Celebrating the Ray Harryhausen Centenary
Today marks the centenary of the birth of master special effects wizard Ray
Harryhausen---born on this date in 1920. Turner
Classic Movies is celebrating tonight with a line-up of some classic
films that feature his remarkable stop motion animation.
I can't even begin to put into words what Harryhausen's films meant to me
growing up. So it's best to let his genius speak for itself! From the 1963 film,
"Jason
and the Argonauts," augmented by a superb score from Bernard
Herrmann.
Posted by chris at 10:35 PM | Permalink |
Posted to Culture | Film
/ TV / Theater Review | Music
Song of the Day #1794
Song of the Day: You've
Made Me So Very Happy features the words and music of Berry
Gordy, Frank
Wilson, Patrice
Holloway, and Brenda
Holloway, who recorded this song
in 1967 [YouTube link]. The song barely cracked the Top 40 on both
the Billboard Hot 100 and the R&B Singles Chart. But it was a featured
selection on the
jukebox of the Stonewall
Inn, which, on
this date, was subject to a police
raid, something that was typically aimed at private establishments
catering to same-sex clientele. Such bars were often denied liquor licenses or
harassed simply because it was illegal for same-sex couples to hold hands, kiss,
or dance together ("lewd
behavior"). This particular bar was owned and "protected" by the Genovese
crime family, which paid off police officers from the Sixth
Precinct to look the other way. Corrupt cops would often get payola
to tip off the bar if there were any impending raids. But no tip offs came on
this night. The police entered the bar, roughed up employees and patrons, and
even arrested people for not wearing "gender-appropriate
clothing" (something that was actually against the law at the time).
The patrons had had enough. They pushed back and touched
off six nights of rioting, fighting for their very right to exist and
to pursue their own happiness. Though there
were many other precipitating events prior to 1969 involving many brave
activists, Stonewall remains
the singular "nodal
point" that gave birth to Pride
Day celebrations the world over (today, to the date, is, in
fact, the
fiftieth anniversary of the first Pride March in 1970 that marked the first
anniversary of the Stonewall uprising). In the end, however, this
date celebrates the birthright of every human being to pursue their own vision
of personal happiness, without fear of state or social oppression. In keeping
with our Summer Music Festival (Jazz Edition), we mark this occasion with
several jazz-infused versions of this song, chief among them the classic Blood,
Sweat, and Tears jazz-rock rendition [YouTube link], released the
same year as the Stonewall
Rebellion, rising to #2 on the Billboard Hot 100. And check
out renditions by song stylist Nancy
Wilson, pianist Ramsey
Lewis, clarinet legend Benny
Goodman, the Lasse
Lindgren Big Constellation and trumpeter Chet
Baker [YouTube links] (from his very commercial album, with the
clever title of "Blood,
Chet and Tears").
Posted by chris at 12:01 AM | Permalink |
Posted to Culture | Music | Politics
(Theory, History, Now) | Sexuality
Song of the Day #1793
Song of the Day: A
Little Less Wonderful [YouTube link], words and music by my dear
friend Roger
Bissell, is highlighted today in honor of his
birthday! This song, written in 1982, features vocals by Roger's
kids (Charlie, Rebecca, Andrew, and Daniel) and gospel singer, Mike
Allen. Roger provides
the scat-singing, whistling, finger snaps, and "mouth percussion" (sounds
perverse, I know). This is a sweet track from the 2010 album, "Reflective
Trombone." And for a loving twist on the tune check out this
George Smith-produced video version [YouTube link]. To my brother
from another mother: Many more happy and healthy returns, with love! Keep
bringing more wonderful music (and many more wonderful ideas) into our world!
Song of the Day #1792
Song of the Day: Captain
Senor Mouse, composed by jazz keyboardist extraordinaire Chick
Corea, made its debut on two 1973 albums: "Hymn
of the Seventh Galaxy" with Return
to Forever (featuring Bill
Connors on guitar, Stanley
Clarke on bass, and Lenny
White on drums) and with vibraphonist Gary
Burton on the duet album "Crystal
Silence" (and in the 2008
Grammy Award-winning live set, "The
New Crystal Silence"). Check out this Chick composition
in all its wonderful renditions: with Return
to Forever and with Gary
Burton in studio and live
settings, as well as covers by guitarist
Al DiMeola, guitarist
Martin Taylor and bassist Peter Ind, guitarist
Kevin Eubanks, and Gordon
Goodwin's Big Phat Band [YouTube links].
Coronavirus (27): Majority Rules NY
As coronavirus cases ebb in NY, and are spiking elsewhere in the country, I had
a chance to catch up with my friend Pasquale Cascone (who lives downstairs from
me!), and his "Majority
Rules NY" crew [YouTube link], which describes itself as follows:
Follow us on Instagram @majorityrulesny ... Message us some topics you'd like us
to address. Check us out on iTunes, Spotify, TuneIn radio, iHeartradio, Google
podcasts for more episodes from before we went to video and audio. We are a show
that relates to all of us in between the full blown adult phase of life and the
last ounce of youthfulness and trying to find the perfect balance.
This video made on 26 April 2020 is just a bunch of neighborhood guys who will
bring a smile to your face. Pasquale's discussion of living as an essential
worker during a time of "f&c*ing chaos" will give you a chuckle, even in the
midst of a world turned upside down. This is no Theatre
of the Absurd---since you'll find some nuggets of wisdom, and lots of
laughs, while listening to these guys thrash it about.
Posted by chris at 07:57 PM | Permalink |
Posted to Culture | Politics
(Theory, History, Now)
Song of the Day #1791
Song of the Day: ABC is
credited to "The
Corporation"---that Motown group
of musical creators who included Berry
Gordy, Freddie
Perren, Alphonzo
Mizell, and Deke
Richards. This song was the second of four consecutive Jackson
Five songs to hit #1, and alphabetically, it is at the beginning of Billboard's
all-time #1 hits. Eleven years ago today, Michael
Jackson died tragically. Last year, I wrote an
essay addressing his legacy and controversial life; this year, I mark
this anniversary with memories of a happier time. Check out the
original J5 single and the
Jackson Five appearance on "The Ed Sullivan Show" on 10 May 1970. But
in keeping with the theme of our Summer Music Festival (Jazz Edition), check
out this
big band arrangement by Jim McMillen from the album, "Swingin' to Michael
Jackson: A Tribute".
Posted by chris at 12:48 AM | Permalink |
Posted to Music | Remembrance
On Statues, Sledgehammers, and Scalpels
"If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail ..."
