Archive for the ‘Alt-right’ Category

Pathetic White Men Are Big Mad That Greta Thunberg Is Time’s Person of the Year – Popdust

Every December since 1927, TIME's Person of the Year award has recognized the most influential person (or group of people) on the global stage.

Its ranks include almost every sitting US president since the award's inception, alongside world leaders, business moguls, and activists. The magazine does not necessarily endorse every winnersometimes their pick for most influential person (i.e. Adolf Hitler in 1938 and Joseph Stalin in 1939) reflects the destructive ends of global influence. But regardless, for most recipients, especially those in the activism space, the award is viewed as an honorand in 2019, it most certainly is.

Time's 2019 Person of the Year is Greta Thunberg, the 16-year-old climate change activist who has traveled the world speaking to politicians, leading protests, and urging everyone to stop turning a blind eye to the myriad ways that humans are destroying the planet.

But even though 97% of climate scientists agree that global warming and climate change are both real and caused by humans, right-wing lunatics (read: very angry white men) hate Greta Thunberg, because...?

Much of their adult hatred directed towards a child dedicating her life to trying to making the world sustainable for future generations stems from the fact that they are, in reality, literal babies trapped in hairy, pale, man-bodies. But their main reason is the fact that their God-King (they're too stupid to understand how elected public officials are supposed to work), Donald Trump, hates her, too.

So because Donald Trump doesn't believe in climate change (putting his stupid ass in disagreement with his own government's science divisions), his even stupider supporters don't either. Now they're real mad on Twitter over Greta Thunberg being TIME's Person of the Year, so they're sh*tting their diapers for all to see. It's great. Let's meet some of the lowest-performing white men in the world up close and personal.

Oh, who's this angry white boy trying to compare Greta Thunberg to Hitler? Why, it's "Count Dankula," the Scottish YouTuber best known for teaching his dog to perform a Nazi salute gesture and respond positively when asked, "Do you wanna gas the Jews?" Apparently it was couched in typical alt-right "just a joke" bullsh*t, but Dankula, whose real name is Mark Meechan, later joined the right-wing populist UK Independence Party (UKIP) alongside frequent milkshake enthusiast Carl Benjamin, so...yeah, really funny! All that being said, when Meechan equates Thunberg to Hitler, he might be trying to give her a compliment.

Here we have Exhibit B: An angry boomer Trump stan/far-right stooge named Bill Mitchell who earned his blue checkmark by hosting a less successful online version of Alex Jones' show. While his opinions might only be relevant to people with actual brain damage, he does have a particular knack for defrauding his followers out of money. Which is to say that yes, at the very least he follows the right-wing ideals of preying on stupid people and attacking children.

Lastly, we arrive at the poster boy of white male mediocrity: Donald Trump Jr.a man so talentless that he needed his daddy's friends to buy up his book, a man so pathetic he got absolutely slaughtered on The View, and a man so self-unaware that he'll probably go his entire life without ever realizing that if his dad wasn't rich, he'd be just another schlub.

There's a reason pathetic white men spend so much of their time crying about the accomplishments of better, more useful people on Twitter. Because at the end of the day, they're absolutely worthless, and deep down they know it.

See the original post:
Pathetic White Men Are Big Mad That Greta Thunberg Is Time's Person of the Year - Popdust

Why We Need to Stop Dreaming of England – frieze.com

God save the Queen / She aint no human being / There is no future / and Englands dreaming, sneered Johnny Rotten on the Sex Pistols single, God Save the Queen (1977), released during the silver jubilee of Queen Elizabeth IIs coronation. The sudden appearance of a wistfully placid England at the centre of this viciously sarcastic, rubbish-strewn national anthem is most curious. What is England dreaming of? Is this a complacent daydream or something more fantastical? The line, so resonant that Jon Savage used it as the title of his pre-eminent 1991 book on punk rock, is trapped provocatively between the archetypal romantic contemplation of an ennobled nation its landscape, its dignity, its ancient feet and the suggestion that the barbarians at the gate, in the form of the Sex Pistols themselves perhaps, are about to unleash a waking nightmare.

But these contradictions are easily subsumed into the dream of England. The Sex Pistols single could be heard during the opening ceremony of the London Olympics in 2012. And cynical distance is inclined to collapse into sincerity. Interviewed on ITVs flagship Good Morning Britain show in 2017, Rotten dolled up in the kind of tweed suit favoured by supporters of the far-right political party UKIP said of Britains 2016 European Union referendum result: The working class have spoke [sic] and Im one of them and Im with them. He then went on to praise Brexit Party leader, Nigel Farage, and defend US President Donald Trump. Perhaps the song wasnt so sarcastic after all.

