#best unknown places in Vietnam | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

victoriadallonfan · 4 months ago

Text

Let's Talk About the Alien vs Predator Films

Talk about wasted potential, am I right?

I'm struggling to format this in an interesting way, since so much has been covered over the past 20 years since the first film was released. You can read my thoughts on Aliens Franchise and the Predator Franchise as well.

Note that it doesn't include Alien: Romulus, but suffice to say it was a good movie!

I think the best place to start is with covering the themes of Alien and Predator, and the history before these films were created (and the failure of Fox).

My fellow AvP enjoyer @agendergorgon has already posted some thoughts on the topic, giving me a lot to think about, so check out their blog too!

For the purposes of this review, I am not going to include Alien 3, Alien: Resurrection, Prometheus, nor Alien: Covenant.... mostly. The AvP films really don't take much of anything beyond the first two films, though I will touch on Prometheus when it comes to religion.

Ditto for the Predator films, but that's because Predator wouldn't get a third film until 2010, 3 years after the AvP duo.

The themes of Alien Franchise:

I'm sure the first thing to come to mind is that the Alien series is about sexual assault, and you'd be correct. The xenomorph is designed to be extremely phallic, the facehuggers quite literally rape their victims, Burke locks his victims (including a child) in a room to be raped, Ash tries to murder Ripley by thrusting a rolled up porn magazine down her throat etc etc.

Some of you might also remember how Aliens was noted by James Cameron to be a criticism of the Vietnam War, Corporate Greed, and the callous arrogance of the US Military. The xenomorphs represented the innumerable "faceless" soldiers that could overwhelm more advanced enemies with ambush tactics and numbers, Burke thinks only in "goddamn percentages" and how this could benefit himself and the company, and the Colonial Marines are not only woefully mismanaged a newly brought on commander but also completely delusional with their own sense of invulnerability, only to break and panic under pressure once they meet a foe who is determined to fight to the death.

(I will NOT be tackling the fucked-upness of comparing people fighting for their independence vs a fucking Xenomorph, because holy fucking shit, it is literally the opposite AND worse counterpart to having the Predators be colonizers)

But, in the broader scope of the series, Alien - and the xenomorph - represent the uncontrollable, unfathomable, unknown. What are they? Why were they there? What are their motives? How did they end up in that ship? Were they built? How do they 'see'? Why did the xenomorph spare Jonesy the Cat? Are they intelligent life? How on earth do they function with their bizarre biology?

We don't get any real answers to these questions in the original films. The whole point of these movies is that there are things that mankind does not understand, and the horrors of space are vast. And equally terrifying is the arrogance of man (and synth kind) to think they can harness this horror for profit at the expense of human lives.

The themes of the Predator Franchise:

There's been tons of articles on how Predator is either a reconstruction or deconstruction (depending on who you ask) of the 80's action hero flick. A team of muscle laden, big gun toting, sweaty men spouting off one-liners as they mow down their enemies in a secret CIA led operation during the Cold War, interrupted by the presence of an intergalactic hunter than treats these badasses like mere toys. The massive Arnold Schwarzenegger is smacked out like a mouse facing off against a particularly cruel cat, needing to rely on tricks - not his brawns or guns - to stay alive and eventually defeat the Predator.

Others might point to its related take down of machismo. The opening scene is rife with characters testing each other's physical strength against each other such as with Dillon and Dutch, Ventura and Dutch have a small face-off in the helicopter as they try to make a pecking order, Ventura makes a whole speech about being a "sexual tyrannosaurus" and then mocked about sticking a gun up his "sore-ass", Hawkins repeatedly tries to make pussy and sex jokes, and they end up with a single woman in the group who is treated more like an object and baggage than a person for much of the movie. All of these men are emasculated by the Predator, some of them not even lasting a single second to its predations (both in tech and physicality), all of them losing any sense of quips and confidence, and the sole woman of the group survives because she didn't fit the movie's (and Predator's) mold of "tough as nails". When Arnold/Dutch is rescued by helicopter, it's not a cheerful one; he's haunted by what he endured and remains silent as the film pans into his thousand-yard stare.

All of this applies to Predator 2 as well, amping up the violence, dick measuring, and rules of the Predator targeting anyone who thinks they are tough shit for carrying a gun or knife. Even Danny Glover's victory is bittersweet, because he is now left in the middle of dozens of officer deaths, and entire subway car filled with corpses, and an antique flintlock pistol that promises the return of the Predators to Earth.

In a much broader sense, the Predator films are about the oversaturation of violence and lack of care for human life. Predator 1's main plot before he arrives is the CIA using Green Berets and then Dutch's special ops team to clean up their dirty work, giving them false information and not even reporting the Berets being MIA in furtherance of their Cold War goals (slaughtering guerrillas who were working with Soviet Russia). In Predator 2, the police are seen as being ineffective because they trample on each other's jurisdiction, with the Federal task force being willing to kill their own cops to keep the Predator existence a secret and letting it hunt people down for a better chance at capture and experimentation.

The Predator creatures are the epitome of such greed and arrogance. They are the General Zaroffs of The Most Dangerous Game, taken to a new height by showing that human lives literally mean nothing to them beyond a trophy hunt. They care nothing about our social lives, our politics, our loved ones, because for them this is nothing more than the equivalent of posh British Elite going on a Fox Hunt: cruel and sadistic, just to placate their egos. They will violate the corpses of the dead and taunt those in mourning, for the thrill of the game. And in that sense, the Predators are very human antagonists: they are not unfathomable nor are their goals beyond our understanding. The horror of the Predators is that they are creatures we can understand, communicate with, and even see similarities in their culture to ours... and that culture is putting us on a trophy rack alongside other skulls of creatures they felt a thrill to hunt.

So, did the Alien vs Predator films cover even half of these topics?

Well... kinda? Just... not well.

Not well at all.

The Build Up

Alien and Predator have a connected history dating back to the creation of the Predator itself. Stan Winston was on a flight with James Cameron some time after the famous director had finished with Aliens, and the director made a comment about wanting to see a monster with mandibles, which eventually led to the creature we know and love today.

Predator's debut on screen was also often compared to Aliens due to the superficially similar premise of a team of commandos going on a mission and fighting an unknown alien threat.

Despite what some people think, the AvP series wasn't started by the films.

Yes, there was a particularly memorable scene in Predator 2, where the City Hunter is admiring his trophy room and a xenomorph skull can be seen mounted on the wall (though, fun fact, it's actually an inaccurate depiction as xenomorph skulls look more humanoid facing), but that wasn't the first time the duo met in media.

And I'm not referring to the 1993 Arcade Game either (since that only came out a year after Predator 2).

The Alien vs Predator comic first appeared in 1989. And there were publications continuing ever since.

Think about that going forward. There was 25 years of content to choose from, storylines they could adapt, interesting forays into the cosmology and interactions between Yaujta, Xenomorphs, and Humanity.

The movies used exactly none of it (barring 1 thing: the Predalien).

Alien vs Predator (2004)

The plot of this movie is that Weyland-Yutani corporation detects a heat bloom under the ice in Antartica that reveals an underground pyramid, and in a race against his competitors, Weyland rounds up a team of elite experts led by Lex Woods to investigate the ruins (and find that the Predators have left them a convenient tunnel to enter the deep ice). Only to find out that this was a trap, as the pyramid comes to life activates a Xenomorph Queen, unleashing a brood of facehuggers on the helpless crew, all the while the Predators hunt them down. After a spectacular shitshow and release of the Xenomorph Queen, Lex and the last Predator (Scar) have to reluctantly team up to escape the pyramid and blow up the xenomorphs, ending in a final battle with the Xenomorph Queen. Scar perishes in the fight, but Lex manages to send the Queen into the depth of the artic ocean, and is rewarded by the watching Eldar Predator with a spear for her troubles. A post-credit scene reveals that Scar had a chest-burster inside of him, birthing the Predalien!

Rewatching this movie, I'm surprised at how good it looks. The opening scene of the satellite in space, several shots of the ship (and spaceship), the frozen tundra, the set pieces like the Xenomorph Queen Prison, and the CGI!

The CGI! Of 2004! I was shocked that they looked so good for something that is 20 years old now, but they did really well for themselves.

But it was the practical effects that blew me away the most. The shifting Pyramid is absolutely iconic and the abandoned whaling station is suitably creepy. The face-huggers look amazing and the xenomorphs are just *chefs kiss*. It's so funny seeing these Xenomorph effects compared to that of Alien:Covenant, and seeing how much work bodysuit and puppetry can do to make a monster look so much more terrifying than a CGI creature.

I know a lot of people didn't like the Predator's bulky appearance in this movie, but honestly... I dig it? It makes sense that not all Predators are literally built the same, and that the ones who would choose to go hunting in the artic would be the bigger ones who could hold more body heat. And the movie does a really great fucking job of making these Predators look badass and distinct from each other, with Celtic having the coolest mask of the whole group.

And the way the movie is shot is really fantastic! There are a lot of wide and tracking shots where the movie lets the atmosphere do the work instead of badgering us with words, taking its time to build up tension and soak up the visuals. One of my favorites shots they did was slow roam through the Predator ship as the systems come to life and we get to see holograms come on-line, feeding information directly into their masks. Equally good was when the Xenomorph Queen is awakened to cackling electricity and ominous lighting, showing us how vast this chamber is and how huge this Queen is in comparison to the one Ripley faces.

The same goes for most of the actions scenes, with a decent amount of cool slow-mo shots for things like Face-huggles launching themselves, Predators leaping across chasms, and showing Scar's impressive athleticism when he leaps 10 meters into the air and stabs a spear through the Queens skull.

And I can always rewatch the first time Alien Meets Predator Fight. God, that score! The music is just so damn good!!! You really feel like you are watching two massive horrors from space finally finding themselves sharing a space together.

Honestly, the Predators using the Xenomorphs as some kind of fucked up exotic pet for hunting trials and training fits the lore PERFECTLY. It’s actually a literal fox hunt not just metaphorical (and of course, in typical Alien fashion, it all went to shit).

Aliens vs Predator: Requiem (2007)

"Wait, Ridtom/VictoriaDallonFan, are you about to say something nice about AvP:R?!"

Well, after turning up the brightness and hanging blankets over my windows and then watching the movie underneath more blankets... yes!

For one thing, the Alien and Predator effects are spectacular! Some of the best work I've seen in the franchises! The fight scenes are creative and use really cool set-pieces like the sewer and power plant, where we get to see Wolf (the name of the Predator of this movie) absolutely kick ass and slaughter his way through hordes of Xenomorphs. Not that the xenos are left in the dust, as they get plenty of murders on screen and even outsmart Wolf on occasion.

I actually like the Predalien design and the idea that it’s more intelligent than the average Xeno, including holding personal grudges and understanding Predator behavior.

And the Predator tech is really cool too! We got laser grids, land mines, power fists, converting the plasma caster into a plasma pistol And I love the moment where Wolf kidnaps one of the human protags to use as live bait. Such a dick thing to do but so in-character.

Even the bits we get of Wolf mourning his fellow dead hunters was a neat addition.

And to be honest, I didn’t mind the idea of seeing an actual xenomorph infestation in real time, in a small town. I think that sort of setting would be really fun for a one-shot story.

And… that’s it. That’s all the good stuff.

What Went Wrong?

I compiled a list of sources where I got a lot of information on the AvP production: Source 1, Source 2, Source 3, Source 4

Note that a lot of these are 20 years old so I apologize for the outdated and honestly abhorrent word use that some articles and videos may use. And another apology for using the Xenopedia wiki, it was just a good shorthand for other information.

In short: Fox fucking sucks. They will absolutely self-sabotage themselves in order to make a (perceived) profit. Tom Rothman is the most well known (and he’s gone to Sony as of now), but Fox has had a looong history of being stingy and terrified of any risks for their films.

The sheer amount of drama involving Alien 3 and Alien Resurrection is an insane rollercoaster.

AvP removed pretty much any sense of horror and purposely had the design of the Predators to be more “human” and “heroic” (hence the weird human eyes and bulky physique), with a PG-13 rating for more audience numbers. While the human characters aren’t bad, they are not unique or even memorable (barring the fandom romantic tension between Lexi and the final Predator). Also, it was very weird that the Predators couldn’t kill a single Xenomorph, meanwhile the Colonial Marines couldn’t trip without blasting apart swarms of them. It felt like they really wanted to save money on the film in that regard.

AvP:R was even worse, with it being filmed with such a lack of lighting that people could not actually see any of the movie, and even modern advancements in color grading make it a strain. The human characters are awful, just absolutely boring and unremarkable beyond being veiled callbacks to characters from Alien, and we get a bunch of stupid Dawson’s Creek drama involving teenagers who look like they are 30 years old fighting over a girl who has no personality because she was written to just be “hot girl”.

If the story had focused entirely on the wife coming home from the war and dealing with the fact that her own daughter doesn’t feel close or comfortable with her after years of being gone, there could have been focus and themes and yadda yadda yadda.

Also, while this movie at least has horror aspects, did we REALLY need to see the Xenomorphs eating the fetuses and belly bursting out of still screaming mothers? Like, there is horror and then there is just being gross.

Final Thoughts

I often wonder if AvP took the wind out of the sails of Prometheus. Both play with the idea of humans worshiping aliens as gods, because Ancient Aliens is fucking everywhere, but it’s really hard to take Prometheus seriously when you remember AvP did basically the same setup (with arguably smarter characters).

And these movies have really soiled the idea of the AvP franchise barring the video games and comics. There’s apparently an AvP anime locked up in Disney Vaults and so far, both franchises have kept their respectful distances from each other.

However, with the recent successes of Alien: Romulus and Prey, there’s been a bit of a stir with some comments hinting at a potential AvP future.

Who knows. It’s been 17 years, perhaps 3rd time is the charm.

#avp #avp:r #avp: requiem #alien vs predator #alien vs predator: requiem #alien vs predator requiem #alien franchise #xenomorph #predator franchise #the predator #yautja #yaujta #film analysis #prey 2022 #alien: romulus

145 notes · View notes

seph7 · 2 months ago

Text

J.T. Walsh Roles - Scumbag Scale Edition!

Let's face it, he played a lot of 'scumbag' characters, so I thought I'd collate where I would place some of them on a scale of worst to... least worst!

Starting with who I think was the best of a bad bunch - Ins. Terence Niebaum - The Negotiator (1998). Niebaum took bribe money to help cover up some dirty cops stealing from the collective police pension fund.

Next, Martin Swayzak - Backdraft (1991). Shut down some fire stations, reducing the numbers of paid firefighters, meaning fewer available fighters which resulted in some unnecessary deaths. Again, I think there was money involved.

Then we have Sgt. Maj. Dickerson - Good Morning, Vietnam (1987). A man wound so tight that Robin Williams' character described him as 'in more dire need of a blowjob than any man in human history'. He was just an overall arsehole and his commanding officer called him mean and shipped him off to Guam!

Now we're getting to the larger ego characters - Charles F. Drucker - Crazy People (1990). A man with command and charisma, and very little moral compass as he takes advantage of mentally ill patients who are making him money with their 'honest ads' campaign and getting very little in return.

It was scary how well he was able to play creepy characters, and Cake - Persons Unknown (1996) was definitely a bit of a creeper! Seemed to be playing all angles at once, even going so far as to attempt to assault a woman in a wheelchair.

I wasn't sure where to put Danforth Keeton III - Needful Things (1993) initially, but, he does have a terrible gambling addiction and kills his wife... He's a fabulous character though! This first scene is my favourite!

