Mediaboss Marketing

Erik J. Chaput| Guest columnist

Erik J. Chaput teaches in the School of Continuing Education at Providence College and at Western Reserve Academy. He is the author of "The Peoples Martyr: Thomas Wilson Dorr and His 1842 Rhode Island Rebellion" (2013).

Over the last 30 years, the politics that surrounds the teaching of American history has from time to time burst into the mainstream. For U.S. History teachers preparing to work with students in the classroom in the coming weeks, there will be no shortage of political minefields to navigate.

As historian Matthew Karp noted recently in Harper's magazine, the study of history is a battleground where we must meet the vast demands of the ever-living now. Our culture wars are not only about the rough and tumble surface of cultural life. They also deal with the clash over public symbols, discourse, and the enduring myths of society. Though todays warring political factions are guilty of flattening multidimensional stories, often about race in America, each side believes that they have a hotline to Clio, the muse of History, making the teachers job that much more challenging.

As a nation, sitting on knifes edge, we have been here before. The debate over how to teach, to celebrate, and be critical of American history has been a perennial part of the culture wars. The question of whether the chronicles of the American past in textbooks should fall on the celebratory or condemnatory spectrum is nothing new. In 1993, a public battle was waged over new national history standards.

Lynne Cheney, then chair of the National Endowment of the Humanities, led a charge against historical standards drafted by the late historian Gary B. Nash and several others. According to Cheney, the end product lacked a patriotic element that was necessary in the classroom. Of course, one can find similar sentiments expressed as far back as the 1920s. Recently this debate has played out in controversies surrounding the New York Times 1619 Project and the Trump administrations counter-effort, the 1776 Commission and its connected report.

Sociologist James Davidson Hunters landmark study, "Culture Wars: The Struggle to Define America," should be required reading for teachers as they prepare for the fall semester. Hunters work, which is enjoying its 30th anniversary this year, remains a must read for those looking to further their understanding of the fault lines that have developed in modern America.

Hunters "Culture Wars" chronicles the fundamental alterations in America since the 1960s and how they have led to a greater level of division. According to Hunter, by the end of the 20th century, a battle was raging between conservatives who were committed to an external, definable, and transcendent authority, and liberals who were defined by the spirit of the modern age, of rationalism and subjectivism. The competing visions, and the rhetoric that sustains them were threatening to become the defining forces of public life.

In one of his last major essays in The New Republic in the early 1990s, Irving Howe, the prominent literary critic, noted that a serious education must assume, in part, an adversarial stance toward the very society that sustains it … But if that criticism loses touch with the heritage of the past, it becomes weightless, a mere compendium of momentary complaints.

This is indeed the balancing act that classroom teachers must perform. If teachers paper-over complexity and nuance, if they shut down debate and dismiss opposing views, they lose the ability to explain anything that happens over time, relying on weak and ineffectual metaphors. We must not be, as the abolitionist Frederick Douglass noted after the Civil War, apostles of forgetfulness.

View post:
Opinion/Chaput: The culture wars and the politics of history - The Providence Journal

We have developed an expansive understanding of trauma, from acute to childhood to systemic and intergenerational.

Each knowledge base validates the existence of distinct, human developmental needs and reminds us we cant discount the needs of identity or group belonging any more than an infants need for a secure attachment to a caregiver. When we neglect to understand and support authentic experience, identity and story, the evidence of harm is compelling. So where does this leave us in the quagmire of identity politics and culture wars?

After teaching on these subjects for many years, I have developed some ideas about the culture wars not commonly found in our literature.

Decades ago, I learned about the right-wrong impasse from relationship expert Harville Hendrix. This term refers to a mindset in which people disagree and lock up, and relationships break down. Realizing this happens on every relational level between friends, families, communities and nations was a revelation, but it did not account for the importance of power dynamics. Simply put, it isnt enough to strive for mutual respect in our differences where power differences or abuses go unacknowledged and unchanged.

Understanding the need to address power inequities is critical, but we must also strive to support basic human developmental tasks beyond ego fulfillment. Consider a child who develops a sense of mastery or competence in a talent or skill. If that child does not also learn strategies for self-care, how to serve on a team or how to apply their ability for the greater good, they are left with an ego-based sense of achievement. Similarly, when we foster personal or group identity without a broader sense of social conscience and awareness, we can only empower our identities to an ego-based degree. From this place, we are more apt to reap the negative consequences of ego-based relations, such as tribalism, culture divides and culture wars.

