big problem even with using the hate crime classification. Like every other issue in life, I use South Park to determine my views on hate crimes: Mayor, it is time to stop splitting people into groups. All hate crimes do is support the idea that blacks are different from whites, that homosexuals need to be treated differently from non-homos, that we arent the same. Thats Stan Marsh wisdom, people. Its problematic to continually bisect grievance-mongers into tinier sub-classified groups. This taxonomy of minorities can continue ad infinitumblack Jews, lesbian Mongols, trans-Latinas, inuit-differently-abled-trans-species-race-non-conforming-dolphinistasuntil the only basis for claiming equal or fair treatment is the newness of the classification and the historical oppression experienced by the identities that make up the fresh grievance category. The logical result is that only the inuit-differently-abled-trans-species-race-non-conforming-dolphinista can have a claim to being discriminated against, resulting in a Rule of Law that is inherently discriminatory. There are certain people who have an algorithmic type of thinking when it comes to politics and ideologytheyre ideologically possessed, as Dr. Jordan Peterson puts it.

Most people will look at a situation and decide how to handle it based on the facts in front of them. The ideologically possessed, however, subconsciously know how theyll respond to any scenario long before it occurs. They may, for instance, favor discrimination so long as it comports with their algorithmic worldview. The ideologically possessed are those who make up the whole of diversity committees, inclusion programs, and so on. Its from those groups that the Hate Crimes Council will recruit. The result will be the arm of the state twisting careless speakers into compliance. Or as Nat Hentoff put it: Free speech for mebut not for thee.

More:

The Tyranny Of A Tiny State: Connecticut Against Free Speech - The Daily Caller

Competing Alt-Right ‘Free Speech’ Rallies Reveal Infighting Over White Nationalism – Southern Poverty Law Center

Tim 'Baked Alaska' Gionet posted a meme aimed at the 'alt light' rally.

Although the alt-right presents itself as a new kind of white male nationalism rewired for the 21st century, it is proving in practice to have many of the same qualities as its old 20th-century forebears: Riddled with infighting and internecine quarrels, the product of a movement whose sociopathic agenda attracts similar personalities, ego-driven and contentious.

The infighting, which first erupted last week between far-right Oath Keepers and whitenationalist alt-righters, deepened this week when two factions outright white nationalists and committed racists on one hand, and alt-righters (dismissed as the "alt-light") who disavow them and their politics while embracing the movement agenda squared off on social media over a series of free speech events aimed at provoking left-wing counter-protests and, potentially violence.

The result is that there will be two competing free speech events this Sunday in Washington, D.C.;one a Rally Against Political Violence hosted by alt-right provocateur Jack Posobiec, planned for noon at the White House; the other a Freedom of Speech Rally hosted by Colton Merwin at the Lincoln Memorial, and featuring such whitenationalist figures as Richard Spencer, Nathan Damigo of Identity Evropa, far-right neo-Pagan Augustus Invictus, blogger Jason Kessler, and social-media celebrity Tim Baked Alaska Gionet.

The White House rally will feature alt-right figures such as Laura Loomer (who recently made headlines by taking the stage during a performance of Julius Caesar in New York City), Kekistan fan Cassandra Fairbanks, and Kyle Prescott of the alt-right fight club Proud Boys. It apparently was organized by alt-right figure Mike Cernovich and Posobiec in response to the roster of speakers invited to the Lincoln Memorial rally; speakers such as Loomer (whose background included a stint as a writer for hate-group leader Pamela Gellers Islamophobia operation) had originally been scheduled to speak there but then canceled.

Organizers explained the rally is intended to condemn political violence such as the attack on Steve Scalise and US Congress recently, as well as depictions of gruesome displays of brutality against sitting US national leaders. All sides must join together to condemn violence and the violent rhetoric that inspires it!

The Lincoln Memorial rally organizers expressed their regrets: I'm sure some of you have already heard by now, but several speakers have dropped out due to the confirmation of Richard Spencer as a speaker. Now, not only is this horribly hypocritical, but is also bordering on an Antifa principle. By not sharing the platform with someone you disagree with you are therefore not supporting their right to speak.

I don't know Spencer, I have been famously ambivalent toward the man, but I am looking forward to meeting with him and to defending his right to say whatever the hell he's going to say on Sunday, chimed in Augustus Invictus. That is where I stand.

The two sides began sniping at each other on social media. All of you guys pulling out of the Freedom of Speech Rally are cucks, posted a critic on the Facebook page of the Political Violence rally. It's flat out hypocritical to be speaking at a Freedom of Speech rally only to pull out of the event because someone you disagree with is speaking. That makes you a hypocrite with no balls and no conviction. Grow a pair.