On the face of it, Wayne Brown - Red Rock West (1993) doesn't seem too terrible, but he does plot to have his wife murdered and did embezzle $2 million...

Lt. Quinn - Black Day Blue Night (1995) starts off by appearing to be chasing down a bunch of bank robbers, only for it to be discovered that he was one of them and has been stiffed of his share! Uses anyone and everyone to track down the money, killing multiple people along the way... Definitely a dirty cop!

Stephen Seldes - Defenseless (1991) starts off as a businessman who unknowingly lets out a building to an adult entertainment company who hires underaged girls to star in their films. It is quickly discovered that not only did he know about the company, he was taking money directly from them and was grooming and pimping out his own underage daughter. Definitely up there in the scumbag rating!

Lt. William Eyler - Gang in Blue (1996) was scummy on a whole other level. He actually starts a baseball team with his partner at some point in the late 60's, early 70's called The Phantoms, using it as a cover to hide racist extracurricular activities against people of colour. His entire department is part of the club and falls under FBI investigation.

Second to last, we have Charles Bushman - Sling Blade (1996). A seemingly sex-obsessed murderer who loves nothing better than to tell anyone who will listen about his exploits before he was caught. The only reason he isn't number one scumbag is largely down to whether any of the stories he told were genuinely true, or if they were embellished...

And, our number one scumbag is... Warren 'Red' Barr - Breakdown (1997). Do we really need to say why?! Kidnapping, extortion, theft, murder... You begin to wonder if there was anything he wouldn't do! He has very few redeeming features, other than the fact that his son seems to idolise him... Which, given what he was spending his time doing, wasn't exactly a good thing...

#underrated actors #j.t. walsh #jt walsh #character actor #scumbag characters #breakdown 1997 #backdraft 1991 #crazy people 1990 #Sling Blade 1996 #The Negotiator 1998 #Needful Things 1993 #Gang in Blue 1996 #Defenseless 1991 #Red Rock West 1993 #Good Morning Vietnam 1987 #Persons Unknown 1996 #Black Day Blue Night 1995

25 notes · View notes

astoundingbeyondbelief · 11 months ago

Text

Kaiju Week in Review (January 21-27, 2024)

Godzilla Minus One made awards show history in both Japan and the U.S. this week. Its Oscar nomination for best Visual Effects is the first of the series (Godzilla [1998], Godzilla [2014] and Godzilla vs. Kong were previously shortlisted) and the first for any Japanese film. Small wonder Takashi Yamazaki, Kiyoko Shibuya, and their team went berserk when the nomination was announced. The other nominees are The Creator, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3, Napoleon, and Mission: Impossible — Dead Reckoning Part One. According to IndieWire, The Creator has the edge, but Minus One could very well win. And while it naturally made less headlines in the Anglosphere, Minus One also picked up a whopping 12 Japan Academy Film Prize nominations, exceeding Shin Godzilla's 10.

Godzilla Minus One/Minus Color is now in North American theaters. I was intrigued enough to make it my fourth theatrical viewing of this movie, but in the end it did basically strike me as a gimmick. Godzilla Minus One was shot digitally with sets designed for color, so making it actually look like a film from the 40s was always going to be an uphill battle. Even with the regrade, there wasn’t a ton of contrast in most shots, and some of the scenes taking place at night were quite hard to see. Still, apart from the Odo Island massacre, I found the Godzilla scenes as gripping as ever.

Thanks to Minus Color, Minus One made $2.6 million this weekend, crawling back into the box office top 10. Its total in the U.S. and Canada now stands at $55 million, third among all foreign-language films released in the U.S.

Brush of the God, Keizo Murase's directorial debut after a lifetime in movies, is finally complete. It'll play at the Osaka Asian Film Festival in March (link contains more images), and hopefully travel overseas very soon. Murase will also receive an Association Special Award at the Japan Academy Film Prize.

Clover Press shipped out copies of Godzilla & Kong: The Cinematic Storyboard Art of Richard Bennett to Kickstarter backers, myself included. It's an excellent art book, and there are plenty of deleted and altered scenes mixed in with more familiar sequences. Believe it or not, Bennett drew the panel above for Kong: Skull Island—they considered having James Conrad (Tom Hiddleston) flash back to an encounter with King Ghidorah in Vietnam. Not sure how that would've worked, as Ghidorah is generally not one to lie low for a few decades, but it's the first I've ever heard of it being considered. I'm hoping to post some more scans soon. Here's the order link.

Minecraft social media accounts teased a crossover with the Monsterverse, in what's likely to be the most high-profile of the Godzilla x Kong video game collaborations. The Mobzilla mod was created over 10 years ago, so this is long overdue.

The big toy news this week was Titanic Creations revealing the digital sculpt for its Yongary figure. This guy's had even less figures than Gorgo - I can only think of one, and very few of them were made - so expect massive demand. New Godzilla toys were also on display at London Toy Fair, both at the Playmates booth and among the plushies made by an unknown company.

#kaiju week in review #godzilla minus one #godzilla #yongary #minecraft #king kong #kong skull island #king ghidorah #art #orochi #brush of the god #kaiju #tokusatsu #godzilla x kong the new empire

103 notes · View notes

dailyanarchistposts · 1 month ago

Text

Chapter One. Faith

Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal. —Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies [1]

I grew up in a small farming town in upstate New York where my life, and the life of my family, centered on the Presbyterian Church. I prayed and sang hymns every Sunday, went to Bible school, listened to my father preach the weekly sermon and attended seminary at Harvard Divinity School to be a preacher myself. America was a place where things could be better if we worked to make them better, and where our faith saved us from despair, self-righteousness and the dangerous belief that we knew the will of God or could carry it out. We were taught that those who claimed to speak for God, the self-appointed prophets who promised the Kingdom of God on earth, were dangerous. We had no ability to understand God’s will. We did the best we could. We trusted and had faith in the mystery, the unknown before us. We made decisions—even decisions that on the outside looked unobjectionably moral—well aware of the numerous motives, some good and some bad, that went into every human act. In the end, we all stood in need of forgiveness. We were all tainted by sin. None were pure. The Bible was not the literal word of God. It was not a self-help manual that could predict the future. It did not tell us how to vote or allow us to divide the world into us and them, the righteous and the damned, the infidels and the blessed. It was a book written by a series of ancient writers, certainly fallible and at times at odds with each other, who asked the right questions and struggled with the mystery and transcendence of human existence. We took the Bible seriously and therefore could not take it literally.

There was no alcohol in the manse where I grew up. Indeed, my father railed against the Glass Bar, the one bar in town, and the drinking in the VFW Hall. We did not work on Sunday. I never heard my father swear. But coupled with this piety was a belief that as Christians we were called to fight for justice. My father took an early stand in the town in support of the civil-rights movement, a position that was highly unpopular in rural, white enclaves where Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was one of the most hated men in America. A veteran of World War II, he opposed the Vietnam War, telling me when I was about 12 that if the war was still being waged when I was 18, he would go to prison with me. To this day I carry in my head the rather gloomy image of sitting in a jail cell with my dad. Finally, because his youngest brother was gay, he understood the pain and isolation of being a gay man in America. He worked later in life in the gay-rights movement, calling for the ordination and marriage of gays. When he found that my college, Colgate University, had no gay and lesbian organization, he brought gay speakers to the campus. The meetings led gays and lesbians to confide in him that they felt uncomfortable coming out of the closet to start an open organization, a problem my father swiftly solved by taking me out to lunch and informing me that although I was not gay, I had to form the organization. When I went into the dining hall for breakfast, lunch and dinner, the checker behind the desk would take my card, mark off the appropriate box, and hand it back, muttering, “Faggot.” This willingness to take a moral stand, to accept risk and ridicule, was, he showed me, the cost of the moral life.

The four Gospels, we understood, were filled with factual contradictions, two Gospels saying Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist, while Luke asserted that John was already in prison. Mark and John give little importance to the birth of Jesus, while Matthew and Luke give differing accounts. There are three separate and different versions of the 10 Commandments (Exodus 20, Exodus 34, and Deuteronomy 5). As for the question of God’s true nature, there are many substantive contradictions. Is God a loving or a vengeful God? In some sections of the Bible, vicious acts of vengeance, including the genocidal extermination of opposing tribes and nations, appear to be blessed by God. God turns on the Egyptians and transforms the Nile into blood so the Egyptians will suffer from thirst—and then sends swarms of locusts and flies to torture them, along with hail, fire and thunder from the heavens to destroy all plants and trees. To liberate the children of Israel, God orders the firstborn in every Egyptian household killed so all will know “that the Lord makes a distinction between the Egyptians and Israel” (Exodus 11:7).[2] The killing does not cease until “there was not a house where one was not dead” (Exodus 12:30). Amid the carnage God orders Moses to loot all the clothing, jewelry, gold and silver from the Egyptian homes (Exodus 12:35–36). God looks at the devastation and says, “I have made sport of the Egyptians” (Exodus 10:2). While the Exodus story fueled the hopes and dreams of oppressed Jews, and later African Americans in the bondage of slavery, it also has been used to foster religious chauvinism.

A literal reading of the Bible means reinstitution of slavery coupled with the understanding that the slavemaster has the right to beat his slave without mercy since “the slave is his money” (Exodus 21:21). Children who strike or curse a parent are to be executed (Exodus 21:15, 17). Those who pay homage to another god “shall be utterly destroyed” (Exodus 22:20). Menstruating women are to be considered unclean, and all they touch while menstruating becomes unclean (Leviticus 15:19–32). The blind, the lame, those with mutilated faces, those who are hunchbacks or dwarfs and those with itching diseases or scabs or crushed testicles cannot become priests (Leviticus 21:17–21). Blasphemers shall be executed (Leviticus 24:16). And “if the spirit of jealousy” comes upon a man, the high priest can order the jealous man’s wife to drink the “water of bitterness.” If she dies, it is proof of her guilt; if she survives, of her innocence (Numbers 5:11–31). Women, throughout the Bible, are subservient to men, often without legal rights, and men are free to sell their daughters into sexual bondage (Exodus 21:7–11).

Hatred of Jews and other non-Christians pervades the Gospel of John (3:18–20). Jews, he wrote, are children of the devil, the father of lies (John 8:39–44). Jesus calls on his followers to love their enemies and to pray for their persecutors (Matthew 5:44), a radical concept in the days of the Roman Empire. He says we must never demean or insult our enemies. But then we read of Jesus calling his enemies “a brood of vipers” (Matthew 12:34).

The Book of Revelation, a crucial text for the radical Christian Right, appears to show Christ returning to earth at the head of an avenging army. It is one of the few places in the Bible where Christ is associated with violence. This bizarre book, omitted from some of the early canons and relegated to the back of the Bible by Martin Luther, may have been a way, as scholars contend, for the early Christians to cope with Roman persecution and their dreams of final triumph and glory. The book, however, paints a picture of a bloody battle between the forces of good and evil, Christ and the Antichrist, God and Satan, and the torment and utter destruction of all who do not follow the faith. In this vision, only the faithful will be allowed to enter the gates of the New Jerusalem. All others will disappear, cast into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:14–15). The Warrior’s defeat of the armies of the nations, a vast apocalyptic vision of war, ends with birds of prey invited to “gather for the great supper of God, to eat the flesh of kings, the flesh of captains, the flesh of mighty men, the flesh of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all men, both free and slave, both small and great” (Revelation 19:17–18). It is a story of God’s ruthless, terrifying and violent power unleashed on nonbelievers:

The fourth angel poured his bowl on the sun, and it was allowed to scorch men with fire; men were scorched by the fierce heat, and they cursed the name of God, who had power over these plagues, and they did not repent and give him glory. The fifth angel poured his bowl on the throne of the beast, and its kingdom was in darkness; men gnawed their tongues in anguish and cursed the God of heaven for their pain and sores, and did not repent of their deeds. (Revelation 16:8–11)

There is enough hatred, bigotry and lust for violence in the pages of the Bible to satisfy anyone bent on justifying cruelty and violence. Religion, as H. Richard Niebuhr said, is a good thing for good people and a bad thing for bad people.[3] And the Bible has long been used in the wrong hands—such as antebellum slave owners in the American South who quoted from it to defend slavery—not to Christianize the culture, as those wielding it often claim, but to acculturate the Christian faith.

Many of the suppositions of the biblical writers, who understood little about the working of the cosmos or the human body, are so fanciful, and the accounts so wild, that even biblical literalists reject them. God is not, as many writers of the Bible believed, peering down at us through little peepholes in the sky called stars. These evangelicals and fundamentalists are, as the Reverend William Sloane Coffin wrote, not biblical literalists, as they claim, but “selective literalists,” choosing the bits and pieces of the Bible that conform to their ideology and ignoring, distorting or inventing the rest.[4] And the selective literalists cannot have it both ways. Either the Bible is literally true and all of its edicts must be obeyed, or it must be read in another way.

Mainstream Christians can also cherry-pick the Bible to create a Jesus and God who are always loving and compassionate. Such Christians often fail to acknowledge that there are hateful passages in the Bible that give sacred authority to the rage, self-aggrandizement and intolerance of the Christian Right. Church leaders must denounce the biblical passages that champion apocalyptic violence and hateful political creeds. They must do so in the light of other biblical passages that teach a compassion and tolerance, often exemplified in the life of Christ, which stands opposed to bigotry and violence. Until this happens, until the Christian churches wade into the debate, these biblical passages will be used by bigots and despots to give sacred authority to their calls to subjugate or eradicate the enemies of God. This literature in the biblical canon keeps alive the virus of hatred, whether dormant or active, and the possibility of apocalyptic terror in the name of God. And the steady refusal by churches to challenge the canonical authority of these passages means these churches share some of the blame. “Unless the churches, Protestant and Catholic alike, come together on this, they will continue to make it legitimate to believe in the end as a time when there will be no non-Christians or infidels,” theologian Richard Fenn wrote. “Silent complicity with apocalyptic rhetoric soon becomes collusion with plans for religiously inspired genocide.”[5]

As long as scripture, blessed and accepted by the church, teaches that at the end of time there will be a Day of Wrath and Christians will control the shattered remnants of a world cleansed through violence and war, as long as it teaches that all nonbelievers will be tormented, destroyed and banished to hell, it will be hard to thwart the message of radical apocalyptic preachers or assuage the fears of the Islamic world that Christians are calling for its annihilation. Those who embrace this dark conclusion to life can find it endorsed in scripture, whether it is tucked into the back pew rack of a liberal Unitarian church in Boston or a megachurch in Florida. The mainstream Protestant and Catholic churches, declining in numbers and influence, cannot hope to combat the hysteria and excitement roused by these prophets of doom until they repudiate the apocalyptic writings in scripture.

The writers of Genesis, as the Reverend William Sloane Coffin has pointed out, who wrote about the creation of the world in seven days, knew nothing about the process of creation.[6] They believed the earth was flat with water above and below it. They wrote that God created light on the first day and the sun on the fourth day. Genesis was not written to explain the process of creation, of which these writers knew nothing. It was written to help explain the purpose of creation. It was written to help us grasp a spiritual truth, not a scientific or historical fact. And this purpose, this spiritual truth, is something the writers did know about. These biblical writers, at their best, understood our divided natures. They knew our internal conflicts and battles; how we could love our brother and yet hate him; the oppressive power of parents, even the best of parents; the impulses that drive us to commit violations against others; the yearning to lead a life of meaning; our fear of mortality; our struggles to deal with our uncertainty, our loneliness, our greed, our lust, our ambition, our desires to be God, as well as our moments of nobility, compassion and courage. They knew these emotions and feelings were entangled. They understood our weaknesses and strengths. They understood how we are often not the people we want to be or know we should be, how hard it is for us to articulate all this, and how life and creation can be as glorious and beautiful as it can be mysterious, evil and cruel. This is why Genesis is worth reading, indeed why the Bible stands as one of the great ethical and moral documents of our age. The biblical writers have helped shape and define Western civilization. Not to know the Bible is, in some ways, to be illiterate, to neglect the very roots of philosophy, art, architecture, literature, poetry and music. It is to fall into a dangerous provincialism, as myopic and narrow as that embraced by those who say everything in the Bible is literally true and we do not need any other kind of intellectual or scientific inquiry. Doubt and belief are not, as biblical literalists claim, incompatible. Those who act without any doubt are frightening.

