#I'd call up Elon Musk to ask him about it

[fuckwhoeverpickedallthefunnyurls]

Me when I accidentaly catapulted myself into a situation where I have to write about the repair of an advanced spaceship engine (I know nothing about spaceships or engines):

[matan4il]

I have a query and I'm sorry that this question is going to upset you in advance. I see a post circling on here about Holocaust survivors apparently saying that Palestinians are exactly like them during attacks on Gaza. I just scroll past it because I have poor attention span that cannot stay focused more than one sentence but I wanted to know your opinion on this post or if you have seen it. Again, deep apologies that this ask is upsetting. Thank you for still being here and sharing with us.

Hi Nonnie!

Thank you for the kind way you approached this.

I have seen a post that might be the one you're referring to... It's a screenshot of a tweet:

The original tweet shows an interview with one Holocaust survivor. The response falsely expands this to survivors, in the plural, as if this one tweet shows a whole movement of Holocaust survivors, that people simply refuse to listen to.

The original tweet comes from an account that calls itself a "media company," but has no website (something I would expect from an actual media company), and is at least 80% tweets that are anti-Israel and anti-Jewish. I'll give you an example. We all know Elon Musk has allowed antisemitism to thrive on Twitter, all kinds of it, including the white supremacist type, and others that have nothing to do with Israel. In an attempt to educate him, he was invited to a tour of Auschwitz. But apparently, according to this "media company," that was just meant to stop anti-genocide speech on his social media platform:

Of the up to 20% of tweets this "media company" posts or shares, many are anti-democratic or in support of dictatorial regimes.

This account also amplified the words of Julius Malema, leader of the South African EFF party, as he justified the Oct 7 massacre, and demanded support for the (genocidal) Hamas and its "resistance."

Malema himself has repeatedly sang, "Kill the Boer," a song which many understand as a genocidal chant against the Boers, the South Africans of Dutch descent. This guy is a controversial figure at best, doesn't seem to have an issue with an actual genocide, and this "media company" upholds his words as if he is a role model.

But if this account tweets Israel hate, then I guess the Tumblr user who passed the tweet along has no issue with how questionable of a source this is.

I recognized the face of the survivor. This is what it looks like in the cut off screenshot in the Tumblr post I saw:

So how did I recognize him? Because the number of anti-Zionist Holocaust survivors is SO small (around 5), and I have seen every single one of them repeatedly tokenized by antisemites so much, that I'm familiar with the name and face of each. The man in this vid is Hajo Meyer, who died in 2014. He couldn't possibly make any comments about Hamas' massacre on Oct 7, 2023 and the war in Gaza since, unless this "media company" has managed to somehow contact the afterlife. Here's a screenshot from Google, showing a recent re-upload of this vid to IG:

And here's a very brief bio, mentioning his date of death:

I'm guessing that "media company" didn't name him, or specify the date out of the vid, because it didn't want people to know the guy was dead, and the views he expressed were pre-Hamas' massacre.

Hajo Meyer was, without a doubt, an anti-Zionist. But would he still be using this rhetoric after Oct 7, after the biggest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, after better understanding the kind of threat that Israel and Jews worldwide (since Hamas has tried to target Jews in European countries as well, including in the Netherlands, where Meyer lived) are facing from this genocidal terrorist organization ruling Gaza? IDK. I'd like to think he would be better than to continue distorting the Holocaust through this false comparison, but I can't say for sure, and I'm not about to claim that I do, putting words in his mouth just to exploit a dead Holocaust survivor. The fact that the anti-Israel crowd would continue to tokenize (meaning, exploit) a dead survivor like that, as if anyone could know for sure that Meyer would continue to toe the same line, just shows there really is no moral low they can't stoop to.

And here I wanna emphasize how wrong this antisemitic practice is, tokenizing Jews. Because no marginalized group is immune to the hatred spread against it, there will ALWAYS be some of its members, who will internalize and embrace poison aimed at it. There were gay Nazis (the notorious Ernest Roehm was the highest ranking one) and we also have contemporary gay neo-Nazis. So, should we use them in order to pretend that Nazi ideology is not homophobic? That it didn't harm hundreds of thousands of gay people? No, we know that the overwhelming majority of gay people suffered due to it, and would insist that Nazism IS homophobic. So, using those few exceptions to ignore (and embolden) the homophbia of this ideology, ends up being homophobic in itself. Embracing the unrepresentative few over the representative, mainstream majority of a marginalized group in "exonerating" what the group says is hateful and harmful towards it, ends up being hateful and harmful in itself.

And that's what people who only listen to the few anti-Zionist Holocaust survivors are doing. They're basically saying, "Listen to Holocaust survivors!" but they mean only the few who say what the anti-Israel movement does. All the other survivors they ignore, dismiss, silence or even erase.

They're ignoring the voices of the overwhelming majority of Holocaust survivors who WERE (and are) Zionist. Who do not agree with this distorted narrative. Yad Vashem estimates that two thirds of Holocaust survivors came to Israel at the end of WWII, and many more supported Israel even when they chose to settle elsewhere. Just recently, we had a group of 870 American survivors (along with their descendants, altogether 2,500 Jews) thank Biden for standing with Israel after the Hamas massacre. These anti-Israel haters are also erasing the survivors who were themselves targeted on Oct 7, whether threatened, kidnapped, injured or murdered (I've talked about several in my posts on this blog). This anti-Israel mob is exploiting Hajo Meyer even in ignoring that if he had been alive and present in Israel, even just to visit a friend or family member, he would have been targeted, too. These haters are ignoring survivors who said that what Hamas has done is similar to what the Nazis did (I've talked about several of them in my posts on this blog, too. All can be found in my Israel tag).

