#i am once again blaming the climate crisis for this

[finhascandles]

Нээх сайхан нэмэх градус руугаа орж байхад дөрвөн сарын сүүлээр цас орно ч гэх шиг. Таарч дээ.

[illuminatedquill]

Nevertheless, Episode 9

More Thoughts/Analysis

“So it’s true, when all is said and done, grief is the price we pay for love.”

- E.A. Bucchianeri

Jae Eon’s Self Sabotage

Chekov’s Gun is the dramatic principle that details within a story will contribute to the overall narrative. You might have heard of this before in its simplest form: if there is a gun shown in Act 1, it absolutely must go off in Act 2 or 3. In episode 9 of Nevertheless, we have this scene right at the beginning:

Yes, that scene. Park Jae Eon sees Yang Do Hyeok standing off to the side as he waits outside Na Bi’s apartment to retrieve his stuff. Na Bi doesn’t know Do Hyeok is nearby. Jae Eon makes the calculation in his head and manipulates his way inside Na Bi’s apartment, knowing exactly what it looks like to Do Hyeok. It’s petty revenge for seeing Na Bi and Do Hyeok together on campus from earlier.

This is the gun. And it backfires on Jae Eon big time. Throughout the entire episode, his acts of sincerity towards Na Bi seem genuine and heartfelt, yet his action in that one scene undermines anything he attempts. It doesn’t work; to his mounting frustration, Na Bi and Do Hyeok continue to talk and meet as if nothing happened.

(We know that’s not the case as seen from Do Hyeok’s alone time but I’ll talk about that later in this post.)

It’s a ticking time bomb and it goes off at last in the rain scene. Nothing is working for him. He is desperate not to lose Na Bi. And he goes off in a drunken rage on Na Bi after she returns home on that fateful rainy night.

And he loses her. The gun goes off. Everything sincere he did turns rotten in Na Bi’s eyes after he reveals his actions. Actions have consequences, always rippling forward and affecting change in moments not yet experienced. He ruined his chances because of his petty cruelty towards Do Hyeok in the beginning. His sincerity only extended towards Na Bi and it was only to get her attention once more.

Jae Eon lost. Not so much to Do Hyeok, as he lost to Na Bi, who cares about him deeply. He underestimated her feelings towards Do Hyeok, assuming, like so many other viewers, that he was an an irritating distraction that refused to go away.

He can’t fathom why Do Hyeok still seems to like Na Bi after seeing them enter her apartment together. Is he really that incredible a person? What makes him so special?

Well, let’s talk about it.

Do Hyeok’s Crisis Playbook

We see from Do Hyeok’s time alone after his initial visit to Seoul that he is taking it pretty hard; I can’t really blame him, considering what he saw that night. His struggle is open, honest, and raw; like Na Bi, it affects him to the point that he can’t focus on his work (anyone seem to notice that Jae Eon’s work never seems to be affected by his feelings?).

It’s jealousy and insecurity eating away at him. Just like Jae Eon. He’s also desperate not to lose Na Bi but doesn’t want to do anything untoward or overboard because he’s afraid of ruining their friendship. Once again, his consideration is for Na Bi and how she feels, but he cannot ignore what he saw and how he feels about it.

So, what is our favorite Potato Boy to do? Park Jae Eon already made his move by staging that whole scene of him and Na Bi going into her apartment together. How does Do Hyeok fight back? What’s his playbook in this time of crisis?

He doesn’t fight back. And that’s how he stays in the game. Do Hyeok is not a player like Jae Eon; there isn’t a manipulative or deceptive bone in his body. Do Hyeok does what he always does and doubles down on his sincerity, on the strength of his feelings, and his faith in Na Bi.

Do Hyeok doesn’t play the game Jae Eon tries to involve him in. He always lays it all out on the table with Na Bi so there is no room for misunderstandings. That’s one of the reasons why their relationship works so well; they talk more. Not just about feelings or romance but about school or their day to day life. What they’re building now is something that can last a lifetime.

So he talks to her about it. And admits his jealousy. She wasn’t even aware that he had seen them and yet it sounds like he’s the one who is apologizing (even though he never let his hurt feelings show in his conversations with Na Bi, DO HYEOK YOU ARE TOO GOOD). He lays himself bare to her once more. We don’t see Na Bi’s response other than her shocked and guilty expression, which is annoying because it would definitely be interesting to see how she reciprocated his frankness.

