#and the amount of Illegal Men we have. it's all very ethical | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

queernuck · 5 years ago

Text

I am almost sorry, but you are likely to be around drug users at Pride if you spend a significant amount of time at various festivities, vigils, and events, even if you attend the most sexless, supposed-safe, sanitized ideations of whatever events are associated with pride. This is effectively a matter of how common drug use is, how many different sorts of drug use there are, and how ubiquitous drug use is within both gay communities and various communities that are in assembly and assemblage with it in one way or another.

What has frustrated me most, recently, in looking at how others view drug use, drinking, and sobriety in relation to Pride is that the understanding of our community’s ties to substance abuse are so poor, so awful, so normative.

So many reinscriptions and repetitions of “advice” or directives given to us about how we must behave at Pride are ones that repeat largely hegemonic advice, advice that looks at public spaces in a way that fundamentally focuses on individual actions rather than structural inadequacies. Admonishments about smoking in public ignore larger issues of air quality, the structuring of capitalist work ethic such that one of the few ways to reliably get breaks on a reasonable schedule is get addicted to nicotine. Alcohol is among the few intoxicants that can be legally consumed in public openly, with marijuana in a kind of grey area in many places and illegal but tolerated, at least to a degree. Cocaine, as a substance that can be insufflated and one that goes well with alcohol, provides stimulation and confidence in a world where you are asked to keep drinking to stay at a bar, and a bar is likely one of the few social spaces you have, so that cocaine becomes a means of making the experience of going to the bar something memorable (in a literal sense, by keeping one from blacking out) as well as providing the energy necessary for going from a bar to an apartment, to a bedroom, to an encounter of a sexual character. The same is even more true of methamphetamine, or Tina, common in many gay communities and a favorite of many gay men, including in circles that by their nature are constructed around drug use.

Drugs and sex go together frequently, even with light usage of entirely acceptable drugs. Alcohol, either consumed or as an accessory to distract those who are satisfied with intoxication at a given moment, is present at most events where the audience is of legal age and the context is casual, or is well suited for such casual encounters. And, as discussed before, the use of cocaine surrounding sex is relatively well-documented as well, both inside and outside of gay communities. The use of poppers, a term for amyl nitrates, in sex is not uncommon, and certainly no longer restricted to gay communities. however, that it got its start, became popular in, gay circles is hardly disputed, mainly because even the amusingly droll wikipedia account of the history of the drug mentions the way in which it was taken on by a kind of avant-garde of straight culture (really, likely, just ones who had fucked a bisexual person and thought themselves subversive for it despite being far straighter than the highway line you walk down when checking if youre gonna catch your third DUI) as the muscle-relaxing effects of poppers are known both for increasing sexual pleasure, and for relaxing muscles in a fashion that allows for a greater ease of sexual acts. Or, if one is speaking without euphemism, after some drinks, some coke and some poppers an average vers or bottom is ready to bust themselves wide open.

These are examples of behaviors that involve drug use, but are not innately tied to it, are not by their nature activities that require drug use, merely ones that drug use can be found in assemblage with. However, “Party and Play” is a far different beast to discuss. The two parts of party and play are relatively easily explained: the “party” involves use of drugs, mainly meth but also integrating others such as MDMA, GHB, and other club drugs, while the “play” is various forms of sex, whether it be relatively tame or a highly fetishized process of exchange and resignification wherein traditional sexual acts are resignified through acts of drug use. PNP literally cannot exist without drug use. Drug use is integral to it as a space, as a fetish, and while it varies the drugs used fall largely within a very narrow list specifically because of how these drugs are consumed, the effects they have, and the sexualization thereof. One not-uncommon act in more hardcore PNP groups is injecting another partner with crystal meth, an exercise in trust, control, and a kind of intimate penetration far more transgressive than any other, a phallic presence signified by the needle rather than by a phallus or phallic object inserted into an orifice. It is the creation of a new orifice, a radical reshaping of the body through the singularity of the needle’s point, and the dangerousness of this, the risks associated with it, are part of what make it a meaningful fetish. As Žižek says of fistfucking, there is a way in which the phallus is, now, inadequately phallic to serve as a proper sexual instrument, a more extreme one must be found.

Not all PNP is this extreme, even though injected use of methamphetamine is not unheard of in gay circles. For some, shooting crystal is more or less as acceptable as any other drug-related behavior, specifically due to the influence of PNP culture and the prevalence of meth more generally in gay spaces. In fact, in many places it is predominantly tied to the gay community, as a kind of currency within it due specifically to PNP’s popularity leading to a wider popularity of the drug in relation to other club drugs. If you’re in Nevada and looking for meth, you probably don’t have to go too far. In some parts of Southern California, it is only the second most common substance because you can buy weed easier than a pack of cigarettes. There are towns in Arizona that all but throw it at you, and at one point Missouri was the meth capital of the world. Meth is one of America’s favorite drugs, but if you’re in New York, it can be hard to come by. Nearby cities like Patterson and Newark on out to Kensington in Philly are dope havens, and if you go far enough uptown or downtown in New York you’ll find the same. And don’t get anyone wrong, dope is great. But dope dick won’t exactly satisfy most. And that’s where Tina comes to town in her Swarovski crystal dress: in NYC, meth is relatively rare outside of gay clubs, gay parties, and most meth users are involved in PNP scenes or at most a step removed from them, drug users who acknowledge the kinship between the two and may rely on it in order to get their own supply, sustain their own dealings, so on. And while meth is more acceptable to inject in certain circles than heroin is to use at all, by any route of administration, that there would eventually be some crossover is hardly surprising.

The popularity of heroin among gay users is less tied to sex and largely tied to the same factors that make alcohol, cocaine, and other drugs popular: lives of depression, rejection, isolation. This is even more true for trans people, given our experience in relation to embodiment as a concept, a process, a continual test of being and becoming. As an experience, heroin and other opiates are some of the drugs most similar in effect and affect to the sadomasochistic restructuring of the body, two of the approaches toward the Body without Organs (as laid out by Deleuze and Guattari) and two means of attaining a restructuring of the body that passes through an embryonic stage rather than requiring the traumatic breaking and restructuring of the body occur in a body that will fracture as a result, the embryonic body able to sustain such change due to its lack of definition. For trans women, heroin may not make us women, but the pain of becoming one is certainly helped by it. Heroin, when mixed with alcohol, benzodiazepines, cocaine, or meth (or really anything else) provides a unique, more euphoric experience, one where anxiety melts away and euphoria comes easily. Dope itself is often not sexualized, as lazing around and listening to music is usually more appealing on it than the effort needed to have sex. Rather than a strictly sexual component, the kinship between sex work and drug use, the way in which the two are commonly found near one another, with one inviting and invoking the other such that involvement in one is often tied with involvement in another. Whether to come down from an upper (smoking heroin to come down from MDMA was and remains a common Irish raver practice) or to add an analgesic to the pain of exploitation, its involvement in gay lives is hardly surprising, even if not as emblematic of glitz and glamour as cocaine, MDMA, and even meth.

To refer back to previous mentions of MDMA, while certainly not associated strictly with gay lives, the queerness of MDMA is hard to dispute, given the artistry with which MDMA pills are often crafted and the scenes in which they are distributed. Raves and gay fashion have frequently intersected, the music that forms the basis for most raves owes its origins in one way or another to gay (and black gay communities, specifically) innovation. The faggishness of rave culture, the effete style of PLUR dress codes, and the way that this is all sublimated back into heterosexuality gives all at once an overwhelmingly “queer” vibe to certain spaces and a sort of drought of any genuine queer identity, gay affinity, trans transgression, merely an apparition of it, a simulacra of rave culture. however, MDMA still can be found at gay clubs, raves, and so on, especially given the way that the Netherlands has begun exporting phenomenal pills in bulk quantities. Madonna dominating the dance floor is an issue of Voguing being in vogue, but the roots of house music, ballroom culture, the influence of both on popular culture and musical development cannot be ignored, and that so much of it rings with the metallic taste of MDMA is also undeniable.

Gay communities have a lot of drugs, are a frequently intoxicated sort of space, one in which intoxication as a means of restructuring transgression and reclaiming certain means of relation, resignifying them, is part of the experience, of what makes a community possible. To say there is no problem with this is to make a statement too far, but to say the opposite, to say that intoxication is a moral failure, is itself a statement that goes against both purposes of community and the reason that intoxication became so involved in them in the first place.

#drugs #pride

69 notes · View notes

discyours · 5 years ago

Note

Could you make a list of ur opinions?

I can try, but I never really learned how tumblr works so I don’t know how to make this an actual page on my blog. Once I do figure out how I’ll definitely link to this. I’ll go off the top of my head for most frequently asked/what I think is most relevant, but if there’s anything you’re missing feel free to ask.

Gender:

Gender is, in short, the roles that are ascribed to sex. This includes the idea that anyone who is born female is bound to be docile, caring, or even just more likely to like pink. But gender identity also falls under this. Defining a woman as someone who wants to be female is referring to something - an action, a personality trait, a feeling, a thought - beyond sex as what “makes” a woman. Gender is not fake, but it is a social construct and in my opinion it’s a harmful one. Whether deliberately created to oppress women (like is the case with women being expected to be submissive) or originated as a relative accident like with certain fashion trends, gender roles end up restricting women’s freedom. Believing in female liberation means being against, or at least critical of that.

Gender identity:

Again, falls under gender but I think it deserves its own answer. I don’t think gender identity is necessarily “fake” either. When people say that they “feel like” a woman rather than a man I don’t think that they’re lying. I may take issue with the wording just like I may expect people to be critical of their own reasoning when they explain that their gender identity is male because the idea of being a man feels right to them whereas being a woman doesn’t, but I do understand how they feel. I relate to the feeling myself and I do think that the average trans man feels differently about this than the average cis (meaning non-trans) woman, however I’m not convinced that this feeling is rigid or innate.

So I don’t think gender identity is “fake” or complete nonsense, but I don’t think it’s a particularly useful category either. There’s no reason I should be sharing bathrooms with people who have an internal sense that they should be male rather than female over people who lack the ability to use urinals and require trash cans to dispose of menstrual products. There’s no reason for me to share changing rooms with people with similar genderfeels rather than people who have similar bodies to mine and are statistically far less likely to sexually assault me than people with a different type of body.

In the context of feminism we need to recognise that sex is the category in which women are being oppressed when they suffer FGM, when they’re put into menstrual huts, when they’re denied reproductive freedom, when they’re kept out of government positions because of their unreliable, hormone driven female emotions, when they’re missing out on jobs that an equally qualified man would be accepted for because their employer doesn’t want to risk having to deal with them getting pregnant. Sex, not gender identity.

Egalitarianism:

I actually don’t get asked about this much which is a shame because I know that people are thinking it; if it’s just about wanting women to have rights then why not be an egalitarian? Why, unless you hate men and want them to be below women rather than being equal?

There’s multiple reasons. For one, feminism started as a women’s rights movement and women do not owe it to men to change that as soon as they decided they were done fully opposing it. There would be something inherently disgusting to me about denying women their own movement for their own issues regardless of where I stand on egalitarianism.

But beyond that, I oppose the idea that we just draw a line at men’s current quality of life and decide that that’s the standard women must be judged against. The idea of it is misogynistic but in practice it’s harmful too; we’ve all seen those “if you want equality then women need to join the draft” and “if we’re equal then can I punch you in the face?” statements. This form of “equality” is still just letting men control the standard for women’s lives. Is still forcing women to fit into a system built by men.

A lot of egalitarians seem hypocritically focused on equal outcome which I also disagree with. The ratio of men to women that die during physically taxing jobs is hardly any more of an issue than the ratio of men to women that die during child birth. There are biological reasons for these discrepancies (one moreso than the other, but there’s still never going to be an effective way to have a 50/50 sex split in every single job) and compensating for them for the sake of some vague concept of “equality” is pointless. The inadequacies in female-specific healthcare are a big reason to have a movement specifically for women’s rights, to have a movement that can advocate for improvement. Likewise if a lack of health and safety regulations in manual labour disproportionately affects men, that’s a good reason for a men’s rights movement to advocate for improvement (not that either of these can replace non-sexspecific advocacy groups which are also very important). I just don’t believe that women have any responsibility to merge with or be involved in men’s rights movements, considering women have historically always been oppressed by men and men still hold the majority of political as well as financial power.

Liberal feminism:

Liberal feminism is often what people refer to as mainstream feminism, but I don’t think it’s right to write off liberal feminism as a whole just because I disagree with the direction that mainstream feminism has gone. In simple terms liberal feminism is just feminism which seeks more individual freedom for women within the current system, whereas radical feminism is focused on class freedom and radically changing the system if not creating a new one altogether. I don’t fully disagree with liberal feminism and in fact I don’t believe any form of feminism that doesn’t at times utilise more liberal solutions has any way of succeeding. Getting more women into our current government without actually overhauling our political system and changing the reasons that women are kept out of government positions is liberal; I still only vote for women when I can, and encourage other people to do the same because when we’re unable to change things completely, it’s better than nothing.

The reason I lean more towards radical feminism is because I ultimately don’t find liberal solutions to be good enough. I don’t want to regulate the porn industry, I want to abolish it. I don’t believe any amount of regulation or “reclamation” can ever make the sex industry ethical and while completely eradicating it is never going to happen, having that as the end goal at least means that you never stop pushing. The same thing goes for just about all other systems which oppress women; I fundamentally disagree with liberal feminists that giving individual women more individual freedom about whether or not to participate in these systems is ever going to be good enough.

Sex work:

I don’t believe that consuming or procuring sex work (ie being a john or a pimp) can ever be ethical as I don’t believe that consent can be bought. If somebody would not have sex with you without being paid, I don’t see that as true consent. There is something inherently coercive about having to choose between not having the money you need or having sex with someone. Coerced sex is not consensual and we all know what non-consensual sex is.

There may be some people who don’t need the money but do it regardless because they enjoy it/want extra cash, especially in “milder” forms of sex work like camming or stripping. But the reality is that the vast majority of people (90% of prostitutes) who do “sex work” do not want to and would be doing something else if they had the option. Their suffering is more important to me than the enjoyment of the select few who do want to be “sex workers”, and that of the johns they “service”.

That being said, I support the Nordic model which criminalises the consumption and procurement of sex work but decriminalises actually being a sex worker. This model has been shown to reduces trafficking as it reduces demand, and it doesn’t harm sex workers (who are the ones we’re trying to protect). Sidenote, I hate the term “sex work” as it already goes along with the idea that sex can ever be a job and should be held to the same standards as one when it comes to the ethics of being indirectly coerced by a need for money - however I’ll use it when I need to to explain my stance to people who do use the term.

Surrogacy:

I view surrogacy similarly to sex work; as an unethical and unnecessary commodification of women’s bodies which puts their health and safety at risk, and is often indirectly coerced through financial needs. Viewing parenthood as being primarily about who “claims” a newborn rather than who actually carried and gave life to it is inherently patriarchal and sets a terrifying precedent. Pregnancy puts a huge strain on women’s physical as well as mental health, and ending the process with a cheque or a sincere thank you rather than a baby can be mentally devastating, even if you knew from the start that you wouldn’t keep it. It is morally inconsistent that surrogacy is often legal in places where it’s illegal to receive money for giving away an organ or your blood; policies that are in place to avoid turning the poor into a class of kidney-suppliers. The idea of consent magically justifying everything falls way short when the same concept hasn’t been applied to blood donations for aforementioned reasons, and when you’re stuck to a contract. If we’ve agreed that consent to sex does not count if it’s irrevocable, why is surrogacy treated differently?

Much like with sex work, the demand always far outweighs the supply which means that the few women who sincerely and genuinely want to do this don’t just justify the whole thing. I believe a system similar to the Nordic model should be in place, where there’s no legal repercussions to being a surrogate but where attempting to recruit one is illegal.

Communism:

I’m definitely a leftist and radical feminism itself has marxist roots. I recognise that capitalism plays quite a big role in women’s oppression through the barriers that women experience to enter many forms of paid labour, and the unpaid labour that is expected of them. Capitalism also leads to the commodification of women’s bodies through sex work or surrogacy. That being said, the inherently authoritarian nature of communism simply can’t be justified in my opinion. People who are corrupted by power exist under every system, which is why authoritarianism can never be safe regardless of the ideology it’s attached to. Even a “benevolent dictator” will die eventually if they don’t get overthrown first.

Transmedicalism:

I view transmedicalism as a harmful ideology. The brain sex studies transmedicalists often link are extremely flawed; incredibly small sample sizes used to draw overreaching conclusions, and a failure to account for neuroplasticity (the fact that your brain’s structure can change over time). Their insistence that transition is the only option for dysphoric people is harmful to all dysphoric/trans people, and often worsens dysphoria while also discouraging the development of alternative treatments. Their claims that all detransitioners were never really trans in the first place and every person who transitioned must’ve secretly been dysphoric regardless of their insistence otherwise are based on no actual fact, just a need for their ideology to make sense.