As protests in the wake of the recent murder of George Floyd have spread
throughout the United States (and even throughout the world)---something I
addressed in my essay, "America:
On Wounded Knee"---I've been participating In several Facebook
discussions, nearly all of which have been unpleasant. Nevertheless, I wanted to
add this postscript to a very heartfelt post for the record, most of it
drawn from these various Facebook threads.
I recently saw for the umpteenth time the 1991 Oliver
Stone-directed film, "JFK",
which opened with this quote from American author and poet Ella
Wheeler Wilcox:
To sin by silence, when we should protest, makes cowards out of men.
A more prescient observation in these times would be hard to find. It is
unacceptable to be silent in the face of injustice; standing by the courage of
our convictions---and protesting against tyranny anytime we see it---is a
necessity for any of us who care about human freedom and dignity.
But as my previous essay made clear: the means of protest often make all
the difference moving forward in terms of the shape of things to come.
Much has been made of the tearing down of confederate statues that pepper the
states of the former confederacy; I have discussed this several times before,
most notably in this
post. I think that these symbols of oppression are reprehensible. One
important point has been obscured in the discussion of the statues of the
confederacy in particular. Most of those statues were not built in the
wake of the Civil War to commemorate the "heroes" who fought in the "war of
Northern aggression." They were built during times of extreme civil rights
distress, with the
clear purpose to intimidate African Americans who were getting too
"uppity" in their struggles for human freedom.
Nevertheless, the historian in me sees the controversy over these statues as "teachable
moments." As relics of a bygone age, their preservation in some
form---a museum or some other gallery---can provide people of different walks of
life an opportunity to understand the cultural narratives embodied in these
symbols of hate.
As protests have spread, so too has the ire of the protesters, who turn toward
statues of such figures as Christopher
Columbus, striking at the heart of the brutality of the European
"discovery" and colonization of the Americas and the destruction of indigenous
peoples. I understand the anger and actions of protesters with regard to
Columbus and what follows is not an apologia for any of his misdeeds. It
is, however, an attempt to contextualize the push-back that inevitably follows
when different narratives collide.
Statues, like all symbols, convey different meanings to different peoples,
giving rise to conflicting narratives. Knowing something about the Italian
American experience, I fully understand the attitudes of many Italians,
especially of an older generation, who came to America, viewing Columbus as
having opened up a "New World" to which they could emigrate, in search of
greater opportunities. No matter how incorrect their perception of Columbus was,
it still remained a powerful symbol for that group of immigrants, among them my
paternal grandparents.
As I have observed here,
Italian immigrants were met with ethnic prejudice of a sort that made them
second only to African Americans in terms of the number of lynchings they
experienced in the years between 1870 and 1940. It was a "murderous spree" that
spanned states from Colorado to Mississippi to Illinois to North Carolina to
Florida. And when they weren't being lynched by those who saw them as dangerous
"others", harboring a "foreign" religion (Catholicism) and "anarchist"
tendencies (Sacco
and Vanzetti, anyone?), they were targeted by their own people. The
so-called Black
Hand extorted "protection" money from residents and businesses alike
(that is, protection against Black Hand thugs who would target any Italians who
refused to buy into the form of "protection" they offered, in the face of
indifference from the predominantly Irish
police force in NYC.) The shift away from outright extortion to more
subtle forms of extortion (through oaths of mutual loyalty) came with the
rise of Mafia organizations---something accurately portrayed in the
story of the rise of the young Vito
Corleone in "The
Godfather, Part II".
So given the symbolism of Columbus to many Italian Americans, I can understand
the predictable push-back toward those who have targeted statues of the
explorer. It will probably take a generational shift in the culture of Italian
Americans before anyone could entertain even the possibility of dismantling that
statue reigning over Columbus Circle in NYC (which has had that name since the
late 1800s). But what some folks don't understand is that the annual Columbus
Day Parade is, essentially, an annual Italian American Day Parade, in the same
way that there is a Greek Independence Day Parade, a Puerto Rican Day Parade, a
St. Patrick's Day Parade, and a Pride Day Parade. Each of these parades may be
rooted in an historical event, culture, or person(s), but ultimately, they
become extensions of the groups and traditions they are meant to celebrate. I
don't think I've watched a single Columbus Day parade where the Grand Marshall
extolled the "virtues" of Columbus, colonialism, or Native American genocide.
It's always focused on the Italian American contribution to American culture and
life... and I don't think this will change, at least not in my lifetime.
Nevertheless, the practice of taking sledgehammers to statues has now moved from
symbols of the confederacy and symbols of European colonization to symbols of
the founders of the American republic, most of whom were, indeed, slaveholders.
The toppling of statues of George
Washington has been met with applause from many of my libertarian
friends and colleagues. Even the NYC City Council is considering removing the
statue of Thomas
Jefferson, another American revolutionary who owned slaves in his
lifetime.
Jefferson surely was an imperfect, flawed human being, a man who owned slaves
and may
have fathered children with one of them. But he was also the author
of these words in the
founding document of the American republic:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that
they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among
these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these
rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from
the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes
destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish
it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles
and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to
effect their Safety and Happiness.
That these words would ultimately serve as the inspiration for those seeking to
abolish the very institution that Jefferson the man sustained is, in itself, a
testament to his enduring intellectual legacy. Even Jefferson would have
understood the need for people to rise up, protest, and rebel against injustice.
"The tree of liberty," he
famously declared, "must be refreshed from time to time with the
blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure."
Ironically, even a thinker as far left as Slavoj
Zizek has emphasized the importance of treating Jefferson as
qualitatively different from, say, Robert E. Lee. As he wrote in Like A Thief
In Broad Daylight: Power in the Era of Post-Humanity (H/T to my pal Eric
Fleischmann):
The point is not just to debunk the War of Independence as fake: there
undoubtedly is an emancipatory dimension in the works of Jefferson, Paine, and
so on. In spite of being a slave owner, Jefferson is an important link in the
chain of modern emancipatory struggles, and one is justified in claiming that
the struggle for the abolition of slavery was basically the continuation of
Jefferson's work. Jefferson was a different kind of man from Robert E. Lee, and
the inconsistencies in his position just demonstrate how the American revolution
is an unfinished project (as Habermas would have put it).
It was this project that led Benjamin
Tucker to identify anarchists as "unterrified
Jeffersonian democrats."