On ExpressNews.com:Commentary: History justifies fears of voter suppression

So, what can we do?

There is no need to associate with oppressive groups and people, but if we are not encouraged to actively develop relationships with people from outside groups, these culture wars are no great spiritual mystery. We are actively creating our dilemmas. And while its easy at times to point a finger at the toxic activism in others, what really matters is the ability to discern this kind of exploitation from our own.

Some good questions to ask oneself are: Do my community members and leaders speak truth without disparaging remarks? Do they engage in polarization or dehumanizing language and tactics? And most importantly, do they encourage us toward relationships with outsiders, not to be confused with acts to convert or control them?

One lie of the culture wars is that we cannot co-exist. Another is that we will be stripped of our identities and values through exposure to those who are different. These lies can feel real because those who operate from ego-based group promotion can willfully drive the divide. Often, they encourage us to focus solely on negative people or encounters in order to rationalize our negative stereotypes, while neglecting to encourage a deeper understanding from the perspective of the outsiders.

Using discernment, we can remove ourselves from ego-based infighting without ceasing to support our disenfranchised groups. We can also remind ourselves that ego-based victories are short-lived. More often they act like a pendulum, creating a negative force of momentum that hurts or knocks out the opposition, but in time, they swing back to harm our own.

One of the best things we can do to foster diversity free of ego is to look inward for change within ourselves. In my classes, students are tasked to conduct scholarly, empirical investigations on the histories of unfamiliar groups, but they are also tasked to interview aspirational members and leaders, and to connect with those members in the safety of their respective communities. Through activities like these, they form a realistic optimism and deeper understanding of human relations, where so many others remain stagnant.

On ExpressNews.com:Commentary: Our mental health system is overwhelmed

Direct experience can teach us that our different identities cultural, political, sexual, national or religious are often not the heart of these issues. Regardless of background or belief, there is no unsafe person to connect with or learn from who commits to engage from a higher place. Some describe that place as one of higher intention, conscience or consciousness. In my words, it combines the highest wisdom of our soul with the purest love in our heart. The research shows this is where diversity thrives, and where those with divergent identities find solutions and common ground.

Lamar Muro is an associate professor of counseling and development at Texas Womans University in Denton.

Go here to read the rest:
Commentary: Reaching beyond the front lines of the culture wars - San Antonio Express-News

There was something inevitable about Piers Morgans response to Simone Biles decision to withdraw (temporarily) from the 2020 Olympics on mental health grounds.

Biles later rejoined the competition and went on to win a bronze medal.

But before this, writing for the Mail Online, Morgan accused Biles of being selfish and stated: I dont think it is remotely courageous, heroic or inspiring to quit. He also suggested that she had pulled out, not because she was struggling with her mental health, but because she had underperformed in her first exercise. Morgan has a steady track record of not giving people the benefit of the doubt. Earlier this year, he mocked and cast doubt on Meghan Markle when she spoke openly about her mental health struggles. Brendan ONeill, Editor of Spiked, was similarly dismissive of Biles, arguing that: the current celebration of her quitting the Olympics as true heroism feels deeply troubling.

Firstly, it is laughable for Morgan and ONeill to imply that Biles was somehow weak, or lacking determination. The 24-year-old American gymnast is arguably one of the greatest athletes of her generation. She was the most decorated gymnast of all time by the age of 22. She has won 25 world championship medals, and four Olympic gold medals. She even has a gymnastics move named after her, called the Biles Vault.

But the star gymnast didnt have the easiest start in life. Her early years were spent in foster care after her biological mother was unable to look after her children, having struggled with drug and alcohol addiction. Biles has even spoken about going hungry as a child. But despite the setbacks, she has demonstrated a remarkable ability to succeed in the face of adversity. The criticisms waged by Morgan and ONeill, arguably pale in comparison to this athletes tough past.

None of this seems to matter, however, to the likes of Morgan and ONeill. For them, the mental health crisis seems to be another example of snowflakery. ONeill has explicitly said as much. A few years ago he complained that young people are being told its cool not to be able to cope, to embrace the identity of fragility and that we shouldnt ditch the stiff-upper-lip; we should rehabilitate it. To the likes of ONeill and Morgan, mental illness is clearly a sign of weakness and yet another example of generation snowflake being unable to cope with the harsh realities of the real world.