“There lives more faith in honest doubt,” the poet Alfred Tennyson noted, “believe me, than in half the creeds.”[7]

This was my faith. It is a pretty good summary of my faith today. God is inscrutable, mysterious and unknowable. We do not understand what life is about, what it means, why we are here and what will happen to us after our brief sojourn on the planet ends. We are saved, in the end, by faith—faith that life is not meaningless and random, that there is a purpose to human existence, and that in the midst of this morally neutral universe the tiny, seemingly insignificant acts of compassion and blind human kindness, especially to those labeled our enemies and strangers, sustain the divine spark, which is love. We are not fully human if we live alone. These small acts of compassion—for they can never be organized and institutionalized as can hate—have a power that lives after us. Human kindness is deeply subversive to totalitarian creeds, which seek to thwart all compassion toward those deemed unworthy of moral consideration, those branded as internal or external enemies. These acts recognize and affirm the humanity of others, others who may be condemned as agents of Satan. Those who sacrifice for others, especially at great cost, who place compassion and tolerance above ideology and creeds, and who reject absolutes, especially moral absolutes, stand as constant witnesses in our lives to this love, even long after they are gone. In the gospels this is called resurrection.

Faith presupposes that we cannot know. We can never know. Those who claim to know what life means play God. These false prophets—the Pat Robertsons, the Jerry Falwells and the James Dobsons—clutching the cross and the Bible, offer, like Mephistopheles, to lead us back to a mythical paradise and an impossible, unachievable happiness and security, at once seductive and empowering. They ask us to hand over moral choice and responsibility to them. They will tell us they know what is right and wrong in the eyes of God. They tell us how to act, how to live, and in this process they elevate themselves above us. They remove the anxiety of moral choice, the fundamental anxiety of human existence. This is part of their attraction. They give us the rules by which we live. But once we hand over this anxiety and accept their authority, we become enslaved and they become our idols. And idols, as the Bible never ceases to tell us, destroy us.

I have seen enough of the world over the past two decades—for although I graduated from seminary I was not ordained, and instead worked in Latin America, Africa, the Middle East and the Balkans as a foreign correspondent—to grasp that men and women of great moral probity and courage arise in all cultures, all nations and all religions to challenge the oppressor and fight for the oppressed. I also saw how the dominant religions of these nations were often twisted and distorted by totalitarian movements, turned into civic religions in which the goals of the movement or the state became the goals of the divine. The wars I covered were often fought in the name of one God or another. Armed groups, from Hamas in the West Bank and Gaza Strip to the Serbian nationalists in the former Yugoslavia, were fueled by apocalyptic visions that sanctified terrorism or genocide. They mocked the faiths they purported to defend.

America and the Christian religions have no monopoly on goodness or saintliness. God has not chosen Americans as a people above others. The beliefs of Christians are as flawed and imperfect as all religious beliefs. But both the best of American democracy and the best of Christianity embody important values, values such as compassion, tolerance and belief in justice and equality. America is a nation where all have a voice in how we live and how we are governed. We have never fully adhered to these values—indeed, probably never will—but our health as a country is determined by our steadfastness in striving to attain them. And there are times when taking a moral stance, perhaps the highest form of patriotism, means facing down the community, even the nation. Our loyalty to our community and our nation, Reinhold Niebuhr wrote, “is therefore morally tolerable only if it includes values wider than those of the community.”[8]

These values, democratic and Christian, are being dismantled, often with stealth, by a radical Christian movement, known as dominionism, which seeks to cloak itself in the mantle of the Christian faith and American patriotism. Dominionism takes its name from Genesis 1:26–31, in which God gives human beings “dominion” over all creation. This movement, small in number but influential, departs from traditional evangelicalism. Dominionists now control at least six national television networks, each reaching tens of millions of homes, and virtually all of the nation’s more than 2,000 religious radio stations, as well as denominations such as the Southern Baptist Convention. Dominionism seeks to redefine traditional democratic and Christian terms and concepts to fit an ideology that calls on the radical church to take political power. It shares many prominent features with classical fascist movements, at least as it is defined by the scholar Robert O. Paxton, who sees fascism as “a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cultures of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.”[9]

Dominionism, born out of a theology known as Christian reconstructionism, seeks to politicize faith. It has, like all fascist movements, a belief in magic along with leadership adoration and a strident call for moral and physical supremacy of a master race, in this case American Christians. It also has, like fascist movements, an ill-defined and shifting set of beliefs, some of which contradict one another. Paxton argues that the best way to understand authentic fascist movements, which he says exist in all societies, including democracies, is to focus not on what they say but on how they act, for, as he writes, some of the ideas that underlie fascist movements “remain unstated and implicit in fascist public language,” and “many of them belong more to the realm of visceral feelings than to the realm of reasoned propositions.”[10]

“Fascism is…a kind of colonization,” the Reverend Davidson Loehr noted. “A simple definition of ‘colonization’ is that it takes people’s stories away, and assigns them supportive roles in stories that empower others at their expense.”[11] The dominionist movement, like all totalitarian movements, seeks to appropriate not only our religious and patriotic language but also our stories, to deny the validity of stories other than their own, to deny that there are other acceptable ways of living and being. There becomes, in their rhetoric, only one way to be a Christian and only one way to be an American.

Dominionism is a theocratic sect with its roots in a radical Calvinism. It looks to the theocracy John Calvin implanted in Geneva, Switzerland, in the 1500s as its political model. It teaches that American Christians have been mandated by God to make America a Christian state. A decades-long refusal by most American fundamentalists to engage in politics at all following the 1925 Scopes trial has been replaced by a call for Christian “dominion” over the nation and eventually over the earth itself. Dominionism preaches that Jesus has called on Christians to build the kingdom of God in the here and now, whereas previously it was thought that we would have to wait for it. America becomes, in this militant biblicism, an agent of God, and all political and intellectual opponents of America’s Christian leaders are viewed, quite simply, as agents of Satan. Under Christian dominion, America will be no longer a sinful and fallen nation but one in which the 10 Commandments form the basis of our legal system, creationism and “Christian values” form the basis of our educational system, and the media and the government proclaim the Good News to one and all. Labor unions, civil-rights laws and public schools will be abolished. Women will be removed from the workforce to stay at home, and all those deemed insufficiently Christian will be denied citizenship. Aside from its proselytizing mandate, the federal government will be reduced to the protection of property rights and “homeland” security. Some dominionists (not all of whom accept the label, at least not publicly) would further require all citizens to pay “tithes” to church organizations empowered by the government to run our social-welfare agencies and all schools. The only legitimate voices in this state will be Christian. All others will be silenced.

The racist and brutal intolerance of the intellectual godfathers of today’s Christian Reconstructionism is a chilling reminder of the movement’s lust for repression. The Institutes of Biblical Law by R. J. Rushdoony, written in 1973, is the most important book for the dominionist movement. Rushdoony calls for a Christian society that is harsh, unforgiving and violent. His work draws heavily on the calls for a repressive theocratic society laid out by Calvin in Institutes of the Christian Religion, first published in 1536 and one of the most important works of the Protestant Reformation. Christians are, Rushdoony argues, the new chosen people of God and are called to do what Adam and Eve failed to do: create a godly, Christian state. The Jews, who neglected to fulfill God’s commands in the Hebrew scriptures, have, in this belief system, forfeited their place as God’s chosen people and have been replaced by Christians. The death penalty is to be imposed not only for offenses such as rape, kidnapping and murder, but also for adultery, blasphemy, homosexuality, astrology, incest, striking a parent, incorrigible juvenile delinquency, and, in the case of women, “un-chastity before marriage.” The world is to be subdued and ruled by a Christian United States. Rushdoony dismissed the widely accepted estimate of 6 million Jews murdered in the Holocaust as an inflated figure, and his theories on race often echo those found in Nazi eugenics, in which there are higher and lower forms of human beings. Those considered by the Christian state to be immoral and incapable of reform are to be exterminated.[12]

Rushdoony was deeply antagonistic toward the federal government. He believed the federal government should concern itself with little more than national defense. Education and social welfare should be handed over to the churches. Biblical law must replace the secular legal code. This ideology, made more palatable for the mainstream by later disciples such as Francis Schaeffer and Pat Robertson, remains at the heart of the movement. Many of its tenets are being enacted through the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, currently channeling billions in federal funds to groups such as National Right to Life and Pat Robertson’s Operation Blessing, as well as to innumerable Christian charities and organizations that do everything from running drug and pregnancy clinics to promoting sexual abstinence-only programs in schools.[13]

While traditional fundamentalism shares many of the darker traits of the new movement—such as a blind obedience to a male hierarchy that often claims to speak for God, intolerance toward nonbelievers, and disdain for rational, intellectual inquiry—it has never attempted to impose its belief system on the rest of the nation. And it has not tried to transform government, as well as all other secular institutions, into an extension of the church. The new radical fundamentalisms amount to a huge and disastrous mutation. Dominionists and their wealthy, right-wing sponsors speak in terms and phrases that are familiar and comforting to most Americans, but they no longer use words to mean what they meant in the past. They engage in a slow process of “logocide,” the killing of words. The old definitions of words are replaced by new ones. Code words of the old belief system are deconstructed and assigned diametrically opposed meanings. Words such as “truth,” “wisdom,” “death,” “liberty,” “life,” and “love” no longer mean what they mean in the secular world. “Life” and “death” mean life in Christ or death to Christ, and are used to signal belief or unbelief in the risen Lord. “Wisdom” has little to do with human wisdom but refers to the level of commitment and obedience to the system of belief. “Liberty” is not about freedom, but the “liberty” found when one accepts Jesus Christ and is liberated from the world to obey Him. But perhaps the most pernicious distortion comes with the word “love,” the word used to lure into the movement many who seek a warm, loving community to counter their isolation and alienation. “Love” is distorted to mean an unquestioned obedience to those who claim to speak for God in return for the promise of everlasting life. The blind, human love, the acceptance of the other, is attacked as an inferior love, dangerous and untrustworthy.[14]

“The goal must be God’s law-order in which alone is true liberty,” wrote Rushdoony in Institutes of Biblical Law:

Whenever freedom is made into the absolute, the result is not freedom but anarchism. Freedom must be under law or it is not freedom…. Only a law-order which holds to the primacy of God’slaw can bring forth true freedom, freedom for justice, truth, and godly life. Freedom as an absolute is simply an assertion of man’s “right” to be his own god; this means a radical denial of God’s law-order. “Freedom” thus is another name for the claim by man to divinity and autonomy. It means that man becomes his own absolute. The word “freedom” is thus a pretext used by humanists of every variety…to disguise man’s claim to be his own absolute…. If men have unrestricted free speech and free press, then there is no freedom for truth, in that no standard is permitted whereby the promulgation or publication of a lie can be judged and punished.[15]

As the process gains momentum—with some justices on the Supreme Court such as Antonin Scalia steeped in this ideology—America starts to speak a new language. There is a slow and inexorable hijacking of religious and political terminology. Terms such as “liberty” and “freedom” no longer mean what they meant in the past. Those in the movement speak of “liberty,” but they do not speak about the traditional concepts of American liberty—the liberty to express divergent opinions, to respect other ways of believing and being, the liberty of individuals to seek and pursue their own goals and forms of happiness. When used by the Christian Right, the term “liberty” means the liberty that comes with accepting a very narrowly conceived Christ and the binary worldview that acceptance promotes.

America’s Providential History, by Mark A. Beliles and Stephen K. McDowell, published in 1989, is the standard textbook on American history used in many Christian schools. It is also a staple of the home-schooling movement. In this book, authors Beliles and McDowell define the term “liberty” as fealty to “the Spirit of the Lord.” The work of “liberty” is an ongoing process, one mounted by Christians, to free a society from the slavery imposed by “secular humanists.” This process frees, or eradicates, different moral codes and belief systems, to introduce a single, uniform and unquestioned “Christian” orientation. Liberty, in a linguistic twist worthy of George Orwell, means theocratic tyranny:

The Bible reveals that “where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty” (2 Corinthians 3:17)…. When the Spirit of the Lord comes into a nation, that nation is liberated. The degree to which the Spirit of the Lord is infused into a society (through its people, laws and institutions) is the degree to which that society will experience liberty in every realm (civil, religious, economic, etc.).[16]

The Global Recordings Network, a missionary group striving to bring “the Name of Jesus” to “every tribe and tongue and nation,”[17] gives close attention to the meaning of “liberty” in their teachings. A tape of a missionary lesson plays: “I want to make you understand this word ‘liberty.’ It is written in God’s book: ‘Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.’ Some say there is not enough liberty in this land, but if that is true, it is because there is not enough of the Spirit of the Lord. What do you think yourselves? Do people do as God commands them? Do they love each other? Do they help each other? Do they speak the truth? Do they flee from fornication and adultery? You know there are those who steal, who lie, who kill, and who worship things that are not God. These things are not of the Spirit of God, but of the spirit of Satan. Then how can there be true liberty?”[18]

The “infusion” of “the Spirit of the Lord” into society includes its infusion into society’s legal system. Liberty is defined as the extent to which America obeys Christian law. When America is a Christian nation, liberty becomes, in this view, liberation from Satan. This slow, gradual and often imperceptible strangulation of thought—the corruption of democratic concepts and ideas—infects the society until the new, totalitarian vision is articulated by the old vocabulary. This cannibalization of language occurs subtly and stealthily. The ghoulish process leaves those leading the movement mouthing platitudes little different from the bromides spoken by those who sincerely champion the open, democratic state.

These tactics, familiar and effective, have often been used by movements that assault democracies. This seemingly innocent hijacking of language mollifies opponents, the mainstream and supporters within the movement who fail to grasp the radical agenda. It gives believers a sense of continuity and tradition. Radical logocides paint themselves as the defenders of an idealized and more virtuous past. Most revolutionary movements, from those in Latin America to those shaped by Islamic militancy in the Middle East, root their radical ideas in what they claim are older, purer traditions.

While the radical Christian movement’s leaders pay lip service to traditional justice, they call among their own for a legal system that promotes what they define as “Christian principles.” The movement thus is able to preserve the appearance of law and respect for democracy even as its leaders condemn all opponents—dismissed as “atheists,” “nonbelievers” or “secular humanists”—to moral and legal oblivion. Justice, under this process of logocide, is perverted to carry out injustice and becomes a mirage of law and order. The moral calculus no longer revolves around the concept of universal human rights; now its center is the well-being, protection and promotion of “Bible-believing Christians.” Logocide slowly and stealthily removes whole segments of society from the moral map. As Joseph Goebbels wrote: “The best propaganda is that which, as it were, works invisibly, penetrates the whole of life without the public having any knowledge of the propagandistic initiative.”[19]

Victor Klemperer, who was dismissed from his post as a professor of Romance languages at the University of Dresden in 1935 because of his Jewish ancestry, wrote what may have been the first literary critique of National Socialism. He noted that the Nazis also “changed the values, the frequency of words, [and] made them into common property, words that had previously been used by individuals or tiny troupes. They confiscated words for the party, saturated words and phrases and sentence forms with their poison. They made language serve their terrible system. They conquered words and made them into their strongest advertising tools [Werebemittel], at once the most public and the most secret.”[20]

And while all this took place, he points out, most Germans never noticed.