So if we're going to view every flawed eighteenth century individual through the
20/20 hindsight of 2020, at least let's get some corrective lenses to help us
grasp more fully the nuances of the larger historical and systemic context. With
the use of every sledgehammer to bring down every statue, it is essential to
retain the intellectual scalpels required for a more delicate, surgical
dissection of America's past: its flaws and its virtues, its injustices and its
promise.
Ironically, there is an historical figure that is, in many ways, more flawed
than Jefferson, and yet, in the narrative of American history, that figure looms
large over the emancipation of African Americans from slavery: Abraham Lincoln.
On almost every level, Lincoln
was neither a model President nor a model libertarian. And yet,
despite his nationalist economic policies, his suspension of habeas corpus and
his odious racialist views, his soaring
rhetoric of freedom rang clear to generations
of African Americans. Before his assassination in 1865, he fought
hard to pass the
Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution that would forever abolish
slavery in the United States. It led many to view him as The
Great Emancipator, and gave the
vast majority of African Americans a reason to vote Republican until the New
Deal era.
And so, in Washington, D.C., there sits a huge memorial to Abraham Lincoln---one
that overwhelmed me when I saw it as a five-year old kid who toured the historic
district for the first time. When opera singer Marian
Anderson was denied the opportunity to sing at Constitution Hall because
she was blocked by the Daughters of the American Revolution, she sang on the
steps of the Lincoln Memorial and made history. When Martin
Luther King, Jr. marched on Washington in 1963, he gave his legendary
"I Have a Dream" speech in the shadow of that same memorial. Given the history
of that memorial in the struggle for civil rights, and despite the
terribly flawed man to whom that memorial was erected, one has to ask: Do we
burn it down to the ground because of the flaws of the man, or keep it as part
of our historical memory precisely for its evolving significance to generations
of people yearning to "breathe
free"? ("I
can't breathe" is indeed far more symbolic here than a mere call for
simple survival: it is the very negation of life and liberty in every meaningful
way.)
When the sledgehammer is wielded without any consideration of the larger context
of American history, the wider cause of justice for all cannot be served.
Over the last century or so, we have seen the atrocities committed by "top-down"
canvas cleaning, from the Nazis to the Soviets to the Maoists to the Taliban.
"Bottom-up" canvas cleaning is an entirely different species. It is an
understandable reaction against systemic and institutionalized
oppression. But in cleaning the soiled canvas of the American experience by
toppling the statues of flawed men, a transcendence is required, or we risk
toppling the ideals that some of these men---especially the American
founders---extolled. These ideals, if followed to their logical conclusion, are
the most potent weapons in fighting injustices around the world.
My friend Roderick
Tracy Long recently quoted Michel
Foucault, and it's worth repeating here:
My point is not that everything is bad, but that everything is dangerous, which
is not exactly the same as bad. If everything is dangerous, then we always have
something to do. So my position leads not to apathy but to a hyper- and
pessimistic activism. I think that the ethico-political choice we have to make
every day is to determine which is the main danger. ("On the Genealogy of
Ethics: An Overview of Work in Progress," afterword, in Hubert L. Dreyfus and
Paul Rabinow, Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics, 2nd
ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983).
This is a call to focus on the main dangers that surround us, challenging
them radically, at their fundamental roots, with all the courage demanded
of us in the face of injustice. Destroying statues is easy; the truly Herculean
task before us is to build alternative statues, symbols, and structures of
meaning that do not replicate the injustices of the past, and that move toward
the realization of the very ideals of freedom, equality, and social justice
embraced by some of those flawed fellows who pledged their lives, fortunes, and
sacred honor to defeat the tyrannies of their time.
Postscript (22
June 2020): Some discussion of these issues took place on Facebook, and I
reproduce some of my comments from the various threads here. My dear friend Ryan
Neugebauer remarked: "Imagine thinking society should be a giant museum where
you have to preserve everything as it is for all times and places. No change,
you must always see the past wherever you go. I would not want to live under
such thinking. It's ridiculous also because every era ends up replacing previous
ones. Even the ones you think you are preserving replaced ones before them."
I replied:
I agree, and this is is why we have museums---where relics of the past might sit
and be more properly contextualized. But I do think a greater context needs to
be grasped here (and I'm not suggesting that the current folks tearing down
monuments are on a par with the Taliban or the Maoist cultural revolutionaries).
Nevertheless, massive social change is not going to be achieved by the kind of
"canvas cleaning" that would demand the dynamiting of Mount Rushmore (the way
the Taliban destroyed the Buddhas of Bamyan) or some Maoist-like cultural
revolution, which tried to wipe out every last vestige of the past as if it
didn't happen, taking thousands of lives along with it.
We don't have to forever preserve the past in temples glorifying bad acts or bad
people. It is easy to bring down a statue or a monument with 20/20 hindsight and
2020 sensibilities; the more difficult task is building new monuments that take
on greater meaning and symbolism for a new generation in affecting the kind of
cultural change upon which any radical political change must ultimately depend.
Look, all I'm saying is: The whole goddamn country's history is drenched in
blood "from sea to shining sea." And there probably isn't a society on earth
that isn't drenched in blood. Here alone we have seen massive systemic violence
directed against indigenous populations, "imported" populations (as in slavery),
immigrant populations, or populations of marginalized people (LGBTQ+).
Ultimately, you can't turn back the clock; you can try to topple symbols or
contextualize them, but the really demanding project is in building alternative,
parallel, more powerful symbols to supplant the older ones---without necessarily
destroying everything from the past. Folks can make this a "teachable moment"...
creating anew, without aiming to destroy every last vestige of the past. It does
not work. It never has. It never will.
Social change is always messy---but thank goodness it's not a "top down"-
dictated social change that we are currently witnessing. We are far more likely
to see a better outcome even from messy "bottom-up" and "spontaneous" excesses
than anything we would witness if "change" were dictated by folks in high places
with guns and gulags.
On another thread was reproduced the famous Lord
Acton passage that, in full, states:
Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are
almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority;
still more when you superadd the tendency of the certainty of corruption by
authority.
... to which I responded:
Mostly applicable to politicians and rulers. Not to comedians, like, say, "The
Great One" (Jackie Gleason). All depends on the context. :)
Jeez... even that got push-back! When one reader suggested that maybe it
applied to Gleason as well, since his oft-repeated line---"One of these days,
Alice ... pow!"---glorified "domestic violence for laughs", I replied:
Except that in the end, Alice always proved to be the wiser one. She was
practically a feminist hero, way ahead of her time, who was ultimately always right.