On Twitter, Spencer labeled Posobiec a cuck, and taunted him: Oooosh... Jack Posobiec is a great war hero. No one can criticize him. He dismissed the rally as the "Alt Light," and called them "a collection of liars ... perverts ... and Zionist fanatics."He also made fun of them for changing the focus of their rally: Apparently, these dorks blushed at the idea of calling their little meet-up a free speech rally. He added: The Tea Party, at least at its inception, was an authentic expression of American nationalism. These people total zeros.

Jason Kessler posted a video demonstrating that Posobiec had plagiarized his work while he was employed at the Canadian alt-right website The Rebel; in response, Posobiec blocked him. Posobiec also apparently blocked Baked Alaska for criticizing one of his media stunts.

Baked Alaska also got into a Twitter war with Loomer after he posted a meme with her face Photoshopped into a gas chamber, outside which stood Donald Trump in a Nazi uniform, ready to pull the switch: Et tu, brute? it read.

Loomer responded in shock: Wow. I'm calling on @bakedalaska to fully condemn anti-Semitism after posting this pic of me inside a gas chamber.

He laughed at her: It's a fucking meme. You're an SJW [Social Justice Warrior] now and it's hilarious.

The poster for Kessler's Aug. 12 event.

A similar feud threatened to break out over another free speech event, this one an Aug. 12 Unite The Right rally in Charlottesville, Va., organized by Kessler as part of his ongoing protest against the threatened removal of a Confederate monument to Gen. Robert E. Lee.

The lineup for that event includes Spencer, Augustus Invictus, white nationalist Matthew Heimbach, and League of the South president Michael Hill.

Infighting is part of every movement - but it doesn't have to be, posted Augustus Invictus on his Facebook page, along with a poster for the event.

A white nationalist commented: Very happy to see that Based Stickman, the anti-white civic nationalist cuck and shameless mountebank, has apparently been removed from the line-up. Good. He would've been fundamentally at odds with the other speakers.

Responded Kessler: He's planning to be here in a non-speaking role to back-up our attendees in the event of Antifa violence. For that, he is a friend to the event and to the First Amendment rights of our speakers.

In the meantime, another would-be participant posted: "Will the Oath Cucks be there?"

It might be time to stock up on the popcorn.

Go here to see the original:

Competing Alt-Right 'Free Speech' Rallies Reveal Infighting Over White Nationalism - Southern Poverty Law Center

Bernie Sanders Tells Progressives to Stop Suppressing Free Speech on College Campuses – Heat Street

Sen. Bernie Sanders has spoken out against the progressive lefts ongoing efforts to suppress free speech on campus, stating that it only contributes to rising political tensions in the United States.

Sanders statements come in the wake of James Hodgkinsons mass shooting of GOP congressmen during a morning baseball practice in Alexandria, VA, which hospitalized Majority Whip Steve Scalise and wounded several others. Following the shooting, Sanders deplored Hodgkinsons actions, describing the violence as despicable and unacceptable in our society.

I condemn this action in the strongest possible terms. Real change can only come about through non-violent action, and anything else runs against our most deeply held American values, said Sanders at the time.

Speaking on CBS, Sanders said that efforts to suppress free speech contributed to the rising tide of political violence.

Look, freedom of speech, the right to dissent, the right to protest, that is what America is about, he said, per PJ Media. And, politically, every leader in this country, every American has got to stand up against any form of violence. That is unacceptable. And I certainly hope and pray that Representative Scalise has a full recovery from the tragedy that took place.

The senator stated that people have a right to speak on campus, even if their speech is considered disagreeable or problematic. In February, leftist activists at UC Berkeley shut down a speech by conservative provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos using violence.

And you have a right, if you are on a college campus, not to attend. You have a right to ask hard questions about the speaker if you disagree with him or her, Sanders said. But what why should we be afraid of somebody coming on a campus or anyplace else and speaking? You have a right to protest. But I dont quite understand why anybody thinks it is a good idea to deny somebody else the right to express his or her point of view.

What is very clear is, we are in a contentious and difficult political moment in our countrys history, he added. I have very grave concerns about the Trump agenda right now.

Ian Miles Cheong is a journalist and outspoken media critic. You can reach him through social media at@stillgray on Twitterand onFacebook.