“The language and symbols of an authentic American fascism would, of course, have little to do with the original European models,” Robert O. Paxton wrote in Anatomy of Fascism:

They would have to be as familiar and reassuring to loyal Americans as the language and symbols of the original fascisms were familiar and reassuring to many Italians and Germans, as Orwell suggested. Hitler and Mussolini, after all, had not tried to seem exotic to their fellow citizens. No swastikas in an American fascism, but Stars and Stripes (or Stars and Bars) and Christian crosses. No fascist salute, but mass recitations of the Pledge of Allegiance. These symbols contain no whiff of fascism in themselves, of course, but an American fascism would transform them into obligatory litmus tests for detecting the internal enemy.[21]

There are at least 70 million evangelicals in the United States—about 25 percent of the population—attending more than 200,000 evangelical churches. Polls indicate that about 40 percent of respondents believe in the Bible as the “actual word of God” and that it is “to be taken literally, word for word.” Applied to the country’s total population, this proportion would place the number of believers at about 100 million. These polls also suggest that about 84 percent of Americans accept that Jesus is the son of God; 80 percent of respondents say that they believe they will stand before God on the Day of Judgment. The same percentage of respondents say God works miracles, and half say they think angels exist. Almost a third of all respondents say they believe in the Rapture.[22]

American fundamentalists and evangelicals, however, are sharply divided between strict fundamentalists—those who refuse to grant legitimacy to alternative views of the Christian tradition—and the many evangelicals who concede that there are other legitimate ways to worship and serve Christ. Evangelicals, while they often embrace fundamentalist doctrine, do not always share the intolerance of the radical fundamentalists. While a majority of Christian Americans embrace a literal interpretation of the Bible, only a tiny minority—among them the Christian dominionists—are comfortable with this darker vision of an intolerant, theocratic America. Unfortunately, it is this minority that is taking over the machinery of U.S. state and religious institutions.

In a 2004 study, the political scientist John Green identifies those he calls “traditional evangelicals.” This group, which Green estimates at 12.6 percent of the population, comes “closest to the ‘religious right’ widely discussed in the media.” It is overwhelmingly Republican; it is openly hostile to democratic pluralism, and it champions totalitarian policies, such as denying homosexuals the same rights as other Americans and amending the Constitution to make America a “Christian nation.” Green’s “traditional evangelicals” can probably be called true dominionists. There are signs that this militant core may be smaller than even Green suggests, dipping to around 7 percent of the population in other polls, such as those conducted by George Barna.[23] But the potency of this radical movement far exceeds its numbers. Radical social movements, as Crane Brinton wrote in The Anatomy of Revolution, are almost always tiny, although they use the tools of modern propaganda to create the illusion of a mass following. As Brinton noted, “the impressive demonstrations the camera has recorded in Germany, Italy, Russia and China ought not to deceive the careful student of politics. Neither Communist, Nazi, nor Fascist victory over the moderates was achieved by the participation of the many; all were achieved by small, disciplined, principled, fanatical bodies.”[24] These radicals, Brinton went on, “combine, in varying degrees, very high ideals and a complete contempt for the inhibitions and principles which serve most other men as ideals.” They are, he said, “practical men unfettered by common sense, Machiavellians in the service of the Beautiful and the Good.”[25] And once they are in power, “there is no more finicky regard for the liberties of the individual or for the forms of legality. The extremists, after clamoring for liberty and toleration while they were in opposition, turn very authoritarian when they reach power.”[26]

Traditional evangelicals, those who come out of Billy Graham’s mold, are not necessarily comfortable with the direction taken by the dominionists. And the multitude of churches, denominations and groups that do lend their support in varying degrees to this new movement are diverse and often antagonistic. While right-wing Catholics have joined forces with the movement, many of the movement’s Protestant leaders, including D. James Kennedy, disdainfully label the Catholic Church a “cult.”[27] These variances are held in check by the shared drive for political control, but the disputes simmer beneath the surface, threatening to tear apart the fragile coalitions. And those few evangelicals who challenge the dominionist drive for power are ruthlessly thrust aside, as the purges of the old guard within the Southern Baptist Convention three decades ago illustrate.

It is difficult to write in broad sweeps about this mass movement and detail these conflicts, since there are innumerable differences not only among groups but among believers. In the megachurches, there are worshippers and preachers who focus exclusively on the gospel of prosperity—centered on the belief that God wants Christians to be rich and successful—and who have little interest in politics. There are strict fundamentalists who view charismatics—those who speak in tongues—as Satan worshippers. There are small clusters of left-wing evangelicals, such as Jim Wallis’s Sojourner movement and Ron Sider’s Evangelicals for Social Action, who believe the Bible to be the literal word of God but embrace social activism and left-wing politics. There are evangelicals who focus more on what they can do in their communities as Christians than on what God’s army can do to change the course of American history. And there are old-style evangelists, such as Luis Palau, who still tell Christians to keep their hands clean of politics, get right with Jesus and focus on spiritual and moral renewal.

But within this mass of divergent, fractious and varied groups is this core group of powerful Christian dominionists who have latched on to the despair, isolation, disconnectedness and fear that drives many people into these churches. Christian dominionist leaders have harnessed these discontents to further a frightening political agenda. If they do not have the active support of all in the evangelical churches, they often have their sympathy. They can count on the passive support of huge numbers of Christians, even if many of these Christians may not fully share dominionism’s fierce utopian vision, fanaticism or ruthlessness. The appeal of the movement lies in the high ideals its radicals preach, the promise of a moral, Christian nation, the promise of a renewal. Its darker aims—seen in calls for widespread repression of nonbelievers; frequent use of the death penalty; illegalization of abortion, even in case of rape and incest; and the dismantling of public education—will, if achieved, alienate many who support them. But this combination of a disciplined, well-financed radical core and tens of millions of Americans who, discontent and anxious, yearn for a vague, revitalized “Christian nation,” is a potent new force in American politics. Dominionists wait only for a fiscal, social or political crisis, a moment of upheaval in the form of an economic meltdown or another terrorist strike on American soil, to move to reconfigure the political system. Such a crisis could unleash a public clamor for drastic new national security measures and draconian reforms to safeguard the nation. Widespread discontent and fear, stoked and manipulated by dominionists and their sympathizers, could be used by these radicals to sweep aside the objections of beleaguered moderates in Congress and the courts, those clinging to a bankrupt and discredited liberalism, to establish an American theocracy, a Christian fascism.

The movement has sanctified a ruthless unfettered capitalism. In an essay in Harper’s magazine titled “The Spirit of Disobedience: An Invitation to Resistance,” Curtis White argued that “it is capitalism that now most defines our national character, not Christianity or the Enlightenment.” Although the values of capitalism are antithetical to Christ’s vision and the Enlightenment ethic of Kant, the gospel of prosperity—which preaches that Jesus wants us all to be rich and powerful and the government to get out of the way—has formulated a belief system that delights corporate America. Corporations such as Tyson Foods—which has placed 128 part-time chaplains, nearly all evangelicals or fundamentalists, in 78 plants across the country—along with Purdue, Wal-Mart, and Sam’s Wholesale, to name a few, are huge financial backers of the movement.

White concludes that “ours is a culture in which death has taken refuge in a legality that is supported by both reasonable liberals and Christian conservatives.” This “legality” makes the systematic exploitation of human workers—paying less than living wages, while failing to provide adequate health care and retirement plans—simply a “part of our heritage of freedom.” White goes on to excoriate our nationalist triumphalism and our unleashing of “the most fantastically destructive military power” the world has ever known in the course of “protecting and pursuing freedom.” Among the resultant diseases of culture, he lists the “grotesque violence of video games and Hollywood movies,” the “legality of abortions [which] at times covers over an attitude toward human life that subjects life to the low logic of efficiency and convenience,” meaningless work, mindless consumerism, a distorted sense of time, housing developments where houses are “coffins” and neighborhoods are “shared cemeteries” and, “perhaps most destructively, the legality of property rights [which] condemns nature itself to annihilation even as we call it the freedom to pursue personal property.”[28]

The power brokers in the radical Christian Right have already moved from the fringes of society to the executive branch, the House of Representatives, the Senate and the courts. The movement has seized control of the Republican Party. Christian fundamentalists now hold a majority of seats in 36 percent of all Republican Party state committees, or 18 of 50 states, along with large minorities in the remaining states. Forty-five senators and 186 members of the House of Representatives earned approval ratings of 80 to 100 percent from the three most influential Christian Right advocacy groups: the Christian Coalition, Eagle Forum, and Family Resource Council.[29] Tom Coburn, elected in 2004 as senator from Oklahoma, called for a ban on abortion in his campaign, going so far as to call for the death penalty for doctors who carry out abortions once the ban went into place. Senator John Thune is a creationist. Jim DeMint, senator from South Carolina, wants to ban single mothers from teaching in schools.[30] The 2004 Election Day exit polls found that 23 percent of voters identified themselves as evangelical Christians; Bush won 78 percent of their vote. A plurality of voters said that the most important issue in the campaign had been “moral values.”[31]

The Bush administration has steadily diverted billions of dollars of taxpayer money from secular and governmental social-service organizations to faith-based organizations, bankrolling churches and organizations that seek to dismantle American democracy and create a theocratic state.[32] The role of education and social-welfare agencies is being supplanted by these churches, nearly all of them evangelical, and the wall between church and state is being disassembled. These groups can and usually do discriminate by refusing to hire gays and lesbians, people of other faiths and those who do not embrace their strict version of Christianity. Christian clinics that treat addictions or do pregnancy counseling (usually with the aim of preventing abortion) do not have to hire trained counselors or therapists. The only requirement of a new hire is usually that he or she be a “Bible-believing Christian.” In fiscal year 2003, faith-based organizations received 8.1 percent of the competitive social-service grant budget.[33] In fiscal year 2004, faith-based organizations received $2.005 billion in funding—10.3 percent of federal competitive service grants.[34], [35] The federal government awarded more than $2.15 billion in competitive social-service grants to faith-based organizations in fiscal year 2005, 11 percent of all federal competitive service grants.[36] Faith-based organizations are consistently winning a larger portion of federal social-service funding, a trend that has tremendous social and political consequences if it continues. The Bush administration has spent more than $1 billion on chastity programs alone. Thirty percent of American schools with sex-education programs teach abstinence only. Not only is there little accountability, not only are these organizations allowed to practice discriminatory hiring practices, but also, as research shows, while abstinence-only programs can sometimes get teenagers to delay sex, they also leave young men and women unprepared for sexual relations, resulting in higher rates of teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.

It is perhaps telling that our closest allies in the United Nations on issues dealing with reproductive rights, one of the few issues where we cooperate with other nations, are Islamic states such as Iran. But then the Christian Right and radical Islamists, although locked in a holy war, increasingly mirror each other. They share the same obsessions. They do not tolerate other forms of belief or disbelief. They are at war with artistic and cultural expression. They seek to silence the media. They call for the subjugation of women. They promote severe sexual repression, and they seek to express themselves through violence.

Members of the Christian Right who have been elected to powerful political offices have worked in several instances to exclude opponents and manipulate vote counts. The current Republican candidate for governor of Ohio, Kenneth Blackwell, a stalwart of the Christian Right, was the secretary of state for Ohio as well as the co-chair of the state’s Committee to Re-Elect George Bush during the last presidential election. Blackwell, as secretary of state, oversaw the administering of the 2004 presidential elections in Ohio. He handled all complaints of irregularities. He attempted to get the state to hand over all election polling to Diebold Election Systems, a subsidiary of Diebold Incorporated, a firm that makes electronic voting machines and has close ties with the Bush administration. By the time of the elections he had managed to ensure that Diebold ran the machines in 35 counties. In an August 14, 2003, fund-raising letter, Walden O’Dell, CEO of Diebold, told Republicans that he was “committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year.”[37] O’Dell and other Diebold executives and board members are supporters of and donors to the Republican Party.[38]

Blackwell, an African American, oversaw a voting system in which African Americans, who vote primarily Democratic in national elections, found polling stations in their districts, especially in heavily Democratic areas such as Cleveland, grossly under-staffed. There were in these polling stations long lines with delays that sometimes lasted as long as 10 hours, sending many potential voters home in frustration. Aggressive poll monitors questioned and often disqualified new voters because of what the monitors claimed was improper registration. Blackwell banned photographers and reporters from polling places, making irregularities and harassment harder to document. The Diebold machines recorded record high turnouts—124 percent in one of the precincts—where Bush won overwhelming victories and low voter turnout in districts that went for Democratic Senator John Kerry.[39] Kerry campaign workers reported numerous irregularities, including the discovery of a machine that diverted votes from Kerry to Bush. Ray Beckerman, part of the Kerry campaign, said that he found that touch-screen voting machines in Youngstown were registering “George W. Bush” when people pressed “John F. Kerry” during the entire day. Although he reported the glitch shortly after the polls opened, it was not fixed. All reports of irregularities, including complaints about precincts where votes were counted without the presence of election monitors, passed through Blackwell’s office.[40] Nothing was ever done. Indeed, Blackwell went on after the elections to issue to county boards of elections a demand that voter registration forms be printed on “white, uncoated paper of not less than 80-pound text weight,” a heavy card-like stock. This allowed his office to disqualify registrations because the paper was not thick enough.[41] The ruling has, his critics say, jeopardized the right of tens of thousands of would-be voters to participate in the next elections. As the Christian Right gains control of state offices throughout the country, it is being tarred by opponents with similar accusations.

Followers in the movement are locked within closed systems of information and indoctrination that cater to their hates and prejudices. Tens of millions of Americans rely exclusively on Christian broadcasters for their news, health, entertainment and devotional programs. These followers have been organized into disciplined and powerful voting blocs. They attend churches that during election time are little more than local headquarters for the Republican Party and during the rest of the year demand nearly all of their social, religious and recreational time. These believers are encased in a hermetic world. There is no questioning or dissent. There are anywhere from 1.1 million to 2.1 million children, nearly all evangelicals, now being home-schooled.[42] These children are not challenged with ideas or research that conflict with their biblical worldview. Evolution is not taught. God created the world in six days. America, they are told, was founded as a Christian nation and secular humanists are working to destroy the Christian nation. These young men and women are often funneled into Christian colleges and universities, such as Jerry Falwell’s Liberty University, Pat Robertson’s Regent University, and a host of other schools such as Patrick Henry University. They are taught, in short, to obey. They are discouraged from critical analysis, questioning and independent thought. And they believe, by the time they are done, a host of myths designed to destroy the open, pluralist society.

Most of America’s fundamentalist and evangelical churches are led by pastors who embrace this non-reality-based belief system, one that embraces magic, the fiction of a “Christian nation” in need of revitalization, and dark, terrifying apocalyptic visions. They preach about the coming world war, drawing their visions from the Book of Daniel and the Book of Revelation. They preach that at the end of history Christians will dominate the earth and that all nonbelievers, including those who are not sufficiently Christian, will be cast into torment and outer darkness. They call for the destruction of whole cultures, nations and religions, those they have defined as the enemies of God.