(Underrated super cute scene between them in this episode; when they meet up at night and bring drinks for each other. It’s even the exact same drink. I was grinning like a maniac.)

But Na Bi is familiar with Jae Eon’s game. And when she finds out how badly Do Hyeok was hurt by Jae Eon’s actions (and how he involved her in it) Na Bi finally is snapped to her senses and severs the thread still binding her and Jae Eon together.

Na Bi’s choice isn’t shown as a redemptive or heroic moment. It never was supposed to be. Although I’m sure a lot of us were cheering in that moment, her moments of unrestrained grief alone afterwards are the sobering reality that love, as always, comes with a price.

Nabi’s Choice (The Review)

This is a follow up to my earlier post before episode 9 came out. So, now we see what Na Bi decides and, maybe, how it will all play out in the next episode (barring any last minute twists).

First, let’s address the still ongoing criticism I see regarding Na Bi and Do Hyeok’s relationship: lack of passion, no romantic vibes, blah blah blah. I wrote at length in a previous post why that isn’t true - at least on Do Hyeok’s part (one of the reasons why we don’t get internal monologue from Do Hyeok is because what else is he thinking about other than Na Bi?).

Na Bi, on the other hand, is still ambivalent about her feelings towards Do Hyeok. Episode 9 provided more clarity for her stance towards Jae Eon - he’s the dog shit she stepped on and was promptly wiped away in the grass - but Do Hyeok is still a mystery. Yes, she’s friendly, she cares, and genuinely enjoys being with him but the spice, the passion is missing. And that is kinda important for a romantic relationship.

Well. Look no more. Na Bi has spice for Do a Hyeok and it shows not once, but twice this episode. Where’s the passion? Jae Eon fucked around and found out. Very kind of him. Turns out Na Bi, like all of us who like Do Hyeok, will not tolerate any Do Hyeok slander and I am 100 PERCENT here for it.

There’s a scene shortly before the climatic rain fight where Na Bi is having another meeting with her assistants: the junior (does he have a name? Jin-su?) and Jae Eon. The junior talks to Na Bi about her and Park Jae Eon: the usual tired gossip of whether or not they’re dating. Na Bi waves it away like dandelion fluff.

And then the junior mentions Do Hyeok. “What about the noodle shop guy? Ever since the camp meeting, people have been saying there’s a higher chance you’re dating him.”

And Na Bi just . . . we’ve never seen this from her before, even when she broke up with Jae Eon in episode 5. Her whole demeanor turns ice cold and her voice is wicked sharp as she proceeds to shut down that avenue of questioning. The junior physically leans back from the force of her anger and wonders aloud why she’s so upset (you’re talking about her love life as gossip, idiot, why do you think she’s so upset). Jae Eon walks in and doesn’t see the foreshadowing; he just hears Do Hyeok and it feeds his jealousy.

There it is, everybody. Evidence of Na Bi’s feelings for Do Hyeok and what he means to her. Her protectiveness over him and her refusal to let him be involved in the drama surrounding herself and Jae Eon. Her desire to be the better around him; not because he asks (and he would never) but because his feelings for her make her think she might be worthy of such a love.

And then there’s the rain scene. Na Bi and Jae Eon, vulnerable in the rain. Na Bi admits to her faults in the relationship, how she brought this upon herself. No, she hasn’t been nice or good this whole time; in fact, she’s been kind of terrible. But Jae Eon revealing what he did and how it was to hurt Do Hyeok wakes her up and convinces that the time has come to end this “game”. It got Do Hyeok hurt because of her inability to end it with Jae Eon and good people don’t let that happen to people they care about.

So Na Bi ends it with Jae Eon and chooses herself. At last. And to do so, she has to cut out this malignant tumor of a relationship and, God, does it hurt so much to end it, but she gets it done and takes the first step to being a better person for herself.

The cinematography in this drama is top tier and we see her situation presented so viscerally. She’s alone, in the light, but it’s not a warm, redemptive light; it has a sickly, yellow tint and is surrounded by darkness.

But she’s still there. She still made it.

One Last Observation, I Promise

Last thing I noticed from this episode that I want to talk about: the professor’s critique of Na Bi. She specifically mentions that a good artist can inspire others and Na Bi, whether she realizes it or not, actually does do that.

Na Bi helps Do Hyeok with his videos, giving advice that helps boost their popularity and making them better.

Jae Eon is inspired to make the butterfly bracelet for Na Bi and gifts it to her.