It is unconscionable, to treat most Holocaust survivors like they don't count, and only see a (literal) handful of anti-Zionist ones as if they do. And it certainly does NOT show the respect the anti-Israel haters imply survivors are owed, through the demand that we all defer to the opinion of the survivors, but ONLY the few anti-Zionist ones.

All that said, off the top of my head, here's a small number of HUGE differences between the Holocaust, and the Israeli-Arab conflict, and anyone ignoring them IS guilty of distorting the Holocaust.

-> The Holocaust did NOT start due to Jews repeatedly murdering Germans on German soil, in an attempt to keep Germans down and prevent them from establishing self rule in the German ancestral land. The Holocaust was completely unprovoked, unjustified and one-sided. Every oppressive measure taken by the Nazis against the Jews, was motivated by antisemitism, and was NOT a reaction to Jewish anti-German terrorism, that the Nazis had to protect their German citizens from. Speaking of unprovoked, unjustified and for a very long time one-sided, that describes the Arab anti-Jewish violence that preceded the establishment of the State of Israel by almost 100 years. But Jewish self-defense in this conflict, which only started about 50 years after said violence began, was provoked, was justified, was a response to what was done to the Jews first.

-> The Holocaust did NOT consist of Jews on German soil collaborating militarily with several Jewish countries surrounding Germany, with the goal of these combined Jewish armies invading and wiping it off the map, in order to prevent German self rule. Guess what the Arabs did to the Jews...

-> The Holocaust did NOT entail repeated German efforts to find a solution for how Jews and Germans could live together on the same land. In pre-state Israel, Jews did try repeatedly to reach an understanding that would allow Jews and Arabs to peacefully share (and co-exist in) the Jewish ancestral land.

-> When Jews finally started rebelling against the Nazis, they did NOT try to get as many Jewish civilians as possible killed. On the contrary, the outbreak of the most famous Jewish revolt, the one in the Warsaw Ghetto, was postponed until the Nazis entered, and the Jewish fighters believed this to be the final 'liquidation' of the ghetto (meaning, the deportation and extermination of the roughly 60,000 Jews still alive there). Only then did they fight back, because (in their own words), they did not want their decision to rebel to cost another Jew "even one hour of life." Compare that to how Hamas has been using Palestinian civilians as human shields. Or even to the Arab leadership back in 1948, which did not hesitate in risking or displacing the entire Arab population in the Land of Israel, in favor of fighting what they called "an extermination war" against the Jews.

-> The Holocaust did NOT see a single day where Germans worked en masse to try and alleviate the suffering of Jews, whether by providing them with humanitarian aid, or by moving them to areas where they would be safe from death. That's in direct contrast to Israel's efforts to make Palestinians' lives better, whether through humanitarian aid, work permits in Israel that guarantee a higher salary and better social rights, medical treatments, warnings when a terrorist target is about to be struck, etc.

-> The Holocaust was NOT supposed to end with even one Jew alive at the end of it. The Germans were going for total extermination of the Jewish people. All Jews who had German citizens were stripped of it in 1935, even before the most murderous parts of this genocide commenced. In contrast, Israel did NOT seek to kill all Arabs, there were many calls for Arabs not to flee Israel and the war which the Arab leadership had started, at the end of the war Israel gave citizenship to 150,000 Arabs who did not leave and did not take arms against Jews, and there was even an offer for tens of thousands of Arabs to return (Weitzmann presented it to the UN), if they do so peacefully. Just a few thousands accepted that offer, but those who did, got citizenship and land.

-> The Nazis were so eager to kill every Jew, that they came to the conclusion they HAD to industrialize their genocide of the Jewish people. That's why they built extermination camps with gas chambers at their core. Auschwitz alone could, on certain days, kill about 20,000 people. No Jew was meant to leave those camps alive. The crematoria were mass murder factories. ANY crime that you want to compare to the Holocaust specifically, you have to show that it includes this industrialization element. Currently, NO GENOCIDE, no matter how horrific, has. And God help us all, I hope it stays that way (this is one of the reasons why the Holocaust mustn't be distorted or minimized. We can't prevent something from happening, if we don't understand what HAS happened, and that we're trying to stop from being repeated). There is not a SINGLE thing in the history of the Israeli-Arab conflict that comes CLOSE to being an industrialized form of massacre. Even the brutality of Hamas on Oct 7, the single bloodiest day in the history of this conflict for either side, doesn't come close.

-> While there are still Jews around, meaning the Holocaust as conceptualized by the Nazis failed, it was so deadly, that it DID lead to the murder of around 70-80% of the Jews living under the Nazi occupation over a short number of years. Even more than 80 years after the end of the Holocaust, Jews have not recovered demographically. Meanwhile, the Palestinian population has increased by about 10 times since Israel's Independence War. But let's say people wanna claim that just this current war is comparable to the Holocaust. There are presently around 7 million Arabs in the territories of the Jewish ancestral land, of which about 2 million are Israeli citizens. I'm gonna go with the anti-Israel narrative for a second, which claims ALL of them are occupied and oppressed by Israel (even though they're not). In order for the ruin of Palestinians to be indeed on the same level, that would mean 70-80% of them would have to be murdered by Israel during the war. Let's go with the lower percent, so it's easier for the anti-Israel crowd to reach the number of deaths that would support their claim. To have killed 70% of 7 million, that would mean Israel would have to kill 4.9 million Arabs in this so-called "genocide." Even if we exclude Israeli Arabs, and only focus on the 5 million Palestinians living in areas where the Israeli army currently operates (imagine the German Nazis allowing Jews safety inside Germany, and only killing them outside it *eyeroll*), that would mean at least 3.5 million Palestinians killed. But after almost 5 months of this war, the number of Palestinian fatalities, as claimed by Hamas, is around 30,000 people (I'm putting aside the fact that at least 12,000 are Hamas terrorists). The gap between what is happening, and what people who make this false comparison are implying is happening, is incomprehensible.