Not to mention the number of laughs Alice got, which far "outweighed" anything
Ralph Kramden could ever say, since she targeted his "weight" for more laughs
than any "Bang, Zooms" that came out of Ralph's mouth. More than that, her
put-downs of him were far more biting and riotous than anything he could ever
say. If somebody ever really did an examination of those "Honeymooners" scripts
and saw how Alice handled "the King of the Castle", they'd easily see just who
was really the "king" of that castle. I'd go one step further: Show me one
other 1950s sitcom that portrayed a stronger woman than Alice Kramden. In an
era dominated by "Father Knows Best" and such, she was truly in a class by
herself.
... and the beat goes on ...
Posted by chris at 02:19 AM | Permalink |
Posted to Culture | Dialectics | Education | Film
/ TV / Theater Review | Politics
(Theory, History, Now)
Cali Turns 3: Long Live the Queen!
Back on May 17, 2018, our little Cali the Cat entered our lives, only to
celebrate her first birthday with us on June
21st of that year. She has been a source of joy, mystery, entertainment,
hilarity, and love.
We celebrated the Terrible
Twos last year, but we've been warned by child
psychologists that the Threes can be Just as "Terrible", with
observations that are obviously just as applicable to cats as they are to kids!
For kids, "at two, they can barely talk. At three, they never shut the hell up."
Well, Cali hardly meowed when she was younger. Now she has a variety of
sounds that tell you exactly what she means.
For kids, "at two, they are distracted by a box of Gerber Puffs at the grocery
store. At three, they want to dictate your entire food list." Clearly applicable
to cats.
For kids, "at two, manipulation is the last thing on their minds. At three, they
own you. And they know it." Yep!
And that's why she's gone from a Diva to the Queen of this Castle!
Happy birthday to our baby! Many more happy and healthy returns, with mucho love
from all of us!
Finally, this proud Daddy is happy to say that his baby daughter wished him Happy
Father's Day after I kissed her belly... from which I escaped
unscathed! (And a Happy Father's Day to all the other Dads out there!)
Posted by chris at 12:01 AM | Permalink |
Posted to Blog
/ Personal Business | Frivolity
Song of the Day #1790
Song of the Day: What
is this Thing Called Love?, words
and music by the great Cole
Porter, was featured in the 1929 Broadway musical "Wake
Up and Dream," where it was introduced by Elsie
Carlisle [YouTube link]. At 5:44 pm, today, the Northern
hemisphere enters the Summer Solstice. And so begins the Fifth Annual Summer Music
Festival (Jazz
Edition). This entire summer, I'll be spotlighting jazz
recordings---from artists past and present. Ironically, long after my playlist
was set in stone for the festival, I discovered that TCM has been running a
wonderful series of "Jazz
in Film" (Mondays and Thursdays in June). This festival was also
planned long before recent
events, but it is a celebration of a genre that owes so much to the African
American experience---while transcending the divisions of social life
through the universality of music. Fortunately, for today, I get to highlight
one of the great contributions to the Great
American Songbook. Though this is going to be a Jazz Summer, I won't
be posting many jazz standards, since my ever-growing list of "Favorite
Songs" has been featuring such standards for sixteen years! But
today's song asks one of the most enduring questions of the human condition.
Musicians from every walk of life---every race, every ethnicity, every
gender---have explored their answers to that question in a variety of ways over
the years, including stride
pianist James P. Johnson, Fred
Rich and his Orchestra (featuring jazz violinist Joe Venuti and both Tommy and
Jimmy Dorsey), twice by jazz
guitar giant Django Reinhardt and legendary
jazz violinist Stephane Grappelli, the
Artie Shaw Big Band, guitarist
Les Paul, pianist
Dave Brubeck and alto saxophonist Paul Desmond, alto
saxophonist Cannonball Adderly, soprano
saxophonist Sidney Bechet and trumpeter Charlie Shavers, jazz
guitarist Joe Pass, tenor
saxophonist Stan Getz and pianist Kenny Barron, trumpeter
Clifford Brown, tenor saxophonist Sonny Rollins, and drummer Max Roach, jazz
violinist Thomas Fraioli, New
York Swing (with guitarist Bucky Pizzarelli, pianist John Bunch, bassist Jay
Leonhart, and drummer Joe Cocuzzo), the
McCoy Tyner Quartet (with tenor saxophonist Joe Henderson, bassist Ron Carter,
and drummer Al Foster), and pianist
Danny Zeitlin [YouTube links]. One of my favorite instrumental
renditions comes from jazz pianist Bill
Evans [YouTube link] from his 1960 album "Portrait
in Jazz"---with its trailblazing interplay between a trio of co-equal
improvisers, which included bassist Scott
LaFaro and drummer Paul
Motian. The album was recorded eight months after Evans's
collaboration with Miles
Davis in creating the best-selling
jazz album of all time, "Kind
of Blue." That revolutionary album was largely based on the
pianist's impressionistic, harmonic
conceptions and modal
approach, which led many to view Evans as
"the
principal creator of [the] album." There have also been some
wonderful vocal renditions of this Porter classic
by such artists as Sarah
Vaughan, Billie
Holiday, Frank
Sinatra, Ella
Fitzgerald, Anita
O'Day, Keely
Smith, and Bobby
McFerrin (with Herbie Hancock on piano) [YouTube link].
Posted by chris at 12:01 AM | Permalink |
Posted to Culture | Film
/ TV / Theater Review | Music | Politics
(Theory, History, Now)
Song of the Day #1789
Song of the Day: Scoob!
("Summer Feelings"), words and music by Lennon
Stella, Charlie
Puth, Invincible
(Producer), Alexander
Izquierdo, Charles
Brown, Simon
Wilcox and Lowell,
can be found on the soundtrack to the 2020 animated flick "Scoob!"
(short for Scooby
Doo). This duet, featuring Lennon
Stella and the deeply jazz-influenced Charlie Puth, is a precursor to
our Fifth
Annual Summer Music Festival (Jazz Edition). This year has been a
transformative one in so many ways and on so many levels; I've seen things that
I could never have even remotely predicted when I toasted
the New Year as the ball dropped in Times Square. I have refused
to stay silent and have spoken out about so
many issues over these many months; so I don't want to be accused of
being a
modern-day Nero, fiddling while our own Rome burned. This song has
little to do with jazz,
but everything to do with those "summer
feelings"---and I can think of fewer ways to express such feelings
than by celebrating
one of the most significant cultural gifts bestowed upon world music,
emergent from the African
American experience, and taking a distinctive form through the
blending of African and European idioms.