The difference between the two? Do Hyeok actually thanks Na Bi for her help and points out that it was her influence that made his videos better.

Jae Eon obviously means his gesture to be romantic and sincere but he again fails to talk about why he’s doing it. The implication is there but Na Bi needs more than some vague nonsense.

Communication is at the heart of this episode and how, without it, relationships stagnate and fail. Bit Na + Gyu Hyun and Soljiwan couple - their relationships only progress because the couples voice their concerns and fears to one another. And instead of being rejected or being hurt, it allows their partners to reassure them and move forward with their relationship.

Why do Na Bi and Jae Eon fail? They. Don’t. Talk. Na Bi is stuck inside her head and Jae Eon relies on vague gestures and sexual chemistry to express himself.

Why do Na Bi and Do Hyeok succeed? Because they talk. About everything. Their dialogue is clear and honest and sincere without any hidden meanings or motives. And you see why Na Bi is rapidly moving more and more towards Do Hyeok and not Jae Eon.

(The preview does raise some questions about how it will all end but I don’t think the show is going to pull a bait and switch and have Na Bi end up with Jae Eon. I also don’t think it’s likely they’ll have an open ending, either. I’ll talk about that in another post.)

My next post will be what I envision to be the best version of a Na Bi and Do Hyeok endgame and what I mean by that since Na Bi shouldn’t be dating anyone right now. So, look forward to that.

Until next time, everybody. Thanks for reading this long ass post. Hope you enjoyed it.

[badgalmorgan]

Tw: r*pe, s*x**l assault

On the 24 of September 2021 I was raped by someone I knew at a house party. I reported my rape on the 26 of September and it was one of the biggest mistakes of my life. Not only was I exposed to my rapist again but it showed me how little support victims actually have, especially in this climate.

At around 11:15 we got to a house party in the old house I used to live at. I had had a dispute with my rapist the year before but I had come to make peace and let bygones be bygones (not to apologise). I had been out with my friend and we only drank what we had purchased which was wine and a little vodka. I was still sober when we got to the house and I didn’t think anything would go wrong since I had lived there before. My rapist insisted me and friend come to his room to talk about the incident and then when we were inside his room my friend went to use his in suite bathroom. I sat down on his bed and placed my drink next to me. I was done drinking for the night. My friend came out of the bathroom and asked if I was ok and I said yes, he then insisted she leave. After she left he locked the door behind her and I remember closing my eyes and laying back down.

When I opened my eyes he was on top of me, penetrating me and it hurt. I remember saying “no no” and trying to close my legs and get up and he pushed me back down. I finally managed to get up from under him and stumbled to his bathroom where he followed me with his pants and underwear hanging low, at this point I was throwing up and then he forced me to give him oral sex. He only stopped once my friend and two other guys began banging on his door. I was disoriented once the door was open and there are parts I can’t remember. My friend said my hair was messed up and she tried to fix it. She asked me if I wanted to leave and I was still shocked and so I said no. I went to sit outside with a couple of her friends and I was silent the whole time ( my friend was narrating this since I can’t remember what happened after I left his room). I asked for water and when my friend went to look for water she didn’t find any, I then asked if we could go home. When I got to the door I began to throw up I then tried to run and I slipped and fell in my own vomit. I attempted to get up again but I couldn’t and someone tried to help me up. I tried to run again. Finally my friend and someone she knew helped us get home. At home I can’t remember what happened since everything was a blur but I remember waking up at 1:00am before finally waking up at 4:00 am and crying because I realised what he did to me.

The next day I got a morning after pill, and I tried to get the PEP but they said they didn’t store it. I then booked an appointment with my doctor and at his office I tried to get a rape kit done but he abruptly told me they don’t do that and indicated that I should leave. He also asked if the rape was ‘confirmed.’ At this point I hadn’t showered because I knew that’s what you’re not supposed to do. After the appointment with the doctor I felt so demotivated and shitty about myself, I decided to go home and finally take a bath. The next day I told my friend what had happened and we decided to go to the town hospital to get the PEP. At the hospital the nurse insisted I get a rape kit done for “my peace of mind” and what if I regretted not doing it? She kept emphasising it was the the right thing to do and so I felt that I should. I didn’t want to because I could anticipate the fall out. At the police station in order for me to get a rape kit done I had make a statement and there the police officer insisted I press charges. Again she also said this was the ‘right thing’ to do and what about preventing him from doing this to other girls? I felt I should open a case even though I didn’t want to. At this point I felt as if everything was out of my hands. I opened case and was finally able to do a rape kit and just get my PEP pills.