For all that England can wryly describe itself as crap, there has always been an immovable, dialectical tendency within that to find the heroism of living in it. Added to the countrys historical and persistent colonialism, chauvinism and feudalism, the impulse to resue the dream of England from its internal and external oppressiveness is just one more form of this ugliness. Attempts to reframe Englishness or Britishness have appeared across the political spectrum since the millennium, not least in the rush to defend and reclaim the wounded patriots who, it is endlessly assumed, cried out in the 2016 EU referendum. Yet, in his latest book, New Model Island: How to Build a Radical Culture Beyond the Idea of England (2019), Alex Niven rejects the modern discourse on rediscovering the green unpleasant land. The negative deadness of England and Englishness is a nightmare from which we are all trying to awake, Niven observes, neatly summarizing, We need to abandon England and start looking for a replacement.

This is not to say that Niven is against everything that has ever taken place and everyone who has ever lived on that particular landmass. For a book whose arguments are ultimately so uncompromising, there is a remarkable tenderness in its pages for people, places and histories. The problem, as Niven often points out, is: England doesnt really exist. As in his earlier book, Folk Opposition (Zero Books, 2011), he is affectionate towards his origin and home in the northeast, thoughtfully detailing the many ways in which the region no less so than England has been a distinct social and institutional territory for millennia. The book also has a subplot of autobiography, as Niven contextualizes his argument with reference to his life, career, family and social circle. Indeed, New Model Islands passages on the thoughts and lives of writers Robin Carmody, Mark Fisher and Joe Kennedy, as well as on the publishing houses Zero Books and Repeater, add a personal and historical dimension to Nivens milieu of left-wing cultural analysts, who started out as a network of bloggers in the 2000s and who, today, have never been more relevant or more widely read.

From Anglo-Saxon kingdoms to Guardian columnists, Niven tracks the discourse of Englishness through both deep and recent history, disentangling an early version that existed between the Dark Ages and the formation of the UK in 1707, as well as a more spurious version that emerged from a combination of postmodern nostalgia and the millennial devolutions of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The relationship between these two Englands, Niven maintains, is distant and tenuous. In the intervening time: England was meticulously de-essentialized and distorted so that it could subsume neighbouring and more distant lands. Today, the still ongoing dismantling of the British Empire means that its rump polity has been left with nothing but the distant echoes of a pre-capitalist feudal past with which to reimagine itself.

The ongoing, if eroding, sense in which England can signify the UK from its point of privilege as the colonial centre is particularly notable in the US. In a recent episode of NBCs magical-realist sitcom The Good Place (201619), for instance, one character gave as an example for weird shit happening the fact that England left Europe. In fact, while the UK voted overall to leave the EU, Scotland and Northern Ireland had opted to remain. And, although Wales also elected to leave, the right-wing backlash of recent years has been particularly associated with a love for, and defence of, England.

At a political rally in August 2018, Trump reflected: People call it Great Britain. They used to call it England. He had also told The Sun newspaper a couple of months previously: You dont hear the word England as much as you should [] I miss the name England. Earlier this year, standing next to the UK prime minister Boris Johnson, and in an even more confused state, Trump responded to a question about international relationships after Brexit by floundering: Wheres England? Whats happening with England? They dont use it too much anymore. Englishness is the depressingly proud heritage of Richard B. Spencer, the American alt-right figurehead, who became infamous following the 2016 US election for shouting: Hail Trump! Hail Victory! Hail our People! He subsequently told the Black British journalist Gary Younge that he would never be an Englishman in a 2017 documentary for Channel 4.

In the UK, the English flag has been adopted by the far-right English Defence League and is frequently eulogized by Farage. But Niven is not just suspicious of the co-option of Englishness by right-wing nationalism. There has also been a centre-left political shift intended to accommodate xenophobia in recent decades, of which the Labour Partys notorious 2015 election-campaign mug bearing the slogan Controls on Immigration is the most potent symbol. Even the melancholic association of England with the aesthetics of hauntology or class struggle both topics close to Nivens heart fall short in saving the moniker for him. Instead, he talks of these islands (incidentally, the term employed in documents jointly produced by the British and Irish governments) or the archipelago, which has a radical air when he uses it, as if all national territorializations have been wiped off the chart and only the various parcels of dry land on which we happen to be standing matter. But Niven is far from ahistorical: these islands have histories that are longer, broader and more surprising than any reductive, quixotic English framing. He argues that their future, too, can be just as promisingly diverse.

Looking to embrace the archipelagos various, multi-vocal identity and to suggest a more fluid, dynamic version of regionalism that retains some sense of history but does not fall victim to bogus nationalist essentialisms, Niven tries his hand at redrawing the map. In one manifestation, the first incision lies between, roughly, Lyme Regis and Middlesbrough, allowing for greater lateral integration between the non-English nations and peripheries of England (Cornwall and the north), as well as an escape from the orbit of London (the obscenely swollen hub of a radically concentric economy). As a southerner potentially left behind in a Tory-run, literal Little England, I would be burning with jealousy over the newly formed gang of cool kids to the north and west. But I could always emigrate.