Sorry for the length, but I hope this is helpful!

(for all of my updates and ask replies regarding Israel, click here)

[listen-to-the-inner-walrus]

Okay, so if you've been anywhere online recently, you may have come across Elon Musk bringing up the issue of grooming gangs that happened over a decade ago in the UK.

And as you can guess, it's a lot of misinformation, and I partly wanted to fact check it in a post out of anger but the other part didn't want to give the "Musk Manufactured News Agenda" oxygen.

However, I just came out of an online town hall on Zeteo (I'd really recommend subscribing to them) with Medhi Hasan and Nazir Afzal - who led the prosecutions for the grooming gangs and continues prosecuting people for this to this day - and I made some notes and I might as well share them:

For all Elon, his ilk and now the Tories calls for a national inquiry on this, we've already had one and several local enquiries as well. The inquiry done for Rotherham was completed in 2013, and the inquiry done on child sex abuse nationwide was completed in 2022.

Not only were the Tories in power when those inquiries were completed, the Tories also decided to implement none of the recommendations made in these reports.

Liz Truss is sat on Twitter talking about how shameful it is that the government are not doing anything, but that second report was completed before she lost to the lettuce.

Boris Johnson called these inquiries a waste of money.

Afzal gave evidence 14 years ago to the government and asked for research to be completed on why men in Muslim and/or Pakistani communities were committing these crimes and no research was completed.

As is, however, 88% of sex offending is committed by white men according to Afzal.

Also, data about ethnicities has not been consistently collected by police. This is once again something Afzal made recommendations on 10 years ago that has not been implemented.

Overall, we've had inquiries on this and the Tories did nothing with the results of them.

Neither Afzal nor David Greenwood (the solicitor for many of the victims) believe another inquiry is needed. They feel it is time to act on the past inquiries.

Hasan did ask Afzal about David Greenwood reporting seeing evidence of police collusion with the grooming gangs. Though Afzal didn't confirm that and rather blamed the failings on incompetence, he did say that if any inquiry is needed, it would be a police inquiry to investigate these claims.

On another note, Keir Starmer did not block prosecution of Jimmy Savile. Alison Levitt's 2013 report exonerates him.

Further, Afzal talked about how he and Keir Starmer had to change policy when it came to CSA and implemented many changes.

Afzal made it very clear that Keir Starmer has not done any of the things he's been accused of, especially not some kind of collusion with the gangs.

Afzal himself has had the same accusations levelled at him. About a decade ago, his home was attacked by the far right who believed him being a British-Pakistani Muslim on the side of prosecution meant that he was there to protect the perpetrators. It was only safe for his children to go to school in taxis.

At one point, Afzal said something along the lines of "These people are as far from Islam as you can imagine." in regards to the perpetrators.

The idea that this was brown men targeting white girls was put to bed by Afzal and Hasan during it. While brown girls are 3 times less likely to come forward, there were many brown victims.

Also talking about coming forward, in speaking with victims, Afzal found that many of the victims were not believed due to classism. Working class girls were routinely not believed by police or local prosecutors.

Elon has spoke a lot recently about Tommy Robinson, aka Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon, and how he should be freed. Jordan Peterson called him a political prisoner and Elon's father compared him to Nelson Mandela. Afzal rightfully pointed out that Stephen nearly ruined two different trials for this with his antics that were considered jury intimidation. The only person who benefited from Stephen's action was him and his bottom line.

Afzal spoke a lot about the victims and how no one is speaking about them or caring about them. He mentioned how focussing on the race of the perpetrators only undermines the victims. I think it's a very important point.

Further, Afzal has spent a lot of this week speaking to the victims of these grooming gangs who have been finding themselves triggered by Elon's antics. Many of them feel like the recovery they've made so far has been pulled out from under them. These people have PTSD and Elon has triggered them as he acts with callous disregard.

TL/DR: We've had national inquiries on this topic and it's the Tories who have decided not to act on them, we do not need more and what Elon is doing is hurting the victims of the crimes he claims to care about.

[llama-named-pizza]

Anyone talking yet about how Elon fired someone right after publicly mocking him, and for what? Asking Elon for some contact after being ignored for days?

Meet Haraldur Ingi Þorleifsson. Born in 1977 with a genetic congenital muscle disease that forced him to use a wheelchair since age 24. That didn't stop him, though. In 2014 he founded the company Ueno. Ueno was a company that designed digital brands for various companies. The company was pretty successful, since it won various awards and Haraldur was named Icelandic businessman of the year in 2019. You can see more things he's done on his website - http://haraldurthorleifsson.com/

In 2021, Haraldur sold his company to Twitter. Not just that! He sold it as a salary so that he could pay higher taxes. He ended up paying the second highest tax in Iceland for that year (for an individual).

Outside of his company, he also aided in a project called Ramp Up Reykjavík, the intention of which is to help in installing wheelchair ramps around the city for better wheelchair access everywhere. After the success of the first project, a second one called Ramp Up Iceland was launched, with the intentions of building 1000 ramps around the country. This seems to be the site for the project - https://www.rampur.is/ - it would be great if someone who knows Icelandic can help with explaining how to donate to it?