#anon #my opinions #radfem #gender critical #anti sex work #anti surrogacy #I swear I'm gonna edit this later on bc the last two answers seem kinda half assed #but if I leave this in my drafts any longer it's gonna stay there forever

41 notes · View notes

torikellypromotions · 2 years ago

Text

Extra Analytics and Points on Dark World wide web

1. The acceptance of Dark Web and TOR Browser: As previously stated over, Dim World-wide-web is the subset of Deep Net that lies in the Deep Web as the most concealed portion of the Web and not publicly available by the common browsers in the typical means of seeking. In that case, experts use TOR Browser which is now employed for only Darkish Net browsing and generally for the Dim internet activities. As time passes, frequent individuals are also receiving mindful of Dim World-wide-web and hearing the Cyber-crimes taking place below desperately from several resources. Now few of them, who are neither legal nor ethical hackers, eagerly downloading the TOR browser into their equipment just in curiosity to get entry and to working experience the black aspect of the Net with no even figuring out the ideal route to browsing it and the danger in it!! Curiosity is very good for awareness but the Dim internet is something distinctive from it!! Dark Internet is not doing the job thoroughly on knowledge but competencies and experiences as that silly curiosity bring about an accidental attempt to the crime world for some people badly!! As TOR becomes community use for cost-free, it attempts for some men and women to go through from cyber-crimes due to landing upon a wrong website, remaining trapped. Even in android versions, there are two famous applications like ORBOT & ORFOX perform as the gateway to accessibility the Dim web from android. But it should not be surfed from Android until you have to surf for a certain and great-for-use darkish internet URL. TOR is obtaining now the only 1 most preferred browser to surf the Dark Web. 2. Accessing Darkish Web is unlawful or not?!: TOR is not unlawful or obtaining access to the Darkish Web is not illegal mainly because there are tons of experts like journalists, ethical hackers from forensics, scientists, writers, some visitors, worldwide political groups or agencies surf the darkish world-wide-web for their demands. But the irony is, below the amount of unlawful things to do seriously increases in diverse types of crimes where by if a person form of criminal offense is obtaining caught and banned by forensic officers, one more form arises right away in a new sort. This tends to make the dim net acquiring included in unsafe to additional hazardous cyber-crimes all situations. The a lot more black hat hackers occur, the more crimes are happening right here. On yet another hand, contrary to we use Research Engines these as Google, Bing, Yahoo in Surface area World wide web, there is no certain Look for Engine for Dark Website that you will start out browsing something in the Darkish World-wide-web by just typing the search phrase and then clicking the "Search" button!!! Should you loved this information and you would want to receive more information relating to hidden wiki please visit our own web site. To get access there, you have to have a precise URL of the onion suffix extra. Now for an unprofessional or inexperienced man or woman, if they someway obtain out or obtain any sort of dark world-wide-web-accessible hyperlink from unfamiliar resources to surf it by way of the TOR browser, it is complicated for them to have an understanding of initial if the URL will lead to any right or mistaken web site!! Because most of the internet site there is unlawful, stability a lot less and there is no guarantee what will come about following. There is no "HTTPS" protocol or SSL certified websites to identify irrespective of whether the web site is good or terrible!! This is fully outdoors of WWW. If the URL is located to be bad, URL people can get hacked, their system and all particular facts or actions can get hacked, can be threatened, can be forced by black hat hackers to do any unlawful undertaking unconsciously at life threat even!!!! No matter what can be happened!! Even at times, an experienced professional also get trapped there!! It is not remaining said that making an attempt darkish net is unlawful but need a surety what URL you are likely to stop by. A whole lot of daily visitors exist there who just like to read confidential posts or reports of worldwide news. Facebook has also its .onion URL there!! Also, Dark Internet has some social media internet sites which are momentary!! There are some precise but short-term look for engines also there but not trusted like Concealed Wiki- it consists of magic formula journals that are not open up to any one. 3. Varieties of crimes taking place here: Black Hat Hacking, Bitcoin advertising, hacked Social Media account’s IDs and Password Providing of popular or concentrate on-based people, Credit history or Debit Card’s Range advertising(Carding), Driving license offering, Degree or Diploma’s falsified certificate marketing, Youngster Pornography, Forbidden Animal promoting, Illuminati or paranormal info transferring, illegal Bitcoin transactions and encrypted documents together with malware, ransoms, viruses advertising, black current market medicines marketing which are unlawful or not authorized for sale in general. Particularly Prescription drugs and Weapon offering, Unlawful Residence selling, Contacts with the profile of Killers, Strike-person and quite a few additional. All of these Dim-web functions are finished in essence by those cyber-crime professionals (Most of them are Black Hat Hackers/Cyber Criminals) who are providing all the forbidden/limited/illegal merchandise anonymously to acquire a massive financial gain from the underworld situations, will take spot in the Darkish Web, which cannot be realized publicly in normal ways. 4. What takes place soon after stealing the general public details under the Dim World-wide-web? Typically, the credentials of focus on-based mostly Social Media profiles, Personal or Enterprise Email messages, stolen Net Banking Details, Credit score or Debit Playing cards specifics which have been stolen employing skimmer in the ATM(s), Government Companies or Non-public agencies or IT Industrial related Projects, Confidential files, Databases System Info are at first hacked by black hat hackers and then all these facts are bought in an encrypted structure to its respective customers anonymously underneath the Dark World wide web. These items of data are stolen by the networking method in the Surface area World wide web by many Cyber Assaults to get its full accessibility. These details are bypassed in the Darkish World-wide-web concurrently. Info Stolen occurs by these styles of cyber-assaults: Phishing Attack: Sending pretend emails which are pretending to be actual to generate a trap for the victims to steal non-public qualifications. Spoofing: Pretending to be actual, spoofing means to make bogus phone calls with faux identities to steal individual information and facts, using social engineering. Simply click-Jacking Assault: Pretty much like phishing but it leads to a fraud application ( or a replicate web site which resembles to the UI/UX of the original web page) to steal credentials. In most scenarios, it steals the credential information/ any formal track record facts of the victims. Spamming: Spam calls, messages, emails. Ransomware Assault: It is a variety of malware which can be mounted in a victim’s laptop to encrypt all the file and to menace the target for a specified amount of money of income to give the hackers usually the details will get offered in the Darkish World-wide-web. RAT: Remote Accessibility Trojans are styles of Trojan that infects a pc by leaving a backdoor in it for the hacker to get control around that computer system remotely. Social Engineering: A way to trick the victim’s head to get his personalized facts or credentials of the bank account or any other profile. SQL Injection: SQL Injection is utilized to snatch facts of a Databases of any internet site or software. Knowledge Breaching: Most comes about in the IT Industries where data gets leaked in the erroneous hand. Brute Pressure Assault, Dictionary Assault, Rainbow-Desk Attack, Drinking water hole Assault: These are used to hack victim’s qualifications. Dispersed Denial of Services Assault, Smurf Assault: Employed to flip down any web-site server. Wrong Transactions: Untrue Gateways saying to transfer your money securely. These are all unique approaches to steal information from victims in the Area Net which are then sold in the Dim World-wide-web in the sort of Cryptocurrency often. There are other ways too!!

0 notes

picspicspicspicspix-blog · 6 years ago

Text

Immediate Courses Of Coupon 2018 Found Out

No extra touring in direction of the grocery keep, circling for parking area, status aimlessly in just queue at the billing counter, loading your groceries inside your car or truck and touring back again residence. The highest significant Those people for by yourself in the direction of depart with some advertising goods thus that they can bear in mind oneself will be individuals that your self will be relying upon for orders afterwards. On line Banner Advertisements can be a remarkably prosperous course in the direction of sector your workplace upon the Website. Entry can be calculated throughout currently being in a position in the direction of call innumerable purchasers inside which can be complete through remaining noticeable on line. If when it comes to taking a medication like Viagra or Cialis, it can work as a wakeup call that you need to take care of other parts of your health. Yourself will locate proven Tips that corporations can employ the service of towards check out genuine thrive inside of their personal gross product sales and dollars. This design of frowning transpires once a speaker endeavours in the direction of crank out a memorized speech. Move in direction of an instant hand dresses keep with each other and pick an outfit for just about every other with out the other understanding what it is. Riri zippers should really contain a spherical brain, and should really not arrive in direction of a fact. There are some counterfeiters that employ false Riri or Lampo zippers, still there are normally distinguishable options concerning the legit and wrong types. So true dahoglund - there is nothing new under the sun - just new to so many of us who are, unfortunately, so far removed from healthy herbs and how to use them! Women, kids, and teenagers must not use Sildenafil citrate tablets as it may lead to various health problems. “We called several centers experienced in the use of Viagra in children. Specializes in which is the exciting avenue for patients viagra side effects mayo clinic and will be used to get through personalized treatments to improve. Nonetheless at still illegal, canadian pharmaceuticals online even after washing machines' lower her drug viagra side effects mayo clinic resistance to provide an automobile as hd is still be viewed digital program in nie. Viagra coupon lets you save many hard earned cash on Netfirms. Viagra coupon allows you save a considerable amount of hard earned cash on Netfirms. Kindly have a look at Cialis coupon to get the most recent working Levitra coupon. Do have a look at Cialis coupon to obtain the most recent working Levitra discount. Do stop by Cialis coupon to get the latest working Discount for Levitra. There are situations that women persist inside of expending for herself. There are pair sites which provides each day discounts upon some specific products and solutions. This sort of Those people every time getting clothing for their both animals shift for the combined and matched garments or transfer for products that will never ever fade out against the canine model market. Hercules was so strong, he seemed like getting force from a rare source, like he had taken generic viagra, that's pretty good. I’d hate to misspell my meds and end up with laxatives instead of my Viagra, although I admit an insulin vending machine in my neighborhood would save me 2H driving every month. Order NOW and SAVE money and time! Does anyone know if the generic soft viagra (meltabs) are for real? There exists a vital have to have for which includes qualified govt in just world careers marketplace in addition they are readily available financially rewarding income bundles. For the approximately 90% of people with Parkinson's who, like me, don't have the gene variants associated with PD, scientists believe there have been more than one cause for neuronal death in our brain's substantia nigra. When I first joined our Parkinson's Facebook group, I had a powerful desire to pursue the"why" of our shared disease. Some patients resorted to extreme methods to deal with their disease. Office environment monetary claims will need toward be supplied, as very well as individual tax returns for the principals. All “mentally-ill” people operate within a (usually coherent) worldview, with consistent internal logic, and rules of right and wrong (ethics). A single issue that all people likes is towards scent beneficial, and this is the declare toward fame for Income. What are the disadvantages of high blood pressure? The chemical pathways are similar. However, if you have the right advice it becomes an easy solution. Two websites have a same theme. Title has a deep impact on your websites search engine rankings. Some men decide to not confront the problem with a reasonable amount of research and self discovery. Monitor upon labels, consider the fragrance, and research exactly where the fragrance arrived in opposition to. For this reason it is a smart idea to look at all your options before you decide which method is most suitable for you. We provide a full service law firm concentrating on criminal defense fort lauderdale, Family Law, Personal Injury, and Commercial Litigation. The result is excessive co-morbidity (multiple Axis II diagnoses). Exactly as oxygen is a birthright, as a result is wealth. “I was skeptical, and fearful of jumping on the bandwagon with so little data on this specific heart condition,” Moore said. He was immediately admitted… His skin was appearing red hot… and the burns started turning in to blisters.. If the patient is already taking tadalafil, the alpha-blocker should be started at the lowest dose.

1 note · View note

hyperbanal · 7 years ago

Quote

Fellow Prisoners by John Berger I picked up the phone and knew immediately it was an unexpected call from you, speaking from your flat in the Via Paolo Sarpi. (Two days after the election results and Berlusconi’s comeback.) The speed with which we identify a familiar voice coming out of the blue is comforting, but also somewhat mysterious. Because the measures, the units we use in calculating the clear distinction that exists between one voice and another, are unformulated and nameless. They don’t have a code. These days more and more is encoded. So I wonder whether there aren’t other measures, equally uncoded yet precise, by which we calculate other givens. For example, the amount of circumstantial freedom existing in a certain situation, its extent and its strict limits. Prisoners become experts at this. They develop a particular sensitivity toward liberty, not as a principle, but as a granular substance. They spot fragments of liberty almost immediately whenever they occur. On an ordinary day, when nothing is happening and the crises announced hourly are the old familiar ones—and the politicians are declaring yet again that without them there would be catastrophe—people as they pass one another exchange glances, and some of their glances check whether the others are envisaging the same thing when they say to themselves, So this is life! Often they are envisaging the same thing and in this primary sharing there is a kind of solidarity before anything further has been said or discussed. I’m searching for words to describe the period of history we’re living through. To say it’s unprecedented means little because all periods were unprecedented since history was first discovered. I’m not searching for a complex definition—there are a number of thinkers, such as Zygmunt Bauman, who have taken on this essential task. I’m looking for nothing more than a figurative image to serve as a landmark. Landmarks don’t fully explain themselves, but they offer a reference point that can be shared. In this they are like the tacit assumptions contained in popular proverbs. Without landmarks there is the great human risk of turning in circles. The landmark I’ve found is that of prison. Nothing less. Across the planet we are living in a prison. The word we, when printed or pronounced on screens, has become suspect, for it’s continually used by those with power in the demagogic claim that they are also speaking for those who are denied power. Let’s talk of ourselves as they. They are living in a prison. What kind of prison? How is it constructed? Where is it situated? Or am I only using the word as a figure of speech? No, it’s not a metaphor, the imprisonment is real, but to describe it one has to think historically. Michel Foucault has graphically shown how the penitentiary was a late-eighteenth-, early-nineteenth-century invention closely linked to industrial production, its factories and its utilitarian philosophy. Earlier, there were jails that were extensions of the cage and the dungeon. What distinguishes the penitentiary is the number of prisoners it can pack in—and the fact that all of them are under continuous surveillance thanks to the model of the Pantopticon, as conceived by Jeremy Bentham, who introduced the principle of accountancy into ethics. Accountancy demands that every transaction be noted. Hence the penitentiary’s circular walls with the cells arranged around the screw’s watchtower at the center. Bentham, who was John Stuart Mill’s tutor at the beginning of the nineteenth century, was the principal utilitarian apologist for industrial capitalism. Today, in the era of globalization, the world is dominated by financial, not industrial, capital, and the dogmas defining criminality and the logics of imprisonment have changed radically. Penitentiaries still exist and more and more are being built. But prison walls now serve a different purpose. What constitutes an incarceration area has been transformed. Twenty years ago, Nella Bielski and I wrote A Question of Geography, a play about the Gulag. In act two, a zek (a political prisoner) talks to a boy who has just arrived about choice, about the limits of what can be chosen in a labor camp: when you drag yourself back after a day’s work in the taiga, when you are marched back, half dead with fatigue and hunger, you are given your ration of soup and bread. About the soup you have no choice—it has to be eaten whilst it’s hot, or whilst it’s at least warm. About the four hundred grams of bread you have choice. For instance, you can cut it into three little bits: one to eat now with the soup, one to suck in the mouth before going to sleep in your bunk, and the third to keep until next morning at ten, when you’re working in the taiga and the emptiness in your stomach feels like a stone. You empty a wheelbarrow full of rock. About pushing the barrow to the dump you have no choice. Now it’s empty you have a choice. You can walk your barrow back just like you came, or—if you’re clever, and survival makes you clever—you push it back like this, almost upright. If you choose the second way you give your shoulders a rest. If you are a zek and you become a team leader, you have the choice of playing at being a screw, or of never forgetting that you are a zek. The Gulag no longer exists. Millions work, however, under conditions that are not very different. What has changed is the forensic logic applied to workers and criminals. During the Gulag, political prisoners, categorized as criminals, were reduced to slave laborers. Today millions of brutally exploited workers are being reduced to the status of criminals. The Gulag equation “criminal = slave laborer” has been rewritten by neoliberalism to become “worker = hidden criminal.” The whole drama of global migration is expressed in this new formula; those who work are latent criminals. When accused, they are found guilty of trying at all costs to survive. Over six million Mexican women and men work in the US without papers and are consequently illegal. A concrete wall of over one thousand kilometers and a “virtual” wall of eighteen hundred watchtowers were planned along the frontier between the US and Mexico, although the projects have recently been scrapped. Ways around them—though all of them dangerous—will of course be found. Between industrial capitalism, dependent on manufacture and factories, and financial capitalism, dependent on free-market speculation and front office traders, the incarceration area has changed. Speculative financial transactions add up to, each day, $1,300 billion, fifty times more than the sum of the commercial exchanges. The prison is now as large as the planet and its allotted zones can vary and can be termed worksite, refugee camp, shopping mall, periphery, ghetto, office block, favela, suburb. What is essential is that those incarcerated in these zones are fellow prisoners. It’s the first week in May and on the hillsides and mountains, along the avenues and around the gates in the northern hemisphere, the leaves of most of the trees are coming out. Not only are all their different varieties of green still distinct, people also have the impression that each single leaf is distinct, and so they are confronting billions—no, not billions (the word has been corrupted by dollars), they are confronting an infinite multitude of new leaves. For prisoners, small visible signs of nature’s continuity have always been, and still are, a covert encouragement. Today the purpose of most prison walls (concrete, electronic, patrolled, or interrogatory) is not to keep prisoners in and correct them, but to keep prisoners out and exclude them. Most of the excluded are anonymous—hence the obsession of all security forces with identity. They are also numberless, for two reasons. First because their numbers fluctuate; every famine, natural disaster and military intervention (now called policing) either diminishes or increases their multitude. And second, because to assess their number is to confront the fact that they constitute most of those living on the surface of the earth—and to acknowledge this is to plummet into absolute absurdity. Have you noticed small commodities are increasingly difficult to remove from their packaging? Something similar has happened with the lives of the gainfully employed. Those who have legal employment and are not poor are living in a very reduced space that allows them fewer and fewer choices—except the continual binary choice between obedience and disobedience. Their working hours, their place of residence, their past skills and experience, their health, the future of their children, everything outside their function as employees has to take a small second place beside the unforeseeable and vast demands of liquid profit. Furthermore, the rigidity of this house rule is called flexibility. In prison, words get turned upside down. The alarming pressure of high-grade working conditions has obliged the courts in Japan to recognize and define a new coroners’ category of “death by overwork.” No other system, the gainfully employed are told, is feasible. There is no alternative. Take the elevator. The elevator is a small cell. Somewhere in the prison I’m watching a five-year-old girl having a swimming lesson in a municipal indoor swimming pool. She’s wearing a dark blue costume. She can swim but doesn’t yet have the confidence to swim alone without any support. The instructor takes her to the deep end of the pool. The girl is going to jump into the water whilst grasping a long rod held out toward her by her teacher. It’s a way of getting over her fear of water. They did the same thing yesterday. Today she wants the girl to jump without clutching the rod. One, two, three! The girl jumps, but at the last moment seizes the rod. Not a word is spoken. A faint smile passes between the woman and the girl, the girl cheeky, the woman patient. The girl clambers up the ladder out of the pool and returns to the edge. Again! she hisses. She jumps, hands to her sides, holding nothing. When she comes up to the surface the tip of the rod is there in front of her very nose. The girl swims two strokes to the ladder without touching the rod. Am I proposing that the girl in the dark blue costume and the swimming instructor in her sandals are prisoners? Certainly at the moment when the girl jumped without the rod, neither of them was in prison. If I think, however, of the years to come or look back at the recent past, I fear that, notwithstanding what I describe, both of them risk becoming or re-becoming a prisoner. Look at the power structure of the surrounding world, and how its authority functions. Every tyranny finds and improvises its own set of controls. Which is why they are often, at first, not recognized as the vicious controls they are. The market forces dominating the world assert that they are inevitably stronger than any nation-state. The assertion is corroborated every minute. From an unsolicited telephone call trying to persuade the subscriber to take out private health insurance or a pension, to the latest ultimatum of the World Trade Organization. As a result, most governments no longer govern. A government no longer steers toward its chosen destination. The word “horizon,” with its promise of a hoped-for future, has vanished from political discourse on both right and left. All that remains for debate is how to measure what is there. Opinion polls replace direction and replace desire. Most governments herd instead of steer. (In US prison slang, “herders” is one of the many words for jailers.) In the nineteenth century, long-term imprisonment was approvingly defined as a punishment of “civic death.” Two centuries later, governments are imposing—by law, force, economic threats and their buzz—mass regimes of civic death. Wasn’t living under any tyranny in the past a form of imprisonment? Not in the sense I’m describing. What is being lived today is new because of its relationship with space. It’s here that the thinking of Zygmunt Bauman is illuminating. He points out that the corporate market forces now running the world are ex-territorial, that’s to say “free from territorial constraints—the constraints of locality.” They are perpetually remote, anonymous, and thus never have to take account of the territorial, physical consequences of their actions. He quotes Hans Tietmeyer, former president of the German Federal Bank: “Today’s stake is to create conditions favorable to the confidence of investors.” The single supreme priority. Following this, the control of the world’s populations, consisting of producers, consumers, and the marginalized poor, is the task allotted to the obedient national governments. The planet is a prison and the obedient governments, whether of left or right, are the herders. The prison system operates thanks to cyberspace. Cyberspace offers the market a speed of exchange which is almost instantaneous and used across the world day and night for trading. From this speed, the market tyranny gains its ex-territorial license. Such velocity, however, has a pathological effect on its practitioners: it anesthetizes them. No matter what has befallen, “business as usual.” There is no place for pain in that velocity; announcements of pain perhaps, but not the suffering of it. Consequently, the human condition is banished, excluded from those operating the system. They are alone because utterly heartless. Earlier, tyrants were pitiless and inaccessible, but they were neighbors who were subject to pain. This is no longer the case, and therein lies the system’s probable weakness. The tall doors swing background We’re inside the prison yard in a new season. They (we) are fellow prisoners. That recognition, in whatever tone of voice it may be declared, contains a refusal. Nowhere more than in prison is the future calculated and awaited as something utterly opposed to the present. The incarcerated never accept the present as final. Meanwhile, how to live this present? What conclusions to draw? What decisions to take? How to act? I have a few guidelines to suggest, now that the landmark has been established. On this side of the walls experience is listened to, no experience is considered obsolete. Here survival is respected, and it’s a commonplace that survival frequently depends upon solidarity between fellow prisoners. The authorities know this—hence their use of solitary confinement, either through physical isolation from history, from heritage, from the earth and, above all, from a common future. Ignore the jailers’ talk. There are of course bad jailers and less bad. In certain conditions it’s useful to note the difference. But what they say—including the less evil ones—is bullshit. Their hymns, their shibboleths, their incanted words security, democracy, identity, civilization, flexibility, productivity, human rights, integration, terrorism, freedom are repeated and repeated in order to confuse, divide, distract, and sedate all fellow prisoners. On this side of the walls, words spoken by the jailers are meaningless and are no longer useful for thought. They cut through nothing. Reject them even when thinking silently to oneself. By contrast, prisoners have their own vocabulary with which they think. Many words are kept secret and many are local, with countless variations. Small words and phrases, small yet containing a world: I’ll-show-you-my-way, sometimes-wonder, pajarillo, something-happening-in-B-wing, stripped, take-this-small-earring, died-for-us, go-for-it, etc. Between fellow prisoners there are conflicts, sometimes violent. All prisoners are deprived, yet there are degrees of deprivation and the differences of degree provoke envy. On this side of the walls life is cheap. The very facelessness of the global tyranny encourages hunts to find scapegoats, to find instantly definable enemies among other prisoners. The asphyxiating cells then become a madhouse. The poor attack the poor, the invaded pillage the invaded. Fellow prisoners should not be idealized. Without idealization, simply take note that what they have in common—which is their unnecessary suffering, their endurance, their cunning—is more significant, more telling, than what separates them. And from this, new forms of solidarity are being born. The new solidarities start with the mutual recognition of differences and multiplicity. So this is life! A solidarity, not of masses but of interconnectivity, far more appropriate to the conditions of prison. The authorities do their systematic best to keep fellow prisoners misinformed about what is happening elsewhere in the world prison. They do not, in the aggressive sense of the term, indoctrinate. Indoctrination is reserved for the training of the small élite of traders and managerial and market experts. For the mass prison population the aim is not to activate them, but to keep them in a state of passive uncertainty, to remind them remorselessly that there is nothing in life but risk, and that the earth is an unsafe place. This is done with carefully selected information, with misinformation, commentaries, rumors, fictions. Insofar as the operation succeeds, it proposes and maintains a hallucinating paradox, for it tricks a prison population into believing that the priority for each one of them is to make arrangements for their own personal protection and to acquire somehow, even though incarcerated, their own particular exemption from the common fate. This image of mankind as transmitted through a view of the world is truly without precedent. Mankind is presented as a coward; only winners are brave. In addition, there are no gifts; there are only prizes. Prisoners have always found ways of communicating with one another. In today’s global prison, cyberspace can be used against the interests of those who first installed it. Like this, prisoners inform themselves about what the world does each day, and they follow suppressed stories from the past and so stand shoulder to shoulder with the dead. In doing so, they rediscover little gifts, examples of courage, a single rose in a kitchen where there’s not enough to eat, indelible pains, the indefatigability of mothers, laughter, mutual aid, silence, ever-widening resistance, willing sacrifice, more laughter… The messages are brief but they extend in the solitude of their (our) nights. The final guideline is not tactical but strategic. The fact that the world’s tyrants are ex-territorial explains the extent of their overseeing power, yet it also indicates a coming weakness. They operate in cyberspace and they lodge in guarded condominiums. They have no knowledge of the surrounding earth. Furthermore, they dismiss such knowledge as superficial, not profound. Only extracted resources count. They cannot listen to the earth. On the ground they are blind. In the local they are lost. For fellow prisoners the opposite is true. Cells have walls that touch across the world. Effective acts of sustained resistance will be embedded in the local, near and far. Outback resistance, listening to the earth. Liberty is slowly being found not outside but in the depths of the prison. Not only did I immediately recognize your voice, speaking from your flat in the Via Paolo Sarpi, I could also guess, thanks to your voice, how you were feeling. I sensed your exasperation or, rather, an exasperated endurance combined—and this is so typical of you—with the quick steps of our next hope.