This was something I planned long before the events of the day. But before we
start the newest installment in our annual Summer Music Festival, on June 20th,
indulge those "summer
feelings": check out the original
studio recording of this song, the
official video, the Quarantine
Video Version, the Bassboosted
Remix, and the Nightcore
Whore Remix [YouTube links].
Posted by chris at 03:52 PM | Permalink |
Posted to Culture | Film
/ TV / Theater Review | Music
More Volts (Not Votes) For Politicians!
Another gem from the anarchic "Pearls
Before Swine" comic strip by Stephan
Pastis:
Posted by chris at 10:43 AM | Permalink |
Posted to Politics
(Theory, History, Now)
Lists, Lists, and More Lists
Back on May 5, 2020, I was first tagged by my friend Daniel Bastiat (on
Facebook) to engage in a book challenge: To post the covers of seven books over
a seven-day period that had an effect on you, with no explanation. I listed the
following seven books (and tagged other people with this, and subsequent
challenges):
1. "Dialectical
Investigations", by Bertell Ollman
2. "A
New History of Leviathan: Essays on the Rise of the American Corporate State",
edited by Ronald Radosh and Murray Rothbard
3. "Capitalism:
The Unknown Ideal", by Ayn Rand
4. "National
Economic Planning: What is Left?", by Don Lavoie
5. "The
Disowned Self", by Nathaniel Branden
6. "Nationalism
and Culture", by Rudolf Rocker
7. "The
Libertarian Alternative", edited by Tibor Machan.
This was followed by a ten-day "Album Challenge", posting key albums that
affected you throughout your life:
1. "Ben
Hur" (1959 soundtrack)
2. "Concierto
de Aranjuez" (Julian Bream)
3. "Concierto"
(Jim Hall)
4. "Intuition"
(Bill Evans)
5. "The
Mad Hatter" (Chick Corea)
6. "Thriller"
(Michael Jackson)
7. "Ultimate
Sinatra" (Frank Sinatra)
8. "At
the Close of a Century" (Stevie Wonder)
9. "I
Wanna Be Around" (Tony Bennett)
10. "Getz/Gilberto"
(Stan Getz/Joao Gilberto/Astrid Gilberto/Antonio Carlos Jobim)
And that was followed by the final challenge: List ten films and ten TV shows
that had an impact on your life or tastes or that loom large in your memory
(they need not even be ranked among your all-time "favorites", though clearly
they may very well be). So here were my choices for that challenge:
Day 1:
Film: "King
Kong" (1933)
TV: "Looney
Tunes Cartoons" (1930-1969)
Day 2:
Film: "The
Wizard of Oz" (1939)
TV: "The
Honeymooners" (1956)
Day 3:
Film: "North
By Northwest" (1959)
TV: "The
Twilight Zone" (1959)
Day 4:
Film: "Ben-Hur"
(1959)
TV: "The
Fugitive" (1963)
Day 5:
Film: "Inherit
the Wind" (1960)
TV: "I,
Claudius" (1976)
Day 6:
Film: "Planet
of the Apes" (1968)
TV: "Jesus
of Nazareth" (1977)
Day 7:
Film: "The
Exorcist" (1973)
TV: "The
Winds of War" / "War
and Remembrance" (1983/1989)
Day 8:
Film: "The
Godfather: The Complete Epic, 1901-1959" (1977)
TV: "The
X-Files" (1993)
Day 9:
Film: "The
Deer Hunter" (1978)
TV: "The
West Wing" (1999)
Day 10:
Film: "Alien"
(1979) / "Aliens"
(1986) - I know, it's cheating, but I can't pick one without the other!
TV: "24"
(2001)
And that's all folks! Next up will be the Fifth Annual Summer Music
Festival (Jazz Edition), which will begin when summer arrives in the Northern
hemisphere and conclude on the day of the autumnal equinox.
Posted by chris at 05:22 PM | Permalink |
Posted to Culture | Film
/ TV / Theater Review | Frivolity | Music | Remembrance
JARS: Our Twentieth Anniversary Celebration Begins!
I am delighted and deeply honored to announce the publication of the first of
two issues celebrating the twentieth anniversary of The
Journal of Ayn Rand Studies. Tonight, it made its debut on JSTOR;
print subscribers should expect the first of these two historic issues within
the next couple of weeks.
The following excerpt is from the Introduction I wrote to Volume 20, Number 1:
Welcome to the first issue of the twentieth anniversary volume of The Journal
of Ayn Rand Studies.
If someone had told me that I'd even be writing that introductory sentence
twenty-plus years ago, when the very first issue of the journal was in the
planning stages, I would never have believed it. But here we are, commencing our
celebration of the twentieth volume in our history with the first of two issues
that will feature reviews and discussions of works relevant to Rand studies that
have never been formally examined in our pages.
JARS began
as a fledgling independent periodical in Fall 1999, the brainchild of Liberty magazine
editor Bill Bradford (1947-2005). He enlisted Stephen Cox and me as founding
co-editors, with a founding advisory board of only three (Robert L. Campbell,
Mimi Reisel Gladstein, and Larry Sechrest). By our second issue, the advisory
board had expanded to include Douglas J. Den Uyl, Robert Hessen, John Hospers,
Lester H. Hunt, Eric Mack, and Douglas B. Rasmussen. With the passing of our
dear friends, Bill, John, and Larry, we expanded our Editorial Board to four
(Stephen Cox, Robert L. Campbell, Roderick T. Long, and me) and our Advisory
Board to a dozen (with the 2013 additions of David T. Beito, Peter J. Boettke,
Susan Love Brown, Hannes H. Gissurarson, Steven Horwitz, and David N. Mayer).
Sadly, David passed away on 23 November 2019; we dedicate this first issue of
our twentieth anniversary volume to his memory.
It should be noted, however, that our editors and advisors provide only a hint
of the astounding interdisciplinary character of the journal, which has
published essays in such fields as anthropology, economics, English and theater
arts, history, law, literature, philosophy, politics, and psychology. Starting
with the July 2013 issue, the journal began a new phase as a Pennsylvania State
University Press print-published periodical. Now we are indexed by nearly two
dozen abstracting services, are available to thousands of public, private,
not-for-profit, business, and institutional libraries worldwide, and are
published electronically by both JSTOR and Project MUSE. Our visibility and
accessibility have grown enormously, as has our subscription base. Our total
electronic downloads alone have gone from 7,922 in 2013 to 14,515 in 2019. I
expect a sharp jump in those figures with the debut of these two very special JARS issues.