Go here to read the rest:

Bernie Sanders Tells Progressives to Stop Suppressing Free Speech on College Campuses - Heat Street

Report From: Atheism, How To Fail – Patheos (blog)

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Its been a wild three days in the City of Brotherly Love at the first annual Atheism, How to Fail Conference. The godless flocked to the Pennsylvania Convention Center to hear prominent academics, bloggers, and the mentally ill speak on how they are ruining the secular cause in America.

This is a matter of Build it, and they will come, stated conference organizer, Andrew Canard. This was only a dream a year ago. There was no doubt in my mind that atheists were doing their best to undermine the fight against religious fundamentalism in America. However, we needed this conference to put the stake in the heart of the secular movement.

The Pennsylvania Convention Center offered an ideal place for the thousands of anti-activists to meet. The one million square feet of available retail space allowed authors to parade their books like Dont Call Your Legislator, Its a Waste of Time!, Apathy is Your Ally, and theall-time bestseller If You Dont Like Another Atheist, Go on Twitter and Act Like a Psychotic TwelveYear Old. I got two copies of the Twitter book one for me and one for my buddy whos really into talking smack anonymously online, said one convention goer who refused to state his name.

I got two copies of the Twitter book one for me and one for my buddy whos really into talking smack anonymously online, said one convention goer who refused to state his name.

Spirits were high as seminars were packed to the max. The popular writer of the blog Skeptically Rambling, Jonathan Adams, gave a moving talk titled: Leftfielding, How to Derail Atheist Meetups by Saying Irrelevant but Nerdy Facts. Mr. Adams issued forth interesting points on a small French hamlet during the Hundred Years War for 90 minutes. A lengthy question and answer period ensued on topics that had nothing to do with atheism or the Hundred Years War.

The most popular seminar, however, was held by Richard Galley, Ph.D., titled You Dont Agree With Me? You Suck! The professor spent two hours detailing the nuances of how much people suck who dont find his particular psychiatric diagnosis agreeable.

The crowd ate up impassioned lines like, Would a crazy person be calling other people crazy? Of course not!

The conference ended with Andrew Canards speech detailing the necessity of presenting the worst possible ad campaigns to the public and never ever doing any local organizing:

Look, nobody likes doing the grunt work of community organizing. Dont do it. Tell other people not to do it. Make some really bad ads to demoralize the community. Above all be a dick to everyone. All. The. Time.

It was no surprise his message was met with thunderous applause. After all, he was preaching gospel to the choir.

Note: This post means nothing. Atheists have only a shared non-belief in gods and have no common interests.

I first wrote this bit back in 2013. I saw David Smalleys postReasonably Controversial: How The Regressive Left is Killing The Atheist Movementand thought it was time to shine it up and share it.

I have a Patreon account just in case you wish to show your appreciation for my work here on Laughing in Disbelief.

Andrew Hall is the author of Laughing in Disbelief. Besides writing a blog, co-hosting the Naked Diner, he wrote two books, Vampires, Lovers, and Other Strangers and Gods Diary: January 2017 . Andrew is reading through the Bible and making videos about his journey on YouTube. He is a talented stand-up comedian. You can find him on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.

Stay in touch! Like Laughing in Disbelief on Facebook:

View original post here:

Report From: Atheism, How To Fail - Patheos (blog)

Spiritual Atheism – Economic Times (blog)

The last verse of Chapter 8 in Gita perhaps contains the kernel of all Vedantic thought. The chapter, as is well known, begins with Arjun asking Krishna about the nature of Brahm, adhyatma and karma, and how they might be interrelated.

Having explained the first two albeit in the aphoristic way typical of the Vedantic spiritual tradition Krishna focuses on the third element of the triad.

Karma, or action, he says, is the real-life bridge that links the two. The ontological or transcendental realm of Brahm (or absolute), on the one hand, and atma, or individuated consciousness rooted in the here and now, on the other.

It is not easy to see this link in a logical or material sense how does one associate that which exists in time and space with that which is both beyond time (without beginning) and space (boundless)?

The true being of atma, attached to the corporeal body, is of course clouded by desire. In a paradigmatic sense, this desire is the desire for the rewards of action. The Gita makes no category distinction between different kinds of action.

Depending on ones worldly calling, or svadharma, going to war is on the same footing as going to a temple or pursuing politics. The key then is not what you do but with what intent or motivation you do it.

The true yogi, as the Gita declares, is one who goes beyond whatever fruit or merit is declared to accrue from the Vedas, sacrifices austerities, gifts. The path to moksha lies in overcoming desire and is described as liberation from the inexorable law of karma.

DISCLAIMER : Views expressed above are the author's own.

Read this article:

Spiritual Atheism - Economic Times (blog)