John Berger, Fellow Prisoners

#john berger #fellow prisoners

12 notes · View notes

darealpatyu · 4 years ago

Text

The Social Dilemma: get off your phone now

This film has been a huge wake-up call for me. I am legitimately scared of how social media has become a tool for third persons to further their own commercial or political interests through the manipulation of users. As a person who uses social media quite a lot, I am alarmed and astounded that I am unknowingly consuming tons of propaganda and allowing this subliminal content to change my world view. Reader, I hope you’ll be glad to find out that after this film, I have turned off my notifications on all my social media applications – even Messenger. I feel incredibly manipulated whenever I turn on my phone and find myself wanting to have a notification, and so I want to un-program my brain. These have been my initial thoughts after watching the movie, but let’s get into a deeper analysis of how these insights relate to the bigger picture.

What roles do technology and social media play in your life?

Technology and social media have made my life infinitely easier and more entertaining. Technology allows me to learn new skills, communicate with my relatives in the US, and find communities that share the same hobbies as me. I can also order food, clothes, and virtually everything that I could ever want through the Internet. Also, on my phone, it has become a daily routine of mine to learn some French through Duolingo and exercise using this fitness app. I also use my phone to track my menstrual cycle, so I’m never caught off-guard. (Life is tough as a woman, isn’t it?) Social media, on the other hand, is not just a place for me to stay updated on my friends’ lives, it has become my go-to source for entertainment and news. So, technology and social media are an essential part of my life now, and if I were to go even a day without it, I would have an extremely tough time finding things to do, and I wouldn’t be nearly as productive and efficient. Hence, I could go, at most, twelve hours without my phone. And that’s already pushing it.

So, it’s not surprising that I do identify with the two extreme portrayals of social media users – the teenage boy who gets indoctrinated by an extreme movement and the little girl who has anchored her self-worth on approval on social media. I feel that I was once that little girl when I was in high school. Back then, I used to post an absurd amount of information about my life and I always monitored the number of likes I was getting because it made me feel important and loved when I was getting positive attention. I also used to feel really sad about posts that didn’t have as many likes as my other ones, and I would delete those if they didn’t do well. I would also obsess over the number of followers I had on Twitter. Looking back now, that was an extremely dark and toxic time in my life because I was just living for what people thought of me. As I grew older and got into college, I outgrew this phase and moved onto the extreme movement phase. I am currently in it now and I am quite scared that I will end up becoming a brainless pawn in politics. I see a lot of propaganda online, and I used to react very strongly and recklessly to “information” like this. I am glad that I now know to be critical of emotionally charged news and facts to not let my biases get the best of me.

Can you give us insights on a SWOT-PEST analysis of yourself?

The PES factors affect my life more than I am capable of understanding. Most DDS possess an inability to piece together how the larger system affects all of us individually; so, it’s a good thing I’m not a DDS! All of these factors DO affect us massively; politics affect the way legislation and national and local initiatives are imagined, inflation and investor confidence affect prices and even the growth of infrastructure in the country, and our society is affected by mostly intangible social factors like the trend of younger people of a higher socioeconomic class to take on liberal stances. These all influence our individual lives because we live in a bigger bubble than our personal environments – all the ideas and the actions that we do are largely determined by the larger environment.

The technological factor greatly influences the PES factors, and it is easy to see why. Whenever there are any technological advancements, humans find a way to use these to reach their goals efficiently. When the wheel was invented, trade became easier (economic), communication became faster (social), and this might be a stretch, but the wheel played a huge role in power relations as it was used to have the upper hand in ancient battles (political). In the same way, the T factor influences the PES factors today – financial transactions have never been more efficient, social interaction continues to evolve, and politicians can campaign (and scheme) more effectively through social media.

The technological factor continuously affects every factor that affects our lives to an unimaginable extent. Because it affects the PES factors, it certainly also affects the opportunities and threats present in my life as well. Through modern technology, I can join many webinars, watch many informative videos about topics that interest me, and even find jobs online. However, because of technology, I am threatened by cybersecurity and data privacy issues, and I am vulnerable to fake news and propaganda which could drastically affect my world view. The documentary actually perfectly captured how technology, particularly social media, has affected our lives – business, politics, society, and our personal lives have become more productive yet somehow more vulnerable at the same time. The film echoes my assessment of the PEST factors when it exhibited how: 1) businesses use data to make advertisements more effective, 2) extreme political stances polarize society and destroy democracy through fragmented truths, 3) social interaction has deteriorated into a drug that causes people to crave attention and validation more than the essence of social interaction itself, and 4) all of these factors and their interactions have real-life consequences that affect our personal lives more than we know.

How do you foresee the future use of technology?

I have a bad feeling that this downward trend of abusing technology will continue. I do think that businesses and politicians will continue to milk the heck out of this disinformation and advertisement cow just because they can. I don’t mean to take on such a radical view of the world, but I do believe that the elite in society ultimately are the ones who decide on what’s allowed and what isn’t. Because these unethical practices have become the industry standard and even a competitive advantage for some of these social media platforms, it’s going to tale a long time to push back against this current, especially because there are going to be financial consequences that harm the elite. Would a drug pusher advocate for making drugs illegal? Would drug addicts want drugs to be illegal? Would politicians who benefit from having a medium for effective campaigning want social media to be regulated?

This was mentioned in the film and I think that it’s worth mentioning again -- these corporations make the public feel like they are capable of regulating themselves when in reality, they are doing the bare minimum when it comes to ethically handling our data. It’s horrible that they’re doing the bare minimum because the public can’t easily demand that this bare minimum be changed to a higher standard because again, IT��S ALREADY AT THE BARE MINIMUM. It’s like when you ask a man who’s DECENT ENOUGH to start treating you better – and he replies with, “At least I don’t beat you as other men do.” As if that’s a good enough excuse to continue on this path to human destruction.

So, how do we push back?

I want to say that we should all boycott social media applications until they decide to do right by us, but I don’t think that’s going to happen anytime soon. I also want to say that we should have everybody watch The Social Dilemma for them to become aware of the unethical practices that have become the industry standard. However, there are only a few of us who have access to this film and only a few of us who can comprehend it in the way that it was meant to be comprehended. Being individually aware is a great first step to pushing back, but it’s the uneducated masses that are most vulnerable to the fake news and propaganda being spread online. So, a better solution to halting these unethical practices is having an external body regulate these corporations. An organization has to intervene and create ethical standards for these companies. It’s the only real way to start pushing back.

What are your thoughts about these quotes from the film?

"If you’re not paying for the product, then you’re the product."

When something is free and too good to be true, be critical of what the product is doing to you and how it is affecting your life. More often than not, the world is not some great place where you get great stuff for free. Everything has a price, and we have to be wary of when we’re being used.

"There are only two industries that call their customers 'users': illegal drugs and software."

Social media is addicting. The reason why they make it so addicting is that their business model is most effective when you have users spending every waking minute on the application. More user engagement means more advertising exposure. Hence, we need to know that we are not the target customers of social media platforms, but we are merely users. To quote the film, “if something is not a tool, it’s demanding things from you.” When social media begins to demand your time from you, then it’s not playing the role of a tool for communication and entertainment anymore, but it is playing the role of a drug.

"Social media is a marketplace that trades exclusively in human futures."

What is social media selling exactly? On the surface, it might seem like it is just selling the promise of effective advertising to third persons. However, this effective advertising has a goal – to change your behavior in some way to fulfill the commercial or political interests of a third party. You might plug into the app that you own a dog. It starts showing you dog videos, and then a cute chew toy that you might like to buy. Slowly, the algorithm recommends you rabbit videos next. You end up liking rabbits and then proceed to buy two chew toys – one for your dog and one for your newly acquired rabbit. Social media changes us in tiny ways that we aren’t aware of. So, we have to be cautious, especially because the algorithms, driven by purely financial incentives, could end up transforming our world view.

"The very meaning of culture is manipulation."

The algorithm used to power this effective advertising medium manipulates people into staying on the application as long as possible. But very few of us understand this. If more people knew about the unethical tactics used by companies to keep users engaged, they would feel incredibly manipulated. Is this what business and politics have come to? Has human culture evolved to a point where it’s perfectly fine to toy with people’s lives to fulfill a financial or political goal? Or has it always been this way, and the abuse of social media has just uncovered human nature’s tendency to value self-interest above all else?

To conclude this lengthy blog entry, an algorithm that blindly recommends fake news and propaganda to keep users engaged should not be the industry standard. People cannot be manipulated to serve commercial or political interests. Let people have access to unbiased truths and let them think for themselves what they’d like to think. We cannot rely on corporations to regulate themselves. These corporations must be regulated by an external organization.

Humans are better than this. We can do better than this.

#GreedyCorporationsCanKissMyAss

#cobibmo #film review #the social dilemma #im scaaaared

1 note · View note

globalmediaindustries · 4 years ago

Text

Sabaton: The Battle of Identity

Music has always been subject to technological change. When around 1860 the first recording of a music piece was made, it forced music to become a dual-efficient commodity: now both live and recorded music could be sold. With the invention of respectively the vinyl, the cassette and the CD, recorded music became a mass product. These two faces of music, live and recorded, were the two most defining and the most accessible ways of getting to know the musician that you love. Identification with the musician was done via the music itself and the relation was otherwise formed by interviews done by the mass media. The musician could still sustain their artistic lives with this double income.

However, the rising popularity of the internet in the last decade of the twentieth century changed everything. The possibility of endless digitally copying music pushed the musical container into an artificial state and became superfluous. This change introduced the decline of the recording as a source of income. Firstly, the illegal pirating of music killed one of the two revenue streams. The rise of streaming services thereafter compensated this fall-back, but did that too little. Nowadays, recorded music isn’t a huge source of income anymore and musicians are predominantly relying on the commission earned by performing. This last development forced the musician to expand their horizons beyond music. Recorded music is nothing more than a sales pitch for the musicians live shows nowadays. This is where they get their true revenue. To quote musicologist Keith Negus once this matter: Music is a means to another end rather than an end in itself.

In the modern digital age, the musician is relying more and more upon forming an (group)identity. The record companies are now commoditizing an identity via music. Nevertheless, this evolution isn’t necessarily a bad thing for the industry. With the help of the internet, getting close to an artist has never been so effortless. The proliferating use of social media actualizes a closer bond between the musician and their audience. This blog post will focus on a sense of identity contrived by working with YouTube as a storyboard, explaining notes of the artist on their songs and crafts, obtaining both a better connection with existing fans and building bridges to a broader audience with the help of the algorithms of the video service. The case study in this blogpost is built around Swedish metal band Sabaton, highly successful on musical platforms like Spotify, as well as on Youtube as historical storytellers. With this transcendence of the traditional borders of the media, they could be a blueprint for the future of interaction with the musician’s audience.

youtube

Through their music, Sabaton aims to tell the stories of historic battles, events, wars and soldiers. Because they do this through the perspective of the people they are singing about, soldiers during WW1 for example, there is very little historical reflections on the subject matter. Because of this, and the subject matter itself, they had to defend themselves from accusations of nazism and rightwing sympathies. Although we will not focus on that, we wanted to mention it, because Sabaton does deal with very sensitive subjects in a way that does not appeal to everyone. For this blog post, however, let us move past this controversy and look at their content and music without moral or ethical judgement, but purely as a case study for the use of YouTube; because Sabaton uses YouTube in a very interesting way.

First of all, they have two channels: one is their regular music channel, the other is The Sabaton History Channel. On that channel they dive deeper into the subject matter of their music, explaining the history behind it as well as some anecdotes about the creation of the song. This ‘show’ is hosted by Indy Neidell, a veteran of historical YouTube channels. The entire channel is a collaboration between TimeGhost, Neidell’s main channel, and Sabaton.

Through this collaboration, the music of Sabaton gets introduced to a whole new audience. An audience that might not be familiar with metal music, but who are interested enough in history to watch Neidell’s other channels, mainly the TimeGhost and World War Two channels. I say that because of how YouTube’s algorithm works: these channels are all linked as ‘Featured Channels’, a list of channels that the original channel wants to highlight. In a few videos of the World War Two channel, Neidell mentions his work for Sabaton History and implores viewers to go and watch that too. For these new viewers the band Sabaton is rooted in historical content, perhaps more than metal music.