In their 2019 election manifesto, the Labour Party has retained its 2017 promise of four new public bank holidays one for each of the UK nations patron saints in a clear gesture to traditional delineations of nationalism. But theyre also proposing a radical decentralization of power in Britain, with Local Transformation Funds and government offices in each region of England and a National Transformation Fund Unit in the north intended to shift the political centre of gravity. The party has also published regional manifestos that highlight how, to take the northeast as an example, a Green Industrial Revolution can echo the original industrial revolution, with new national parks founded in the region.

Both Niven and Labour (in a more moderate sense) see a future in which power can be redistributed not just economically but geographically, but without cleaving to centralizing nationalisms. It is in the regions that Labour will win or lose this weeks general election: the party has to convince voters that broad-based yet localized investment is preferable to the Conservatives quick and quite possibly hard Brexit. Yet, even if this election results in Labours defeat, such dreams are unlikely to fade. As Niven attests, a new left-wing generation is imagining a different future and making strong arguments for it. Perhaps, in order finally to dream of something else, we need to stop dreaming of England.

Main image: Pro-Brexit demonstration, London, December 2018. Courtesy: Getty Images; photograph: Adrian Dennis; AFP

Read the original:
Why We Need to Stop Dreaming of England - frieze.com

Immortal Hulk Is Unabashedly Political – and That’s What Makes It Great – CBR – Comic Book Resources

WARNING: The following contains spoilers for The Immortal Hulk #28, by Al Ewing, Tom Reilly, Matias Bergara, Chris O'Halloran, VC's Cory Petit and Alex Ross, on sale now.

Marvel comics are said to reflect the "world outside your window," although the degree to which the publisher has ever fully succeeded varies, often creating a question as to where that window is located as well as what it looks out upon.However, this idea of reflecting the world in which readers live also means, like in any other medium, providing relevant social commentary. The most recent issues of The Immortal Hulk reflect that "world outside your window" by approaching the political and social discourses surrounding such hot-button subjects as climate change, corporations and the news media, and the book is all the better for it.

RELATED: Marvel Drastically Changes Its Super Teens' Status Quo in Outlawed

The Immortal Hulk#26 seesBruce Banner announcing his intention to attack the main entities exacerbating major societal problems, and often profiting off of the very issues they create. His goal is to provide real consequences for the injustices of corporations and other organizations. In his monologue,Banner mentionsclimate change, and the way the actions of particular entities creates a loop that trades results in destruction for short-term gain. There's no ambiguity here: Bruce's world is dying because of the actions of predatory members of the economic elite -- and so is ours, with 100 companies responsible for the majority of the emissions that place Earth at risk.

Hulk's first target is -- and this isn't a coincidence -- Roxxon Energy Corporation. The company is led byDario Agger, who in The Immortal Hulk#27 explicitly explains that he actively moved Roxxon away from renewable energy when he became CEO. However, this isn't due to the villain thinking climate change isn't real. Instead, Aggerbelieves the science about climate change, but he plans to profit off of the resulting "resource war." There's an advantagein destroying the world.

RELATED: Old Man Quill Establishes a New Guardians of the Galaxy

Agger is certainly an exaggeration of a CEO who prioritizes profit over the greater good (although when the science is as irrefutable as it is in regard to climate change, the choice to ignore reality in favor of profits is certainly not much different). However, he's an expression of present anxieties and frustrations about the ultra rich and the CEOs of massive companies and whether they're doing enough to save our world.

In The Immortal Hulk#27, Agger explains he won't be hiding his true form anymore, remarking nobody will care that he's literally a monster. People also seem to have forgotten Aggersided against humanity in the War of the Realms. For Agger, there are no consequences for publicly being a monster. Roxxon's stock price is actually rising when the story begins, meaning Agger is making more money than he was before. Even though the CEO behind the company is a literal monster, people continue consuming Roxxon's products and services, which include Roxx News, YouRoxx and RoxxFace. Like in Hulk's explanation, there are no consequences for Agger's actions to enrich himself at the expense of others.

RELATED: Marvel Celebrates 750 Issues of Incredible Hulk With... The Thoughtful Man?

As those aforementioned names imply, Roxxon itself is a composite sketch of various corporations, including Fox News, Google and Facebook. The critique of these three organizations are particularly important for understanding how Immortal Hulk explores the role media places in further perpetuating broken systems. Fox News is often critiqued as something of an uncritical mouthpiece for conservative views and claims; Google owns YouTube, which hosts videos linked to increasing alt-rightradicalization;Facebook has come under fire for its handling of disinformation and fake news spread on the platform. These organizations have failed to take steps to address these issues in earnest, in part because there's money to be made from not doing so. And the effects are clear:Fox News is still one of the most-watched cable brands in North America, Facebook reported record profitsdespite controversyand YouTube has 2 billion monthly users.

The Immortal Hulk#26 and #27 lay the groundwork for understanding the larger system, but #28 takes a more ground-level approach in showing how the aforementioned media organizations affect people. The Immortal Hulk #28 explores the story of a white, middle-aged security guard. His story draws on conservative, if not specifically alt-right, understandings of the world, which are a result of a steady diet of Roxxon's various media products. The security guard believes his purpose is to take back his country "for our children," even if that means taking it back from them when they choose to protest what they find wrong in the world.