In one respect they are right; athletes and other public figures have been increasingly vociferous about their mental health issues. Recently, the Japanese tennis player Naomi Osaka pulled out of the French Open, citing mental health as her reason for doing so. It is also true that more and more people are claiming to struggle with mental health issues more generally, especially the young. Since lockdown, mental health referrals amongst young people doubled in England. But cases have been rising even before the pandemic. In 2018, a study found that the proportion of young people saying they had a mental illness had increased sixfold over two decades.

There are many reasons why more people might have been complaining of mental health problems in recent years, especially those in the public eye such as Biles and Osaka. One obvious explanation is social media. Almost anyone, anywhere in the world can be abusive about you on platforms like Twitter and Instagram. We saw this in the aftermath of Englands defeat in the Euro 2020 final, when three black players were subjected to torrents of racist abuse online. These people may be public figures, but they are also human and therefore not impervious to cruelty and verbal assault. Such things leave scars that can later trigger or exacerbate existing mental health concerns. Therefore, for someone like Biles, a nerve-wracking experience of competing at the Olympics could be made even worse knowing what some people might say about her if she performed poorly especially if she already felt that she was not in the right frame of mind to perform her complex and dangerous routines on global television. It has since been revealed that her aunt died unexpectedly during the tournament, adding pressure to an already fragile mental state.

It is also quite possible that, as the stigma around mental illness has lifted in recent decades, more people have felt confident enough to speak openly and candidly about their struggles.

Neither Piers Morgan, nor Brendan ONeill, nor any of the other culture warriors are experts in this field. To my knowledge, neither of them have any qualifications in medicine or psychology. We should be listening to the people who do, rather than those who continue to stigmatize and prosecute individuals for showing mental health ailments.

Simone Biles has revealed that she was experiencing something known as the twisties. This is when gymnasts lose their sense of control and bearing while in mid-air. Performing a complex set of moves without being able to spacially plant your landing could result in serious injury and worse. It was the right call for Biles to put her physical and mental health first.

On Good Morning Britain, Dr Amir Khan praised Simone Biles for being open about her struggles. Further, he confirmed that many of his patients who experience physical symptoms such as fatigue and chronic pain are actually suffering from psychological issues such as depression and anxiety.

During the pandemic, we have (mostly) put our faith in experts. Its time that we listened to the experts on mental health as well rather than attention-seeking, outrage merchants like Piers Morgan. This should include considering how the world has changed, and how the challenges of the modern world (especially social media), might impact peoples ability to cope with stress.

View original post here:
The Mental Health Crisis is Becoming a Casualty of the Culture Wars - Shout Out UK

Is Christianity under attack in the United States? It depends on whom you ask. Some church leaders and politicians claim recent LGBTQ progress such as the 2015 U.S. Supreme Court ruling guaranteeing same-sex couples the right to marry is an attack on Christianity.

Researchers at Washington University in St. Louis sought to understand whether that sentiment is widely shared by other Christians. Their findings from five separate studies conducted over 3 years shed light on the root causes and consequences of such zero-sum beliefs a belief that social gains for one group necessarily involves losses for the other about Christianity and the LGBTQ community, and offer possible interventions to reduce such all-or-nothing beliefs.

The findings are published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, a leading empiricalsocial psychology journal. They show that zero-sum beliefs (ZSBs) are most common among conservative Christians, and are shaped by their understandings of Christian values, the Bible and in response to religious institutions.

Many Christians have come to see themselves as being on the losing side of the culture wars, said Clara L. Wilkins, principal investigator and associate professor of psychological and brain sciences in Arts & Sciences. Christians may perceive that an America where same sex marriage is legal is one in which they have lost their sway and are now victimized.

This is especially common among conservative Christians, who also are more likely to believe that Christianity is a defining feature of being American. As a result, they see themselves as being at odds with LGBTQ individuals, who are perceived as having increasing social influence.

Wilkins and Lerone A. Martin, co-principal investigator and director of American culture studies at Washington University, conducted five studies between July 2016 and December 2019 to explore the extent to which Christians endorse ZSBs about their relationships with LGBTQ individuals. For four of the five studies, they surveyed approximately 2,000 self-identified, heterosexual, cisgender and predominately white Christian Americans.

The February 2019 United Methodist Church (UMC) vote on language regarding human sexuality provided an opportunity for Wilkins and Martin to examine the role of church authorities in shaping attitudes. For this naturalistic experiment, they collected data in a sample of 321 United Methodists recruited at churches in St. Louis County and at the UMC General Conference.