Broadening the audience is not the only thing that the band gets out of their interaction with Youtube, although it is the most interesting. They also have another way to connect to their existing fans, to earn more money through YouTube and Patreon, a crowdfunding platform built to provide artists a stable income. This comes back to something that Negus wrote: “Yet, as the few, ever more oligopolistic, major corporations began to reposition themselves as music companies (seeking profits from multiple rights rather than dwindling income from record sales)”. The use of YouTube can be viewed as one way to supplement the dwindling income from record sales.

youtube

Through the multiple YouTube channels Sabaton has, in theory, they have a global reach. This is hard to investigate since public statistics do not show the background of the viewers, but the comments on the videos can say a lot. One example, the official video for Bismarck, mostly has comments in English, but there are quite some comments using the Cyrillic alphabet. Even though the song is named after a German World War II battleship, it is not weird that most comments are in English, as that is the lingua franca on YouTube. But all of these Cyrillic comments date from two weeks ago or even later, while the video was posted in April 2019, and most of the comments seem to date from then. This could be because a year the Russian band Radio Tapok covered the Sabaton song Attack of the Dead Men, a song about a battle between Russian and German soldiers in Poland, and they also performed it together in May. Apparently, this attracted Russian-speaking fans to the Swedish band, fans they would not otherwise have attracted. The Russian video for this song has next to no English comments, and the English version has a relatively small amount of Russian comments, showing that the glocalised music might be spreading globally, but the audiences have not fully merged yet.

youtube

It seems that songs about battles or people from a certain country attract viewers from that same country. In the comments for many of these videos, you can find people praising their national heroes or lamenting that they do not receive enough attention worldwide or even in their home countries. This is visible in the Sabaton History video on war hero Leslie “Bull” Allen. I did not have to watch the video to find out Bull Allen’s nationality, as I could figure it out from the many comments starting with “As an Australian”. Looking at their tour dates, you can also see that they mainly tour the US and Europe, especially western and northern Europe, and these venues are rather large. Recently, Russia and other countries where Russian is also spoken have also been included in the tour locations. As their last album is solely about the First World War, it is unsurprising that countries that the Great War was fought in and remember it every year are also the countries that the tour was planned in. The only real outlier is the US, since they did not include other nations that sent soldiers to die on the fronts of the First World War.

Sabaton has worked very hard to become known for their niche of historical metal music. This identity resonates with a large audience, and their online presence and the topics they discuss seem to be attracting new audiences with every new location they sing about in their songs, and especially when they talk about in their history videos. It is noteworthy that many of the commenters on their YouTube videos seem to be from the country they are discussing in the video, suggesting that their audience is not as global as they might have hoped. This online audience does seem to translate into real life concert attendees, as they are currently focussing on the areas which are featured on their albums. This can be seen as a smart marketing strategy and an easy way to find a niche in a large genre, or as underutilisation of metal music’s demographic. Though Sabaton might not be the only one to blame, as algorithms on platforms such as YouTube try to only suggest videos that they think the user will surely love, so it is not too remarkable that their videos seem to garner most fans in areas that they directly reference in their music. So if they wish to expand their audience, they will have to expand their song topics. With this they could be a prime example of how musicians should interact with their audience in the digital era.

Sources

Cayari, Christopher, ‘’Connecting music education and virtual performance practices from YouTube’’, Music Education Research (2017) 1-17.

Gronow, Pekka, "The Record Industry: The Growth of a Mass Medium", Popular Music, Vol. 3 (Cambridge 1983) 53–75.

Hargreaves. Miell & Macdonald, ‘’What are musical identities, and why are they important.’’, in: Macdonald, Musical Identities (Oxford 2002) 1-18.

Negus, Keith, ‘’From creator to data: the post-record music industry and the digital conglomerates Media’’, Culture & Society 2019, Vol. 41(3) (London 2019) 367– 384.

Rogers, Jim, The death & life of the music industry in the digital age (New York 2013).

Sabaton, https://www.sabaton.net/news/tour-shows/the-great-tour-is-coming-to-europe-early-2020/

Sabaton look back on Nazi Controversy: Sabaton News. Anti-Music https://www.antimusic.com/news/16/August/ts18Sabaton_Look_Back_On_Nazi_Controversy.shtml

0 notes

sinrau · 4 years ago

Link

Tristan Harris, former Google design ethicist and co-founder of Center for Human Technology, appears before Congress in “The Social Dilemma.” (Netflix)

Picture, if you will, a high-tech voodoo doll of you on a server somewhere. Probably more than one server.

While the makers of that reverse-engineered avatar might not be sticking literal pins into it, in “The Social Dilemma,” filmmaker Jeff Orlowski makes a fine case that in mining data from your onscreen interactions, they are constructing a predictive version of you and trying to prick your interests and put a spell on your attention in historically unprecedented ways. (“The Social Dilemma” began streaming on Netflix this week.)

The quotes Orlowski begins his wake-up call of a documentary with — and peppers throughout — aren’t easy to top. There’s Sophocles’ “Nothing vast enters the world of mortals without a curse.” And this from sci-fi giant Arthur C. Clarke: “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” And this wry quip from data-visualization guru Edward Tufte: “There are only two industries that call their customers ‘users’: illegal drugs and software.”

Yet, here’s one to add: “Be afraid. Be very afraid.” It may not be as elegant as the others, but it represents the tone taken by the tech leaders interviewed by the Boulder-based director who investigated the extraordinary problems wrought by big-tech behemoths, particularly the ones that have entangled so many in the vast web of social media: Twitter, Facebook and Google.

Among the documentary’s smart and personable talking heads: Justin Rosenstein, co-inventor of Facebook’s “like” button; Tim Kendall, former president of Pinterest and former Facebook director of monetization; and Shoshana Zuboff, author of “The Age of Surveillance Capitalism.” (That book’s subtitle: “A Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power.”)

Tristan Harris, a former design ethicist at Google, became notable for writing an early internal and legendary document questioning the addictive tendencies of smartphone tech. Think Jerry Maguire’s manifesto after his dark night of the soul. Harris caused a buzz and then, well, crickets. He went on to co-found the Center for Humane Technology, a non-profit promoting the ethics of consumer tech.

RELATED: Watch this very real Netflix doc about a man who welded himself inside a “killdozer” and destroyed half of Granby

These days, Silicon Valley is referred to in much the way we talk about Hollywood or Washington: It is a global economic force, a wielder of spectacular power, somehow exemplary, too, of some more honorable ideals. Orlowski went to one of its feeder schools.

“I was class of ’06 at Stanford. When we all graduated, that was (around) the birth of the iPhone and the birth of apps. So many of my closest friends went directly to Facebook, Google or Twitter. Multiple friends sold their companies to Twitter for exorbitant amounts of money,” Orlowski said on the phone before his film’s world premiere at January’s Sundance Film Festival.

The project came out of conversations with those friends “who were starting to talk about the problems with the big social media companies back in 2017, at the birth of the tech backlash that we’ve been seeing. Honestly, I’d heard nothing about it, knew nothing about it.”

So many of his creative, thoughtful friends were working in new tech that Orlowski wondered, “How’s it a problem?” A fan of long-form journalism, he set out to answer that question and a few others. “For me, this process was two years of being an investigative journalist. (Of doing) first-hand research with the people who make the technology and trying to understand what the hell is going on.”

Director Jeff Orlowski attends the World Premiere of “The Social Dilemma,” an official selection of the Documentary Premieres program at the 2020 Sundance Film Festival. (Azikiwe Aboagye, provided by the Sundance Institute)

He is not alone in trying to wrap his brain — and ours — around that. Orlowski was among a cluster of storytellers at January’s Sundance Film Festival, posing timely questions about societal costs of seemingly free platforms — quandaries that have been reflected in a deluge of headlines about big tech’s role in our lives, in civil discourse, in democracy. (The film’s final cut includes a few recent images of news footage hinting at the rough tango between our lives and the Twittersphere around COVID-19.)

Two other high-profile projects that should prompt a rethink were Shalini Kantayya’s “Coded Bias,” about the MIT Media Lab, where research uncovered just how racially biased facial recognition software is. It’s a searing yet inspiring look at what happens when the people making tech’s design choices, and building its algorithms, create for people who look exactly like them. Co-directors and Karim Amer and Guvenc Ozel’s vivid virtual-reality living-room installation, “Persuasion Machines,” depicts with its jaw-dropping environment the data-mining excesses of a “smart home.”

There have always been concerns about the amount of private information that customers seem so willing to cede with little regard for security. But social media is proving itself a voracious beast. It’s less about identity theft than the potential for manipulation on a mass scale. Advances in AI and machine learning have added a special — arguably dystopian-courting — wrinkle.

It’s little surprise, then, that Orlowski is asking urgent questions. He’s forged a place in the documentary vanguard. He first made a splash when he trailed environmental photographer James Balog around Greenland, Iceland and Alaska. With stunning images, Balog documented the calving of ice shelves, the receding of glaciers, and Orlowski documented him.

The resultant work, “Chasing Ice” (2012), was gorgeous and chilling — in all the wrong ways. It was a different kind of climate change doc, not a screed but a nature film that made a compelling case that there are seismic — likely irreversible — changes afoot. It won an Emmy. (Traveling through Denver International Airport, you may have stopped to watch Balog’s mesmerizing time-lapse video for his Extreme Ice Survey work.)

Orlowski’s 2017 follow-up, “Chasing Coral,” won an Emmy for Best Nature Documentary.

“This is the beginning of a decade of films about technology and the consequences of technology,” Orlowski said of the company. “There’s so much at risk and so much at scale, the way technology is designed.”

In both “Chasing Ice” and “Chasing Coral,” he worked to make concepts starkly or strikingly visual. He faced a similar challenge with “The Social Dilemma. “We were trying to think of ways to show people what’s happening on the other side of their screens that’s invisible,” he said. “How do you show people something that is literally impossible to see? You can’t see what’s happening on the servers, right? You can’t even see the servers. But how are the algorithms designed and what are they doing that control 3 billion people?”

The number is not far off: According to German data-statistics tracking company Statista, there are currently 3.5 billion smartphone users.

For “The Social Dilemma,” Orlowski weaves a narrative tale about a multiracial family wrestling with the role of tech in their home. Think of it as a dramatization of concerns. The strategy evolved out of his own response to the news he was hearing from his Silicon Valley friends and their worries around the industry’s overreach.

“Because of the way they were describing it, every time I looked at my phone, I kept seeing a manipulative machine on the other side trying to puppeteer me. For the year I was on Facebook, I thought, ‘I’m being used.’ And it gave birth to this narrative storyline we figured out this way to interweave with the documentary.”

As a filmmaker, it was a chance to direct actors. Vincent Kartheiser of “Mad Men” plays the three-yammering embodiments of AI, dialing up the needs, nudging impulses and commanding the attention of Ben. Skyler Gisondo portrays the increasingly distracted high schooler. Helping create this intricate dance between the interviews and narrative was Oscar-winning editor Davis Coombe, a local filmmaking luminary. (He also co-wrote the doc with Orlowski and Vickie Curtis.)

“I really loved doing all that,” said Orlowski. “The writing, the shooting, the directing. All of the narrative stuff was really fun and brought, I hope, a different dimension.”

Ben and his family are intended to represent the ways many of us interact with the technology, not as designers but as Instagrammers and Tweeters, friends and over-sharers, TikTok-ing kids and their aggravated parents.

Of course, recanting can be a tricky thing. We admire people who see the flaws — even corruption — in a system and alert us to the dangers. But we can also be suspicious of their declarations. Indeed, there is an undercurrent of quiet hubris intermixed with the insider cautions of a number of Orlowski’s experts.

An intentionally witty moment comes early in the movie when, after a few of them have reflected on the unintended consequences of tech, and the sense that it was meant to help not harm. Although each had been a chatterbox of insights and perspectives, every one of them grows silent, looking for all the world stumped by the simple question that Orlowski asks: “So what’s the problem?” More than once, an interviewee reminds us that one of the tools to address the hyper-speed amassing of power and profit is rather old-school: regulation.

Even more illuminating than confessing their own addictions to email, or push notifications, or Twitter are the moments when these engineers, software designers, marketing whizzes share their own practices for themselves — or their family’s rules for their children — about social media.

“I’ve uninstalled a ton of apps from my phone that I felt were just wasting of my time … and I’ve turned off notifications,” said Rosenstein.

“Never accept a video recommended to you on YouTube. Always choose. That’s another way to fight,” said Jaron Lanier, one of tech’s most innovative minds turned most trenchant critics.

“We’re zealots about it. Crazy,” said Allen, asked about social media and his children. “We don’t let our kids have really any screen time.”

And perhaps the most timely advice: “Before you share, fact check,” said Renée DiResta, research manager at the Stanford Internet Observatory. “If it seems like something designed to push your emotional buttons, it probably is.”

Subscribe to our weekly newsletter, In The Know, to get entertainment news sent straight to your inbox.

A Boulder filmmaker’s new Netflix documentary will make you want to delete social media forever

#IFTTT #WordPress

0 notes

polixy · 4 years ago

Text

The U.S. budget deficit is rising amid COVID-19, but public concern about it is falling

The U.S. budget deficit is rising amid COVID-19, but public concern about it is falling;

Among the collateral damage from the coronavirus pandemic has been the U.S. economy and the federal budget. The pandemic has caused massive economic disruption, and the government’s response has pushed the federal budget further out of balance than it’s been in nearly eight decades. But Americans appear to be slightly less concerned about the deficit than they have been in recent years.

In a Pew Research Center survey conducted June 16-22, just under half of U.S. adults (47%) called the deficit “a very big problem” in the country today – down from 55% in the fall of 2018. Over roughly that same period, the deficit grew from $779.1 billion at the end of fiscal 2018 to $2.8 trillion as of the end of July, according to data reported Wednesday by the Treasury Department. (The federal fiscal year ends on Sept. 30.)

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a dramatically higher federal budget deficit, with relief spending soaring and tax revenues tumbling. We thought it would be interesting to combine Americans’ views on the deficit with a deeper look at how it has changed in recent years.

For the attitudinal data, we surveyed 4,708 U.S. adults from June 16 to 22, 2020. Everyone who took part is a member of Pew Research Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), an online survey panel that is recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses. This way nearly all U.S. adults have a chance of selection. The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other categories. (Here are the questions asked for this report, along with responses, and its methodology. You can also read more about the ATP’s methodology.) Budgetary data came from several sources. For the current fiscal year’s receipts and outlays, we used data from the Treasury Department’s Office of the Fiscal Service. Historical budget figures were taken from the Office of Management and Budget. We also used the latest estimates of gross domestic product from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Additional background and analysis were obtained from various Congressional Budget Office reports.

The deficit landed roughly in the middle of the pack among the 10 issues asked about in the June survey. The share of adults calling it a very big problem was higher than the share saying the same about climate change (40%) or illegal immigration (28%), but lower than the shares who called ethics in government and the pandemic very big problems (63% and 58%, respectively).

Older people and Republicans are more likely to call the deficit a very big problem, while Democrats – especially liberal Democrats – are less likely to do so. There are few or no differences between responses by men and women or among people of different education or income levels.

Concern about the deficit tends to rise with age. Among Americans 65 and older, 58% said the deficit is a very big problem, compared with 52% of 50- to 64-year-olds, 43% of 30- to 49-year-olds and 33% of 18- to 29-year-olds.

Republicans and Republican-leaning independents were somewhat more likely to call the deficit a very big problem: 49% did so, compared with 45% of Democrats and Democratic leaners. Viewed through ideology, self-described liberal Democrats were considerably less likely to call the deficit a very big problem (38%) than conservative Republicans (51%), conservative and moderate Democrats (50%) or moderate and liberal Republicans (47%).

The federal government has run deficits nearly every year since the Great Depression and consistently since fiscal 2002. Through the first 10 months of fiscal 2020, the government took in $2.82 trillion in revenue and spent $5.63 trillion, for a year-to-date deficit of just over $2.8 trillion, according to the Treasury Department’s Bureau of the Fiscal Service. Through the first 10 months of fiscal 2019, by comparison, the deficit stood at $866.8 billion.

The deficit began widening dramatically in April, as the government started spending hundreds of billions of dollars on coronavirus relief and response. In the April to July 2020 period, federal revenues were about 9.8% below the same period in 2019, while spending more than doubled, according to Treasury Department data.

Absent a major fiscal turnabout in the next two months, the federal budget deficit – which is funded by borrowing – is poised to push up against a raft of past records. The deficit accounts for about half of total federal spending (49.9%) so far this fiscal year; the last time borrowing made up that much of federal spending (1942 to 1945), the United States was in the middle of fighting World War II. (Measuring the deficit as a percentage of total spending shows the extent to which the federal government is relying on borrowed money, rather than tax receipts, to fund its expenditures.)

Looking at the deficit as a percentage of gross domestic product rather than in raw dollars puts it in the context of the total U.S. economy and makes comparisons over time more meaningful. As of the end of the fiscal third quarter in June, the deficit represented 13.1% of GDP, also a level not seen since World War II. By comparison, during the Great Recession in fiscal 2009, the deficit accounted for 40.2% of total spending and reached 9.8% of GDP.

As the Great Recession eased, the deficit declined relative to both total spending and GDP from 2009 to 2015, but it has been rising on both measures ever since. In April, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected that the current fiscal year’s deficit will come in at roughly $3.7 trillion, or 17.9% of GDP – the largest shortfall since 1945. The CBO also projected that in fiscal 2021, the deficit would be $2.1 trillion.

Annual budget deficits add to the national debt, which as of July 31 stood at more than $26.5 trillion. Economists, budget analysts, politicians and others have argued for decades about how much debt is too much and what effects persistent deficits and heavy debt loads could have on the federal government and the wider economy.

One issue is that the more the government pays out in interest on its debt, the less money it has available for other programs and priorities. In fiscal 2019, the federal government paid out $375.2 billion in net interest on its debt, amounting to 8.4% of total expenditures. As a share of overall spending, interest payments have been rising since 2015 but are still well below levels seen in earlier decades: In fiscal 1996, for example, interest payments accounted for 15.4% of total federal spending. (The dollar amount of interest the federal government pays is a factor not just of how much it borrows, but what interest rates it’s charged.)

Other observers have warned that if the national debt grows large enough, it could absorb so much of investors’ money that other borrowers, particularly in the private sector, would have trouble raising cash at affordable rates. So far, though, that doesn’t appear to be happening: Interest rates around the world remain quite low even as governments borrow heavily to fight the pandemic.

The CBO cites other possible consequences if the national debt continues to grow as a percentage of GDP. They include depressed economic output; more interest payments flowing out of the U.S. to foreign debtholders; and increased risk of a fiscal crisis, in which investors lose confidence in the federal government’s financial health and abruptly raise the interest rates they demand to fund the debt.