The media the security guard consumes shapes his understanding of himself as right and righteous, while those who disagree with him as wrong and, in this case, worshipers of the devil. In turn, the security guard's views remain unchallenged, and he's unable to see the problems with his own beliefs, Roxxon's behavior and the general issues plaguing his world. By reinforcing his views and ideas, Roxxon has effectively created support for its attempts to profit off of disaster.

The Immortal Hulk#28 also explores the idea of dissent getting repackaged and undermined for the sake of profit.Before heading off to get his own Hulk, one of Dario Agger's lackeys reveals that Roxxon is actually using a shell company to sell Hulk masks with the intent of eventually leaking the company's involvement and the environmentally unstable nature of the masks so as to "dampen enthusiasm with the 12-18s." Here, Roxxonis actually planning to make money off attempts to protest while simultaneously undermining those working against them and for a better world.

However, don't mistake The Immortal Hulk's critique as a simple oneof good versus evil.Immortal Hulk has never shied away from graphically rendering the horror of the title hero's actions, making readers wonder if he has, in fact, become too brutal, and the book isn't starting now. Plus, the entire arc has the events ofImmortal Hulk#25, which sees Hulk as the Breaker of Worlds laying waste to the universe, priming readers to wonderjust how far his rampage, left unchecked, could go.

Most importantly, The Immortal Hulk#26 features a conversation between Amadeus Cho and Bannerexamining whether the latter's destructive plansare correct, and if he'd transformed from hero to villain. Cho serves as the voice of hope, believing that there are other potential ways to make the world better. The intersection of Banner's race and rage also play a role in the conversation, as it has in previous entries in the run. Although Banner's rage is a powerful tool, the aforementioned security guard is also angry. That doesn't mean he's right or that his attempts to make a better world mean one will come about. Amadeus subtly warns Bruce to check his privilege in how he's approaching his next endeavor, as he's "an angry middle-class white guy talking about revolution. That doesn't always end so well."

RELATED: X-Men: How Apocalypse Turned Gambit Into His Horseman

However, Amadeus never says Bruce is wrong in his evaluation of how corporations are destroying the world. This conversation doesn't change the fact that what Roxxon is doing is wrong or that destructive, self-perpetuating systems are risking everyone on Earth for profit. This then leaves the question of how best to fix the problem which, if left unchecked, will lead to catastrophe. Bruce's experience reflects the frustration so many feel about watching the world around them collapse and feeling powerless to act, which is why Hulk's actions inspire a new Teen Brigade: The young and disaffectedfinally have someone who can dosomething about the problem.Immortal Hulkwants readers to question the title character and his methods while making the problem he's addressing clear and unambiguous.

The Immortal Hulkis engaging with some of the most difficult questions about the future of humanity and how to fix problems that threaten everyone.As new issues release,there will certainly be twists and turns that further complicate Bruce's quest and the politics of the book. All of this works together to create an urgent book reflecting some of the biggest anxieties of the world of its readers. Thisalso leaves one major question: When the system can only be fixed through radical intervention, does Hulk have any other choice?

The Immortal Hulk #29 releases Jan. 8, 2020.

KEEP READING: Al Ewing's Immortal Hulk Confronts Roxxon - and the Marvel Universe

Superman & Wonder Woman's Daughter Is a Total A-Hole - and It Works

Tags:feature,immortal hulk

More here:
Immortal Hulk Is Unabashedly Political - and That's What Makes It Great - CBR - Comic Book Resources

Truth, Justice, and the American Way Have Been Assassinated by We the People – City Watch

ONE MANS OPINION-Trump constantly lies for two reasons: (1) He suffers from a Histrionic Personality Disorder, which makes him mentally incapable of telling the truth; (2) No one really cares that Trump lies.

The claim that the Dems care about Trumps lies is disproved by the adage actions speak louder than words. In fact, Pelosi and other Dems love the fact that Trumps is so mentally ill that he cannot help but tell outrageous lies. Trump must be the center of attention; he must always receive cheers and praise and if he must always attack anyone who displeases him. We experience his daily Twitter Insanity, which is chock-full of lies and incoherency, but the Dems only care to the extent they can raise money from Trumps mental deficiencies. If Pelosi and the other Dems cared about the nation, they would have cooperated with the moderate GOP in early 2017 to Nixonize Trump. Look at the timeline. Only after the Dems would not Nixonize Trump, did the GOP make a pact with the lunatic Alt-Right, i.e., The Freedom Caucus.

Trump is a clear and present danger to the nation and the idea that the Dems care is another gigantic lie. All Pelosi cares about is raising money and winning her ferkata Group Rights War. Anything which raises money is fine for Pelosi, who has flung open the doors for the Dem Party to vile anti-Semites.