We have published important symposia on remarkably diverse topics, including
Rand's aesthetics (Spring
2001), Rand and progressive rock (Fall
2003), Rand's literary and cultural impact (Fall
2004), Rand among the Austrians (Spring
2005), and Rand's ethics (Spring
2006). We brought out two issues celebrating our tenth anniversary,
including one devoted to Rand and Nietzsche (Spring
2009); a 2016
double issue (and our first published Kindle
edition) devoted to an examination of "Nathaniel Branden: His Work
and Legacy"; and a December
2019 issue marking the sixty-plus-year career of Atlas Shrugged.
With this thirty-ninth issue in our history, we will have published 366 articles
by 173 authors.
The introduction continues with a list of acknowledgments to all those who have
made this achievement possible. We remain the only double-blind
peer-reviewed interdisciplinary scholarly periodical published by a university
press devoted to the study of Ayn Rand and her times. I conclude my introduction
by acknowledging our most important debt:
In the end, however, we thank our readers above all, because they are the key to
our phenomenal success. Here's to another two decades and beyond of JARS triumphs
. . . two decades, or until such time as Rand studies have so penetrated the
literary and philosophic canon that specialized journals of this nature are no
longer required.
So... what do readers have in store for them in this twentieth anniversary
celebration? As mentioned above, we decided to devote two issues to reviewing
those works in the general area of Rand studies, which have never been
critically appraised in our pages. The list of works reviewed in this first
issue of volume 20 are:
Understanding Objectivism,
by Leonard Peikoff
How Bad Writing Destroyed the World: Ayn Rand and the Literary Origins of the
Financial Crisis,
by Adam Weiner
Perspectives on Ayn Rand's Contributions to Economic and Business Thought,
edited by Edward W. Younkins
Equal Is Unfair: America's Misguided Fight against Income Inequality,
by Don Watkins and Yaron Brook
Selfish Women,
by Lisa Downing
Ayn Rand and the Posthuman: The Mind-Made Future,
by Ben Murnane
A New Textbook of Americanism: The Politics of Ayn Rand,
edited by Jonathan Hoenig
Independent Judgment and Introspection: Fundamental Requirements of the Free
Society,
by Jerry Kirkpatrick
The Unconquered: With Another, Earlier Adaptation of "We the Living",
by Ayn Rand (edited by Robert Mayhew), and Ideal: The Novel and the Play,
by Ayn Rand
Who Is John Galt? A Navigational Guide to Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged",
by Timothy Curry and Anthony Trifiletti, and So Who Is John Galt, Anyway? A
Reader's Guide to Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged", by Robert Tracinski
Anthem,
by Ayn Rand (adapted by Jennifer Grossman and Dan Parsons, illustrated by Dan
Parsons); Anthem, by Ayn Rand (adapted by Charles Santino and Joe
Staton); The Age of Selfishness: Ayn Rand, Morality, and the Financial Crisis,
by Darryl Cunningham
What's in Your File Folder? Essays on the Nature and Logic of Propositions,
by Roger E. Bissell
***
As is the case with every issue, we have introduced at least one new contributor
to the JARS family. This issue brings debut pieces from Roger Donway and David
Gordon. Here is our Table of Contents for Volume 20, Number 1 (the abstracts can
be found here;
contributor biographies can be found here):
What Ayn Never Told Us - Dennis C. Hardin
How Bad Scholarship Destroys Literary and Economic Analysis - Peter J. Boettke
Promethean Commerce and Ayn's Alloy - Roger Donway
Misguided Arguments - David Gordon
Ayn Rand: Selfish Woman - Mimi Reisel Gladstein
Ayn Rand and Posthumanism - Troy Camplin
Textbook of Americanism 2.0 - Neil Parille
The Psycho-Epistemology of Freedom - Steven H. Shmurak
Posthumous Publications - Stephen Cox
Who John Galt Is - Roger E. Bissell
Illustrated Rand: Three Recent Graphic Novels - Aeon J. Skoble
File Folder Follies - Fred Seddon
Those seeking to subscribe to the journal should visit the sites linked here.
And---as we march into the third decade of this remarkable journal---those
wishing to submit manuscripts for consideration should follow the instructions here.
Once again: My eternal gratitude to every person who has made this day possible.
Posted by chris at 12:10 AM | Permalink |
Posted to Culture | Periodicals | Politics
(Theory, History, Now) | Rand
Studies
America: On Wounded Knee
When I started to compose this essay, I couldn't get three images out of my
mind. The first image is of former NFL quarterback, Colin
Rand Kaepernick, who took to kneeling during the national anthem, in
protest against police brutality and racial inequality in this country:
Some folks expressed great moral indignation at Kaepernick's "disrespectful"
behavior; Donald
Trump himself called on NFL owners to fire anyone who "disrespects
our flag." At the time, he said: "Get that son of a bitch off the field right
now, out, he's fired. He's fired! ... That's a total disrespect of our heritage.
That's a total disrespect of everything that we stand for." The NFL was so
petrified by the public outcry that it adopted a league policy, allowing teams
to fine any players who exhibited such behavior "an unspecified sum"---demanding
further that such players be relegated to the locker room rather than exhibit
disrespect for the flag on the field, for all to see. When all was said and
done, Kaepernick went unsigned after the 2016 season, and filed a grievance
against the NFL, accusing owners of colluding to keep him out of the league. He
later reached a confidential settlement with the league, and withdrew the
grievance.
Alas, the technicalities of NFL ownership of teams didn't make this a clear-cut
issue that might fall under free speech guidelines; players employed by the NFL
either play by the rules or get another job. The fact that most of them play in
stadiums that have been built with
taxpayer dollars or through the use of eminent
domain didn't mitigate the circumstances in favor of free expression.
Next to that image of an NFL player taking a knee during the national anthem,
and all the hoopla that surrounded it, there is the harrowing image of George
Floyd, an unarmed black man in Minneapolis, Minnesota, handcuffed,
face down, pinned to the ground by a white policeman, Derek Chauvin, whose knee
was also bent---grinding into the back of Floyd's neck, even as he pleaded with
Chauvin that he couldn't breathe, that he was going to die.
Fortunately, the moral outcry over this nightmarish injustice seems to have
eclipsed the umbrage expressed by so many when they saw an NFL player kneeling
during "The
Star-Spangled Banner"---in protest of police brutality.