The research was funded by the Templeton Religion Trust and as part of the Self, Virtue, and Public Life Project, a three-year research initiative based at the Institute for the Study of Human Flourishing at the University of Oklahoma.

Key findings from the studies include:

The church is a strong moral authority with the potential to shape norms and attitudes toward sexual minorities like court rulings have shifted attitudes on same sex marriage, the authors wrote.

We found this take-away very interesting in light of how religion, evangelicalism in particular, is often associated with strict definitions of civic belonging. Our research found that biblical faith can also lead to broad civic acceptance, said Martin, who also is an associate professor in the John C. Danforth Center on Religion and Politics.

Our research found that biblical faith can also lead to broad civic acceptance.

Since taking office, President Joe Biden has reversed bans on transgender peoples participation in the military and has reaffirmed protection for LGBTQ federal employees. He also made historic appointments, including Pete Buttigieg as the first openly gay secretary in the presidential Cabinet and Rachel Levine, the first openly transgender federal official. In Delaware, Sarah McBride also made history as the first openly transgender state senator in U.S. history.

Applauded by LGBTQ people and advocates, these momentous changes have sparked outrage by opponents. They argue that the growing acceptance of LGBTQ individuals impedes the ability of Christians to practice their faith as if gains for one group necessarily involved losses for the other. For example, then-Sen. Jeff Sessions described the 2015 U.S. Supreme Court ruling as an effort to secularize the country by force and intimidation.

That outrage has political implications. While the number of white evangelical Christians has decreased significantly in recent years from 23% in 2006 to 14% in 2020, according to a Public Religion Research Institute survey their political influence continues to grow.

The politicalinfluence of white evangelicals goes beyond their numerical representation, in part because of their historic willingness to Americanize Christianity through mass media, laissez-faire capitalism and pragmatic political partnerships. This blending of Christianity and Americanism has helped white evangelicals create abroad community that extends beyond their stated theological and institutional commitments, Martin said.

Whether with the phonograph, radio, television or the internet, whiteevangelicals have traditionally used mass media as a bullhorn. Theseelectric pulpits have enabled white evangelicals to disseminate their messages of Christian nationalism, culture wars and cultural grievances and political conservatism to afar-reachingconstituency.

These gospel seeds often find fertilegrounds amongst politicalpartners beyond the narrow theological confines ofwhiteevangelicalism.Politicians, many of which are not evenevangelicals or committed toevangelical theology, pick up the cause andtrumpet evangelicalcultural andsocialconcerns during theircampaigns in an attempt to cater to whiteevangelical voters.These voters in turn crown such political actors as their leaders in a political bargain where the ends justify the means. In this way, the numbers of self-proclaimed evangelicals may be small, but their political influence issizable. The election of President Donald Trump, the January insurrection and the increase in anti-LGBTQ legislation are just a few examples.

Indeed, recent social advancements have spurred an increase in anti-LGBTQ legislation fueled in part by conservative Christian groups. According to Wilkins and Martin, the Human Rights Campaign predicted that this will be a record-setting year for anti-LGBTQ legislation with as many as 250 bills introduced in state legislatures in 2021 alone.

While the research may seem disheartening at first glance, Wilkins and Martin insist it contains a hopeful message.

In particular, our data suggests that perceived conflict between groups is not inevitable, they said. In fact, we were able to successfully lower the extent to which mainline Christians perceive that LGBTQ gains come at a cost for Christians by having them reflect on biblical acceptance. According to recent analyses, mainline Christians now outnumber more conservative groups.

In other words, we identified an intervention to successfully lower ZSBs formostChristians.

Read the original:
Cultural backlash: Is LGBTQ progress an attack on Christianity? | The Source - Washington University in St. Louis Newsroom

Police vans were lined up early Friday evening outside Warsaws Ujazdowski Castle Center for Contemporary Art, as protestors gathered to demonstrate against the cultural institutions decision to proceed with an exhibition that critics say platforms antisemitic, racist, and Islamophobic messages under the guise of freedom of expression.

Exhibition organizers claim the show, which is titled Political Art and features many controversial and political artists, is designed to confront cancel culture on the political left. It is the second exhibition since Piotr Bernatowicz was controversially appointed as the museums director by Polands populist conservative ruling Law and Justice party in 2019.