As American history and the fundamentalist movement itself have changed, so have the objects of fundamentalist hatred. Believers were told a few decades ago that communists were behind the civil-rights movement, the antiwar movement and liberal groups such as the ACLU. They were racist and intolerant of African Americans, Jews and Catholics. Now the battle against communism has been reconfigured. The seat of Satan is no longer in the Kremlin. It has been assumed by individuals and institutions promoting a rival religion called “secular humanism.” The obsession with the evils of secular humanism would be laughable if it were not such an effective scare tactic. The only organized movement of secular humanists who call themselves by that name is the American Humanist Association (AHA), which has about 3,000 members and whose credo was published in the 1933 Humanist Manifesto I and the 1973 Humanist Manifesto II. Its Humanist Magazine has a minuscule circulation. In terms of influence, as Barbara Parker and Christy Macy wrote, “these humanists rank with militant vegetarians and agrarian anarchists, and were about as well known—until the Religious Right set out to make them famous.”[43] But it is not important who is fingered as Satan’s agent, as long as the wild conspiracy theories and paranoia are stoked by an array of duplicitous, phantom enemies that lurk behind the scenes of public school boards or the media. As the movement reaches out to the African American churches and right-wing Catholics, it has exchanged old hatreds for new ones, preferring now to demonize gays, liberals, immigrants, Muslims and others as forces beholden to the Antichrist while painting themselves as the heirs of the civil-rights movement. The movement is fueled by the fear of powerful external and internal enemies whose duplicity and cunning is constantly at work. These phantom enemies serve to keep believers afraid and in a heightened state of alert, ready to support repressive measures against all who do not embrace the movement. But this tactic has required the airbrushing out of past racist creeds—an effort that, sometime after 1970, saw Jerry Falwell recall all copies of his earlier sermons warning against integration and the evils of the black race. The only sermon left in print from the 1960s is called “Ministers and Marchers.” In the sermon Falwell angrily denounces preachers who engage in politics, specifically those who support the civil-rights movement. The effort to erase the past, to distort truth and reinvent himself as a past supporter of civil rights, is a frightening example of how, if a lie is broadcast long enough and loud enough, it becomes true. Distortions and lies permeate the movement, which fends off criticism by encasing its followers in closed information systems and wrapping itself in Christian vestments and the American flag.

The movement is marked not only by its obsessions with conspiracy theories, magic, sexual repression, paranoia and death, but also by its infatuation with apocalyptic violence and military force. On its outer fringes are collections of odd messianic warriors, those ready to fight and die for Christ. These include American Veterans in Domestic Defense, a Texas group that transported former Alabama Supreme Court justice Roy Moore’s 2.6-ton 10 Commandment monument by truck around the country. Moore, who graduated from the U.S. military academy at West Point, lost his job as chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court after he defied a judge’s order to remove his monument from the Montgomery judicial building. He and his monument instantly became celebrities for those preaching that Christians were under siege, that there was an organized effort to persecute all who upheld God’s law. These carefully cultivated feelings of persecution foster a permanent state of crisis, a deep paranoia and fear, and they make it easier to call for violence—always, of course, as a form of self-defense. It turns all outside the movement into enemies: even those who appear benign, the believer is warned, seek to destroy Christians. There are an array of obscure, shadowy paramilitary groups, such as Christian Identity, the members of which, emboldened by the rhetoric of the movement, believe they will one day fight a religious war. Military leaders who stoke this belief in a holy war are lionized. After leading American troops into battle against a Somalian warlord, General William Boykin announced: “I knew my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his God was an idol.” General Boykin belongs to a small group called the Faith Force Multiplier, whose members apply military principles to evangelism in a manifesto summoning warriors “to the spiritual warfare for souls.” Boykin, rather than being reprimanded for his inflammatory rhetoric, was promoted to the position of deputy undersecretary of defense for intelligence. He believes America is engaged in a holy war as a “Christian nation” battling Satan and that America’s Muslim adversaries will be defeated “only if we come against them in the name of Jesus.”[44]

These visions of a holy war at once terrify and delight followers. Such visions peddle a bizarre spiritual Darwinism. True Christians will rise to heaven and be saved, and all lesser faiths and nonbelievers will be viciously destroyed by an angry God in an orgy of horrific, apocalyptic violence. The yearning for this final battle runs through the movement like an electric current. Christian Right firebrands employ the language of war, speak in the metaphors of battle, and paint graphic and chilling scenes of the violence and mayhem that will envelop the earth. War is the final aesthetic of the movement.

“Now, this revolution is not for the temperate,” the Ohio pastor Rod Parsley shouted out to a crowd when I heard him speak in Washington in March of 2006. “This revolution—that’s what it is—is not for the timid and the weak, but for the brave and strong, who step over the line out of their comfort zone and truly decide to become disciples of Christ. I’m talking about red-blooded men and women who don’t have to be right, recognized, rewarded or regarded…. So my admonishment to you this morning is this. Sound the alarm. A spiritual invasion is taking place. The secular media never likes it when I say this, so let me say it twice,” he says to laughter. “Man your battle stations! Ready your weapons! They say this rhetoric is so inciting. I came to incite a riot. I came to effect a divine disturbance in the heart and soul of the church. Man your battle stations. Ready your weapons. Lock and load!”

BattleCry, a Christian fundamentalist youth movement that has attracted as many as 25,000 people to Christian rock concerts in San Francisco, Philadelphia and Detroit, uses elaborate light shows, Hummers, ranks of Navy SEALs and the imagery and rhetoric of battle to pound home its message. Ron Luce, who runs it, exhorts the young Christians to defeat the secular forces around them. “This is war,” he has said. “And Jesus invites us to get into the action, telling us that the violent—the ‘forceful’ ones—will lay hold of the kingdom.” The rock band Delirious, which played in the Philadelphia gathering, pounded out a song with the words: “We’re an army of God and we’re ready to die…. Let’s paint this big ol’ town red…. We see nothing but the blood of Jesus….” The lyrics were projected on large screens so some 17,000 participants could sing along. The crowd in the Wachovia sports stadium shouted in unison: “We are warriors!”[45]

The use of elaborate spectacle to channel and shape the passions of mass followers is a staple of totalitarian movements. It gives to young adherents the raw material for their interior lives, for love and hate, joy and sorrow, excitement and belonging. It imparts the illusion of personal empowerment. It creates comradeship and solidarity, possible only as long as those within the movement do not defy the collective emotions of the crowd and willingly devote themselves to the communal objective, in this case creating a Christian America and defeating those who stand in the way. It gives meaning and purpose to life, turning a mundane existence into an epic battle against forces of darkness, forces out to crush all that is good and pure in America. And it is very hard for the voices of moderation to compete, for these spectacles work to shut down individual conscience and reflection. They give to adherents a permissiveness, a rhetorical license to engage in acts of violence that are normally taboo in a democratic society. It becomes permissible to hate. The crowds are wrapped in the seductive language of violence, which soon enough leads to acts of real violence.

Apocalyptic visions inspire genocidal killers who glorify violence as the mechanism that will lead to the end of history. Such visions nourished the butchers who led the Inquisition and the Crusades, as well as the conquistadores who swept through the Americas hastily converting en masse native populations and then exterminating them. The Puritans, who hoped to create a theocratic state, believed that Satan ruled the wilderness surrounding their settlements. They believed that God had called them to cast Satan out of this wilderness to create a promised land. That divine command sanctioned the removal or slaughter of Native Americans. This hubris fed the deadly doctrine of Manifest Destiny. Similar apocalyptic visions of a world cleansed through violence and extermination nourished the Nazis, the Stalinists who consigned tens of thousands of Ukrainians to starvation and death, the torturers in the clandestine prisons in Argentina during the Dirty War, and the Serbian thugs with heavy machine guns and wraparound sunglasses who stood over the bodies of Muslims they had slain in the smoking ruins of Bosnian villages.

The ecstatic belief in the cleansing power of apocalyptic violence does not recognize the right of the victims to self-preservation or self-defense. It does not admit them into a moral universe where they have a criminal’s right to be punished and rehabilitated. They are seen instead through this poisonous lens as pollutants, viruses, mutations that must be eradicated to halt further infection and degeneration within society and usher in utopia. This sacred violence—whether it arises from the Bible, Serbian nationalism, the dream of a classless society, or the goal of a world where all “subhumans” are eradicated—allows its perpetrators and henchmen to avoid moral responsibility for their crimes. The brutality they carry out is sanctified, an expression of not human volition but divine wrath. The victims, in a final irony, are considered responsible for their suffering and destruction. They are to blame because, in the eyes of the dominionists, they have defied God.

Those who promise to cleanse the world through sacred violence, to relieve anxiety over moral pollution by building mounds of corpses, always appeal to our noblest sentiments, our highest virtues, our capacity for self-sacrifice and our utopian visions of a purified life. It is this coupling of fantastic hope and profound despair—dreams of peace and light and reigns of terror, self-sacrifice and mass murder—that frees the consciences of those who call for and carry out the eradication of fellow human beings in the name of God.

Societies that embrace apocalyptic visions and seek through sacred violence to implement them commit collective suicide. When Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, as they do, sanction preemptive nuclear strikes against those they condemn as the enemies of God, they fuel the passions of terrorists driven by the same vision of a world cleansed and purified through apocalyptic violence. They lead us closer and closer toward our own annihilation, in the delusion that once the dogs of war, even nuclear war, are unleashed, God will protect Christians; that hundreds of millions will die, but because Christians have been blessed they alone will rise in triumph from the ash heap. Those who seek to do us harm will soon have in their hands cruder versions of the apocalyptic weapons we possess: dirty bombs and chemical or biological agents. Those who fervently wish for, indeed, seek to hasten the apocalypse and the end of time, who believe they will be lifted up into the sky by a returning Jesus, force us all to kneel before the god of death.

If this mass movement succeeds, it will do so not simply because of its ruthlessness and mendacity, its callous manipulation of the people it lures into its arms, many of whom live on the margins of American society. It will succeed because of the moral failure of those, including Christians, who understand the intent of the radicals yet fail to confront them, those who treat this mass movement as if it were another legitimate player in an open society. The leading American institutions tasked with defending tolerance and liberty—from the mainstream churches to the great research universities, to the Democratic Party and the media—have failed the country. This is the awful paradox of tolerance. There arise moments when those who would destroy the tolerance that makes an open society possible should no longer be tolerated. They must be held accountable by institutions that maintain the free exchange of ideas and liberty. The radical Christian Right must be forced to include other points of view to counter their hate talk in their own broadcasts, watched by tens of millions of Americans. They must be denied the right to demonize whole segments of American society, saying they are manipulated by Satan and worthy only of conversion or eradication. They must be made to treat their opponents with respect and acknowledge the right of a fair hearing even as they exercise their own freedom to disagree with their opponents. Passivity in the face of the rise of the Christian Right threatens the democratic state. And the movement has targeted the last remaining obstacles to its systems of indoctrination, mounting a fierce campaign to defeat hate-crime legislation, fearing the courts could apply it to them as they spew hate talk over the radio, television and Internet. Despotic movements harness the power of modern communications to keep their followers locked in closed systems. If this long, steady poisoning of civil discourse within these closed information systems is not challenged, if this movement continues to teach neighbor to hate neighbor, if its followers remain convinced that cataclysmic violence offers a solution to their own ills and the ills of the world, civil society in America will collapse.

“Hope has two beautiful daughters,” Augustine wrote. “Their names are anger and courage; anger at the way things are, and courage to see that they do not remain the way they are.”[46]

Anger, when directed against movements that would abuse the weak, preach bigotry and injustice, trample the poor, crush dissent and impose a religious tyranny, is a blessing. Read the biblical prophets in First and Second Isaiah, Jeremiah, Micah and Amos. Liberal institutions, seeing tolerance as the highest virtue, tolerate the intolerant. They swallow the hate talk that calls for the destruction of nonbelievers. Mainstream believers have often come to the comfortable conclusion that any form of announced religiosity is acceptable, that heretics do not exist.

The mainstream churches stumble along, congregations often mumbling creeds they no longer believe, trying to peddle a fuzzy, feel-good theology that can distort and ignore the darker visions in the Bible as egregiously as the Christian Right does. The Christian Right understands the ills of American society even as it exploits these ills to plunge us into tyranny. Its leaders grasp the endemic hollowness, timidity and hypocrisy of the liberal churches. The Christian Right attacks “cultural relativism,” the creed that there is no absolute good and that all value systems have equal merit—even as it benefits, in a final irony, from the passivity of people who tolerate it in the name of cultural relativism.

The most potent opposition to the movement may come from within the evangelical tradition. The radical fundamentalist movement must fear these Christians, who have remained loyal to the core values of the Gospel, who delineate between right and wrong, who are willing to be vilified and attacked in the name of a higher good and who have the courage to fight back. Most liberals, the movement has figured out, will stand complacently to be sheared like sheep, attempting to open dialogues and reaching out to those who spit venom in their faces.

Radical Christian dominionists have no religious legitimacy. They are manipulating Christianity, and millions of sincere believers, to build a frightening political mass movement with many similarities with other mass movements, from fascism to communism to the ethnic nationalist parties in the former Yugoslavia. It shares with these movements an inability to cope with ambiguity, doubt and uncertainty. It creates its own “truth.” It embraces a world of miracles and signs and removes followers from a rational, reality-based world. It condemns self-criticism and debate as apostasy. It places a premium on action and finds its final aesthetic in war and apocalyptic violence.

The pain, the dislocation, alienation, suffering and despair that led millions of Americans into the movement are real. Many Americans are striking back at a culture they blame for the debacle of their lives. The democratic traditions and the values of the Enlightenment, they believe, have betrayed them. They speak of numbness, an inability to feel pain or joy or love, a vast emptiness, a frightening loneliness and loss of control. The rational, liberal world of personal freedoms and choice lured many of these people into one snake pit after another. And liberal democratic society, for most, stood by passively as their communities, families and lives splintered and self-destructed.

These believers have abandoned, in this despair, their trust and belief in the world of science, law and rationality. They eschew personal choice and freedom. They have replaced the world that has failed them with a new, glorious world filled with prophets and mystical signs. They believe in a creator who performs miracles for them, speaks directly to them and guides their lives, as well as the destiny of America. They are utopians who have found rigid, clearly defined moral edicts, rights and wrongs, to guide them in life and in politics. And they are terrified of losing this new, mystical world of signs, wonders and moral certitude, of returning to the old world of despair. They see criticism of their belief system, whether from scientists or judges, as vicious attempts by Satan to lure them back into the morass. The split in America, rather than simply economic, is between those who embrace reason, who function in the real world of cause and effect, and those who, numbed by isolation and despair, now seek meaning in a mythical world of intuition, a world that is no longer reality-based, a world of magic.

Those in the movement now fight, fueled by the rage of the dispossessed, to crush and silence the reality-based world. The dominionist movement is the response of people trapped in a deformed, fragmented and disoriented culture that has become callous and unforgiving, a culture that has too often failed to provide the belonging, care and purpose that make life bearable, a culture that, as many in the movement like to say, has become “a culture of death.” The new utopians are not always wrong in their critique of American society. But what they have set out to create is far, far worse than what we endure. What is happening in America is revolutionary. A group of religious utopians, with the sympathy and support of tens of millions of Americans, are slowly dismantling democratic institutions to establish a religious tyranny, the springboard to an American fascism.

7 notes · View notes

planerot · 1 year ago

Text

Age is confusing in the World Of Cars universe and I wanna rant a bit.

I'm currently in the very, very early pre-planning and research phase for a Planes fic idea I want to write, and I decided to try and do some calculation for character ages. Not really plot relevant, but a good frame of reference to have none the less.