But there is now a third image that haunts me. It is the image of another man,
George Floyd's brother Terence, who traveled from Bedford-Stuyvesant, Brooklyn,
to the spot in Minneapolis, where his brother was killed. Terence tried to
kneel, but the wounds in his soul ran so deep, that they crippled his ability to
balance himself. He collapsed in tears.
These three images tell different stories---but they are all united in some way.
They tell the story of protest---both after and before, before and after, the
ongoing murder of unarmed black men throughout our country by police officers.
They tell the story of what happens when taking a knee in prayer morphs into
using a knee as a weapon to snuff out the life of another human being. They tell
the story of what happens in the aftermath of that death, when a kneeling man
can barely steady himself in an effort to pay tribute to his fallen brother.
America is now under siege, not by rioters, but by what these three images
project: protest, death, and remembrance. And if what we are seeing on the
streets of America is a war of sorts, I can only quote Herman Wouk: "The
beginning of the end of war lies in remembrance."
***
Over these last three months, I have lived in a home town that has lost nearly
30,000 human beings to a pandemic. I've posted twenty-six
installments on the Coronavirus.
It is typical of funeral
processions around these parts for the hearse carrying a person's
remains to pass that person's home on the way to the cemetery. So, every
morning, over the past few months, as I get on my stationary bike to work out in
the front room of my home, I look out the bay window of my apartment, which
faces the street below, and I've seen---day-in, day-out---one funeral procession
after another. A part of you becomes numb to the vision. Until it doesn't.
The morning after Memorial Day, I heard of yet another nightmarish tragedy
taking place in an American city. It was the day after George
Floyd was killed on the streets of Minneapolis, Minnesota by police officer
Derek Chauvin, whose knee was pinned to the right side of Floyd's
neck for 8
minutes, 46 seconds, even as the
victim pleaded that he could not breathe---and onlookers screamed for the
officer to stop [warning: graphic YouTube link].
When I first heard this news report, I found myself just as numb. Numb not
because it was yet another death in a time of unending mass death, devastation,
and destruction. Numb because it was the death of one more African American man,
in a long list of such atrocities, by a police officer. These senseless
brutalities have become so common over the years. But the outrage expressed in
their aftermath has become so predictable---and so ineffective---that as I
watched the news, all my overtaxed brain could manufacture as a response was:
"Another one."
I shook my head in despair, I felt my eyes well up with tears, but I was
confident that, once again, people would express their anger for a few days, the
politicians would get in their potshots at each other, as they did in the
aftermath of Charlottesville, and life would return to "normal"---whatever the
hell that term means nowadays.
But I was wrong. By Friday night, May 29th, the
protests were spreading from coast-to-coast. And when I turned on the
television at around 11 pm, and saw the streets of my home town, Brooklyn,
aflame, in front of the Barclays Center, and down Flatbush Avenue, I could not
contain the depths of my sorrow. I just began to cry. Night after night, I have
watched peaceful protests punctuated by violence and looting, with the typical
push-back from police.
I'm not going to sit here and pontificate about how violence is not the answer.
For a person who has celebrated the riotous response of the Stonewall
Rebellion fifty-one years ago, I certainly appreciate how a violent
reaction against a corrupt police force attempting to destroy the lives,
liberties, and property of a marginalized group can have a revolutionary effect.
Those rebellious souls in 1969 directed their anger specifically at a corrupt
police force that routinely raided the Stonewall Inn and arrested its peaceful
patrons to clamp down on "lewd behavior" (that is, same-sex folks who were
holding hands and kissing in the confines of a private establishment). Those
raids were almost predictable---especially
if the police didn't get their timely payola from the Mafia owners of the bar.
This singular violent event has been marked ever since that fateful late
June day not with further violence, but with annual parades, in which
police---some of them out and about, walk arm-in-arm with their same-sex
partners and friends.
The current violence that has punctuated otherwise peaceful mass protests across
the country might be chalked up to spontaneous outbursts from those who feel the
sting of poverty
and institutional inequality, magnified further in the
wake of lockdowns and high unemployment during a period in which a pandemic has
taken the lives of over 100,000 Americans (many of them Latino and
African American, in percentages disproportionate to their populations).
In many instances, the violence, however, has not been spontaneous at all, since
it does appear that outside groups have infiltrated these protests specifically
to cause mayhem---provocateurs
from the left or the
right, perhaps. The looting of a
Target store in Minneapolis, known for its
collaboration with the police, might seem justified to some. But mob
action sustained over these many days must, by necessity, degenerate over time.
It is not about striking a blow for equality or against oppression; it is not
about looting
luxury stores in midtown Manhattan or Macy's
on 34th Street or the
swanky shopping districts in SoHo [YouTube links] as a symbol against
"excess"
[Twitter link]. The mob does not distinguish; it ultimately aims its wrath even at
small neighborhood businesses and stores like those along the Grand Concourse in
the Bronx [YouTube link], which directly impact the
very communities that have been victimized by police brutality. Their
store owners have struggled to keep afloat throughout this pandemic, and now
they have no businesses left to open.
Terence Floyd,
George's brother, who traveled from Brooklyn to pray at the site in Minneapolis
where George was murdered, collapsed in agonizing grief when he arrived there.
You could hear him praying---"I need you and Pops to watch over me"---as he
cried uncontrollably.
But then he turned to the crowd: "I understand ya'll upset. But ... I doubt
y'all are half as upset as I am. So if I'm not over here wilding out, if I'm not
over here blowing up stuff, if I'm not over here messing up my community---then
what are y'all doing!? What are y'all doing? Y'all doing nothing! Because that's
not gonna bring my brother back at all. ... You all protest, you all destroy
stuff. And they [the powers that be] don't move. You know why they don't move?
Because it's not their stuff. It's our stuff. They want us to destroy our
stuff." He implored them to find "another way." "My family is a peaceful
family," he exclaimed. He asked the protesters to use their anger as a tool for
peaceful, nonviolent change. He urged them to exercise their power at the ballot
box and implored them to an even higher cause: "Educate yourself," he said.
"It's a lot of us. And we still gonna do this peacefully."
This has been a mantra among long-time civil rights advocates. Even Al
Sharpton, an "imperfect
vessel" if ever there was one, has also expressed an urgent moral
indignation: "Don't use George Floyd and Eric Garner as props," he declared.