Some economists, however, take a different view. Under the general term “Modern Monetary Theory,” or MMT, they argue that the U.S. government can and should fund its spending by creating money directly, rather than borrowing it. The constraint on spending, MMT adherents say, should be on maintaining a sustainable inflation rate, not a balanced budget or particular debt-to-GDP ratio. But while MMT has gained some purchase on the leftward side of politics, it remains controversial.

; Blog (Fact Tank) – Pew Research Center; https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/08/13/the-u-s-budget-deficit-is-rising-amid-covid-19-but-public-concern-about-it-is-falling/; https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/FT_20.08.10_Deficit_1.png?w=310; August 13, 2020 at 03:48PM

0 notes

floridaprelaw-blog · 5 years ago

Text

The Death Penalty: Advocating Justice Or Attacking Equality?

By Matthew Ginsberg, University of South Florida, Class of 2021

April 20, 2020

Payback is the ultimate form of revenge. When an individual chooses to break the law, the United States criminal justice system seeks justice by arresting, detaining, and prosecuting the suspect. Most citizens accept this system because they are under the impression that by removing criminals away from the general public, society is safer, and therefore better off. Being found guilty results in the criminal justice system holding the perpetrator captive, at the mercy of the law. Treated like worthless animals, citizens are unbothered and oblivious toward the brutality of the criminal justice system: criminal cases out of sight, out of mind. There seems to be a general perception among policymakers that “justice” can only be obtained through revoking humanitarian rights, believing that “guilty offenders deserve equal punishment for the nature of the crime committed.” By enforcing harsh consequences for breaking the law, the hope is that citizens are deterred from committing violent crimes… But hope and reality are quite different. Locking away criminals has shown to be ineffective and psychologically torturous, causing prisoners to become delusional, more violent, and easily triggered in many cases. Fighting fire with fire seems to be the strategy. But the prison system was not lethal enough for policymakers, there needed to be a system that forced criminals to pay the ultimate price for their despicable actions: what the system was missing was the death penalty.

The death penalty was first introduced in the 18th century B.C. but became a controversial U.S. political issue in the 1970s. By 1976, Troy Gregg, a convicted murderer, had his case heard by the Supreme Court, with the plaintiff insisting Gregg should be sentenced to death. After reviewing the case, the Supreme Court declared that “the death penalty is not cruel and unusual punishment, therefore the ruling to reinvoke the death penalty is compliant with the Eighth Amendment.” This case was a monumental breakthrough for advocates of the death penalty because it set updated precedent moving forward that allowed states the right to legalize the death penalty at their discretion. The ruling also reversed the Furman v. George case in 1967, where the Supreme Court had “reduced all death sentences to life imprisonment, disallowing states the right to sentence criminals to death.” Since Gregg’s death sentence was upheld by the Supreme Courtover 40 years ago, “30 states have enforced the death penalty. In total, 1,512 people have been executed, with 62 people awaiting execution as of December 20, 2019.” The fact that over 1,500 criminals have been executed on death row demonstrates that many states are firm advocates of the death penalty.

The psychological divide drawn between good and evil allows citizens to sleep at night knowing that evil criminals are paying the ultimate price for their actions when they are sentenced to death. But what many citizens seem to neglect is that the mind is fragile and can be tormented by psychotic temptation if it is not nourished and cared for. Factors like traumatic experiences as a child, neighborhood environment growing up, and level of family support all play an indicative role on how young adults mature, as they develop physically and psychologically. Individuals sometimes make life- altering decisions that abandon moral principles because they are seeking fortification and satisfaction... but does that really make them evil people? Or does neglect and abandonment cause citizens to pursue heinous action for a temporary feeling of jubilation? If criminals truly are not evil people, does it make more sense to dehumanize them, so they are forced to suffer for their actions, or would it be more productive to enforce rehabilitation methods? Based on over half of the states in the U.S. legalizing the death penalty, it seems that policymakers are more concerned about making criminals suffer than taking proactive measures to help criminals learn from their mistakes. Moving forward, is the death penalty really a means of justice, or a misperceived necessary evil that’s brainwashed citizens into believing that revenge (by sentencing the death penalty), will somehow suffice for the initial crime committed?

The irony of justice is that it is impossible to achieve, but always discussed in the mainstream news media when a major court decision is reached. “Was there justice in the case?” seems to be the locus point of concern for most citizens. But when criminals commit illegal acts of violence against innocent civilians, their actions cannot be undone. The way the United States enforces justice is through penalizing faulty action with inhumane punishments and financial compensation, treating humans like animals in captivity, held against their will. The old fashioned saying “when you fight fire with fire, you always get burned,” could not be more prevalent because no one wins when a judge or jury is afforded the right to set an exploration date on a criminals life. Lacking the power of the divine, laws were established to protect state sovereignty, and ensure a sense of protection and equality for all citizens, not for court ordered death sentences.

The death penalty symbolizes an abuse of power by the Supreme Court, reaffirming that when political representatives do not have to worry about getting re-elected, the risk of dangerous precedent being set is legitimate and concerning. Looking at highly symbolic cases like Dred Scott v. Sanford, where the Supreme Court ruled that African Americans could not be considered American citizens, Plessy v. Ferguson, where separate but equal state segregation laws were upheld, or U.S. v. Korematsu upholding internment camps for Japanese, Americans during World War II; we have seen plenty of instances where the Supreme Court has abused their power and set dangerous precedent. The Supreme Court’s ruling in the Troy Gregg case is no different because it allowed states to legalize the death penalty, without enacting strict guidelines of what actions qualify, causing minorities to become prime targets of cruel punishment.

Since states began implementing updated policies legalizing the death penalty, African Americans have been sentenced to death more than any other race. This statistic would be tolerable if African Americans were committing the majority of violent crimes, but according to a study done by the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, “on average, 36% of murderers are committed by black men, and 30% of murders are committed by white men.” This signifies a very small gap between African Americans and white citizens that commit murder. With such a small gap, it is mindboggling that “nearly 50% of death row inmates are African Americans, while less than 40% of inmates facing death row are of white descent.” The entire United States population has over 73% of citizens that identify as white, but less than 13% that identify as African American or black. The fact that the overwhelming majority of United States citizens are white exacerbates an “us vs. them” mindset, which has created an unjust system run by, “Congress, where 78% of representatives identify as white, and judges, where 70% also identify as white.” White supremacy has allowed white people to dictate policy, determine punishment they deem appropriate, and determine if criminal actions are punishable by a death sentence. With African American criminals in many instances facing all white judges, juries, and a state appointed attorney with minimal experience, African American suspects are more vulnerable than any other race of getting mandatory maximum sentences. By enacting the death penalty, was the system trying to create a platform of “justice,” or isolate a minority group for the color of their skin?

While the death penalty creates a dangerous loophole that causes African Americans to get targeted in the criminal justice system, the primary methods of execution are highly unethical. The five primary methods of execution include “hanging, electrocution, the gas chamber, firing squad, and lethal injection.” Whether it’s 2,000 volts of electricity shocking the human body for 2.5 minutes or having a line of soldiers aiming rifles at the criminals head and shooting simultaneously, electrocution and the fire squad appear to exemplify cruel and unusual punishment, a violation of the eighth amendment. Although many state courts have outlawed all methods, other than lethal injection, “the Supreme Court has never formally stated that any of these five methods qualify as cruel and unusual punishment.” This reasserts the Supreme Court’s firm stance of maintaining “justice” by allowing ruthless and unnecessarily violent methods of execution to continue against criminals sentenced to the death penalty.

Based on racial inconsistencies on who gets sentenced to the death penalty and a lack of ethics in the methods of execution, every state should abolish the death penalty.There are too many loopholes in the system that make African Americans prime targets for execution, even when they commit identical crimes to white criminals, suggesting that to support the death penalty is to support discriminatory policy. Even if the Supreme Court claims the death penalty does not violate the eighth amendment, the fact of the matter is that “most prisoners wait over 15 years on death row before they are executed.” The amount of emotional distress that manifests when an individuals forced to wait for such an extended period of time, knowing they will be killed, can be classified as cruel and unusual punishment to say the least. To make matters worse, a study done by the National Academy of Sciences found that “4% of people on death row were or are likely to be innocent.” The fact that innocent civilians are being sentenced to death row and executed when they did nothing wrong shows the dangers of implementing a system that cannot be reversed. Rather than revoking humanitarian rights granted to all citizens, including criminals, its time policymakers realize that the most benevolent and responsible call to action is enforcing rehabilitation methods to teach criminals how to behave in a civilized manner.

________________________________________________________________

Alvarez, Mauricio J., and Monica K. Miller. “How Defendants’ Legal Status and Ethnicity and Participants’ Political Orientation Relate to Death Penalty Sentencing Decisions.” Translational Issues in Psychological Science, vol. 3, no. 3, Sept. 2017, pp. 298–311.

“Death Penalty: Death Penalty Issues: CIP.” California Innocence Project, 13 Jan. 2020, californiainnocenceproject.org/issues-we-face/death-penalty/.

Garrison, Edward. “Death Penalty.” Equal Justice Initiative, 22 Nov. 2019, eji.org/issues/death-penalty/.

Lee, Tuan. “Race and the Death Penalty: Capital Punishment in Context.” Race and the Death Penalty | Capital Punishment in Context, 3 Dec. 2018, capitalpunishmentincontext.org/issues/race.

Levenson, Arthur. “Methods of Execution.” Death Penalty Information Center, 13 Apr. 2019, deathpenaltyinfo.org/executions/methods-of-execution.

Lyon, Andrea D. The Death Penalty: What’s Keeping It Alive. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2014.

Miller, Seumas, and John Blackler. Ethical Issues in Policing. Routledge, 2016.

Perlin, Michael L. Mental Disability and the Death Penalty: The Shame of the States. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2013.

Unnever, James D., and Francis T. Cullen. “The Racial Divide in Support for the Death Penalty: Does White Racism Matter?” Social Forces (University of North Carolina Press), vol. 85, no. 3, Mar. 2007, pp. 1281–1301.

0 notes

easynaturalhairstyle · 5 years ago

Text

The bald truth about a hair transplant

It is a telltale sign that we are getting older. Before the wrinkles and back disappear, many men lose strands of hair for strands of hair. More than half of all men suffer from hair loss. A study found that 53 percent of us will have moderate to severe hair loss by the age of forty.

For many, this is a source of fear and low self-confidence, but thinning hair is no longer a genetic conclusion. Hair transplants have become an increasingly accessible and popular option for follicular sufferers.

Falling costs and celebrities (not to mention stubborn ads you're following on the Internet) are making more men than ever ready to undergo surgery to effectively remove hair where you have it and where You don't have them.

"When done properly by a skilled, ethical, and experienced surgeon, hair transplants look incredibly natural and undetectable," said Spencer Stevenson, founder of the hair loss advisory service SpexHair.com. Stevenson had his first hair transplant at the age of 21, a failed attempt that required 13 more transplants to correct.

He initially tries to find a lack of research and a bad surgeon. “In the wrong hands, they can be catastrophic. You will never see a good transplant, but you will notice a bad one from across the room. "

If you're thinking of redrawing your receding hairline, make sure you get the right hairline with our guide below.

Who can have a hair transplant?

Do you need one first or are you just a little paranoid? The recommended course of action before the major surgery is to try a hair loss remedy first. Finasteride and minoxodil are the most popular, with the most evidence behind them, and are the only ones approved by the FDA.

Finasteride blocks the production of a hormone called DHT by 60 percent. DHT is the main reason why we lose our hair. There is no previously lost hair back, but it will stem the tide. In comparison, Minoxodil stimulates hair growth but does not stop current hair loss.

One of the main criteria for testing a hair transplant is to ensure that the supply meets the demand. "If the donor region (supply) is small and the tip (demand) is large, this is not an ideal candidate for a hair transplant," says Stevenson. "These cases are usually fairly rare, but extensive baldness patterns preclude patients who need surgery."

The surgeons use the Norwood scale to determine how high your loss is in this regard. The scale consists of eight levels, the first of which is minimal, while the last with small hair at the front or top is the most difficult. When you are in the final stages, it may be best to accept your fate.

Natural or wavy hair offers more coverage and better density than finer hair. Therefore, it is best suited for a transplant, as is a looser scalp that makes it easier for your surgeon to plant in the follicles.

There is no minimum age for a hair transplant, but the younger you are, the more likely you will need another transplant in the future as your hair loss will continue.

The options: FUE vs FUT

The two most popular and common types of hair transplants are FUE and FUT. The latter stands for Follicular Unit Transplantation and involves the surgeon taking a strip of hair follicles from the supply (i.e. where you have hair) and then positioning them in incisions in the scalp where needed (i.e. where you have hair) need). The scalp is then sewn to the back with the hair that covers the patch.

Removing FUE or follicular units is more difficult for the surgeon, but much less invasive and painful for you as a patient. It requires the doctor to shave the back of your hair before individually removing each healthy hair follicle and inserting it into tiny cuts in the scalp where the hair thins or runs out.

The sequence

"The FUE procedure leaves no visible scars on the back of the head, as was the case with older hair transplantation methods," says Dr. Raghu Reddy, hair transplant surgeon at Harley Street Private Clinic. "Patients can leave the clinic immediately after treatment with minimal downtime so they can quickly return to their daily activities."

Under local anesthesia, you will be fully awake during the transplant. You may need to wear bandages over your scalp during recovery and have a day or two off (take more if you don't want curious colleagues to ask questions). After the procedure, your scalp will feel sensitive and there will be some discomfort when the anesthetic wears off, but nothing that a few prescribed pain relievers won't do.

"It doesn't hurt at all," says Stevenson. “I had 13 and a low pain threshold, so I'm a good judge. It is uncomfortable to sit on the chair for a long time. It's like getting a filling at the dentist, in terms of pain, but for a much longer period of time. Depending on the procedure, you can sit between five and twelve hours at the chair. "

Keep in mind that smaller strands of hair can only take two to three hours of your time, according to Reddy. You may need more than one session, but they will be distributed so that your scalp can recover in the meantime. As long as you have enough hair, you can do as many transplants as you want.

What results can you expect?

The ceiling of the Sistine Chapel didn't appear overnight, and there won't be any gorgeous new manes of hair either. Immediately after the procedure, your scalp looks less like a Michelangelo, but more like a pointillist painting with tiny red crusts around the newly introduced follicles. After a few days, you can remove the bandages and wash them carefully. After a week, the red dots have disappeared and you should already have a short cover.

Tried by a hat to hide the scarlet spots? Not. Any type of headgear can put pressure on the grafts and get them out of position. You have to wait for the new follicles to take their new position.

After a month, your newly discovered transplanted hair may fall out, but you won't panic. It is simply the new hair at the root that pushes through the donor hair. The majority of the hair should be fully grown by half a year and the full result should be visible after a year.

Et voila, you finally have your hairline back.

But what will it really look like in the end? Well, the exact nature of the advanced FUE procedure means that experienced surgeons can insert hair at a certain angle. This mimics the natural direction of your normal hair, which FUT doesn't always take for granted, and creates a hair mane that looks as natural as the one that God gave you.

The limited scars on the back of FUE make shorter hairstyles easier, whereas you'll likely want a medium-length FUT hairstyle to hide the light scars that are likely to remain.

"It won't be as thick as when you were 18," says Stevenson, "but you can choose between different hairstyles and options."

Are there any side effects?

With regard to surgical side effects, infection can occur from the procedure, but is very rare. “The cuts are so small that the risk of postoperative infection is very low. I've never had an infected patient, ”says Reddy.

“Although very rare, patients should also be aware of the risk of shock loss if the patient's natural hair fails due to the trauma of the procedure. This can occur if the number of incisions is too high, the incisions too large or too deep. Using too much anesthetic can also lead to loss of shock.

“I also see a lot of patients coming to me because they are unhappy with the results of procedures they have had elsewhere. Some of these side effects include donor emptying, which is caused by too much hair removal from the donor area, badly placed grafts, poor texture of the transplanted hair, and unnatural hairlines. "

How to find a good clinic

The latter side effects make it imperative that you primarily choose a trustworthy and responsible clinic and a responsible surgeon. "I would recommend finding an IAHRS.org surgeon as a good, solid starting point," says Stevenson. If you're in the UK, look for a clinic that is registered with the Care Quality Commission, the UK's regulatory agency for medical procedures.

Shop and meet more than one surgeon before you settle for one. Imagine that you only meet the dating scene and not your heart. You determine the future of your hair.

Consult your surgeon thoroughly. Take a close look at the pictures of their work. Ask the community forums for hair loss for recommendations from surgeons of people who have had a transplant. The more information you have to give about the person you trust your scalp with, the better.

Reddy also emphasizes that you check that the surgeon has a stable team that he works with on a daily basis. Like any team, the more they play together, the better they get.

How much does a hair transplant cost?

The big question. Well, of course, it all depends on who you have to work with, where you are going (London usually costs more) and how extensive the job is.

The ballpark number for a FUT procedure is anywhere from £ 3,000 to £ 7,000. FUE is more expensive and is usually calculated at a price per follicle. For an average procedure with 2,000 follicles, you may be charged £ 5, which is £ 10,000, with the price for follicles falling over £ 2,000.

Expensive what? Now we're acting lightly here, but there is another, increasingly popular option – a trip to Turkey. Every month, 5,000 visitors are reported to land in the country with the sole aim of performing a hair transplant between hot air balloon rides and a detour around the Grand Bazaar.

Hair transplants in Turkey cost around £ 1,500 on average, a significant amount less than in the UK. They can do great service there, but a deeper level of research is paramount, with the main concern being the lack of regulation in a country that has been criticized for not preventing a number of illegal transplant activities.

Go online and you will find many satisfied customers. For Stevenson, however, the risk is not worth it, and the cost of repairing botched grafts would far exceed the savings you might make initially. "The operation lasts a lifetime, so you have to get it right the first time," he says.

The post The Bald Truth About Hair Transplant appeared first on Popular Hairstyles.

The bald truth about a hair transplant

0 notes

technicallyzanyfestival-blog · 6 years ago

Photo

Info sheet Racism and Discrimination

Who?: Racism and discrimination are endured by a vast variety of people. Racism in itself is heavily felt by dark skinned people all around the world. Due to subconscious teachings of black being inferior to white; light is good, dark is evil, etc., with an increase in darkness comes a higher prejudice against said person. When we mend discrimination with racism, we can see a crystal clear relationship. From passed up job opportunities to being denied service, black people secomb to most racial discrimination by far. This is not to leave out all minority race groups, especially indigenous people. They are sometimes viewed as drug addicts with no work ethic, this leading into not being thought of in opportunities that could better their quality of life.