Since the party came to power in 2015, Law and Justice government officials have corralled many of the countrys leading cultural institutions, including museums and theatres, into its conservative ideological orbit.

Kristian von Hornsleth, Head (2019). Ujazdowski Castle Centre for Contemporary Art.

The exhibition at Ujazdowski Castle is quickly proving to be a major flashpoint in Polands highly divisive culture wars. On the night of the opening, the institution braced for large protests by groups including Polands anti-fascist league and various LGBTQ+ and Jewish organizers. Photos posted to social media hours before the opening on August 27 showed at least six police vans parked outside the institution.

The newest exhibition under Bernatowiczs stewardship includes works by nearly 30 artists, one of whom is the controversial Swedish artist Dan Park, who was arrested in 2009 for a stunt that saw him placing swastikas and boxes labeled Zyklon Bthe gas used in the mass murder of Jews during the Holocaustin front of a Jewish community center in Malmo.

Parks contribution to the show is a poster that depicts the convicted Norwegian criminal Anders Behring Breivik, who killed 77 people, mostly children, in a series of coordinated terrorist attacks in Norway.Alongside Parks work is a piece by Danish artist Uwe Max Jensen consisting of a large flag constructed from several smaller LGBT rainbow flags that the artist has fashioned into the shape of a swastika.

One of the most controversial works in the show is by Kristian von Hornsleth from Denmark, who made a work depicting Ugandan villagers who were given pigs and goats in exchange for changing their last names to his own, a move the Ugandan government condemned as racist and disrespectful. The Political Art show includes photos of several of the villagers holding up their changed IDs. Artnet News reached out to all three artists, but did not hear back by publishing time.

Von Hornsleth told the Associated Press earlier this week that he believes his work is a celebration of free speech. Even if this show was right-wing and crazy, it should be allowed because its art. But its not [right-wing and crazy]its really about creating a space in which anybody can disagree about anything.

Some of the works appear to straddle left-wing political movements. The work of Hong Kong-Chinese photographer Tam Hoi Ying, for example, included in the exhibition, shows numerous human rights abuses in Hong Kong.

Tam Hoi Yings Being Disappeared 1. Human rights defender: Liu Xiaobo, Case: Co-authoring. Charter 08, a call for democratic reforms in China, Crime: Incitement to subvert state power, Punishment: 11-year sentence (2016). Courtesy Ujazdowski Castle Centre for Contemporary Art.

Co-curator Jon Eirik Lundberg, a Norwegian who oversees the Laesoe Kunsthal gallery in Denmark, agreed with von Hornsleths statement. If you dont have free speech, you dont have political freedom. If you dont have political freedom, you dont have any protection, he told the Associated Press. The best way to protect any minority is to make sure there is freedom of speech.

Many in Poland claim that the exhibition platforms problematic views that hark back to dangerous ideas emulating during the countrys Nazi occupation.A Ujazdowski Castle employee who wished to remain anonymous due to fear of reprisals told Artnet News:Under the guise of freedom of expression and bizarrely understood pluralism, Bernatowicz is admitting into the institution people associated with the neo-Nazi movement, at the same time canceling and stigmatizing projects inconsistent with his worldview.

The cancelled programming includes a Miet Warlop show that was originally scheduled for earlier this year, as well as the museums participation in an anti-fascist program, both of which were axed by Bernatowicz, allegedly due to budget shortfalls.

One anti-fascist network in Poland, the Anti-Fascist Year, accused the curators of using democratic principles to convey and justify right-wing hate speech. In a statement, the group said that the art in the show only strengthens the electoral prospects of authoritarian parties everywhere.

Bernatowicz doubled down on his commitment to the exhibition, stating his belief that despite the controversial nature of the works, the call to censor them is worse. In a letter published on the institutions website in response to concerns raised Warsaws Jewish community, Bernatowicz wrote that calls to censor the exhibition are misguided, coming from the well-educated circles and elites that, rather than engaging in dialogue with artistic attitudes that seem surprising or offensive, prefer to expunge them from the public sphere.

A statement posted to Instagram by the workers union at the cultural institution decried what it sees as hate speech. We express our opposition to the people who promote hatred in the walls of our institution [] This should not happen, especially in a country as severely experienced by Nazism as Poland.

Read the original:
Crowds Gather to Protest Warsaws Leading Contemporary Art Museum, Which Just Mounted an Anti-Cancel Culture Art Show - artnet News