The Entire Impeachment Process Has Become a Farce Wrapped in Multiple Lies

There are two truths about impeachment: (1) Trump has committed numerous impeachable offences including treason; (2) Nancy Pelosi is working as hard as she can to prevent Trump from being removed from office. The moment Trump is gone, Pelosis power drops into the basement and there is nothing in the universe more important to Nancy Pelosi than her personal power.

Washingtonese

When the GOP on the House committees act badly, they are sending two messages one to their Alt-Right base and the other to the Congressional Dems. When the GOP complains that there is no evidence, they are signaling for the Dems to call more witnesses, especially the Three Fat Ladies (Giuliani, Pompeo, and Bolton).

After America finally saw honest men and women do that very un-American thing of telling the truth to power, the public praised them and gave them standing ovations. Then, Adam Schiff stabbed them in the back. The testimony of Vindman, Hill, Holmes, Sondland, etc. laid a fantastic foundation for the GOP to Nixonize Trump. The GOP responded by signing, Yes, give us more facts so we can get rid of the lunatic. (In Washingtonese, you have no facts means gives us more facts.)

Adam Schiff Let Speaker Nancy Pelosi Stop All the Evidence Gathering

That means Vindman, Holmes, Hill, Sondland, etc. appeared for nothing. Vindmans family is in danger and Schiff let Pelosi stab him in the back. Schiff could simply have announced that the subpoenas for more fact witnesses were being issued to the Three Fart Ladies and others. Then, let Pelosi publicly counterman what Schiff announced. (Memo to Schiff: Weenies have no business in elected office.)

The Dems complain that the GOP will not stand up to Trump, while they all cower in fear of Nancy Pelosi. The GOP laid out a road a map of the additional evidence which the House needs to produce so that the GOP can turn on Trump.

Even Senator Mitch McConnell is placing pressure on Pelosi to let Jerry Nadler call more fact witnesses by saying the Senate is unlikely to call new witnesses. In other words, the GOP is telling others who understand Washingtonese: In order for us to Nixonize Trump, you Dems have to produce all the evidence in the House because we will not allow you to introduce one iota of new evidence in the Senate. Remember, removal only will happen while the case is in the House.

Pelosi, McConnell and Other Congressional Members Know This. . .

Under Senate rules, a majority of the Senate will not approve more witnesses to testify against Trump. Unless the Dem House bucks Pelosi and calls heavy hitting fact witnesses, there will be no new evidence allowed in the Senate and Trump will not be removed.

OJ Redux

Heres another big Pelosi lie which the Dems are shamelessly spewing: There is overwhelming evidence against Trump. Like with the OJ Trial, the evidence in the record is little more than paltry. Vindman and the others gave us a wonderful foundation, but the evidence to turn the tide against Trump is being intentionally excluded. We will know when the evidence is overwhelming. The GOP will Nixonize Trump.

More evidence to convict OJ existed, but it was not introduced before Judge Ito. (Remember, OJ talked to LAPD for hours after which his attorney Howard Weitzman quit.) Prosecutor Marcia Clark talked about the mountain of evidence and had her chart of a pyramid of evidence, but it was mostly fantasy. Yes, OJ did it. He later told us how. The point is that when incompetent or corrupt prosecutors handle a case, the guilty go free. That is what Pelosi is doing right now. (Marcia Clark did not want OJ to go free; it was pure incompetence at the highest levels of the LA DAs office.) If you want an OJ Redux, let Pelosi stop the evidence gathering. Chairman Jerry Nadler can do what Schiff was too chicken to do issue subpoenas to more fact witnesses.

As explained previously, Prof. Noah Feldman said, impeachment is essential to the Republics survival when the election process is inadequate. That is why we cannot let Nancy Pelosi truncate the impeachment process by allowing the most damning witnesses not to become part of the official record. Pelosis clear goal is to aggrandize her personal power as her power rests in her fundraising for elections. If Trump is Nixonized by the GOP, her power evaporates.

The Real Culprits Are We the People

The reality is that we elect two types of people to political office: (1) crooks like Eric Garcetti, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, and (2) craven cowards like Adam Schiff. There is no courage for a Dem to complain about a GOP and vice versa. What neither will do is tell the truth about their own party. Both parties are in a race to the ethical gutter and both parties are winning. Why? Because We the Sheeople condone outrageous lying. Whatever our group says is A-OK and whatever the other group says is 100% bad and facts play no role in our judgments.

Who thinks the Republic can survive when We the People are habituated to lying crooks and cowards so that decent people quit Congress?

(Richard Lee Abrams is a Los Angeles attorney and a CityWatch contributor. He can be reached at:Rickleeabrams@Gmail.com.Abrams views are his own and do not necessarily reflect the views of CityWatch.) Photo: Doug Mills/New York Times. Edited for CityWatch by Linda Abrams.