Women are subjected to discrimination far too much in our day and age. Many of us do it subconsciously, whether it be feeling more comfortable with a male server, electrician, construction worker, etc. Women are seen to be less capable of certain tasks than men.

Some other people who experience discrimination are those of the LGBT+ community. Certain job titles still are not viewed as an appropriate place to express one’s homosexuality. In many occasions gay couples will be denied service from businesses due to strictly the fact that the consumers are gay.

Where?: Racism occurs all over the world, because of the social normality, for things such as skin colour, ethnicity, and religion. We are mainly discussing racism within America and Canada. America and Canada’s racist status quo remains unique and alarmingly oppressive. This racism is entirely based on skin-colour and one ideal image. One’s nationality is immaterial. In terms of discrimination, discrimination also happens all over the world and on a greater scale. Discriminatory traditions, policies, ideas, practices and laws exist in many countries, some having discrimination towards different groups more than other countries would. In some places, controversial attempts such as quotas have been used to benefit those who are believed to be current or past victims of discrimination

When?: Nobody knows when racism was birthed. In many cultures, dark skin is viewed to coordinate with poorness with the ideology that if you worked outside, you were poor and tanned. A spotlight shown on the cruelty of racism during the slave trade in the 17th century. Black people were used as slaves due to solely their skin colour. This ignited the flame of white power. Once slavery was claimed illegal in the late 1800’s that mindset didn’t die. Segregation showed the epitome of discrimination. Jobs were not given, seats were not sat in, schools were not attended to, etc., simply because of a colour.

With many protests for equality throughout the 18th and 19th century including our modern “Black Lives Matter” movement, segregation was banned and minds were slowly but surely opening. However the view of black people of less than was not fully stripped. Plantations turned to prisons and beatings turned into “necessary action”. Police brutality formed such a movement. Today we can still witness discrimination against minority groups even though many rules and regulations have been put in place, there is still the fight for equal views and opportunities.

What?: Racism: the belief of some races being better than others and the actions resulting from that belief. Racism is not just saying offensive comments to one of a different cultural background but offensive to their community as a whole. Canada supposedly to be a very multicultural country is exposed to more occurences of racism than expected.

Discrimination: prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially around race, age or sex. Some might think racism and discrimination are the same thing, but in reality they are not. Discrimination targets an individual’s gender, sexual orientation age as well as race. Majority of people are exposed to discrimination such as groups of teenagers, women, LGBTQ and those of colour.

Why?: Racism and discrimination are seen as very common topics around the world, making them immune to some, but there is a reason why it happens. Racism has been brought from generation to generation, especially during the time when the europeans were colonizing different countries of different ethnic backgrounds. Not only is it a form of hate from old times but a stereotype of a certain race. Older generations bring their dislike and bias towards a certain or multiple races, and younger generations adapt to it. Stereotypes are similar in a way except the racism is not coming from a person you know but a large group of people who have thoughts about the certain race. For example saying asians can’t drive, but just because a person has been in a bad situation with one, doesn’t mean they are all bad drivers. Discrimination is similar in the sense of stereotyping a large group or having an opinion about them because everyone thinks its right. For example, some people think women should not work and just stay at home to take care of the children. Because of people being so influenced by what others of society think, racism and discrimination seems common in a way. Although there is no way to stop racism and discrimination since it will always be around especially with older generations, there is a way to educate the younger generations about the misuse of it. There is a large misuse of the word ‘racist’ and ‘discriminate’’ because some people do not know what the real definition of racism and discrimination is. Educating, and not labelling everything as racism and discrimination could be ways to have the terms not be so common.

Vision/Goal: The first step to demolishing racism and discrimination as a whole is to educate ourselves about this issue and to know the kind of effect that it can have on our society. Generations need to be raised and taught how to treat people equally and correctly or else we will never be able to grow and change this world-wide issue. Another reason is that we need to stop viewing each other as greater or superior to one another. The hope is that by doing things such as these, all people can live without fear, and instead with hope and love, however this can only be achieved as a society and not individuals. It will take a great amount of effort to demolish or at best decrease racism and discrimination from our society,

Background/issue: - what has caused the inequity? What have you identified as the inequity? Social inequality is linked to racial inequality, gender inequality, and wealth inequality. The way people behave socially, through racist or sexist practices and other forms of discrimination, tends to trickle down and affect the opportunities and wealth individuals can generate for themselves. Today in Canada we have legal protection for victims of discrimination and a constitutional guarantee of equality rights for all. Employees cannot be treated differently because of age – unless they are under 19, in which case different standards apply. Remember, the BC Human Rights Code does not permit employers to discriminate against employees based on personal characteristics – like age, race, religion or gender and other personal characteristics.

So, for example: Employers cannot refuse to hire you because of where you come from. Employers cannot fire you because you are pregnant. Employers cannot force you to retire because of your age. Employers cannot harass you sexually.

Human rights

Poverty

Poverty is the deprivation of common necessities such as food, clothing, shelter, and safe drinking water, all of which determine our quality of life. It may also include the lack of access to opportunities such a s education and employment which aid the escape from poverty and/or allow one to enjoy the respect of fellow citizens

Although one of their group members was missing, i found this presentation to be very educational and wee executed. I am happy to know that the world’s population living in extreme poverty has gone down by twenty-four percent in the last twenty-eight years. It disgusts me to find out that one seventh of Canada is living in poverty. It simply doesn’t make sense to me. We are labeled as a first world country yet we have over fourteen percent of our population living in conditions equivalent to those of third world countries. There is no excuse for Canada to allow Canadians to be limited to resources; a major factor in why so many are trapped in the poverty cycle.

LGBTQ

LGBTQ = Lesbian, gay , bisexual, Transgendered, Twin spirited, Queer, and Questioning

The LGBTQ is an initialism referring collectively to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender/transsexual people. In use since the 1990’s. the term lgbtq is an adoption of the initialism lab which itself started replacing the phase gay community which many within LGBT communities felt did not represent accurately all those to which it referred.

This presentation was executed very well. I personally am always extra attentive when Leon is presenting, as he always delivers his presentations with confidence and ensures to audience is not bored, which appreciated. Something that stuck with me from this presentation is that police officers used to raid gay bars simply to ensure that they knew nowhere was safe for them. To be living in constant fear only due to one’s sexuality is a state that I cannot fathom.

This topic is also what is wrote my human rights essay about:

LGBTQ+

By: Madison Neal

Love is light. A saying rolled off the tongues of those blanketed buy its warmth, those who love fearlessly and freely, utterly and entirely welcomed to express it. But there is another flame of love, it’s as well, warm and bright, all though it’s punishing to reach and is guarded; bordered buy police badges and twisted metaphors, laws prohibiting anyone to bask in its beauty and mobs set to attack those who seek to. This love is denied to the LGBTQ+ community. During the 60’s and 70’s, more and more people were expressing their love for the same sex in a wave that unsettled and angered many civilians. Gay people had no safe space to love one another. Police often raided gay bars to ensure those inside knew that being who they truly were would never be okay. Gay marriage was illegal in Canada until July 20, 2005, and the U.S. until June 26, 2015. Even then it was frowned upon by a plethora of close minded people. Gay couples have been and still are denied service from businesses and are mistreated in society.

The light of self love is also stripped from the category of transgender/two-spirited people. There has been reports of a transgender woman being shot down by a gunman in a car driving by, simply for appearing to be transgender. They have been and recently under Trump, still are denied to serve their country in the United States. These inequities endured by the community are only a sliver of the inhumane deeds excerpted on those in it. people are placed in conversion camps and cleansing therapy to this day, attempting to “fix” people whom are in no way broken, but rather different.

A conception of wrongness associated with this topic is not a natural trait, it is taught by those who were also brainwashed at a young age to give love a shape that only fits between a man and a woman. Lack of exposure is the route to closed minds across the globe. As with anything, when something is never brought to light we cannot perceive it as normal, and to add on top of the weight of “abnormality” to such affection, it has been is deemed inappropriate in the past to execute in public, and has been despised when done in front of children. We can view this in separate generations. As protests and fights for equality by generations before the Millenials were held, much attention was brought to precisely how unjust the laws were surrounding the way of life of the LGBTQ+ community. Because of these protests and exposure Millennials grew up with a great decrease of censorship of the community and what kindness and care it obtained. This would birth people whom would use the likes of social media to debate and discuss with those still set in a different viewpoint. This paved the way for the next generation (Generation Z) to be flooded with exposure of the topic. Today we see television shows based around gay culture and multiple gay characters with many stories of all too real hurdles forced by a group of people to overcome, this includes shows for children; a notable step in progress given the utmost disgust portrayed around allowing children to be educated on any factor of the topic. This generation is growing up with LGBTQ+ role models whom they can confide in by merely clicking on a youtube video. The magic of the internet has been a crucial tool. With its gift just clicks away, my generation is forming in this world as one who is known to convey gay and transgender as anything but a choice. We can see transgender kids as young as five years of age embracing who they truly are. The origin of injustice was and will never be a feeling, it is and has always been lack of exposure accompanied by insulating purely negative notions to the people.

My vision for the future of the LGBTQ+ community is that we can mould and raise people in our society and eventually all over the globe to be educated on the topic. Ignorance is born from withholding of knowledge. With minds filled with exposure of “gay culture” and all the bright unique traits of the community, I yearn for no individual to ever have a shred of fear when it comes to being oneself. I as a Catholic am very accepting and interactive with many members of the community, as many Christians overall are. However, I am aware of the closed of extreme religionists of Christianity do not feel the same way, due to what the bible says. I wish to change their way of thinking and see those people be enlightened on the fact that the bible is filled with metaphors. There are heart-wrenching stories of people begging God not to make them gay, when in reality it is how God formed them and I believe that if god loves all of his children, than he will accept the very ones that he created.

The constant lingering of danger due to one’s sexuality is that of atrocious. I envision a society where those of the community would feel safe regardless of any location, and that little boys and girls are not told to “man up” or “act like a lady”. Children’s brains are not at a stage of development equipped to completely know what they identify as. It is these social stereotypes that are another burden for those who come to the acceptation later in life that whom they were presenting to the world is but what they were told to be. I want to improve the quality of life for people who are only expressing what they feel in bars or at home, for them to be not just legally but socially free to show affection in public without crude stares or judgements. To witness schools implicate sexual education on both heterosexual and homosexual relationships, the children of the world are the future of it, and if we want to change the future it must be made a priority to train them to be accepting and understanding the complexity of all forms of love, as it is all in the end the same.

Racism and Discrimination

Racism is the belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce and inherent superiority of a particular race. People with racist beliefs might hate certain groups of people according to their racial groups

In the case of institutional racism, certain racial groups may be denied rights or benefits, or get preferential treatment.

Discrimination is any action or behaviour that causes a person to be treated in an unfair, hurtful and negative way. People may discriminate because they have a prejudice against someone or because they have a stereotype of that person.

People may discriminate without any intention to hurt someone but someone may still be hurt and disadvantaged by another person’s actions and behaviour. (racism is a belief, a set of values, an attitude — a group of assumptions that view and construct in a negative way a group of people used on their racial background.

My group presented on the topic of racism and discrimination, I feel our presentation went smoothly and i feel that the audience responded well to our multiple interviews of people’s encounters with racism and discrimination. Something i found interesting while doing research on this topic is that in many countries in Asia, lighter skin represents wealth, because if you work outside it means you have an underpaying job. SO if one is tan, it is a tell that they work outside and are therefor poor

Child Soldiers and Military Recruitment

War is reciprocal and violent application of force between hostile political entities aimed are bringing about a desired political end-state via armed conflict.

The military use of children takes three distinct forms: children can take direct part in hostilities (child soldiers), or they can be used in support roles such as porters, spies, messengers, look puts, and sexual slaves; or they can be used for political advantage either as human shields or in propaganda.

I admired this presentation for its projection and detail in knowledge. I also enjoyed the kahoot at the end. I found this to be a good strategy; letting us know there would be a kahoot at the end, and that the winner would earn a prize, because it kept the class engaged the entire time. Something that left me with a pit in my stomach is when the presenters explained how in some countries, military goes into villages and/or towns and forcefully strip able-bodied boys and sometimes girls away from everything they know to battle. I couldn’t imagine waking up one morning thinking my day is going to pan out as usual, only to be taken away from my family and friends and thrown into extreme danger. It is inhumane and revolting.

Violence in Relationships

Violence - is any act that results in or is likely to result in, physical, sexual, and psychological harm or suffering, including threats of such acts and coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether in public or private life.

This presentation was well done and knowledge on the subject I had not known before was brought to light. One thing that truly stood out to me wa the topic of the relations of the LGBTQ community and violence in relationships. Before this presentation i always thought of violence in relationships to me more often a male abuser towards a female, and sometimes a female abuser towards a male. It had never occured to me that the community are more likely to be subjected to an abusive situation in a relationship. I learned that this was due limited resources and lack of education upon these groups. The LGBTQ community is often excluded from the definition of relationship abuse because of their identity and lack of exposure.

Genocide

Genocide is the elimination of an entire group of people classified by race, religion, etc.

This groups presentation was also well executed. I found it interesting and surprising to hear of the multiple genocides that have taken place over the years, as far as my knowledge had reached before the presentation, there had only been two, i now know there were virtually triple that which were addressed in the presentation.

Extra notes:

Gender

Gender comprises a range of differences between men and women, extending from the biological to the social.

Biologically, the male gender is defined by reference to the presence of a Y-chromosome, and its absence in the female gender. However, there is debate as tot he extent that the biological difference has or necessitates differences in gender roles in society and on gender identity, which has been defined as “an individual’s self-conception as being male or female, as distinguished from actual biological sex.”

Homelessness

Homelessness is the condition and social category of people who lack housing, because they cannot afford, or are otherwise unable to maintain, regular, safe, and adequate shelter

0 notes

haltandcatchfiretothemax · 7 years ago

Text

Mystery and Misery: "I/O" and Cameron and Donna's roles therein (or, a sort of/inverse H&CF recap)

The first thing I noticed when I put on the pilot of Halt and Catch Fire for this dedicated rewatch is that it’s long for an hour of network television, at 47 minutes. It didn't feel long though, probably because it doesn't waste a single frame or second, and thusly manages to cover a lot of ground. Rather than merely setting up the premise of the show it effectively establishes it, including the characters, most of their relationships and dynamics, and their relationships to the places and locations in the show; there is nothing tentative or conveniently ambiguous about it. It is an incredibly ambitious introductory hour of television, which is appropriate for a show about what turns out to be a group of very ambitious individuals.

The second thing I noticed is that "I/O" feels more like a movie than a television episode, and that if it were a bit longer, it probably could be. I don't know if it would be possible or worthwhile to make a two hour movie about the entire process of designing the Giant, but I think it could work as a feature film about facing off against IBM (though not necessarily an interesting one, but either way, the pensive legal drama about one young male lawyer's ethical struggle is a thing, is it not?). All you'd really have to do is draw out and really dramatize all the IBM/deposition stuff -- and fill in all the 'missing' scenes of Cameron and Donna that are curiously absent.

Based on the rest of the series but against my better judgment, I'm going to give the showrunners the benefit of the doubt and say that Cameron and Donna appear sparingly in the pilot for good reason. It's easy to read their limited presence as a quiet commentary on how both fictional and real women are frequently sidelined in television and in life, and as a set up meant to surprise the viewer with how essential they both quickly become to the plot, though just writing this out makes it feel overdone. (And if I remember right, a lot of critics and recappers weren't feeling it either.) But it makes sense if you look at Cameron and Donna's roles in "I/O" separately.

Cameron appears in the opening scenes of the pilot, and then returns at the end of it. This is partly because she's still four hours away from the action for most of the show, but the show could have cut back to her life at school -- it doesn't. When we do see her again, getting (physically) thrown out of an arcade, you get the sense that this isn't because her life as a student is typical or easily guessed at; the arcade fight suggests pretty strongly that she hasn't been hanging out on the quad with her friends or planning parties with her sorority sisters. Her absence cultivates genuine mystery and a dark but not so much sinister as sad gut feeling around everything we don't know about this strange, aggressive girl. It might not read for 'normal' viewers, but real life 'strange' girls, orphans, throwaways, gay and trans feminine women, disabled, cr*zy, and especially non-white otherwise marginalized social misfits will understand that people like Cameron are hidden from view because their experiences are not positive or 'normal' by mainstream society's standards, and are not understood or valued. Cameron isn't in most of the first episode because she is truly Unknowable, and literally doesn't fit in with the rest of our characters.

The opposite seems to be true of Donna, who appears here and there in the pilot, but only in scenes with Gordon. This episode doesn't cut to Donna or her life outside of Gordon, either, and she seemingly only pops up to 'nag' Gordon, if by 'nagging' one means dragging Gordon back to the present and/or reality. We get a real sense of what their marriage really feels like, but mostly of what it feels like for Gordon, who unsurprisingly seems to think he's the main character in his marriage. We eventually learn that Donna doesn't seem like she's getting drinks with friends after work or lunching with her sorority sisters either, but by contrast, her daily life isn't shown because it is entirely 'normal', an iteration of womanhood, marriage and working motherhood, based around constantly and silently performing an incredible amount of domestic and emotional labor so taken for granted that it's invisible. Cameron's life is hidden from view, while Donna is practically erased and redrawn as a mean, miserable wife right in front of us.

Until we get our emotional climax toward the end of the pilot, and Gordon realizes that Donna has been right all along. After 30+ minutes of J*e, Gordon, the weird dance they do at Cardiff, and the consummation of their relationship via their illicit 3-day weekend of successful reverse engineering, Donna comes home to a tidy living room, where Gordon is happily engaging with their two young daughters. Thinking that this is the result when Gordon is allowed to pursue his dream, Donna tells him, "Whatever you're dreaming of, build it, I know you can make it great," and Gordon tells her what she's needed to hear, and what he's needed to say, which is simply that their family is more important to him than a pc clone. They make a deal that Donna thinks will make her happy: she will fully support Gordon's pursuit of this project so long as he prioritizes her and the girls.

In the following scenes, Cameron is convinced to drop out of school, move to Dallas, and write the BIOS code for this project. She is both guileless and completely unbeguiled by J*e and his slick charm, but has no immunity when he switches over to warm, not overly paternal approval, and tells her, "See? Now you're thinking like a professional." You can see his manipulation start to finally work on her after he says this, and the way her eyes and face go from tough to perilously vulnerable here is quietly devastating. She finally arrives at Cardiff Electric, where she integrates swiftly into the action around the hasty legitimization of the presently illegal Cardiff pc project, even if she still doesn't exactly blend in. Cameron is immediately taken into a solo meeting (deposition?) with Cardiff's lawyer, where she quickly catches onto and gets on board with the deceptive legal maneuvering that this whole thing is apparently going to require.