I decided to try and figure out Cabbie's age first, since he's presumably the oldest.

I always thought the idea that he was apart of the Korean war (and by extension Vietnam war) was just very popular fanon, but no! It's actually mentioned in the Meet the Planes book.

The Korean war took place from 1950 to 1953, meaning that, during 2014, the time the movie was set in/released, he could be around 64-61 years old assuming he was made (born? manufactured?) explicitly for the war.

This causes problems for me! In the canon cars universe, if I'm not forgetting anything, it is unknown whether or not characters are just...brought into this world as adults or if they have a childhood like real people. It also could be very possible that cars characters live longer then humans on account of them being vehicles.

Even then, I want to make this fic a human AU, meaning I have to slap on an extra 18 years to make it actually possible for a human Cabbie to join the military.

This means he'd be about 82-79 years old.

I'm all for having old characters in my fic, but Cabbie is also an aerial firefighter and I don't know if they'd let someone that old still work.

I'm just stuck between a rock and a hard place, haha. Do I keep the fact he was in the Korean war, the one piece of real backstory we have for him, and just kind of wave away the age issue? Do I retcon the Korean war stuff and make him be much younger, thus making it more plausible he's still apart of the team, but removing a large part of his character both canon (which, to be fair, isn't a lot) and fanon wise? I honestly don't know what's the best option tbh

EIther way, Cabbie is a really cool characters based off a cool, old plane model and thus causes me MANY issues because of that old plane model.

#cabbie mchale #planes fandom #disney planes #planes fire and rescue

15 notes · View notes

dreaminginthedeepsouth · 4 months ago

Text

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

August 21, 2024

Heather Cox Richardson

Aug 22, 2024

In 1974, music writer Jon Landau saw a relatively unknown musician in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and wrote for an alternative paper: "Last Thursday, at the Harvard Square theater, I saw rock'n'roll past flash before my eyes. And I saw something else: I saw rock and roll future and its name is Bruce Springsteen. And on a night when I needed to feel young, he made me feel like I was hearing music for the very first time." The review helped to catapult Springsteen to stardom.

After three days at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, Illinois, I feel like I have seen the political future and its name is the Democratic Party. But rather than feeling like I’m hearing politics for the first time, I am hearing the echo of political themes embraced in the best moments of America’s past.

The theme of the third day of the Democratic National Convention, held in the United Center in Chicago, Illinois, was “A Fight for Our Freedoms.” But the speeches were less about fighting than they were about recovering the roots of American democracy.

The Democrats have not lost their conviction that the reelection of Donald Trump and the enactment of Project 2025 are an existential threat both to democracy and to Americans themselves. Speakers throughout the convention have condemned Trump and highlighted Project 2025, a blueprint written by the Heritage Foundation and other right-wing organizations for a second Trump term. Although Trump has tried to distance himself from Project 2025, Democratic vice presidential nominee Minnesota governor Tim Walz, who was a high school football coach, notes that no one bothers to write a playbook if they’re not going to use it.

Tonight, comedian and actor Kenan Thompson illustrated the dangers of Project 2025 with humor, bringing home the horror of it as only humor can do. With a giant copy of the plan as a prop, he gave a woman married for eight years to her wife the bad news that Project 2025 would end protections for LGBTQ+ Americans, informed a woman who pays $35 a month for her insulin that the plan would overturn the law that makes drugs more affordable, notified an OBGYN that the plan would ban abortion nationwide and throw abortion providers into jail, and put a woman who called herself a proud civil servant on notice that Project 2025 would guarantee she would be fired unless she is a MAGA loyalist.

But the dark dangers of the assault of Trump and the MAGA Republicans on the country have finally pushed the party to move away from its customary caution and focus on policy to embrace the possibilities of a new future. The convention is electric, packed with young people who push jokey memes and poke fun at themselves, much as Walz and presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris are doing to deflect criticism, and who are sharing homemade politically-themed friendship bracelets that echo the homemade paraphernalia of singer Taylor Swift’s Eras tour.

And, after decades in which Republicans claimed the mantle of patriotism, now that the fate of democracy itself is on the line, Democrats are joyfully claiming the symbols and the principles of American democracy for their own.

During the Vietnam War in the 1960s and early 1970s, many Democrats shied away from symbols of patriotism because they seemed to support imperialism. Then, in the 1980s, Reagan and his supporters wrapped themselves in the flag and claimed it for their own. That impulse to define “Americans” as those who vote for Republicans has led us to a place where a small minority claims the right to rule over the rest of us.

The Democratic National Convention has powerfully illustrated that the rest of us are finally reclaiming the country and its symbols. The convention has been full of references to the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the American Revolution, the national anthem, and the pledge of allegiance. Tonight, attendees chanting “USA” waved signs emblazoned with the letters. Speakers, many of whom are military veterans, have testified that they are proud to be Americans. The theme of patriotism was even in one of tonight’s afterparties: Haitian-born rapper Wyclef Jean played The Star Spangled Banner with an interpretation that recalled Jimi Hendrix at Woodstock. “America is the best place to be,” he said. “I’m the best of the American dream. Welcome to America…. You know what makes America great? We’re a bunch of immigrants.”

As Jean indicated, that embrace of our history does not come with the exceptionalism of MAGA Republicans, who maintain that the U.S. has a perfect past that it must reclaim to become great again. Indeed, speakers have emphasized that honoring our history means remembering the nation’s failures as well as its triumphs. The Democrats’ patriotism means recognizing that despite the fact that the U.S. has never fully realized the principles laid out in the Declaration of Independence, it has never abandoned them either—a statement paraphrased from President Joe Biden, who has said it repeatedly.

Speakers have highlighted that the imperfect version of those principles has enabled their personal success stories. Speaker after speaker, from Harris and Walz, of course, to tonight’s speakers Maryland governor Wes Moore, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, and journalist and television personality Oprah Winfrey, have recounted their own process of rising from humble beginnings to their current prominence,

Winfrey is an Independent who generally stays out of politics, but tonight she spoke passionately during prime time about electing Vice President Kamala Harris and Governor Walz. When a reporter asked her why she was willing to make a political statement, she said: "Because I really care about this country. And there couldn't have been a life like mine, a career like mine, a success like mine, without a country like America. Only in America could there be a me."

The many stories in which ordinary Americans rise from adversity through hard work, decency, and service to others implicitly conflates those individual struggles with the struggles of the United States itself. Running through the stories told at the convention is the theme of working hard through a time of darkness to come out into the light. “Weeping may endure for a night, but joy comes in the morning,” speakers have quoted the Biblical psalm, and they have referred to the vision of the American flag still flying after a night of bombardment during the War of 1812, captured by Francis Scott Key in the national anthem, promising that after our time of national darkness, there will be light.

The DNC has called not just for reasserting patriotism, but for reclaiming America with joy. It has showcased a deep bench of politicians, some of whom are great orators, repeatedly calling for joy in the work of saving democracy, and it has shown poets like Amanda Gorman and a wide range of musicians, from Stevie Wonder to Lil Jon to D.J. Cassidy to John Legend. The convention is designed to appeal to different generations—tonight actress Mindy Kaling helpfully explained to older attendees who she is—and younger attendees have handed out friendship bracelets saying things like “Madam Prez” to older people in an echo of the exchange of bracelets among Taylor Swift’s fans.

After an era in which politicians have seemed to lie to the American people, the convention has emphasized authenticity. It has featured testimonials about the candidates with speakers ranging from the candidates’ children to extended family and, tonight, to members of the football team Walz coached. There have been stories of Harris’s cooking and how Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff awkwardly called her for a date, and fond memories of Walz pulling a student out of a snowbank, hunting, and caring for his children. The convention has emphasized that the American government is made up of individuals and that the character of the people we put into leadership will determine what that government does.

Further, the Democrats have made their points with the stories of individual Americans who have overcome dark hours in order to move forward. In that storytelling, individuals represent the nation itself.

The message of joy as we protect democracy, backed as that message is with four years of extraordinary accomplishments that have bolstered the middle class and spread opportunity among poorer Americans, has taken off. The convention has heard from three Democratic presidents and a range of other speakers, including a number of Republicans who have turned against Trump and are backing Harris and Walz. In July, Harris raised four times the money Trump did: $204 million to $48 million, much of it from small donors.

The palpable energy and enthusiasm in Chicago, based as it is in a celebration of American values—especially in the idea of American freedom—reminds me of the enthusiasm of 1860 or 1932. It is about ending the darkness, not indulging in it, and it requires the hard work of everyone who believes that we deserve the freedom to determine our own lives.

Tonight, after his acceptance speech, Walz walked off stage to a favorite song of his: Neil Young’s “Rockin‘ in the Free World.” Neil Young personally allowed the campaign to use the song. When the Trump campaign used it, Young sued to make them stop.

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

#Letters From An American #Heather Cox Richardson #DNC convention #Harris/Walz #american values #democracy #the middle class #freedom #patriotism

5 notes · View notes

southeastasianists · 10 months ago

Text

After being abandoned as a French resort built in 1919 in colonial Vietnam, Bà Nà Hills was rebuilt and redesigned as a theme park. The beauty of Bà Nà Hills is unmatched. Majestically rising from the Da Nang region below, the only way to access this place is through a cable car ride. Make no mistake, as this is one of the best and longest cable car rides in the world, offering a 360-degree view overlooking the greenery below.An attraction is the Golden Bridge, a bridge meant to look like a thread being held by the hands of God. This is likely the most popular attraction of Bà Nà Hills. Beware though, because the bridge is overly congested with private groups of tourists trying to snap a photo on the bridge, which is just wide enough for a few people to pass through. Additionally, the entirety of Bà Nà Hills is built as a replica of the old French buildings in the once-abandoned resort. Separate from all the new buildings, a few ruins have been preserved. Bà Nà Hills has gone to its furthest extent trying to replicate what it once was, playing French music in the background and rebuilding cobbled roads.From a culinary standpoint, Bà Nà Hills is diverse, unique, and has many options. There are many French cafes and restaurants, but also restaurants with Vietnamese, Italian, and other foods. There’s also a lot of alcohol available, especially at the Beer Barrel, a giant barrel-shaped building with a bar inside. You can also visit the wine cellar, built inside the mountain with long tunnels, fireplaces, storage rooms, and more. These cellars were all created over a century ago by the French to store wine.Bà Nà Hills is also known for its unpredictability. The weather, 5,000 feet up, is subject to change at any time. Some days, Bà Nà Hills might be sunny and bright, while others might be cloudy and dark. Although Bà Nà Hills has become a tourist attraction, its presence is still unknown to many visitors in Vietnam.

#Southeast Asia #Viet Nam #Vietnam

4 notes · View notes

spenglercore · 11 months ago

Note

Tell us about the Big Damn Heroes incident where Ilse almost murdered Piotr

So, to start with: Piotr is the kind of guy who would rather suffer himself than let other suffer if he can help them. The man has a heart of gold and it's gotten his ass kicked more than once in his life. He's got a strong sense of justice and loyalty and would give you the shirt off his back or take on someone he knows is going to beat the shit out of him if means you'd be spared the harm.

At some point in his late twenties he joins the army as a tank mechanic and serves in both Korea and part of Vietnam. In the latter conflict, he gets set to a forward repair base when their foreman is KIA. He's slated to take the guy's place temporarily until his replacement arrives, and while he's there they end up having to go on tank recovery in hostile territory.

Now, retrieving an M48 Patton tank is almost always going to be An Affair in and of itself, depending on just how badly damaged it is. And if it was damaged enough that it couldn't be driven back to base, that means you've gotta send people out to get it, which requires a tank recovery vehicle (usually just another wholeass tank modified for towing) and also possibly do any repairs that it might need to even make it towable, and do so in the field.

This is what Piotr and his guys are doing when they discover it was a trap and they walked right into it.

So bullets are flying and people are diving for cover, of which there isn't much. Piotr is the guy in charge as far as the mechanics go, and he knows that the longer they sit there the more losses they'll incur. Yeah, they've got a guy on the radio yelling for backup, but between that moment and when backup actually arrives, IF it arrives at all, is an unknown quantity and a lot can happen in that time frame. Their best bet is to get to the recovery vehicle and beat a hasty retreat, while hoping the VC don't have any anti-tank weapons.

So this motherfucker decides that it's his job to get the recovery vehicle unhooked from the tank they were gonna recover and pile as many guys into it as possible while providing moving cover for anyone else so they can get out of the middle of things and into a more defensible position. Of course, this is a dumb idea, but Piotr can be dumb as a box of rocks at times. He's a machinist, engineer and mechanic, not a tactician.

He gives his dog tags to another guy, says the classic 'tell my wife and kid i love them' line, and then runs off. Miraculously, he's not instantly hit. Instead, when he gets to where the two vehicles are hooked together, he runs into an enemy soldier. Once again, he miraculously escapes injury or death by bayonet and instead brains the guy on reflex with the mini sledgehammer he had in his hand. Being close enough to see the effects of a hammer on a human head and watching the guy die is not something he was ever prepared for, and it's here that he locks up and gets hit. Not only does he get perforated, but his left knee takes a decent piece of shrapnel right to the joint and he gets a pretty nasty concussion and goes down.

Backup does arrive, and being concussed and panicky because holy shit he's been hit, Piotr gets uncharacteristically combative and gets his ass sedated before he's flown out to a MASH unit where he's patched up. But when he starts to come out of sedation, he's still combative due to having a traumatic brain injury and keeps saying his last name isn't Spengler, it's Kowalski, so not only can they not immediately verify his identity, he gets put in a medical coma for a while and is expected to recover but have chronic problems at absolute best.

While he's out, a clerical error occurs where he's mistakenly listed as KIA, and the corresponding letter is sent out to his wife, who is understandably distraught. Luckily, the day after she gets the letter, Piotr is brought out of the coma and it turns out he's just one of those lucky sons of bitches who recovers completely from the brain injury and nobody really knows why or how. And once he's been awake for a day or so, he finds out that he was mistakenly listed as dead and goes 'Oh fuck I need to call my WIFE.' Which he does, and when he explains that this whole mess is because he was trying to be a hero, he gets chewed out in German loud enough for everyone in the vicinity to hear.

Not long after that, he finds himself on his way home on a medical discharge because the cartilage of his left knee got pretty fucked up and he's no longer fit to serve. But rather than a warm welcome, Piotr is greeted with a halfhearted slap across the face and another tirade of German as Ilse goes off about what an ass he is, how he scared the shit out of her, about what a dipshit move that was taking off his dog tags and trying to be a hero, etc etc. The ride home is quiet and tense, as is getting settled in for the evening.

Once everything is put away and they're behind closed doors though, he pulls Ilse in for a hug and apologizes for putting her through so much. er emotions finally come out and she just sort of collapses into the hug and cries. Seeing her crying over the whole thing has more of an impact on Piotr than her being pissed enough to slap him; he goes to sometimes comical lengths to avoid causing her distress or otherwise upsetting her or making her feel bad, even on accident, and knowing that he did it anyway really eats at him for awhile.

Over the decades though, the time Ilse almost murdered her husband for being a shit idiot becomes something of a running joke.

Along with the time he got goaded into going streaking on a motorcycle.

#none braincells left beef #asks #spenglerisims #piotr spengler

3 notes · View notes

praeteritus-memories-muses · 11 months ago

Text

Name: Aslan Jade Callenreese Ash Lynx

Series: Banana Fish

Continuity: 2018 Anime

Age: 18

Height: 5'11"

Birthday: August 12th

Birthplace: Massachusetts, United States

Orientation: Biromantic / Asexual

Species: Human

Occupation: Gang leader

Father: Jim Callenreese

Mother: Unnamed (unknown status)

Sibling(s): Griffin Callenreese

Bio:

TRIGGER WARNING: CSA, HUMAN TRAFFICKING, GANGS, ETC.