"Activists go for causes and justice, not for designer shoes. New York should
set the tone, because the first time we heard, 'I can't breathe,' it was not in
Minneapolis. It was on Staten Island, six years ago, and we did nothing."
I have always understood the horrific structural issues at work, the broader, tragic context of historic and systemic brutality that breeds violent responses such as we've seen over the past week. I have addressed these issues countless times over the past three decades, including essays, in recent years, on subjects as varied as the war on drugs and the problems of mass incarceration, the trouble with Trump and Antifa, and the reciprocal relationship between the growth of state power and racism as a cultural and political phenomenon. I refer readers to those highlighted links because this is just not the time to say: "I Told You So." [Ed.: See also this essay on Cato Unbound.]
Nevertheless, understanding why violence often punctuates protests does
not mean that I subscribe to the view that nonviolent resistance is somehow
deficient or protective
of the status quo.
For a person, like me, who has dedicated his life to exploring the context of
human freedom, who has upheld the libertarian ideal of a free society, the
status quo is a system that is the embodiment of violent brutalization. Violence
is a way of life in this country. It is the means by which a genuinely political economy
redistributes wealth to those who are powerful enough to wield the mechanisms of
state. They have been wielding those mechanisms at home and abroad for eons,
especially through the apparatuses of "national security," designed to sustain a
policy of "perpetual war for perpetual peace." It sometimes astonishes me that
so many folks who are understandably threatened by these newest displays of
violence on the streets of America's cities and who call upon their government
to "dominate" the rioters, have rarely given thought to how such "domination"
has given the United States the dubious distinction of having the
highest incarceration rate in the entire world---higher than both
China and Russia, and the even more horrific distinction of being, historically,
among the most powerful forces for instability throughout the globe, given
sustained policies of interventionism abroad.
On the importance of using strategies of nonviolent resistance---not to
be confused with pacifism---I highly recommend the work of Gene
Sharp, a man of integrity whom I met and with whom I had a 25-year
correspondence. The author of such books as From
Dictatorship to Democracy: A Conceptual Framework for Liberation, Social
Power and Political Freedom and a three-volume work, The
Politics of Nonviolent Action, Sharp did more to champion various
strategies by which to overturn the status quo in ways that tend not to
reproduce the patterns of brutality that its practitioners seek to end.
Over this past week, there have been remarkable displays of how nonviolent
protest---in some profoundly symbolic gestures---can change the dynamics between
protesters and those to whom their protests are typically directed. Yes, we have
seen burning neighborhoods, but we have also heard stories and seen images
marked by an extraordinary depth of humanity. From Bellevue,
Washington, where the Police Chief declared "We are with you. We are
not against you"---to Miami,
Florida [YouTube links], where a highway trooper hugged a protester,
who told him "I love you"... from Foley Square in Manhattan, where police
officers kneeled to the applause of the protesters, a young African
American man reaching out, telling them: "I really appreciate you doing that.
Thank you very much. I hope you all stay safe and have a great night" to images
of protesters
in Louisville, Kentucky forming a human barrier to protect a police officer who
had been separated from his unit, from violent attack. White
women standing in a line, to separate and protect protesters from police and
police from protesters. Police chiefs from New Jersey to Wisconsin
walking side-by-side with protesters. Chief
of Department of the New York City Police, Terence
Monahan, hugging an activist as protesters paused in Washington
Square Park, the same park where I once protested myself---against
the reinstatement of selective service registration for the draft by President
Jimmy Carter---telling protesters that he was with them standing
against police brutality.
And then there was an unforgettable
video that went viral [YouTube link] of Flint
Michigan, Genesee county sheriff Chris Swanson [YouTube link], who
confronted a gathering of protesters and spoke to them from his heart. He
assured the crowd that he meant them no harm. He took off his riot gear, put
down his baton, and yelled out to the crowd: "We want to be with you all
--- I
want to make this a parade, not a protest. ... These cops love you." The crowd
chanted: "Walk with us!" And he did. "We will protect you. We are with you," he
said. Later, he observed: "I knew that the benefit far outweighed the risk. And
when you show action of, listen: I'm going to make myself vulnerable in order to
come into your circle and show you that I want to be that solution. That was the
change maker right there. It was beautiful. Not a single arrest. Not a single
injury. Not a single fire."
As much as these stories and images uplift and inspire, Kumbaya is not going to
cut it. (Indeed, in
some instances, the same police who knelt with the protesters were
later involved in tear-gassing the folks with whom they expressed solidarity.)
Nor is the opposite tendency among those who simply call for the outright
abolition of the police going to cut it. Why stop there? Abolish the state!
To my principled anarchist friends (not the "bomb-throwing" kind),** who see the
state and its police functions as the distillation of evil in the modern world,
I am compelled to ask: If you were capable of "pushing the button," what do you
propose to replace it with? This is the danger of thinking undialectically,
of dropping the context of the conditions that exist in the real world. We are
dealing with structural racism that permeates not only our political
institutions but our very culture. Certain measures can be taken (from
ending qualified
immunity to challenging the
militarization of the police force) but a genuine cultural transformation
is a necessary precondition for any genuinely radical social and political
change.
***
Despite all these mixed messages in an age of mixed premises, I must end this
essay where it began---with images. Images of many police officers who have now
taken to one knee, one wounded knee, the position of the Colin
Kaepernicks of this world---in opposition to the brutality in their own ranks
and the racial inequality it perpetuates. [Ed.: This practice has continued in
earnest even weeks after the riots have subsided... to the credit of people on
both sides of a crumbling blue wall.]
--
Notes
** In a recent study group discussion for the anthology, The
Dialectics of Liberty, I had the occasion to quote from a Spring
1980 article I wrote, while an undergraduate at New York University for The
New Spectator: The NYU Journal of Politics:
Anarchism has had a long and negative conceptual history. Traditionally, the
image of the anarchist has always been one of a bearded, bomb-hurling immigrant
attempting to violently overthrow the social order in a revolutionary and bloody
battle against authority. It is quite ironic that skeptics will see anarchism as
a ridiculous, idealistic, floating abstraction without realizing that the
present-day situation is in essence, one of international anarchy among monopoly
governments, which have considerably refined the practice of bomb-throwing
beyond what any anarchist would have dreamed. In this context, the real issue
seems to be what kind of "anarchy" we want---governmental or voluntary.
Posted by chris at 11:19 PM | Permalink |
Posted to Culture | Dialectics | Foreign
Policy | Politics
(Theory, History, Now) | Remembrance | Sports