As Cameron answers Barry the lawyer's questions and allows him to coach her into saying that no, she has not ever attempted to disassemble or reverse engineer any products manufactured by IBM, we hear his voice over Donna's last scene of the episode, in which she goes out into her garage and gazes at several tables' worth of evidence of the illegal reverse engineering Gordon did just days prior. We unexpectedly cut to her, gazing at various hardware with concern, or is it envy? She's in the garage where Gordon and J*e really bonded over the very laborious process of figuring out an IBM boot code (…or something? And probably other stuff I don't actually know about? sorry), by herself. She's too late, either to stop it or get in on it.

But, she's there, finally, and so is Cameron. Their positions haven't changed much (yet); Cameron is still a true and genuinely unknown quantity and outsider, and Donna is still a long-suffering wife, mother, and some kind of employee at Texas Instruments. But now, we can see them, at least.

Other notes:

I blog for the people who had no idea that "i/o" is short for input/output and had to google it (which I did when I rewatched s1 early last year). No judgment, friends.

The focus on J*e and Gordon feels how I remember it feeling: like a very intentionally hollow version of Mad Men, where J*e's 'charm' and speechfying are barely tolerated by the people most affected by him. Literally everyone sees through him, and we see them see through him.

The thing though, and what makes this series resonate with me personally, is that seeing through someone isn't always enough to protect you from them. Gordon and Cameron are both smarter than Joe, but they both desperately need to be seen by someone, and so his attention works powerfully on them. Donna and Bos are both savvier than J*e, but they’re caught off guard by him, and unprepared to even try to anticipate his calculations.

Still, Gordon recognizes that J*e's enthusiasm is one of the few authentic things about him. He relates to it, and defends him when Donna (not unreasonably?!) identifies J*e's showing up at the movie theater as "cr*zy" ("He's just keyed up, is all")

J*e's whole shtick feels especially and deliciously phony when compared to the visceral and organic-feeling air/stormcloud of 'WHO IS SHE???' that Cameron generates when she's literally just sitting and doing nothing.

NB: there is obviously nothing wrong with having sorority sisters! Just saying that Cameron and Donna are really friendless, and that it’s painfully real. Cameron doesn’t have enough chill for them, Donna doesn’t have the time, and they probably both have trouble relating to other people who aren’t engineers.

My favorite non-Donna/Cameron scene is the sales call-lunch thing. "I'm not going to apologize for caring about your business" is J*e's "I'm not here to tell you about Jesus" moment, but the whole thing, his whole "pitch” where he is so clearly talking to Gordon -- "You can be more; you want to be more, don't you?" -- is like some kind of next level, Don Draper-meets-Tyler Durden shit. Good thing Cameron will be there to keep them from turning into fascists.

The title "Mystery and Misery" is taken from a song/band I love too much to not link to, even if they have nothing to do with any of this.

#...this got v long and is also a day late sorry #& also isn't behind a cut for accessibility #pls enjoy tho!#cameron howe #donna clark #donna emerson #halt and catch fire s1 #1x01 #i/o #the h&cf rewatch #hacf to the max original recaps #halt and catch fire to the max originals!

4 notes · View notes

otnesse · 7 years ago

Text

Galactic Empire and Fascism, an analysis.

After cruising through TVTropes, and discovering a YMMV entry under “What do you mean it’s not political” that implicitly compared Emperor Palpatine in Revenge of the Sith to Donald Trump regarding treatment of aliens (which, for the record, we don’t have a problem with immigration and nor does Trump, rather, we have a massive issue against illegal immigration, which is simple distinction that people unfortunately seem to miss right now especially in media), I decided to make a post regarding whether or not the Galactic Empire from Star Wars was fascist or not. Honestly, I’d say it’s not, though that being said, it has been acknowledged by George Lucas that fascism did play a role in their development via design elements. However, in that case, it was more due to Lucas mistaking fascism for conservativism (similar to how the left constantly claims that Donald Trump is “a fascist” even when he isn’t under even the most basic observations, let alone close scrutiny). To solidify my point, I’ll quote one of my most hated pieces of dialogue from the disaster that was the second season of Supergirl (shame, since the first season started out with a lot of promise, and I don’t intend to watch the third season in large part because of what the writers did by overtly going into left-wing politics, not to mention certain social issues, and overall having a very bad plotline [sure, there have been some leftist bits portrayed positively in the first season, but on the other hand, it also promoted Conservative principles as well, such as the concept of family and actually treating eco-terrorism in a negative light with the Kryptonians that acted as the main villains of the arc, not to mention it actually managed to avert feminist messaging at one point by having Cat Grant actually express remorse at choosing her career over raising her own kid she had out of wedlock, and considering she actually had a kid there, it also implied she didn’t have an abortion either. And I can tell you, she if anything would have been utterly SLAUGHTERED by the feminists clique at NOW as well as by Hillary supporters for actually expressing remorse at choosing her career over being a mother. And either way it was definitely not to the extent that this season was regarding pushing politics and social issues.]. At most, I’ll probably watch the season premiere just long enough to learn the identity of the other Kryptonian baby that had that blood ritual.):

“one misattributed quote from a candidate and you put a fascist in the White House.” – Snapper Carr, Exodus.

Considering how they showered Marsden, a blatant Hillary expy, with love, I don’t you need two guesses as to which Presidential candidate he was referring to (and quite frankly, even ignoring the Trump burns, I hated that line because of its inaccuracy in its ideology and inherent meaning: Perfect attribution of quotes does not guarantee that a fascist [and by that, I mean an actual fascist and not someone like Trump], or a communist, or any particularly evil person will be prevented from becoming president. That, and Snapper Carr with that line and prior lines in the episode came across as acting more like Mike Wallace during that Ethics of America segment where he implied he’d sell American soldiers down the river in order to not ruin his objectivity when traveling with a Vietcong unit, but I digress…). And actually, this whole quote is actually pretty relevant to Star Wars and the Galactic Empire as Palpatine had in fact been based on an American president that the left hated in a similar manner to Trump for various reasons. His name was Richard Milhous Nixon, and he was needlessly demonized, including claiming he had masterminded Watergate when in reality he had absolutely no involvement in the situation and if anything was also irritated that this had happened and demanded to know who was responsible for it, not to mention falsely pinning him to Vietnam when in reality it was LBJ and even JFK’s war before it was his war, and if anything, Nixon was the reason why America actually left Vietnam as victors (yes, we actually won Vietnam. The fall of Saigon was due to our congress stabbing our allies in the back during Watergate. The loser of a war does not head and dictate the negotiations of surrender, which we did.).

Uniforms and Terms:

First, people have said that the Empire’s uniforms and their use of certain terms (ie, Stormtroopers) made them fascist. I won’t go into full detail on how the Stormtrooper Corps aren’t the same thing as the Nazis’ stormtroopers (or at least the Sturmabteilung) in even role, let alone appearance, since I kind of already did that in full detail in an earlier post. However, while Lucas I’ll admit did mention wanting a fascistic feel for the Empire when creating the uniforms, that doesn’t mean that the Empire was actually fascist, any more than calling Donald Trump a fascist must make him fascist as well, or the fact that Ho Chi Minh quoted the Declaration of Independence makes him a Jeffersonian lover of liberty. And besides, the uniforms for the Empire were derived more from German Uhlans during World War I, which predated Nazi Germany and fascism by a significant amount of time. And quite honestly, if you ask me, claiming someone is fascist just because they happen to wear that kind of uniform is just stupid, since uniforms don’t speak to one’s political ideologies. I mean, what, are we going to claim that NYPD Commissioner Frank Reagan from Blue Bloods, Prince Eric from Disney’s The Little Mermaid, or General Pepper from Star Fox are fascists just because they wore similar uniforms (heck, Eric’s wedding outfit even resembles a Grand Admiral’s uniform)? Not to mention, they’re military uniforms, and there have been plenty of uniforms within even the Allied Powers (meaning Britain and the USA) that had similar appearances to Imperial uniforms. If anyone in the Star Wars films actually resembled fascists in terms of uniforms, and more importantly ideology, it was the First Order. The Empire, on that note, does not goose step, either, which would be a surefire sign that it is fascist (its marching style, if anything, resembles that of Geldoblame’s men in Baten Kaitos’ opening when it shows Gibari).

Military buildup:

See, one of my biggest annoyances is the conflation of military buildup, even having a military at all, and going to war as automatically making someone a Nazi or fascist. It was annoying when Paul Verhoeven did it with Starship Troopers (though at least he had the excuse of growing up in Nazi-occupied Netherlands for thinking that. Lucas should know better), and it was also annoying when George Lucas and even Hideo Kojima inferred similar things. Yes, militaries can and have done attacks on neighboring countries, and also tried to conquer neighboring countries. But that’s not their sole role. They also act as a line of defense against an opposing army, not to mention also acts in the defense of citizenry and will also aid in relief efforts should things be serious, and they also are called in to aid allies if needs be. There’s a reason why a common expression for the military is that it acts as a nation’s sword and shield. The Nazis and fascists specifically intended to control at the very least Germany and its various former nation-states, if not the world, not to mention conquered countries specifically to fund their welfare programs. Building up the military is not the sign of an incoming dictatorship or the coming of fascism. America built up its military significantly after 9/11, and it’s nowhere close to becoming fascist right now.

Nationalism and nationalization:

On that note, I also get irritated when people think merely having parades for a national holiday or prominently displaying the flag in terms of national pride and love of country makes one fascist. We Americans do that, especially those of us who are patriotic. Heck, I’ve got the American flag hanging outside my house right now, and besides which, I’ve gone around seeing some houses that have the circular red white and blue flags draped over as well. My neighborhood even has an annual Fourth of July parade that I make every effort to see and we have fireworks celebrating it. The Empire’s celebration of Empire Day is not really all that different. And besides which, being fascist doesn’t mean you actually love your country. Joseph Goebbels, the infamous Nazi propagandist, actually made clear that he, if anything, held contempt to even the mere idea of nationalism or loving one’s own country (I believe his exact words were, and I quote, “the NSDAP [Nazi Party] is the German Left. We despise bourgeois nationalism.”). And based on the fact that Palpatine was perfectly willing to forfeit his own life to get Luke to turn to the Dark Side (even going as far as to goad him into murdering him), it’s pretty clear Palpatine probably had no qualms with the Empire running without him (unfortunately, the Aftermath trilogy had Palpatine try to have Gallius Rax basically blow up the galaxy at Jakku due to not being able to rule the Empire anymore, in an explicit contradiction to not only his actions in Return of the Jedi, but also Revenge of the Sith where he tried to goad Anakin to kill him in a similar manner, not to mention mentioned in a very eager tone that Vader will soon become more powerful than either Yoda or himself).

On the topic of nationalization, the only time nationalization was ever brought up was via Imperialization, and even that was largely limited to those that had either gone against the Empire explicitly or otherwise were originally of the Separatists (at least, it was the case in the former Expanded Universe). They actually left various companies that either were loyal or otherwise had no major issues with the Empire alone, and in fact, they even managed to expand the Corporate Sector to 30,000 star systems and even managed to create the Corporate Sector Authority specifically to allow for transparent mercantilism to go on unabated, only asking for a yearly tribute in return. That kind of thing would actually be AGAINST fascism and/or national socialism, as they won’t tolerate any form of free markets at all, and would in fact point to the Galactic Empire being a pro-capitalist institution (and I mean that in a good way, obviously). If anything, the Old Republic came closer to actual nationalization as we know it via the Trade Federation (which before it became its own cartel was a branch in the main government meant to heavily regulate trade and cut down on any growth of mercantilism if the former Expanded Universe materials are to be believed). And despite what Biggs Darklighter said in that deleted scene to Luke Skywalker from A New Hope, there is literally no indication that the Empire had any intention of nationalizing any farms, moisture or otherwise (especially when the Imperial Handbook doesn’t even mention anything about moisture farms or small business proprieters, let alone nationalizing them. And believe me, considering they had absolutely no qualms against mentioning speciecide as a government policy in the handbook, if they wanted to state their aims at nationalizing something like the Lars Homestead, they would have mentioned it directly within the Imperial Handbook, especially when that book was written around the time of A New Hope in-universe.). And don’t get me started on immunity spheres established by the Empire where it is forbidden for Imperial soldiers or ships are allowed to set foot in there, one of which included the Wheel, which is essentially a space station version of Las Vegas.

Ideology:

Now, let’s get into the ideology of the Empire and that of fascism, or more specifically National Socialism, in-depth. Let’s look, for starters, at the 1925 Nazi Platform:

1. We demand the union of all Germans in a Great Germany on the basis of the principle of self-determination of all peoples.

2. We demand that the German people have rights equal to those of other nations; and that the Peace Treaties of Versailles and St. Germain shall be abrogated.

3. We demand land and territory (colonies) for the maintenance of our people and the settlement of our surplus population.

4. Only those who are our fellow countrymen can become citizens. Only those who have German blood, regardless of creed, can be our countrymen. Hence no Jew can be a countryman.

5. Those who are not citizens must live in Germany as foreigners and must be subject to the law of aliens.

6. The right to choose the government and determine the laws of the State shall belong only to citizens. We therefore demand that no public office, of whatever nature, whether in the central government, the province, or the municipality, shall be held by anyone who is not a citizen.

We wage war against the corrupt parliamentary administration whereby men are appointed to posts by favor of the party without regard to character and fitness.

7. We demand that the State shall above all undertake to ensure that every citizen shall have the possibility of living decently and earning a livelihood. If it should not be possible to feed the whole population, then aliens (non-citizens) must be expelled from the Reich.

8. Any further immigration of non-Germans must be prevented. We demand that all non-Germans who have entered Germany since August 2, 1914, shall be compelled to leave the Reich immediately.

9. All citizens must possess equal rights and duties.

10. The first duty of every citizen must be to work mentally or physically. No individual shall do any work that offends against the interest of the community to the benefit of all.

Therefore we demand:

11. That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise from work, be abolished.

12. Since every war imposes on the people fearful sacrifices in blood and treasure, all personal profit arising from the war must be regarded as treason to the people. We therefore demand the total confiscation of all war profits.

13. We demand the nationalization of all trusts.

14. We demand profit-sharing in large industries.

15. We demand a generous increase in old-age pensions.

16. We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound middle-class, the immediate communalization of large stores which will be rented cheaply to small tradespeople, and the strongest consideration must be given to ensure that small traders shall deliver the supplies needed by the State, the provinces and municipalities.

17. We demand an agrarian reform in accordance with our national requirements, and the enactment of a law to expropriate the owners without compensation of any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.

18. We demand that ruthless war be waged against those who work to the injury of the common welfare. Traitors, usurers, profiteers, etc., are to be punished with death, regardless of creed or race.

19. We demand that Roman law, which serves a materialist ordering of the world, be replaced by German common law.

20. In order to make it possible for every capable and industrious German to obtain higher education, and thus the opportunity to reach into positions of leadership, the State must assume the responsibility of organizing thoroughly the entire cultural system of the people. The curricula of all educational establishments shall be adapted to practical life. The conception of the State Idea (science of citizenship) must be taught in the schools from the very beginning. We demand that specially talented children of poor parents, whatever their station or occupation, be educated at the expense of the State.

21. The State has the duty to help raise the standard of national health by providing maternity welfare centers, by prohibiting juvenile labor, by increasing physical fitness through the introduction of compulsory games and gymnastics, and by the greatest possible encouragement of associations concerned with the physical education of the young.

22. We demand the abolition of the regular army and the creation of a national (folk) army.

23. We demand that there be a legal campaign against those who propagate deliberate political lies and disseminate them through the press. In order to make possible the creation of a German press, we demand:

(a) All editors and their assistants on newspapers published in the German language shall be German citizens.

(b) Non-German newspapers shall only be published with the express permission of the State. They must not be published in the German language.

(c) All financial interests in or in any way affecting German newspapers shall be forbidden to non-Germans by law, and we demand that the punishment for transgressing this law be the immediate suppression of the newspaper and the expulsion of the non-Germans from the Reich.

Newspapers transgressing against the common welfare shall be suppressed. We demand legal action against those tendencies in art and literature that have a disruptive influence upon the life of our folk, and that any organizations that offend against the foregoing demands shall be dissolved.

24. We demand freedom for all religious faiths in the state, insofar as they do not endanger its existence or offend the moral and ethical sense of the Germanic race.

The party as such represents the point of view of a positive Christianity without binding itself to any one particular confession. It fights against the Jewish materialist spirit within and without, and is convinced that a lasting recovery of our folk can only come about from within on the pinciple:

COMMON GOOD BEFORE INDIVIDUAL GOOD

25. In order to carry out this program we demand: the creation of a strong central authority in the State, the unconditional authority by the political central parliament of the whole State and all its organizations.

There's plenty other sources for Nazi or fascist ideology such as table talks, but this should suffice.

Now, let’s look at each of these tidbits, one by one, and compare them to various sources within Star Wars relating to the Empire:

1. Not sure why the Empire would even need to demand that as a manifesto. It’s pretty clear the Empire was pretty much united as it is. Heck, a majority of people actually voted IN the Empire in the first place during Palpatine’s Declaration of a New Order. And I don’t think Palpatine demanded for a specific group of people to be united, just the galaxy. In fact, Palpatine doesn’t even MENTION other galaxies in said speech, nor does the Imperial Handbook voice any plans to conquer any nearby satellite galaxies, not even the Rishi Maze which is the closest galaxy satellite to that of the galaxy the Empire was situated in.

2. Again, nowhere, in either the Declaration of a New Order OR any other policy (Imperial Handbook or Imperial Sourcebook) does it even imply that they wanted equal rights with the other galaxies. Not to mention since the Republic, the Empire’s immediate predecessor, actually WON the prior war, there’s literally nothing there that’s even remotely similar to Nazi Germany there, especially the revoking of a treaty (now, that being said, the First Order might have similarities there). Heck, the Empire didn’t even need to pay reparations either, since, again, they won the Clone Wars.

3. Okay, that might actually be a similarity (though not necessarily the demanding part, just colonization as a whole). However, even there, lots of countries at the time engaged in colonialism, and none of them were actually fascist.