The rape kit was such a horrible and painful ordeal. It was so dehumanising and the victim support the police sent with me did not do anything but text on his phone the entire time and discuss his own personal problems. After all that, the victim support not only watched them mishandle my clothes that were my evidence but he gave me a thumbs up and said “you’re gonna be alright girl”. After all this I finally got the PEP pills that I had wanted and set home. At home I was phoned by a woman claiming to be the investigating officer. She said she was going to meet me and my friend outside our flat to get my friend’s statement. Instead of doing the statement outside our flat she began to drive to house of the attack and said we had to be there to show her where it happened even though I already gave her the address. She then demanded we come inside to the house and wait for my rapist to return so she could tell him I was pressing charges. I later found out this was not proper procedure and instead my rights were violated. At the house she made the call to my rapist and when him and friends arrived, in front of everyone she announced I was pressing charges of rape against him. Him and friends began to harass us and she allowed him to get in my face ( I later asked why she did this and she replied “But you were protected mos?”). The investigating officer took 2 grainy photos after the entire ordeal and only then we could leave. The police officer woman who brought us to house instead stayed behind and offered them to come to her office if they wanted the next morning. In the car she refused to speak to my therapist as I began having an anxiety attack. She then turned to my friend and said she hopes we’re telling the truth because I have ruined his “career”. She drove us home and then I left the car because I couldn’t stand to be in her presence any longer. Alone in the car with my friend she insisted that my friend tell the truth of what really happened that night. Later that night I phoned a rape crisis Center and was told that the police were not meant to take me to my attacker’s house and that it had been a violation of my rights.

The following day while I was at the doctor’s office getting a prescription for anti-anxiety and depression and sleep meds, the same police officer called me and said because my J88 form came back negative nothing happened and I was not raped. She insisted that because the form was negative I was not raped even though I reported a day later and had already showered. She then demanded to know if I would drop the case despite being opened a day before. I replied that I wanted more time and she said no, I had to be at her office by 12 that afternoon to drop the case. I later went to her office where I found my attacker and his numerous friends outside her office. Inside her office she berated my friend, demanding to see what my friend was texting on her phone and when she asked me as to why I wanted to drop the case I told her because I don’t feel supported. She then patronisingly asked what support would I like? She then asked if I was on any psychiatric medication. At this point I didn’t want to deal with all of this anymore so I just asked to drop the case. On our drive back to my flat, she told me to stay away from those boys cause they are bad news and to call her if I ever felt unsafe(??).

After contacting my school’s sexual harassment Center I was told that from the word go, no proper procedure and protocol was followed in my rape case. I was re-victimised by being made to talk to my rapist and accuse I’m in front of people. The relevant people were not notified despite telling them I was a student at this University. The investigating officer began calling me to threaten my friend to stay away from this case. I was pressured by the police to drop my case. My clothes were mishandled at the hospital and victim support didn’t utter two words to me except a thumbs up and a you’ll be alright girl. To make matters worse my mother only focuses on the fact that I can’t drop out of school and can only focus finishing the school year despite being extremely traumatised. When I tried to vocalise this to her, her response was that I shouldn’t dare be rude to her. She then lied about my father seeing a video of me being drunk in order for me to tell him what happened, knowing he’s ignorant and victim blames.

All in all, this entire experience has been so traumatic for me. I literally feel suicidal and alone. The systems meant to support me have not done so and instead threatened and demonised me. My mother has decided to take toxic positivity mindset and insisted that if I focus on my schoolwork everything will make sense. I don’t know who’s this gonna reach, I just wanted to get my story out and say what happened to me and why I would not report my sexual assault.

When I do inevitably end up killing myself, I don’t want the same support system to cry and try make it seem as if I didn’t ask for help because I did and I was failed at every turn.

[purplesurveys]

766

My dad is starting to gear me up for ~adult life~ and has made me start a Paypal, a social security number, and all that jazz and it’s making me immensely anxious, so expect more surveys than usual in the next few days lmao.