More:
Truth, Justice, and the American Way Have Been Assassinated by We the People - City Watch

Back into the Fold: An Interview with Chlo Valdary – lareviewofbooks

DECEMBER 12, 2019

CHLO VALDARY IS a public educator and lecturer who teaches a program called the Theory of Enchantment to students, administrators, and educators at high schools and college campuses around the country. The program, which aims to teach young people a framework for healthy identity formation, is rooted in the study of classic literature and philosophy alongside cartoons, ad campaigns, the music of Beyonc, and the porous borders where universal narratives merge with contemporary pop culture.

Valdary also hosts the Theory of Enchantment podcast, where she holds conversations with artists, musicians, and authors, as well as business owners and community organizers. Her writing has appeared in The New York Times, The Atlantic, The Wall Street Journal, and Commentary.

I spoke with Valdary about her visions for social change and how they are informed by storytelling in all its forms, and we discussed the connections between politics and art, anomie and extremism, and volunteerism and self-knowledge.

The interview has been edited for clarity and length.

OTIS HOUSTON: Where did the name Theory of Enchantment come from?

CHLO VALDARY: I was at The Wall Street Journal for a year a couple of years ago and I was working on a research paper about why we gravitate toward the things we gravitate toward within pop culture, and one of the books I read was called Enchantment by Guy Kawasaki, who was a former marketing director of Apple. And that book was very inspirational to me because the way he defined enchantment was essentially the process by which you delight someone with an object or product or idea or whatever. And this idea of inspiring people or delighting people is a little bit more than a material reaction to something, right? The reason people buy Nike shoes is not simply because they like the design, but because the idea behind Nike speaks to something fundamental to their identity, and so in that sense it delights them. And that has a lot to do with why I picked the word enchantment, because thats essentially what Im trying to do with great art.

Theory of Enchantment is my company and what it aims to do is sell a curriculum to high schools, corporations, and other workplaces. The curriculum specifically focuses on mental health and healthy identity formation for students given that there is an epidemic right now of increased rates of anxiety, depression, and suicidal thoughts and actions among high school students and also among college students. A study found that one in five college students last year had suicidal thoughts, which is a very new trend that were dealing with in this country. The curriculum aims to teach basic life skills about knowing the self and knowing ones neighbor or the Other, if you will. The idea is that you cannot really navigate the complexity of the world if you dont understand the complexity of your own self. What that means is being aware of everything that human beings deal with, like insecurities and parental baggage and all the things that we have to navigate that are part of the human condition.

I specifically use both contemporary artists and their material in conversation with ancient artists and their material. For example, I teach Stoicism as a sort of emotional regulation practice. I teach what Epictetus and all of the other Stoics actually taught in their original works, but then at the end of a particular section in the Theory of Enchantment curriculum we study the movie The Lion King, which is obviously not really about lions. Its a story about coming of age, of a transition from adolescence to adulthood. And so, what is seemingly just an entertaining Disney film is actually a story that young people can learn from and apply certain lessons in their own lives, lessons that directly relate to their sense of self.

[Discussions of] mental health come with a lot of stigma these days, unfortunately I think thats changing, but it still has a lot of stigma attached to it. So if one can teach this through the lens of pop culture, I think its much more palatable for the demographic in question. Connecting the ancient ideas of Stoicism that touch upon concepts like sympathia the idea that you are connected with everyone else around you is precisely what the song Circle of Life is about. So connecting these things and showing that theres a dialogue happening between ancient voices and contemporary voices I think is fascinating and can help texts come alive in a new way for students that will also help their personal growth.

Your Theory of Enchantment curriculum draws heavily on literature and movies, as well as philosophical texts. And, as you mentioned, you also bring in popular contemporary music for close reading. How can we draw meaning from popular entertainments in ways that are important for how were living our lives right now?

I think that, oftentimes, people who discuss the impact and power and influence of the Western canon do so by referring to people who are no longer with us. And whats ironic about that is that the ideas many of these individuals, authors, and intellectuals actually promoted are what we would call timeless. But if they are timeless, that generally means that they can be found in different forms and contemporary spaces. Its very possible, for example, for me to find ideas espoused by Plato or by the Stoics or other thinkers and intellectuals that could be found in contemporary hip-hop or in contemporary literature.

Even music is a text of sorts, right? So we can look at lyrics from Jay-Z or from other contemporary artists. Even Lil Wayne has certain songs that would be relevant to healthy identity formation. And so I thought, lets expand this canon because what Shakespeare is saying in this piece, I heard in a song by Drake earlier this week. Think of people like W. E. B. Du Bois, who said, I sit with Shakespeare and he winces not, or Baldwin, who was very explicit about how the Western canon shaped and informed his ability to write.

If we bring to light the fact that they are the same ideas that have been promoted by people who have come before us, they can be ideas that are, once again, relevant to a new generation. And so a new generation of students is not forced to simply be in conversation with Plato in a historical vacuum, but can bring him into their own lives and have him sit in conversation with Kendrick Lamar or Jay-Z or some other contemporary artists that they actually look up to.