Ash Lynx, or Aslan Callenreese, was born in Cape Cod to his father and his second wife. Yet he never actually knew his mother because she walked out on his father when Ash was just a few months old, leaving him to be raised by his father and brother.

Yet his father was honestly terrible. He was an alcoholic and was extremely neglectful so he gave all legal rights to raise Ash to his brother, Griffith. Griffith absolutely loved his little brother and was the one person that Ash cared about more than anything, yet even these happy memories with his brother didn’t last.

Griffith chose to leave for the army when Ash was six years old, he was immediately shipped off to Vietnam. (Iraq in the anime). This left Ash all alone with his father, who definitely wasn’t happy to be left with Ash again even if he had no involvement in his life.

It’s at the age of seven that he was raped by the coach for the local little league which deeply traumatized Ash. Though his father notified the police about it, they didn’t believe him so his father simply told Ash “Let him do it again but ask for money next time.”. Ash was raped repeatedly by this coach until the age of eight where he chose to take matters into his own hands and used his father’s gun to kill his rapist.

It’s then the coach was uncovered to be a child murderer and was labeled the “Cape Cod Blue Beard” and Ash was found not guilty for killing him by means of self defense. This killing made Ash the talk of the town where everyone harassed him with questions about what happened, his father saw the toll it did on Ash so he sent him to live with his aunt.

This did not go well as Ash was already severely traumatized and never even made it to his aunt’s house. As a runaway kid in New York, he was immediately kidnapped by a group of child traffickers for prostitution. He’s immediately sent to a place called Club Cod. A club owned by mafia don, Dino Golzine, where Ash is absolutely horrified by it but he has to learn how to survive in this new situation if he didn’t want to end up dead the way the other kids secretly would if they preformed badly enough.

He learned how to be extremely charismatic and entice the politicians and other mafia members in this club, even unfortunately staring in adult films and photoshoots that he’s since been trying to destroy for his own pride. To this day, camera clicks when he's not asked for a photo are still a huge trigger for him as the memories of these 'photoshoots' and 'videos' come flooding back.

He caught the eye of Dino Golzine who personally took Ash as a personal sex slave or “pet”. Dino would then teach Ash everything of someone in the upper class, including fine dining and extremely high education which later resulted in Ash having an IQ of 210. Not only was he raised like someone in the upper class would, but he was taught to fight and shoot where he’d learn how to use a handgun and knife by a profession Russian assassin named Blanca.

At fourteen, he fell in love with a very nice girl but it never went anywhere as she was killed immediately once it was assumed she was Ash’s girlfriend. He never even got to tell the girl he loved her, and it was a sign for Ash that he simply can’t let people get too close.

When he was fifteen, he was sent to juvenile detention for killing three people where he met his best friend, Shorter Wong. It was seeing Shorter’s gang in Chinatown that he slowly gets the idea to start a gang.

Yet these thoughts of pulling up one stops when he finally found his brother Griffith in a dirty old hospital for unnamed Vietnam soldiers (a regular hospital in the anime). Griffith was completely handicapped and many doctors assumed he was brain dead but Ash knew he was still alive so he got him out of the hospital and into his dingy old apartment with his roommate, who was a little boy he befriended.

Wanting to earn better money and try to figure out what the hell happened to his older brother, Ash started up a gang in Manhattan at the age of sixteen and works under Dino Golzine. He has plans to expose him and everyone else once he hears about this “Banana Fish” that is supposedly connected to Dino and his brother.

While Ash can be very serious but crack a few jokes, he struggles a lot with his personal demons. He’s suffered so much that he easily can risk his life doing something because he’s been through so much that dying simply isn’t a big deal to him anymore. He can be philosophical as well but absolutely terrifying to deal with if you’re on his kill list. He can shoot right between the eyes at a far distance without much trouble and skilled with his fists and knives.

He’s also very sex repulsed, having been abused for so long by it that all he can view sex as is simply the easiest way to get what you want so Ash only every offers sex if he needs information, money or manipulate someone to get what he wants. The act disgusts him, to a point of nausea, that he refuses to get intimate with anyone. Even if he managed to fall in love, the overwhelming repulsion of sex is too much for him to make an exception.

4 notes · View notes

gaywatermelonbread · 1 year ago

Note

More info about ur codz ocs?

I have alot of zombie critters...So how about I give fun facts about them! ^^

There's about 12(13 if you count primis ida as a separate oc) of these guys, hints why I'm jist gonna make it like a fun fact thing. All facts of them under the cut.

Ida(OG/Ultimis) - Ida, genuinely, loves cooking. Since she had to cook for her and Richtofen(her "brother") when they lived together, her fondness of cooking grew on her. It was a past time she longs for now, but hopefully will be able to do. If she does fins the time, she makes the best Käsekuchen(German cheesecake)

Ida(Primis) - She only became a scientist to spite Richtofen. Due to their heated argument, Richtofen made a very unwelcome comment on how she's probably the stupidest person he ever met. Now, she lives comfortable in her secret lab where she grows mushrooms and other veggies that she had genetically modified to grow in human made light

Gunther(Child Ida)- He is a lover of space. He once told Richtofen that when he gotten older he was going to go to the moon...

Bobby - He actually helped raised some puppies during his youth and continued to do so when he took over his fathers mafia. He is a big dog lover, but he is allergic to them sadly

Scarlett - Her dog plushie is based on a rl plushie called Bonzo the dog during 1920s! Her parents gotten it from a yard sale for her so she can at least have a "friend" to keep her company when

Sarah - She was a teacher for kindergartens before the zombies came along. She uses ASL for her classes as she speaks due to her and her brothers mother going deaf in her older years

Sammy - He used to work as a carpenter before quitting when he was drafted for the Vietnam War...but that was a bust when his sister tried to take his place and the zombies came

Edgar - The definition of the shy guy that listens to heavy metal. He's embarrassed by it, but will honestly die if Stuhlinger founds out about it. He was just going through an edgy phase that he never really gotten out of

R.O.B. - A robot designed by an unknown japanese scientist to keep an eye on the wild life/test subjects in shi no numa. This robot would record its finds so the research and finds will never be forgotten. It really loves the animals, and tries it's beat to never harm any living things

John - He's actually AroAce! Even though his story shows differently, he later finds out that he never liked it in the first place. He does become a better person after the whole MPD thing, and he wrapped up in a different universe where 5 adult children claim him as their dad

Lifmos - They are fascinated by the concept of love. How humans come together and be so affectionate to one another. How it changes from different people. It was probably the proudest creator of humans moment for them

Solsif - Has memories of every cycle, of every universe. Being the protector of universe isn't the beat, especially when you're missing your friends that had to have their memory wiped

Zelmesh - This guy...them right their...are the definition of hopeless romantic. They love Lifmos and their ideas, and honestly will try to always be there for them. Just an alien in love with another alien

5 notes · View notes

brookstonalmanac · 2 years ago

Text

Events 4.2

1513 – Having spotted land on March 27, Spanish explorer Juan Ponce de León comes ashore on what is now the U.S. state of Florida, landing somewhere between the modern city of St. Augustine and the mouth of the St. Johns River. 1755 – Commodore William James captures the Maratha fortress of Suvarnadurg on the west coast of India. 1792 – The Coinage Act is passed by Congress, establishing the United States Mint. 1800 – Ludwig van Beethoven leads the premiere of his First Symphony in Vienna. 1801 – French Revolutionary Wars: In the Battle of Copenhagen a British Royal Navy squadron defeats a hastily assembled, smaller, mostly-volunteer Dano-Norwegian Navy at high cost, forcing Denmark out of the Second League of Armed Neutrality. 1863 – American Civil War: The largest in a series of Southern bread riots occurs in Richmond, Virginia. 1865 – American Civil War: Defeat at the Third Battle of Petersburg forces the Army of Northern Virginia and the Confederate government to abandon Richmond, Virginia. 1885 – Canadian Cree warriors attack the village of Frog Lake, killing nine. 1902 – Dmitry Sipyagin, Minister of Interior of the Russian Empire, is assassinated in the Mariinsky Palace, Saint Petersburg. 1902 – "Electric Theatre", the first full-time movie theater in the United States, opens in Los Angeles. 1911 – The Australian Bureau of Statistics conducts the country's first national census. 1912 – The ill-fated RMS Titanic begins sea trials. 1917 – American entry into World War I: President Wilson asks the U.S. Congress for a declaration of war on Germany. 1921 – The Autonomous Government of Khorasan, a military government encompassing the modern state of Iran, is established. 1930 – After the mysterious death of Empress Zewditu, Haile Selassie is proclaimed emperor of Ethiopia. 1954 – A 19-month-old infant is swept up in the ocean tides at Hermosa Beach, California. Local photographer John L. Gaunt photographs the incident; 1955 Pulitzer winner "Tragedy by the Sea". 1956 – As the World Turns and The Edge of Night premiere on CBS. The two soaps become the first daytime dramas to debut in the 30-minute format. 1964 – The Soviet Union launches Zond 1. 1972 – Actor Charlie Chaplin returns to the United States for the first time since being labeled a communist during the Red Scare in the early 1950s. 1973 – Launch of the LexisNexis computerized legal research service. 1975 – Vietnam War: Thousands of civilian refugees flee from Quảng Ngãi Province in front of advancing North Vietnamese troops. 1976 – Prince Norodom Sihanouk resigns as leader of Cambodia and is placed under house arrest. 1979 – A Soviet bio-warfare laboratory at Sverdlovsk accidentally releases airborne anthrax spores, killing 66 plus an unknown amount of livestock. 1980 – United States President Jimmy Carter signs the Crude Oil Windfall Profits Tax Act. 1982 – Falklands War: Argentina invades the Falkland Islands. 1986 – Alabama governor George Wallace, a former segregationist, best known for the "Stand in the Schoolhouse Door", announces that he will not seek a fifth four-year term and will retire from public life upon the end of his term in January 1987. 1989 – Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev arrives in Havana, Cuba, to meet with Fidel Castro in an attempt to mend strained relations. 1991 – Rita Johnston becomes the first female Premier of a Canadian province when she succeeds William Vander Zalm (who had resigned) as Premier of British Columbia. 1992 – In New York, Mafia boss John Gotti is convicted of murder and racketeering and is later sentenced to life in prison. 1992 – Forty-two civilians are massacred in the town of Bijeljina in Bosnia and Herzegovina. 2002 – Israeli forces surround the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, into which armed Palestinians had retreated. 2004 – Islamist terrorists involved in the 11 March 2004 Madrid attacks attempt to bomb the Spanish high-speed train AVE near Madrid; the attack is thwarted. 2006 – Over 60 tornadoes break out in the United States; Tennessee is hardest hit with 29 people killed. 2012 – A mass shooting at Oikos University in California leaves seven people dead and three injured. 2014 – A spree shooting occurs at the Fort Hood army base in Texas, with four dead, including the gunman, and 16 others injured. 2015 – Gunmen attack Garissa University College in Kenya, killing at least 148 people and wounding 79 others. 2015 – Four men steal items worth up to £200 million from an underground safe deposit facility in London's Hatton Garden area in what has been called the "largest burglary in English legal history." 2020 – COVID-19 pandemic: The total number of confirmed cases reach one million. 2021 – At least 49 people are killed in a train derailment in Taiwan after a truck accidentally rolls onto the track. 2021 – A Capitol Police officer is killed and another injured when an attacker rams his car into a barricade outside the United States Capitol.

#Events

2 notes · View notes

00towns · 5 days ago

Text

2024: media in review

A Cook’s Tour: Global Adventures in Extreme Cuisines, Anthony Bourdain

A Venn diagram of my taste in television and my dad’s would look like two circles straining at the seams to get away from each other. The items that keep the two pinned firmly together are two programs: FX’s The Bear and Anthony Bourdain’s Parts Unknown.

The last time I was home for Christmas, we sat on the couch in a post-dinner haze and watched as Bourdain explored the Lower East Side, finding and commenting on the best of what every street corner in the city has to offer. Neither my dad or I are particularly discerning eaters, but we were entranced: my dad in that funny way that New Yorkers get when they see their city represented on TV, belonging to themselves as much as it seems to belong to everyone else, and myself by the way that Bourdain seemed determined to fill out his life at every corner, expanding and contracting to fit the space he’s in, and consume enthusiastically in a way that I would describe as high-octane and not excessive, a fine, fine line to draw.

A Cook’s Tour is a detailed account of the behind-the-scenes of filming for Parts Unknown, where Bourdain sheds his television personality to take up a writing one which prides itself on being more candid, honest, and critical while maintaining the same dynamic, intensely focused way of experiencing the world. The book is sequenced in bits and pieces, following Bourdain’s original proposal for the show following the success of Kitchen Confidential to vignettes in Portugal, Russia, Japan, and more. While much of the novel follows the by-line of ‘extreme’ cuisines, the shiny parts of his story are when Bourdain looks at other facets of foreign foodways: concepts of luxury, moral approaches to meat-eating, and family. In Vietnam, he eats his way through a floating market and emphasizes the fresh ingredients and the foodways required to get them; in Portugal he kills a pig and notices the way that the life he takes feeds the entire community for several days and beyond. Along the way, he takes aim at fast food conglomerates, celebrity chefs who are more celebrity than chef, and the American empire that shaped the food politics of many of the locales he visits. Bourdain writes about food, certainly, but much of the beauty of his prose comes not from long-winded descriptors of flavors or textures, but the sense of place surrounding each meal he enjoys. In fact, much of his eating seems to do less evocation of taste and more of sensory experience, beyond the five senses to catalog humor, affect, generosity, place. He escapes his corporate overlords in this way – forcing the reader to pay attention to context, despite jumping around the world in vignettes. Every bite is in the direct shadow of the bite that came before it. Every open seat at a table inviting you to sit down is the result of generations and generations of community, an impossibly complex web of foodways, and importantly, chance. Not only is it one of the best ways to do food media, I’ll argue it’s the only way to write about it. Bourdain does a lot with words that much food communication struggles to do with pictures, videos, and audio.

Not everything in A Cook’s Tour is perfect; I think the reason that his writing is considered edgy is for the same reasons I often found it grating. I cringe when he advocates for blindly running as far away from tourists as possible without a particular thought of what exactly one is running into. Much of the travel and eating advice sprinkled throughout his work is astonishingly male, including the suggestion to go into salaryman’s bars and just start drinking in order to experience Japanese culture. A particularly tense portion of his novel takes place in Cambodia, where he tramples over cultural and political custom to try to make his way to the heart of Khmer Rogue territory to film and eat, then cracks a joke about a ‘cowardly’ cab driver who his team forces to drive into dangerous terrain. This made my skin crawl; I know the feeling of wearing Americanness in Southeast Asia like armor and it’s disgusting, not empowering. It’s also unsurprising that Bourdain’s takes on much of Asia lack nuance and read as terribly outdated; in No Reservations he claims to have been bewitched by his travel in Asia, “even [falling in love with] not-so-pretty Taiwan and Korea”. Who are we kidding? No Reservations was written in 2007 – SNSD was already performing Into the New World. It takes a forgiving eye to read beyond Bourdain’s less-than-discerning writing for the middle American reader to his leftist takes on Kissenger in Cambodia, loser white dudes in Vietnam, and migrant workers in professional kitchens. Some of his descriptions of adventurous food feel just a hair on the wrong side of politically correct, but I’m not eager to take up the job of explaining exactly why they feel this way, given that I’ve never eaten half as adventurously as he has.