He also created Bueno, a project that, by his own words, "a non-profit that donates money to good people doing good things". He was given The Order of the Falcon by the president of Iceland, the Icelandic medal of chivalry for contributions to social issues. He was Person of the Year in Iceland in 2022. Honestly, there's probably even more.

And this is the person Elon Musk decided to take the mick out of.

Queue March 6th, 2023. Haraldur tweets out to Musk.

[id: Dear elonmusk,

9 days ago the access to my work computer was cut, along with about 200 other Twitter employees.

However your head of HR is not able to confirm if I am an employee or not. You've not answered my emails.

Maybe if enough people retweet you'll answer me here?]

[id: Elon Musk: What work have you been doing?

Haraldur: I would need to break confidentiality to answer this question here.

If you have your lawyers share in writing that I can do that then I'd be happy to discuss that openly!

Elon Musk: It's approved, you go ahead.]

[id: Two consecutive tweets by Haraldur: Among others:

- led the effort to save about $500k on one SaaS contract. Supported closing down many others

- led prioritization of design projects across the company to make sure we were able to deliver with a small team

- led design crits to help level up design across the company

- was hiring manager for all design roles

- worked on efforts to steer the company away from focusing on power users and on to younger users (because our user base is aging)]

[id: Elon Musk:

- Level up from what design to what? Pics or it didn’t happen.

- We haven’t hired design roles in 4 months

- What changes did you make to help with the youths?

Elon Musk: Would you say that you're a people person?

Attachment to the second tweet: A YouTube video named "What would you say...you do here?". The video depicts a conversation between two men, presumably higher ups, and a third man, presumably someone who works at the company. The conversation is condescending towards the third man, implying his job (a type of customer service) is useless. The video ends with the third man outbursting "What the hell is wrong with you people!" before he leaves the room - based on his body language (looking down when he almost bumps into a colleague), it is implied that he was fired.]

There are other threads with the two conversing, this one is the most notable though as this seems to be when Haraldur learns he is fired. Musk later attempts to imply that Haraldur didn't work, saying that Haraldur "claimed he had a disability that prevented him from typing". As I mentioned above, Haraldur has a disability that forced him into a wheelchair. This same disability is slowly forcing Haraldur to lose strength in his upper body and arms. Not to mention, you don't need to type to work, mister "Lines of code matters". Newsflash, people can do work without typing. Musk thinks he's the only one who can do work without typing, I believe.

It's unknown (to me) if Haraldur was fired during this exchange or before it. At any rate, don't forget that Haraldur was on a "Don't Fire" list, yet Musk still laid him off.

And definitely don't forget that Musk seems to be avoiding paying him.

[id: Tweet by Haraldur: But ok, fair enough, I've been laid off and I'm ok with that.

Next up though is finding out if Twitter will pay me what they owe me per my contract.

Or, will elonmusk, one of the richest people in the world, try to avoid paying?

Stay tuned!!]

[bopinion]

2024 / 51

Aperçu of the week

“Basically, it is always the connections with people that give life its value.”

(Wilhelm von Humboldt, Prussian scholar, writer and statesman who reformed the German education system in the spirit of Neo-Humanism)

Bad News of the Week

As we all know, genius and madness go hand in hand. No one is currently more archetypal of this than Elon Musk. It is one thing that he has used his business acumen and ruthlessness to achieve a level of wealth that the world has not seen since John D. Rockefeller. But it's another thing that he acts like a politician without ever having been elected to any office. Only recently, the “adviser to the US president” single-handedly and out of nowhere prevented a budget compromise between Republicans and Democrats and almost plunged the USA into a government shutdown.

With his commitment to Trump's re-election - with pleas in (his own and other) media, an estimated 250 million campaign donations and, above all, wise buddy advice - it almost seems as if he won the election. Not to say he bought it. Hateful comments are already referring to his boss as “Vice President Donald J. Trump”. Which apparently encourages Musk to let other countries benefit from his infinite wisdom too. At least their right-wing representatives. For example, Brexit idol Nigel Farage can apparently look forward to a 100 million US dollar donation to his far-right party Reform UK. Which at least does not have an immediate election opportunity ahead of it, as elections were only held in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland last summer.

The situation is different here in Germany, where elections are due in two months' time. And according to all election forecasts, the radical right-wing AfD (Alternative für Deutschland / Alternative for Germany) has been stable in second place for months with around 18%. And now Elon Musk comes around the corner and tweets “Only the AfD can save Germany”. In the debates that followed, one thing quickly became clear: he doesn't have the slightest idea about either Germany or the AfD. When I express a political opinion - as I do in this blog for example - it is well-founded on the one hand. On the other hand, it is a personal opinion. Musk, on the other hand, informs himself superficially at best, but still hesitantly dares to make a definitive analysis of the situation.

The problem is that a dazzling personality like Elon Musk is a role model, especially for those people who would not classify themselves as right-wing extremists but feel addressed by “Germans First”. A guy who takes risks, doesn't care about conventions and crosses boundaries. And in the end, his success proves him right. So I'd rather listen to such a refreshingly colorful parrot than the boring gray pigeon who calls himself a knowledgeable politician. Cover beats content. The political caste must finally understand this in order to stop allowing such shouters to exert such far-reaching influence.

Incidentally, the Standard Oil Company, the centerpiece of Rockefeller's wealth, was broken up in 1911 for violating the Antitrust Act. And it was all about excessive economic power. The first billionaire in history had probably simply failed to make the political system compliant in time. In 1915, correspondent J. M. Allison of the New York Sun assessed Rockefeller's life's work as follows: “[I am] a believer in the truth that there are only three perfect organizations: the Catholic Church, the Standard Oil Company and the German army.”