I sometimes wonder if its becoming difficult for people to connect contemporary narratives with historical ones because, especially in the last, say, 10 years or so, many people have been questioning the notion that we have any kind of truly shared narratives at all. The value and universality of literature from the Western canon in particular is being called into question in academia and in school curriculums, and some are advocating for replacing texts. But Im not sure anyone agrees on what to replace them with or what a more inclusive canon would look like.

I have seen a push to replace, for example, old white male authors with authors who are people of color. But I would say no, just expand the canon! And I would again echo W. E. B. Du Boiss sentiment, which is that I can be in conversation with Shakespeare, and if Shakespeare was here and alive he would actually respect that.

Lets say you wanted to throw out Shakespeare and replace him with Baldwin, just as a hypothetical thought exercise. You cant do that, because Baldwin was influenced by Shakespeare; Shakespeare will still be there. You cant really separate the two, and I dont want to separate the two. And so, I think its better and much more enriching to say that the canon is actually pretty expansive, and lets continue to expand the canon. And thats why we refer to these peoples ideas as timeless, right? Not to be clich, but their ideas echo throughout eternity. These ideas are central to the human condition, and you can find them in different forms, articulated by all different types of authors and intellectuals and influencers, whether they are dead old white men or people of color, because there is a transcendent human condition that connects us in some way.

I would also say that it is incredibly ironic for someone to want to throw out the Western canon in order to replace it with, quote unquote, authors of color. Because if people think that the West is exclusively white, thats the wrong idea. There are white supremacists who extol the virtues of Western civilization, and by that they mean white people. And then there are some anti-racist people who will say, Lets throw out the Western canon because its too white. And whats ironic is that those two camps of people are actually agreeing on that point. And Im disagreeing with them and saying that the West is actually full of people of different backgrounds. The Western canon includes both Shakespeare and Baldwin, both William Faulkner and Toni Morrison. It includes all of these authors and all of these ideas, which are oftentimes in sync with each other, rhyme with each other, et cetera.

I think that Beyonc and Jay-Z represent an interesting conversation on this. I dont know if youve seen her music video Apeshit, where she and Jay-Z are in France. Beyonc and Jay-Z present [Meghan Markle] with this Mona Lisalike figure, but instead of it being the original Mona Lisa its a picture of the Duchess. Beyonc is essentially rejecting the idea that people of color are not part of the West. What she was saying is that we are part of the rich legacy that created the West and makes the West what it is today. And I think thats very clear if you study the African-American musical tradition, which includes blues and jazz. This is the West. This is the Western tradition! So instead of rejecting the West, I think its more accurate and more interesting to say we are very much part of the West and we have contributed to its traditions and we can have our texts be in conversation with those who have come before us without it seeming like a jarring experience.

I was just listening to you yesterday on a podcast with the comedian and writer Bridget Phetasy, and you said something that I thought really got to the heart of what it means to create art or to be an artist. It might sound a little bit provocative on the surface, but I think it got to some truth about the relationship between identity and creativity. You said, essentially, that a person who follows the doctrines of intersectionality as an overarching worldview cant truly be an artist.

Yes. Well, its interesting because, increasingly, I feel like there are some people who subscribe to intersectionality who would come to conclusions similar to mine, meaning they would totally be for more Baldwin in the classroom. And they would totally be for a dialogue between Shakespeare and Kendrick Lamar in the classroom, if that was an option. But I think that the way I came to my conclusions was very different from the way they would come to theirs.

Speaking of Baldwin, he wrote a piece in the late 40s titled Everybodys Protest Novel in which he criticized the author of Uncle Toms Cabin and he also criticized Richard Wright. And he says, The failure of the protest novel lies in its rejection of life, the human being, the denial of his beauty, dread, power, in its insistence that it is his categorization alone which is real and which cannot be transcended. I think that is the essence of my critique of certain intersectionalists. And I say certain because I dont think all people who subscribe to intersectionality would necessarily come to conclusions that undermine art. But many of those whom Ive encountered do fall into that category. And its essentializing categories that are constructs and that really dont speak to the essence of who we are as human beings and the universal human condition that we must all navigate. We must all navigate fears and ambitions and insecurities and our sense of purpose and meaning in the world, whether we are white and rich and high status or we are poor and coming from an inner-city background.

Thats the other critique that I have of intersectionality that it seems to understand the meaning of life only in a materialist way, which is, in my opinion, neither the primary form of meaning nor the most interesting form of meaning. So in that sense, I think it would be very difficult for people who really believe in intersectionality to produce great art. I am an African-American woman and if I believed in certain intersectionalist ideas, I would say that you couldnt possibly understand my experience as a human being because we come from different backgrounds. But anyone who knows anything about art, whether youre producing music or literature or a painting, knows that the role of the artist is to facilitate an experience in which the audience can see themselves in the work of the artist. If you subscribe to the idea that someone cant possibly feel your experience or empathize with your experience because they dont look like you, how can you experience art? What is the relationship you have with art?