Bourdain’s approach to living seems to be on an upwards trend right now, six years after his death. I feel like I understand deeply why, although I don’t agree entirely with everything he writes. Perhaps his words echo strongly with young people doing their best to live a life of slow richness (in the sense of food, not money), savoring every bite in a culture of excess, the type to order seconds but never takeout. Bourdain’s aspirations to connect deeply to where things come from and why feels like a valuable ethos for right now, but raise questions about how to do so when the fact of the gaze always remains. For Bourdain, his viewer has a name, which is a team of television producers and cameras that follow him and document his every interaction with his surroundings, making his gaze not just a handful of people in a room but hundreds of thousands across the English-speaking world. Can we all slow down? Can we all connect to new places and locales the way Bourdain does, or does that make those places tourist joints, too?

I chewed through A Cook’s Life in a park in Seoul, at my desk in Yokkaichi, lying down in the forest in Naeba. He ate tete de veau in France while I chugged down vinegary cold noodles, he sipped at bird’s nest soup as I ordered the best vegan ice cream I’ve ever had twice in a row. Bourdain’s world is just as wide as mine, but traveling while reading travel writing feels like reading fantasy. Bourdain writes about his travels in a way that I find myself jealous of; not for the fact that he eats and drinks for a living, but the fact that he’s able to write so brazenly, without hesitation, full of conviction in what he says and feels, humility without fear. At time of writing, I’ve become slightly obsessed with Bourdain. I’m working on his other books, too, and the only thing stopping me from delving into his cookbooks is my disdain for French cooking. My dad and I watch Parts Unknown to unwind, but I would never wish a book like A Cook’s Tour on anyone looking to relax. Bourdain is the traveler’s travel writer for a reason.

Babel: Or the Necessity of Violence: An Arcane History of the Oxford Translators’ Revolution, R.F. Kuang

I’ll start with what I enjoyed: I thought the function of the magical realist elements were delightful. In Babel, magic is woven into the real world of 1830s England through match-pairs, or pairings of words between English and other languages inscribed onto bricks of silver. The silver is able to capture what is ‘lost in translation’, which in turn creates magical outcomes based on the difference in nuance between the two words, like making ships go faster, food stay fresher, buildings last longer. The main character, Robin Swift, is a native Cantonese and Mandarin speaker who learns English from a young age through being partially raised by an English maid in Canton, making him a prime candidate for the fictional Babel School of Translation at the nonfictional Oxford University. The book came at a good time for me. At time of writing I’m about ten months into a twenty-four month period in Japan, and am hitting (what I perceive to be) a critical point in my language acquisition where things are actually starting to make a lot of sense while still being wildly confusing, so the themes of embodied language and the politics of fluency overlaid onto a magical setting struck close to home. The role of magic and the translation school in the larger setting of colonial Britain sets Kuang up for strong commentary on a number of different thematic elements of empire, including the invisible hand of academia, wasians, and the frenetic potential in being able to speak a second or third language so easily it comes like breathing. A few weeks ago, I met someone who is a native speaker of Mandarin, Japanese, and English, and I’ll tell you, it’s easy to imagine what she can do as magic.

I spent a few days after finishing Babel wallowing in self pity that I would never be a native speaker of another language, despite my best efforts. The world constructed in the novel is just so textually rich and layered with the power of language and openings for meaning; truly, while reading I felt a deep melancholy that I would never have the depth of intimacy with another language that Kuang portrays as so powerful and out of the reach of many that it constitutes magic. I couldn’t even find it in me to blame my parents, who are equally the victims of language (in)access as I am, despite my mom’s ridiculous talent for five or so Chinese dialects. Robin’s half-brother Griffin at one point admits that he was a failed project of true bilingualism because his dreams – that ultimate, truth-telling space – weren’t in Chinese. Griffin yearns to be a truly native Chinese speaker, but his subconscious space remains just out of reach. I closed Babel with a sort of forlorn determination in my journey of language acquisition.

Onto my critiques: Babel makes its goals clear. The long-winded title informs the reader of not only its overarching plot, but also the tortuously simple political messaging being swung at. Kuang insists on a similar level of hand-holding throughout, from the comically racist white British colonizers, the pages-long dialogues of spirited academic debates where Kuang is so painfully literal she could stand to cite her sources, to the core set of archetypal characters that make up the Oxford cohort the story follows. If you’ve read Yellowface, you’ll know all about Kuang, projecting, and absolutely rinsing white women, which is tee’d up so obviously for such an unforgivable smackdown in both pieces I almost want to ask for mercy. In Yellowface, the white woman narrator hates Chinese food while pretending to be Asian online, in Babel, the British professor fathers Robin with a Chinese woman while looking down on their intellect and civility; in both cases I think Kuang forgets that the most insidious white person is the one who genuinely believes that they love ethnic cultures while looking down on them.

I want to be clear; I do not think that RF Kuang is a good writer, but I knew generally what to forgive given the limitations of the YA genre. The majority of my issues with Babel come at the last quarter of the book. Much potential for nuance is lost as the novel descends into a cartoonish parody of rebellion, complete with the barricading of a building at Oxford, betrayal from the white woman intelligentsia, and an embarrassingly brazen allyship with a group of working class white men. Babel is not for anyone looking for high level commentary or a truly built-out portrayal of revolution in a magical world. Ursula K Le Guin suggests (speaking on science fiction but applicable to this magical realist historical fiction) that a successful piece in the genre is not one that extrapolates from a logical extreme to inevitably end in massive destruction, but is rather one that uses extrapolation as one tool of many to reflect a present reality. “[...] let’s say this or that is such and so, and see what happens… In a story so conceived, thought and intuition can move freely within bounds set only by the terms of the experiment, which may be very large indeed.” Taking this analytic, where Babel fails is in its overcommitment to “the necessity of violence” as a singular political message, so such exaggerated that the goal of the novel at some points seems to be impressing upon the reader that political message rather than actually portraying it in the text, the other commentary on community building and revolutionary sacrifice taking the form of stray bullets. Kuang spends the first four hundred pages of the book building out a colossal magical world with movement between the Global North and South, a cast of characters from across the world brought to Oxford under suspicious circumstances, and a colonial power capable of incredible cruelty in the real world, now armed with a magically enhanced abilities. The bounds of Kuang’s experiment are nonexistent, but its one-track minded focus on Oxford as an institution leads to a particularly cringeworthy climax where Robin literally climbs on a table in a library to soapbox to the workers. In this way, I felt as if the internal intuition of the world of Babel is forgone for an attempt to impress the relevance of its main commentary to the modern world. It draws a sharp contrast to other similarly YA-targeted novels about dystopian rebellion, such as The Hunger Games, where commentary about disenfranchisement and power is both genre-appropriate and nuanced.

All things considered, I wouldn’t have made a particular note of Babel if I hadn’t been moved by the novel overall despite its many flaws. Perhaps my experience would be further enhanced if I delved deeper into this literary subgenre about books about/through/upon language and language acquisition. I welcome recommendations.

Thank you, C, for this recommendation. Eat shit, Half Price Books!

Big Ideas (2024), Remi Wolf

Remi was scheduled to appear at Fuji Rock Festival, at which I was also scheduled to appear, but on the shinkansen to Tokyo I took a nap and woke up to the news of her cancellation. The night before, I had danced around my apartment packing, doing odds and ends of laundry, and folding things at random, blasting Big Ideas on repeat, giddy with excitement. I put my head down on the tray table, tried to ignore my friends cooing over me in pity, and let myself be super bummed for about ten minutes. Then I picked myself up, accepted a canned beer, and got ready to enjoy myself.

Fuji Rock was a blast, although it did have a tender Remi-shaped hole. I’m still obsessed with this album in the way that I think a lot of people felt about The Rise and Fall of Midwest Princess. There’s not a single low point, each track showing off a different element of artistry from gritty vocals to funky instrumentals. My favorite song is Frog Rock, who’s instrumental chorus of ribbits is familiar to a few weeks in late spring when the tiny green Japanese tree frogs sing unceasingly in the rice paddies. I enjoy how slightly nauseating the lyrics are, poking at that weird line between the ick and an amphibian. A few weeks ago, a Japanese tree frog spent a summer sabbatical living on my monstera on my balcony, and he was christened (for a few precious days) Wolf.

On the last day of Fuji Rock, I bought a Remi Wolf T-shirt despite not seeing her. It was a consolation prize. I didn’t see a single person wearing the same one until Summer Sonic, where I was reeling from PinkPantheress’s cancellation instead. Save our girls!

AAA Tour in Tokyo, Hyukoh and Sunset Rollercoaster

If you know me, you already know how annoying I’ve been about this show. I like Hyukoh but I love Sunset Rollercoaster, and I was eager to see them again after catching the Infinity Sunset tour at the Howard Theater in 2022. I also fell hard for Hyukoh’s guitarist after seeing his other project band Bongjeingan as rookie guests at Fuji Rock.

Through the course of the two and a half hour show, both bands run through the hits from their own discographies, covering each other’s parts and ad-libbing where necessary. It was a riot knowing what beats to expect but not exactly where, or in what style. They also play the entirety of the six track collaboration EP, including the dreamscapey Aaaaaannnnteeeennnnaaaa, mixed live. I found the visuals and stage setting to carry a sense of humor, a lot like the EP itself, while still being serious about the music. They’re all wearing these stupid hats that aren’t mentioned or acknowledged once, including a crocheted beard for the bassist, a brain beanie for Hyunjae, and a hat from the merch stand with added devil horns made from fake hair on Hyuk. Throughout the show, no one talks to the audience except for a handful of sentences and one or two odd jokes, which often have to be cued through the teleprompter. Kuokuo asks us to buy merch so that he has more money to spend at Matsuya. (I was in Taiwan this summer – I’m like 95% sure they have Matsuya there). After the encore, Haoting Facetimes Inwoo, Hyukoh’s drummer who doesn’t tour abroad for health reasons. He yells into the phone in English over the crowd. Kuokuo picks up an acoustic and starts playing Wonderwall.

The first night, two extremely drunk girls behind me catcall Haoting, the saxophonist, all night. A white lady standing next to me studying East Asian history at Sophia University (lol) tries to strike up a conversation with me – she cracks a weird joke about mainland China within the first five minutes of our interaction. The second night, a woman next to me covers her face with the AAA vinyl or her hand the entire time, blushes hard whenever any of the members approach us, then records Hyuk with shaking hands during the encore. The moment I leave the venue, it stinks like menthols. In addition, the calling from the crowd to the stage covers just about every language base that I can manage: the bands speak in English, the songs are in Mandarin and Korean, the crowd yells in a mix of all three plus Japanese. I feel bizarrely attached to each word that I can pick up. You dropped this! I want to yell. But I got it!

As of October, this EP is easily my favorite music project of the year. Long live Taiwan!

Look Back (2024), Fujimoto Tatsuki

I watched Look Back in decidedly strange circumstances. I don’t usually find narratives about writers writing about writing to be compelling, but I walked away from Look Back certain this is his best work.

Look Back is short, sweet, and emotionally demanding. It asks a lot of its audience in its runtime of just under an hour, and commands attunement to everything packed into its narrow frame, from the middle Japan setting, the familiar yet foreign school life vignettes, and the boisterous insistence of adolescent pride. Blink, and you’ll miss a moment rich in text and subtext, all pulling desperately towards the final cut of Fujino at her desk, pen tapping away at her illustration tablet. Despite the tragedy of the story, she's not more renewed, focused, or desperate than she was, at least not in a way that we can see. What is there to do after a fundamental shift in the world but to continue on?

Look Back is titled in katakana, meaning that it doesn’t have a native Japanese title and takes English loanwords instead. I thought this was interesting to consider from a Japanese speaker’s perspective: while ‘look back’ in English conjures a distinct image of a person with their head turned to view what’s behind them, several scenes and themes of the film also reference ‘look back’ in a more linguistically roundabout way. In one of Kyomoto’s later four-panel mangas, she draws the scene in which Fujino, in superhero caricature, defeats the axe murderer at her college by crashing into him with a swift kick. The punchline arrives when she turns around, and the axe is sticking out of her back. We are again invited to ‘look (at her) back’, an interpretation allowed by the looser grammatical rules of Japanglish. It’s where the humor in tragedy is, twentytwenty in hindsight, what we can attain when we look back. In montage scenes of Fujino and Kyomoto running in the snow or parading around town, the former constantly looks back at the latter to symbolize their power dynamic and build to the eventual climatic argument, but again, a different interpretation of the title also invites us to put ourselves in Kyomoto’s shoes: she is look(ing) (at) Fujino’s back, always. Her ambition is not stunted by being a follower, it’s also provoked by being allowed to support someone whose work she admires. We again meet this emphasis on Kyomoto’s role as a lesser but not inferior match to Fujino’s artistry: she draws the backgrounds for every manga they publish, and goes to art school with the goal of improving her ability to do exactly that. Kyomoto only ever has the intention of supporting Fujino’s work: (a) look (at the) back(ground).

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about look back (grammar rules ignored) as a way of relating to others. The circular narrative laid out in Look Back seems to urge us to this conclusion despite its interruption, and asks us to hang our hopes on Fujino and Kyomoto reunited as more mature, fully realized adults in a partnership that may never be equal but will be mutual. For some, the rays of their partner are enough to eclipse personal ambition; the blessing of drifting in their orbit is a life well lived. This feels fundamentally incongruent to who I am as a person, but I have to ask if there is a world out there where I meet someone for whom it becomes possible for me to take a very, very happy passenger seat to their life. Am I looking for a partner who I can watch from the edges of the party? Or am I looking for someone who might join me there?

(I swear I’m not intentionally trying to bring up Hadestown in a year-end review for the third year in a row, but it does fit nicely. Can we be assured that when we look back, what we are leading will still be there? Do I have the strength to be faithful that whatever I have turned away from will remain?)

Even more, what do we do lieu of all these questions and uncertainties? I think we keep drawing.

Honorable mentions (some media, some not, all very Textual to me)

Taiwanese streetwear brand Goopi.co

Working out twice in one day

The salt melonpan from Pea Green Bakery

The Acolyte Season 1

Mugicha

Meal consisting of canned corn, fried Spam, rice with furikake, and two sunny side up eggs

Spiritfarer (2020)

Costco membership

Mark - 200

Password manager Chrome extension

Conclusion

This year, I wrote about my 'best of' as they came to me throughout the year instead of waiting until writing this recap. I think this produced a list based much more on an emotional response to media than an assessment of their quality or artistic merit, which I may have (self-consciously) done in past years when selecting at time of writing. In this way, this year's recap feels a lot more genuine and a lot more vulnerable, despite containing some of my more unintentional or quick reads. I did consume a lot of excellent media this year which might be considered to have 'high' artistic value and I also had an emotional response to, but the thing about high art is that I'll always be scraping at the heels of someone smarter than myself. I feel like I can tell when an idea is present but escaping me. Perhaps that emotional response is my failure to put an idea into words, but to allow myself to process it in other ways.

Postscript: 2024 music recap

Festivals: 4

Concerts: 25

Best live set: AAA tour, never young beach

Worst live set: Noname

2025 want to see: tofubeats, mass of the fermenting dregs, poison girlfriend, helsinki lambda club, pink pantheress, remi wolf, wave to earth, se so neon, deca joins, kendrick & sza, weyes blood, chappell roan, khruangbin

0 notes