Good News of the Week

Unfortunately, Time magazine didn't ask me. Otherwise it wouldn't be Donald Trump who would be Person of the Year, but Gisèle Pelicot, a woman who a year ago nobody outside the Avignon region in the south of France knew. Pelicot's service to society is undoubtedly more valuable than Trump's - especially when it comes to respect for women. The weekly newspaper “Zeit” wrote: “Gisèle Pelicot does not want to be a role model and yet she is one - for her daughter (...) and for millions of women who have experienced sexual violence in their lives.”

For years, Pelicot was drugged by her husband and offered to rape at least 82 men on the internet. For years, she did not understand what her physical and psychological problems resulted from - because she was unconscious during the more than 200 acts of sexual violence. However, she conducted the trial against her husband with the maximum possible consciousness. And thus became a feminist icon. This is because she prevailed with her wish for her trial to take place in public. This “changed her role from victim to a woman who radiates strength and dignity”, according to the public broadcaster ZDF. There is now a consensus that Pelicot not only plays a major role in the #MeToo movement, but also for all people who find themselves in a victim role. As shame has changed sides.

At the end of the trial, there were not only solid verdicts against all (!) fifty defendants, but above all insights into how society can deal with taboo topics. “Rapist, we see you! Victim, we believe you!” was one of the claims chanted by thousands outside courthouses across France. This is thanks to the courage of a single woman who stood alone for so long. And yet, as President Emmanuel Macron wrote on the day the verdict was announced, she “moved and inspired France and the world”. Chapeau!

Personal happy moment of the week

We have a new car. After BMW unfortunately decided to discontinue production of its all-electric i3 model, the fourth version of that was no longer an option and we had to find an alternative. The Model 3 from Tesla was out of the question because of you know who. The Volkswagen ID-3 wasn't iconic enough for me, the ID-Buzz was too expensive and oversized. All Japanese cars seem rather boring to me, and I don't like the Chinese on principle (employee rights, unfair subsidies etc). Now it's a Mini Cooper. And because of the successful combination of go-kart chassis and electric drive, I can't wipe the grin off my face. Fun with a clear conscience makes me happy.

I couldn't care less...

...that there are people who feel cheated by the influencer “Immo Tommy”. Anyone who listens to a YouTuber on something as important as deciding on a real estate investment is even more naive than someone hoping to win the big lottery. The chance of winning is just as low. But the stakes are much higher.

It's fine with me...

...that the incumbent Minister President of Saxony will remain in office, even if Michael Kretschmer only heads a minority government (consisting of his conservative CDu and the social democratic SPD). Here, too, the AfD was the second strongest party in the state elections in the fall, but did not make it into government because the much-cited firewall held firm. And the fact that legislation now also has to convince members of the opposition on a case-by-case basis because their own coalition does not have a majority is not undemocratic either.

As I write this...

...the crooners are playing on the HomePods. For someone like me, who can't stand the typical Christmas songs from Wham! to Mariah Carey to Cliff Richard, Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Sammy Davis Jr. and company are an extremely worthy alternative, which in some strange way fits very well into this season, but is also stylish and sophisticated.

Post Scriptum

There are families in Ukraine who have lost everything but their hope. There are children in Gaza who are missing their parents and both legs. There are still people in the world who are dying of malnutrition. And even in our own neighborhood, there are people who lack the most basic necessities after a flood, for example. Especially at this time of year, when you stop and reflect, it doesn't hurt to remember how well off you actually are. And whether you can give a little of it to those who are not doing so well. With this in mind, Merry Christmas and thank you for every donation to a good cause.

[liskantope]

Public intellectual Robert Wright, who runs the Nonzero YouTube channel (once known as Bloggingheads), just a week ago finally had the last of his weekly political discussions with his conversation partner Mickey Kaus on the channel since around the end of 2005. I've been a regular listener for the past few years (only a small fraction of their total run though, and I've never been a subscriber and so haven't seen their after-conversations in what they call the Parrot Room). Although I've always found their dynamic to be a bit cold and caustic compared to that of other pairs of conversation partners that began through Bloggingheads (Bill Scher and Matt Lewis, Glenn Loury and John McWhorter, Kat Rosenfield and Phoebe Maltz-Bovy), and that Wright in particular is unpleasantly prickly towards Kaus, I'm going to miss the sound of their voices in their weekly back-and-forths.

Here is a bit of what I humorously imagined to be their final episode (which in real life turned out to be as dry as usual and not so much of a "goodbye episode").

[Videos turn on in split screen.]

ROBERT WRIGHT: Hi, Mickey!

MICKEY KAUS: Hey Bob!

RW: How're you doing, Mickey?

MK: I'm doing fine, Bob! [holds a photo up to the camera, which shows a split-screen image of two dark-haired middle-aged men each with a microphone in front of him; the man on the right is mostly bald] I have a quiz for you, Bob. Can you guess the identities of these two men in the photo?

RW: [squinting with perhaps a feigned intensity] Let's see... is it Jerry Seinfeld and Larry David, back thirty years ago?

MK: It's not them, Bob! But you're right that it's from many years ago.

RW: Are these guys more the political type?

MK: You could say that, Bob.

RW: Is it... is the one on the left George W. Bush during his administration and the one on the right Karl Rove?

MK: Closer, Bob! But they're not actual politicians. And they're not neocons.