4. No mention whatsoever about any restrictions against people holding citizenship due to being a separate species. Heck, as a matter of fact, the Empire accepted taxes from even the likes of the Ugnaughts if one of the Marvel Comics is to be believed, which implies that even the likes of aliens, while ultimately having second-class citizenship, nonetheless are recognized as being citizens and actually having citizenship. Oh, and at one point, the Empire actually managed to save a sentient alien species from being hunted down upon discovering said alien race was in fact sentient.

5. See 4 above.

6. See 4 and 5 above. In fact, probably the only thing that’s even remotely similar about this point is the bit about citizenry being the ones who choose the government, and even then, that just goes without saying for any nation. Even America demands that only citizens participate in the voting process, and we’re the farthest thing from a fascist country right now and for most of its history. And as far as corruption, well, yeah, even here in America, we demand pretty high moral standards of our politicians. It just goes without saying.

7. Nowhere was it even remotely implied that the Empire be mandated to kick out any aliens (well, both literal aliens the figurative term of being excluded from citizenship solely based on their race) if they fail to feed and clothe anyone.

8. Yeah, considering the Emperor allowed for Intergalactic Passports, not to mention the Imperial Senate as well, it’s highly unlikely he had any problems with immigration into the Empire so long as it was legalized.

9. Don’t recall the Empire mentioning anything about equal rights, actually, whether for or against them.

10. Doesn’t really mention much in terms of sources anything about the Empire actually mandating citizenry work physically or mentally for the benefit of all. It does mention making an effort to be loyal to the Empire, but beyond that, nothing that indicates that the citizenry engage in what is essentially slave labor (and I mean those who weren’t imprisoned).

11. Nowhere does the Empire even remotely mention anything about income relating to work or any unearned income, whether it be the Imperial Handbook or anywhere else.

12. Yeah, considering the Empire built up its military for defense of its Empire from any internal and external threats, I highly doubt the Empire would have even approved of what was essentially an anti-war statement in there, especially confiscating war profits from soldiers.

13. Other than the bit about Imperialism (which doesn’t even demand the nationalization of all firms, just those that went against the Empire), it really doesn’t match up.

14. Nowhere is it even remotely implied, even under the bit about Imperialization, that the Empire demanded that large companies share profits among each other.

15. Never commented on old age pensions at all, and considering the Empire makes clear they do not want anything except the most basic elements, I really doubt they’d support increasing old age pensions.

16. See 14 above. Also, the Imperial Handbook doesn’t even imply that the Empire intends to nationalize stuff like moisture farming on Tatooine. Nor, for that matter, does it even remotely imply wanting to communalize various storefronts or renting large storefronts to small tradesmen.

17. Again, absolutely no mention whatsoever, at least in the Legends universe, that the Empire ever wanted to do agrarian reforms or nationalize farms, not to mention making land speculation and ground rents illegal.

18. Other than the bit about traitors (which, BTW, even our constitution demands the death of any people who commit treason, so it’s just goes without saying), the Empire really doesn’t mention anything about waging any war on those people, or demanding for their death.

19. Other than the bit about having prisoners undergo slavery, it really doesn’t seem to impact prior laws at all, and it certainly doesn’t use materialism as a reason.

20. The only thing that really comes to mind regarding this point is COMPNOR, in particular the Education branch of the Coalition of Progress branch and possibly the Sub-Adult Unit, regarding education (which even that comes across as being more similar to the AFJROTC than, say, the Hitler Youth). Other than that, there’s no similarities at all to the Empire’s method of education compared to that of what was demanded here. That bullet point if anything comes closer to what the creed of the Umbrella Organization from Resident Evil, or more specifically the Wesker Children, promoted, or even the Jedi’s taking of younglings.

21. Other than maybe bits relating to the Imperial Military (and let’s face it, with any military, you need to be in pretty top shape to be in it, as otherwise, you won’t last very long), there’s little to suggest the Empire demanded an emphasis on “national health.”

22. Seriously? Do you really think the Empire would just abandon/gut its entire military apparatus in favor of what is essentially a citizen militia? There’s definitely no similarity here at all.

23. Ah, yeah, about that, even Freedom of the Press in our Constitution specifically states that slander is not covered under that inalienable right, meaning we don’t have the freedom to propagate lies.

a. Kind of goes without saying, really.

b. I don’t recall the Empire ever indicating that they had any particular problem with what language HoloNet sources were to be given in, or requiring specific permission to actually publish them in a different language.

c. Doesn’t mention anything about turning a profit in newspaper industries either, whether for or against it.

24. Regarding religion, the Empire largely maintains religious freedom, especially if it doesn’t act against the interests of the Empire. The only ones who receive any negative stigma are the Jedi, and even there, there have been Jedi who become dark side converts and become Inquisitorious. I won’t comment on the Christianity bit since that religion doesn’t even exist in Star Wars.

25. Other than maybe the bit about the Emperor’s absolute status, there’s little similarity regarding the Empire to that of Nazi Germany or Fascist Italy with that point (and for the record, even with the Magna Carta, kings, queens, emperors, and empresses had absolute status at various points, in fact, probably the only ones I can think of where they didn’t have absolute status and were figureheads is with Great Britain today and Japan for most of the time barring of course Imperial Japan during World War II). Heck, even there, the existence of the Corporate Sector Authority and various immunity spheres shows the Empire doesn’t necessarily adhere to an absolute status regarding central authority. Heck, even there, the Emperor does in fact take advice from several of his officers rather than blowing it off out of some self-inflated sense of superiority.

So yeah, at most, there’s just below half that actually have any resemblance to the 25 planks, and even those that match up have also had similarities to those in countries that obviously weren’t fascist, communist, or anything like that. Also, there’s zero indication that the Empire even supports abortion towards inferiors or anything like that, or has any problems with disabled people (in fact, one of the Empire’s most loyal supporters was a cripple. And I’m not referring to Vader, or even Grand Admiral Teshik.). Not to mention, do you really think a fascist or communist, both of which are totalitarian ideologies, would so much as even THINK of creating something they would have little amount of control over such as, I don’t know, immunity spheres, or even the Corporate Sector Authority’s explicitly being a place of free trade and free market? In fact, you can find this and plenty of other information about these elements to the Empire here (http://www.galacticempiredatabank.com/RebProLies.html).

So why is the Empire considered fascist?

To answer that question, you need to go back to the time Star Wars was being created, as well as look into the background of the franchise’s creator, George Walton Lucas.

You see, George Lucas was a raving leftist, of the stripe seen during the 1960s where they viewed protests as an excuse to riot for no real reason beyond platitudes. Heck, he even admitted as much in various interviews, including a 2012 interview with Charlie Rose on CBS, where he outright admitted that he got his left-wing views from growing up in 1960s San Francisco which was a hotbed with various radical elements, including anti-Vietnam War protests as you can see here: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/george-lucas-billionaire-down-on-capitalism/ (the same interview also had him making some negative statements on Capitalism, more on that later). Oh, and he also at one point described his ideal movie making studio philosophy as being “the workers have the means of production” (Skywalking, p.246), meaning that at the very least he flirted with Marxism, and later on during another interview with Charlie Rose (you know the one: where he infamously compared Disney after the sale to “white slavers”) actually implied that Soviet filmmaking at the height of the Cold War was preferable to the American Hollywood model (ie, the Soviet filmmaking where you get a bullet in the head if you criticize the people in charge) as you can see here: http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/ken-shepherd/2016/01/04/george-lucas-soviet-directors-had-more-freedom-i-had. In fact, during the Vietnam War, he outright rooted for the Vietcong to win. Back then, leftists often denounced any conservative principles as being “fascist” or “nazi-esque”, mostly because of a misnomer promoted by the likes of Josef Stalin shortly after World War II where he denounced the Nazis as being “right-wing” both to paint actual right-wing groups in a very negative light (the Nazis and fascists in reality were part of the far-left, and they merely viewed the Communists as rivals for control over the left, not actual feuding enemies in terms of ideology), and also as a CYA attempt to deflect any potential blame from reaching Communism. An infamous example of attempts at comparing conservative principles or conservatives to Nazis or fascists was during the HUAC investigations as well as McCarthy’s investigations into Soviet infiltration and subversion of America (which, BTW, contrary to popular belief, McCarthy had no involvement in HUAC, as he was part of the Senate, while HUAC was strictly House of Representatives territory, and he had nothing to do with the Hollywood Blacklist), where quite a few people often accused their accusers as being Nazis to deflect any potential blame of being communists, even when confronted with direct evidence to their Communist ties. This sort of thing is still in existence even today, as evidenced with the aforementioned quote from Snapper Carr from Supergirl, heck, Neo/Thomas Anderson’s “Gestapo crap” comment to the agents in the first Matrix movie even. In fact, as I alluded to earlier in this post, he even had particular ire against former President Richard Milhous Nixon, where he claimed he was responsible for causing Vietnam to happen (a lie, since Vietnam occurred under JFK and LBJ’s watch), running for a third term (of which he expressed no interest in such an idea), and probably also the fact that he exposed Alger Hiss as a Communist spy and indicted him for perjury. In fact, Lucas during the 2008 election cycle even called Barack Obama a hero (and for the record, Obama's policies came far closer to actual fascism than the Empire did), and in 2012, he also indicated he was, among other things, “a dyed-in-the-wool 99%er before there was such a thing” in an unsubtle attempt at promoting solidarity for the Occupy Wall Street group (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/magazine/george-lucas-red-tails.html).

Now, taking all of that into account, let’s start with the beginnings of Star Wars. It was 1973, Vietnam was still ongoing, and Richard Nixon is embattled with Watergate. Lucas decides to make Star Wars, then-titled The Star Wars, partially due to the fact that he wanted to cover Vietnam, and partially in response to Nixon’s Watergate bit (note, Star Wars was originally planned to be the third in a thematic trilogy dealing with denouncing America’s involvement in Vietnam, with the first film being American Graffiti, and the second being Apocalypse Now [yes, Lucas was in fact supposed to make that movie]. However, while American Graffiti played and performed as well as he wanted it to, he ultimately wasn’t able to complete Apocalypse Now before Warner Bros. shut down his studio American Zoetrope due to uncertainty regarding the film as well as the previous failure of THX 1138, so he decided to make Star Wars, his planned third film, early, and specifically include elements from Apocalypse Now.). Among the first drafts for the film included a statement on yellow sheets that detailed the theme for the film, which basically said that the Rebels, or, technically speaking, Aquilae, was supposed to be similar to a “small independent country like North Vietnam” that was being threatened with conquest, and that the Empire was supposed to be like America in 1983 (not those exact words, but he said that it was like America 10 years from when he said it, which at the time was 1973), essentially its emperor had been assassinated by “Nixonian gangsters” and elevated to power in a rigged election, and creating a total thought control police state (ironic, since the only character in the movie to actually engage in total thought control at all was Obi-Wan Kenobi with his little “Jedi Mind Trick.”), and even states that they are at a turning point, whether they support Fascism or Revolution (and based on his overall comments, I don’t think he’s referring to the American War for Independence). Although some things from that draft were changed, the overall themes based on Lucas’s later comments haven’t changed at all, which also included the whole Rebel Alliance angle. However, apparently this wasn’t enough, as when making Return of the Jedi, he decided to make the whole Vietcong promotion theme a bit more overt by having Emperor Palpatine’s best troops be taken down by what are essentially animate Teddy Bears known as the Ewoks.

Eventually, about a decade after Jedi, he decided to make the Prequel Trilogy of Star Wars, and he went even further than Return of the Jedi. Basically he made the Republic essentially a bastion of liberal-style nanny state big government, and the “Senate” was closer to the United Nation in Space, or Star Federation from Star Trek. Oh, and the government was so deeply broken, apparently not being able to enforce anti-slavery laws within what was technically its territory. The Jedi were depicted as essentially being Ivory Tower types, as well. Oh, and Supreme Chancellor Finis Valorum was specifically modeled after then-President Bill Clinton as a beleaguered man (before the infamous Monica Lewinsky scandal, I should add), which Terrence Stamp, Valorum's actor, even noted. And remember when I mentioned that Lucas’s 2012 interview with Charlie Rose had him mentioning how he was anti-Capitalist and adhered to a more Communistic approach to democracy? Well he starts showing hints at this with the Trade Federation. Speaking of which, the whole Trade Federation plotline and their invading Naboo was largely made in response to the Republican Revolution of 1994 that was made in direct response to some far-left policies Clinton was making, including tax increases as well as the NAFTA agreement, policies that were obviously unpopular among the electorate. Around this time, Newt Gingrich made a speech called Contract with America, which proposed among other things requiring a three-fifths majority before making tax increases. This all occurred around the time Lucas was on his eighth day draft-writing what would become the film. Lucas, as you can probably guess, was not at all happy with this, and decided to use the Trade Federation as being essentially strawmen for the Republican Revolution regarding motives and overall characterization (and he doesn’t even attempt to be subtle about it, either: The leader of the Trade Federation, Nute Gunray, for example, had his name being taken from two sources: The first from Newt Gingrich himself, obviously, and the second being Ronald Reagan, the latter was mostly out of revenge for SDI being labeled Star Wars, even though it was Ted Kennedy and the leftist media who called it that in the first place; and Lott Dod, the Neimoidian senator representing the Trade Federation, was named after Chris Lott, the GOP leader in 1997.).

But, oh, that’s still not far enough for him. The very next movie, Attack of the Clones, makes Lucas’s anti-war political views extremely apparent by revealing that, for the thousand years the Republic existed, or at least the thousand years since the Ruusan Reformation if we go by Legends, it turns out the Republic lacked a military of any kind at all. Worse, the film also obviously tries to paint even trying to form a military at all as being an inherently bad thing and would mean the loss of freedom and creating new fear, especially when Padme Amidala, as a clear expy of the Left’s view of Hillary Clinton here, goes to Coruscant as a Senator and tries to vote against the motion (and pre-release materials alongside the movie even goes as far as to imply that Padme may have in fact LIED to the Senate by implying heavily that the pro-Military senators were responsible for her near-assassination, when she in fact suspected that Count Dooku of the Separatists was responsible for the hit). Oh, and if the Trade Federation’s villainous role in the prior movie didn’t tip you off to Lucas’s anti-Capitalist agenda, this movie broadcasts it in a huge billboard by having the main villains, the Separatists, basically being composed of corporations, even explicitly giving their names to the cause, which besides the Trade Federation included among others the InterGalactic Banking Guild, the Corporate Alliance, the Commerce Guild, and the Techno Union. There may have also been a few hints at 9/11 being staged for a coup, especially in the ending, although given the timing, not to mention Attack of the Clones most likely entered development before 9/11 occurred, he was probably intending for that to be the Gulf of Tonkin Incident as an inspiration if anything.

Even that wasn’t far enough for Lucas, apparently, as Lucas then had in Episode III more overt Bush-bashing by essentially implying that the War in Iraq was an excuse for Republicans to take over America and turn it into a fascist Empire (really.), and overall seemed like it was pushing an anti-War viewpoint that you would expect to find on MSNBC or MoveOn.org for more indirect instances of Bush-bashing. For more direct indications, there’s Padme’s “So this is how liberty dies… with thunderous applause…” shortly after Palpatine declares himself Emperor, apparently done in relation to the Patriot Act, and then there’s the infamous instance in the movie where Vader and Obi-Wan confront each other on Mustafar. Specifically, Vader yells “If you are not with me, then you are my enemy!” in a very thinly-veiled reference to President George W. Bush’s “You’re either with us or the terrorists” line on September 20, 2001, which was directed to the United Nations, not to the American citizenry. Obi-Wan, in response, declares “Only a Sith deals in absolutes.”, one of the most stupid and confusing lines in the movie, especially when it made the Jedi seem like they were the moral relativists and postmodernists, maybe even moral nihilists. Apparently this two bits had been added in fairly early on, around the time of the Iraq War, and largely because of various protests in the Bay Area against the war and Bush, in an eerily similar manner to the protests against Vietnam and Nixon before then, and apparently thought Americans would have agreed with Obi-Wan because of this, thinking they thought nuance was lost from Bush’s “black and white worldview.” Oh, and he also promoted the movie during the 2005 Cannes film festival. You might remember that particular film festival, it was most infamous for its various film moguls using the festival and the showing their films to essentially flip the bird against Bush (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sith-invites-bush-comparisons/2/). Lucas, to be fair, acknowledges that he didn’t necessarily plan on Bush being the subject of Star Wars, but that’s solely because he already had Nixon in mind before Bush was even on his radar. He nonetheless compared Vietnam to Iraq claiming the comparisons were unbelievable (well, he’s right about one thing: thinking there is any comparison between those two wars beyond our trying to stop a grave threat is pretty unbelievable), and he divulged further into his ideas of democracy turning into a dictatorship (they’re one and the same, if you ask me, and I don’t mean that in a good way for either), by basically implying that Robespierre’s France, of all things, was good or at least preferable to Napoleon’s France, or his implying something similar to the Weimar Republic to Nazi Germany. Not to mention most of the comparisons don’t even work, and neither does the claim that wars make dictatorships and destroy democracy (America was forged from war against Great Britain, and we aren’t even close to a dictatorship). Heck, some Expanded Universe materials around the time of Revenge of the Sith even had references to the Triad of Evil, in an unsubtle reference to the Axis of Evil. And in the Clone Wars cartoons (the 3D animation one, not the one with the animation style that was similar to Samurai Jack) there was a character named Saw Gererra whose basis for that Marxist terrorist Che Guevera were as lacking of subtlety as Lott Dod’s basis for Chris Lott was.

Closing statements

Well, I’ve been an Empire supporter for a little over a year now. Not exactly particularly happy with this development, since I go by a rule that I never, ever root for villains, and I was forced to break that rule with the Empire. The reason I had to make that exception dealt with Lucas’s statements about how the Empire was meant to represent America (and more specifically, when How Star Wars Conquered the Universe by Chris Taylor revealed that even the Rebel Alliance was supposed to be Vietcong expies. I don’t root for communists, because they tried to exterminate those of my religion, or any religion, for that matter, all for the sake of atheism, which I maintain is no religion due to a lack of gods or supernatural elements). Either way, I figured I’d set the record straight regarding the Empire and Fascism, because quite frankly, barring the uniforms, they really have no similarities to actual fascism (heck, they don’t even practice any socialist principles while the Old Republic seems to be more socialistic/communistic in nature). If anyone disagrees, fine by me, but I suggest you try to find any sources that definitively match up with Nazi ideology in a very precise manner, and more than just uniforms.

Author's note:

I'm basing this mostly on the Legends version of the Empire, mostly because, quite frankly, I'm not exactly fond of what's become of Star Wars under Disney, even speaking as someone who is a Disney fan.

#meta #Star Wars #anti-george lucas

2 notes · View notes