I hate to say his name, but if we look at somebody like the white nationalist Richard Spencer, although his intentions are not morally equivalent to an intersectional social justice point of view, he is similarly essentialist in his beliefs about race and its singular importance to identity formation. And Ive always thought that, so long as his whiteness is central to his self-conception, its impossible that he would ever produce any poetry, or anything of beauty, because its such a limiting viewpoint to see yourself primarily as a representative of your race or your gender or what have you. Ultimately, it produces an identity thats just too boring to say anything interesting about.

Yeah, I think thats very well put, especially your point about beauty. Its also ironic because [Spencer] claims that he is coming from a sort of Western predisposition or a place of love for Western civilization. I think hes being selective in his understanding of what Western civilization has produced. If I were to reduce it to a very simple formula, I think that this is all a function of unhealthy identity formation and insecurity.

By the way, Im actually about to start doing a lot of work with organizations that focus on rehabilitating former extremists and helping them integrate back into society, so Ill be dealing a lot with the ideology that foments the creation of white nationalists and also members of ISIS.

If you were to study the development of an extremist, oftentimes youll find that the catalyst for diving deeper into extremism has something to do with identity malfunction or just unhealthy identity formation because of a whole host of issues. What often happens is, if your sense of identity is undermined, you can feel that you are totally lost and you will want to latch onto something that gives you a feeling of home, a sense of belonging, a sense of purpose, a sense of meaning. And we know for a fact that white nationalist groups oftentimes prey on disaffected youth who are in search of that sense of meaning, and they exploit that.

I do a lot of work in my community with mentoring young people whose parents are incarcerated, and these people tend to be at risk of joining gangs, and the patterns are the same. This also speaks to the universality of the human condition, right? Whether youre talking about studying the factors that go into peoples decisions to join street gangs or peoples decisions to join white nationalist movements, the patterns are often the same. Youre talking about disaffected youth, lack of home structure, lack of meaning and purpose. Oftentimes theres alcoholism in the family. Oftentimes there are low socioeconomic factors affecting these decisions, and all of these things sometimes come together to create this monster, so to speak. If you are of a certain background, you may be more likely to join a gang. If you have all these things happening in your life and you are of another background, you may be likely to join an alt-right organization. So, you can see how all of this is related to mental health and healthy identity formation.

So, when you talk about us digging deep and finding some kind of transcendent meaning or ethos to continue to build our culture or society around, what would that look like on a large scale?

The million-dollar question! I dont know I only know what I can do to contribute to it, which is what Im trying to do with the Theory of Enchantment. But its not one thing, its multiple things. I can tell you about the organizations I love that I think speak to this issue of spiritual nourishment on different levels. For example, I volunteer for an organization in Brooklyn called Children of Promise, which, as I mentioned earlier, mentors kids whose parents are incarcerated. Its given something to the kids I volunteer for, but its also given something to me, and I think that idea of service and experiencing obligation to another in pursuit of a higher good is something that Americans need to do more of. I think if there was a campaign to produce more of the spirit of volunteerism, that would be very useful for Americans. Ive been reading a book called Trust First [by Bruce Deel and Sara Grace], which is about an organization called City of Refuge, which opened in Atlanta and now its in dozens of locations around the country where it helps rehabilitate drug addicts and sex trafficking victims. Theyre really doing incredible work thats bringing people on the fringes of society back into the fold and back into places of love, quite frankly. There are organizations like Homeboy Industries, which rehabilitates former gang members in Los Angeles and gives them jobs and trains them and really helps them grow.

And so, I think its not necessarily one thing that we have to do. But what if there was a new spirit of ideas that came out of the American people about how we shore up people in need, and not simply in a materialist way, but in a way that will rejuvenate their spirit and in a way in which they will know that they are important to us? And by the way, its not just people who are victims of X, Y, Z; its people in general. How can we make it so that our young people in general know that we care about them and know that we believe in them and believe in their potential?

So I think its this idea of a uniting spirit that needs to be fostered by everyone, from civil service leaders to politicians, to business owners, that gives us the sense that were in this together, that we know some of the problems were confronted with, but we have each others backs and we believe in each others potential despite the mistakes we have made in the past. (And despite the mistakes that were going to make in the future, because human beings make mistakes and theres no such thing as perfection, which sounds clich, but no one actually internalizes that fact.)

One of the other things that I teach in Theory of Enchantment is a series of quotes from Maya Angelou. She says, if you tell a person over and over again they are nothing, they will say to you, So you think I am nothing? Dont worry about what I am now, For what I will be, I am gradually becoming.

The moral of the story is that a person cannot develop character unless they are valued. If you were to expand that on a larger scale, a nation cannot develop character unless its citizenry values one another. I think that if we try to endow our work and the way we live with this sense of caring and of valuing both ourselves and one another, then we can perhaps see a renewal of the American spirit.

Otis Houston is a graduate of Pacific Universitys MFA creative writing program and lives with his wife in Portland, Oregon. His work has appeared inKitchen WorkandDefenestration.

Link:
Back into the Fold: An Interview with Chlo Valdary - lareviewofbooks