RW: Oh, I see. So if they weren't neocons, is it possible that one of them happen to vote for Trump twice?

MK: I'll give you a hint, Bob: this photo is to commemorate the end of an era that has arrived this week.

RW: Wait a minute... [mock moment of realization] Is that us, Mickey?

MK: It's us, Bob! From almost 18 years ago, when we started having conversations on your channel.

RW: But... but how can those guys possibly be me and you? Look at those baby faces, and such dark hair...

MK: It's called aging, Bob! I'd say you should try it sometime, except, well, judging from the photo and your face as it appears now, it, uh, it looks like you have. [awkward grin at having successfully reached a spontaneous punchline of sorts]

RW: [unperturbed] Yeah, you got me there, Mickey. You know who else has tried aging? I'll give you a hint: he has a little more power and influence than you or I do, Mickey. And I've been harping on him for a while.

MK: Elon Musk isn't getting that old.

RW: [visible exasperation] I'm talking about Joe Biden, Mickey! I noted three more moments of the past week that highlight his senility, which I'd be happy to describe to you, but since this is our final episode, I'd rather just take my last opportunity to ask, is it still not too late to get him off the Democratic ticket?

MK: Since last week I've developed a new theory about that, Bob, about a plan that possibly could work for getting him to step down, one that I don't think anyone else has considered, Bob. It involves coercing him to take a seat on the Supreme Court, after removing one of the current justices by invoking a constitutional clause that hasn't been recognized since eighteen--

RW: Let me stop you right there, Mickey: does this idea of yours end with Kamala Harris taking his place?

MK: [a bit sheepishly] Uh, yeah.

RW: Because I may not have made myself clear the last dozen weeks I've brought this up, but my one condition to go with Biden not running for reelection is that I don't want Kamala Harris on the ticket either. Geez, is that too much to ask?

MK: Well then I don't think I can help you, Bob. But I'm sure I can come up with some other clever idea in time for next week's conversation.

RW: There isn't going to be an episode next week, Mickey! Today was our last chance to get Biden and Harris out of the race!

MK: Well, there are enough problems right now where Biden is concerned. Something really came to a head for him this week, and it vindicates me on something I've been railing against for quite some time. One of my favorite topics, actually.

RW: Could it possibly be the Child Tax Credit, Mickey?

MK: No, it's not the Child Tax Credit. Why would anything that happened with the Biden administration this past week have anything to do with the Child Tax Credit? Although I'm happy to discuss that as much as you like, even though it's not on our planned list of topics, Bob. I thought of half a dozen more points I wanted to make right after the last time you actually let me talk about it, which I --

RW: I can't even remember the when the last time was...

MK: Exactly my point, Bob! And yet, from back whenever that was, I do still remember just a few more arguments I wanted to make --

RW: [hastily interrupting him] Wait, don't you have another favorite topic, Mickey? Oh yeah: the influx of undocumented immigrants?

MK: [eagerly, with a smile] You got it, Bob! Undocumented immigrants and how they're driving down wages of decent working Americans!

RW: [with obvious sarcasm] Oh right, I had almost forgotten what your views on that were! That's right, now it makes sense again, that's why you voted for Trump twice, never mind him being a visible menace to our democracy...

MK: Right, uh, well, uh, it looks like Biden is going to be forced to take up Trump's policies on the immigration issue, due to the unprecedented influx of illegal immigrants into big cities full of his voting base. Guess who's talking about building a wall now?

RW: Well I potentially have a lot of strong counterarguments to make to the thesis that I know you're driving at, Mickey, but I don't think our listeners really want to be treated to the dry conversation that would ensue. The important point is, you voted for Trump twice, even though he's a threat to our democracy; let that be put into the record.

Now, I say one of us comes up with some sort of segue to the war in Ukraine.

[awkward silence]

MK: Well, it's not my job to get us onto the war in Ukraine, Bob.

RW: Shall I just dive into it then? I can talk for the next twenty minutes about something going on in the Donbas, and in Kyiv, and name several other places, and bring up the ground hardening for the winter, and how Russia can replace its troops much more easily than Ukraine can, and how Biden should be urging Zelensky to pursue peace talks, and so on, provided you're willing to nod along and interject with an empty comment or two to keep the conversation flowing. Are you feeling up for that?

MK: Sure, Bob! It's always relaxing, listening to you talk about Ukraine and nodding my head and jumping in with occasional comments and questions without really having to know what we're talking about. But do our listeners really want twenty minutes of that on our last episode ever?

[continuing with sincerity] We could have a very engaging conversation instead about the unacceptable shortcomings of the Child Tax Credit. I think I already suggested that actually, and mentioned that I came up with several more shortcomings.

RW: [gazing at the ceiling] Please, let's end on anything but the Child Tax Credit. Anything, Mickey.

MK: How about amnesty bills for illegal immigrants, then?

RW: Okay, you know what? That's the alarm, to remind us to wrap it up. [No alarm is heard, but he is glancing over at a supposed object sitting just off-screen.]

MK: You set it to go off awfully soon, Bob.

RW: Yeah well, I'd forgotten that I wanted to make this last episode short and sweet. It's our final Parrot Room afterwards that the subscribers are really excited about, after all.

MK: Do you know what I think, Bob? I think you decided on the spot to pretend that the alarm went off, because you didn't like the way the conversation was going. Do you know what I just employed there? Your favorite skill, cognitive empathy, Bob!

RW: That's not really what cognitive empathy is about, Mickey. Or the type of thing it should be applied to. But I understand, even if I don't approve, of where you're coming from here: you hear me bringing up the importance of cognitive empathy from time to time, and you couldn't pass up a potential opportunity to show me that you understand and care about the concept too, especially if it helps deflect from the fact that you voted for Trump in both his elections. And this is a natural tendency that you and others have and I should learn to expect in the future. See what I just did there, Mickey?

MK: [with half a grin] Right. Well. Do you have your list of Parrot Room topics, Bob? I have mine. [picks up half a novel's worth of sheets of handwritten notes and starts riffling through it]

RW: Yeah, well I have both of mine up here. [points to head] Want to give a run-down of everything you got?

MK: If we go through all of these, we'll have spent more than half of this conversation on what we're going to cover in the Parrot Room, Bob.

RW: Oh, well I suppose that's right. At least, given how much detail you put into describing your topics, so that I always have to stop you from completely spoiling your takes on them right away and thus rendering the Parrot Room superfluous.

MK: It doesn't matter, Bob! It's too late for newcomers to subscribe anyway, and it's our very last Parrot Room so our current subscribers are excited about it regardless!

RW: Now once again I want to make sure listeners are clear on the fact that this YouTube channel will remain as active as ever, and I'll still be having conversations every Friday night, just with other people who are not Mickey. Because Mickey here had to attend to other projects of his, projects that are so important. Which is perfectly all right.

MK: [with a loyal, slightly strained grin] That's right, he'll be talking to much more worthwhile conversation partners than me.

RW: [matter-of-factly] Exactly, my Friday podcast guests are going to be much better than Bob here. And hardly any of them will have voted for Trump even once... [holding up a solemn index finger towards the camera]... that's how high-quality my future Friday guests will be. Anyway, I don't think our listeners really want to hear us discuss actual issues in the Parrot Room this last time, Mickey, any more than they wanted to hear us discuss actual issues in our final episode.

MK: That's right, Bob, they just wanted to hear us spar and jab at each other. And I think we delivered, Bob!

RW: I think I delivered on this, Mickey, and you... Well, I suppose you delivered on this about to the extent that you usually do.

MK: [the strained grin momentarily returns] And there's another blow! Well, I guess it's time to head to the Parrot Room, where what the subscribers really want to hear is our reminiscences about the last 18 years, and how much we'll miss talking to each other.

RW: [very dryly] Oh I'll miss talking to you, Mickey. I might actually cry in the Parrot Room. Tears may be shed. I may, in fact, weep.

MK: I actually had a point I wanted to make, a take on one of your superficial attributes I'll miss the most from our conversations, Bob: the uniquely whiny, nasally quality of your voice.

RW: Didn't we already discuss this, Mickey? I thought we came to the conclusion that, although it had been agreed upon by scientists that my voice is the most whiny and nasally among all human voices, a certain presidential candidate --

MK: They did a further study, Bob, with an audio analysis, and showed that the previous conclusion was correct after all, that even Ron DeSantis' nasally voice is no match --

RW: [hastily interrupting] There you go again, giving away Parrot Room material to those who haven't paid for it! Anyway, I'm sure that all of this is motivated by your desire to take superlatives away from DeSantis, since he's running against your superlative bestie, Donald Trump.

MK: Since when is Trump my bestie, Bob?

RW: Perhaps our listeners are unaware, but you voted for him both in 2016 and in 2020, Mickey...

MK: That's right, but, uh, our listeners may not realize that it's not as though I actually ever liked Trump, I was mainly concerned about Congress not being able to pass an amnesty bill...

RW: ...even after Trump refused to promise that he would accept election results...

MK: ...and actually, uh, the thing is, I was making a calculation based on an average of predictions for the number of House and Senate seats the Republicans would take, and if I'd known that Republicans would gain so many House seats, there's actually a chance, uh, Bob, that I may have voted for, I dunno, someone else! [a little feverishly] It's the Amnesty Bill, Bob, the Amnesty Bill would be the very undoing of our country, and sometimes you have to choose between the lesser of two --

RW: [ignoring MK] Okay everyone, we're heading to the Parrot Room for some very intriguing and exclusive content, as always. Something much more interesting than Mickey's opinions on amnesty. Patreon-dot-com-slash-parrotroom.

MK: [taking out his toy parrot and speaking into its microphone] Down with the Child Tax Credit and with amnesty! Forever and ever!

PARROT: [in a high-pitched rendering of MK's voice, flapping its wings] Down with the Child Tax Credit and with amnesty! Forever and ever!

RW: See you in the Parrot Room!

[The screens flicker and blip off, for the very last time.]

[msfbgraves]

I always go on about Americans not knowing about class and its intricacies, but the people in The Age of Innocence certainly do, and also know that, for instance, in European eyes, they are all English and Dutch merchants and though that's nothing to be ashamed of, it is nothing to write home about either. I was born more than 100 years after that novel is set, Dutch aristocrats still think that way. It has not changed.

So they would know that Mad Men's Pete Campbell going around calling himself Peter Dyckman Campbell is being a terrible poseur. A Dyckman is a humble watchman of dykes; nothing to be ashamed of, certainly, as such a watchman must have made it big in America later on, yet, to a Dutch aristocrat, very obviously working class in ways they are not. And these Archers and Belforts and Van der Luydens know it. Because I have been screaming at my tv over that terrible lack of form. Wharton's people know society wise, they're a step down from English and Dutch aristocracy, because they're all new money. Whyever emphasise it, Peter? As least the Campbells are a clan!

And I've heard these things in The Hague growing up, though it would be extremely crass to openly discuss it. In fact, the way Wharton lays it all out in the book is not bon ton at all, it's a huge flipped bird to her milieu, but God yes, she gets it, all the inanities of the rules and who's who and the gossip and the veiled ostracism. And I used to think I must have had a stroke to worry about the fact that People Would Talk at my choices, because it doesn't seem to exist anymore, but it does and it's every bit as insane now as it was then. And she's laying it all bare and thank you, Edith Wharton, for telling me from a century ago that I did not grow up in the Twilight Zone.

I will never be one of that incrowd, but I was partly educated among them, and know enough to have the insanity of it validated. Even my own family doesn't believe it is really 'like that', and you do start to doubt your own sanity, because who would even care and am I making this shit up? No, I'm not! Though you never discuss The Rules with 'outsiders', and when you try to explain anyway (which is rude!) they think you are insane. Only one colleague outside of The Hague ever once confided in me that she thought a certain figure of speech her daughter used was 'provincial', and what did I think? To which I said, well, I'd never have said anything, heaven forbid -no, no - but since you ask, yes, I feel that this is a rather regional word and maybe she should want to point that out if her daughter was set to join other rich kids from out of town. Yes, quite, she's always felt that, but since her husband did not see what she was talking about - well, no one would have told him...- goodness, no! - Still, if she were mine I'd tell her - quite, quite, as long as we don't embarass anyone?

It's the same thing how I feel that I would have understood Emily Gilmore, even though I know I'd never be up to her standards. And I feel how stifled Lorelai feels, because these rules are restrictive af and that is of course what Prince Harry is also rebelling against. It's really like, well, if money is no object anymore, we must find other ways to make ourselves miserable. And again, the reason I'm even saying all of this is because I am disabled and have been Not Good Enough since birth, so I can't boot myself out again. Yet when I go home I see it all going on still, completely unacknowledged, and it makes me want to scream.

Bless this book for laying it all out, in a way that hopefully Americans can understand. You need to know how these people tick, because they're as dangerous and weird as Elon Musk.

[kayluh1915]

Are you still planning to write that one starker mixed media fic? The one you posted about around 5 months ago

Reference to this post.

Hi sweetie! I am, Indeed! I hadn't realized it's been so long since my "mini sneak peek." 😬 I don't want to over-hype it up, but it's REALLY long and still has a bit to go.

I struggle a lot with toxic perfectionism so I'm not gonna lie, it's gonna be a while. I'd like to be optimistic and say another month or two, but it well could be another 6 months. I hope not, but history tends to repeat itself...

I just want it to be perfect! I'm working extremely hard on it and I hope I can get it finished for you guys sooner rather than later!

While you wait, I published a Starker fic back in April called "Perfect." I'm not very happy about the ending, but you can check that out if you like! Keep in mind, though, it is A/B/O. I understand that isn't everyone's cup of tea so I put some more "mini sneak peeks" under the cut!

I hope you guys like it so far and I'll keep you updated on my progress!

--------

These are subject to change and may be different once the story is finished! I also couldn't resist adding in Stucky! 😍😍

ALSO also, let's pretend Elon Musk never bought Twitter, okay? Okay.

DISCLAIMER

“I don’t think we allow children in this program, Mr…” He paused, looking at the embroidered last name on his lab coat. "Parker." Chuckles from the other interns filled the otherwise silent room. Peter gulped, his eyes darting back down to his shoes.

“I-I’m not… not a child, sir.” He stuttered, drying his increasingly sweaty palms on his oversized labcoat. Peter heard Tony shuffle the papers some more. He wasn't actually reading them and got a kick at how much more nervous the kid got the more he shuffled through everything.

“How old are you, kid?”

Peter cleared his throat before answering, trying to get rid of the lump in his throat. “24, sir.”

Silence filled the room once again, the sound of Tony’s foot steps growing closer until Tony’s cisp, expensive dress shoes joined the sight of Peter’s converse.

“You’ve got a lot to prove, Mr. Parker.”

--------

--------

“What’re yo-”

"Come on, dance with me."

"Uhh, I-I a-are you sure?" Tony's smile grew wider.

"I wouldn't have asked you if I wasn't." Peter hesitated, but allowed Tony to take his hand. He wasn't prepared for Tony to yank him up from his seat so fast. He tripped over his own feet with a squeak, grabbing Tony's forearm to catch himself.

"Tony!" Peter yelped. Tony allowed him to fix himself and Tony led him over to the dance floor.

They danced quietly for a moment, neither one speaking.

"So… Tony, huh?" Peter looked up at him with a furrowed brow.

"What?"

"You called me Tony."

"I-I didn't."

"Yes, you did. I think I'd notice my name falling from these cute lips " Peter blushed as Tony caressed Peter's bottom lip with his thumb.

--------

--------

"We'll be back in a little while. Call us if anything changes." With that, Steve and Bucky left, closing the curtain back behind them. Tony focused back on Peter, petting his hair gently.

"I'm so tired, Tony..." Peter said, his voice low.

Tony's heart broke. He's never seen Peter this weak before and he hopes he never has to again. "Then sleep, Honey. I'll be right here when you wake up." Peter hummed, scooting away from him as far as he could.

"What're you doing?" Tony asked, confused.

"Lay with me..." Tony huffed a small laugh.

"I don't think I'm allowed to, Peter."

"I don't care. I want you..." After that, Tony didn't care either. He toed off his sneakers and placed his phone on the guest's chair, climbing into the small stretcher as carefully as possible, being mindful of Peter's IV line and monitor wires. Once he was as comfortable as he was going to get, he pulled Peter close to him and covered them both up with the thin hospital blanket. Once Peter was settled, Tony placed a gentle kiss atop his head.