How frequently are you inclined to read, and how much? Not frequent at all. I’ll read only if I have to; and when it comes to reading for leisure, I’ll only reread books I’ve already read in the past. I find it sad considering how big of a bookworm I was as a kid. When was the last time you questioned the direction your life was taking? Right now, what with the Covid crisis. My life would have been mapped out ever so neatly if my life’s schedule went as expected - finish the sem, finish my thesis, graduate, travel for a bit, get a job. Now that that has been thrown out the window I essentially have to start from scratch and go into the world blind. And if you've been reading my surveys, you’ll know my least favorite thing to have to deal with is big change. Would you say that your personal views align with society's, generally? Not the society I have no choice but to be surrounded by, which is mostly Catholic, homophobic, sexist, and just very backwards in general. But when it comes to people I voluntarily choose to be with, like the friends I make and the people I follow on social media, I make sure their views are as liberal as mine so I don’t go completely crazy. ^ If not, in what ways do your opinions drastically differ? I just said it, but yeah Filipinos continue to be very resistant to more open-minded, modern views. Girls will still often be told to cover up, religions other than Christianity are viewed as wrong and of lower status, abortion is the most scandalous thing a woman could do, drug addicts must be handled with bullets and not rehab, etc. Basically everything you can roll your eyes over, that’s what Filipinos will tend to side with; and it’s very difficult to want to have your voice heard here because you will be ridiculed and thrown Bible verses instead of legit arguments. What small things have the ability to get under your skin? People who only start picking their orders once they’re the ones at the cashier, drivers who do have their turn signal on but will go THE OTHER DIRECTION, finding out there’s a car accident and I find out traffic has been building up only because drivers slow down to look at the crash site. The last one makes me especially mad every time it happens lol.

When was the last time you were caused to be upset with someone? I haven’t been upset with anyone in a while. If I’m upset these days, blame it on the weather. ^ Have you made up with that individual yet, or will you ever? I will never be ok with the summer climate over here. What is something small that has the ability to cure a bad mood? Hearing a favorite song on the radio as I’m driving, hitting all the green lights while driving, finding a parking spot near the mall entrance... man I really miss going out :(( What beverage is best capable of quenching your thirst? Water. What was the last big change through which you went? It hasn’t happened yet but I’ll be graduating and will officially be done with school forever in a few weeks. I mean, that’s the case unless I decide to take up a master’s but honestly the chances of that are super blurry as I’m over school at this point. ^ Do you deal well with change, typically? Have you always? I am honestly terrible at it and as much as I’m excited to get my first real job, I’m also scared to see how my adjustment pans out. I’ve had a pattern for not being able to adapt well to a new phase – I didn’t adjust in high school until my junior year, and I didn’t adjust in college until the latter half of my sophomore year. I really wish the trend doesn’t continue in the workplace because I can’t handle another mental slump. How do you feel after spending a great quantity of time online? I feel nothing? I mean I need the internet to do almost everything so it’s just become a part of daily routine; it’s normalized already. I would tend to feel some shame if I’ve been unproductive online when I could’ve been doing much more important stuff, but I’ve been avoiding that - I’ve been working on my thesis again, working on stuff for my org, participating in my other extracurriculars, etc. I feel relatively productive given the current circumstances. What do you consider to be the biggest drawback to being you? Like I said, I’m terrible with change. It takes forever for me to warm up to new conditions, and in that period I tend to feel very alone and miserable. I don’t know why I’ve never learned to just get out and make friends earlier. What do you consider the best part of being who you are? ^ Related to said drawback, once I have adjusted to the change, I do very well. I make lots of friends and am back to being my bubbly, social self. I just wish She could come out more easily. What kinds of things do you have on display in your room? Several Audrey Hepburn frames, a couple of paintings, and a poster of a Korean actor. What do you think your room and its contents say about you, if anything? I think more than anything you’ll see how my interests have shifted over the years haha. There’s tons of old WWE magazines, Paramore albums, Beyoncé albums and DVDs, crafty stuff like painting sets and coloring books, etc. When was the last time you felt insecure about something/some situation? Half hour ago when my dad was encouraging me to register for a bunch of grownup stuff. He doesn’t pester me a lot in small bits everyday (which I would really prefer); he’s more of a I’ll-dump-all-this-shit-on-you-in-one-go kind of person, which pressures me even more. I mean I’m excited for this new chapter but I wish he didn’t tell me to start a bank account and a Paypal and a social security number and a TIN all at the same time. What is something about which you are very confident or self-assured? I pride myself on being a good worker/co-worker. Do you ever stop to contemplate infinity? No. Are you comfortable amongst nature, or does the wilderness discomfit you? Sure, it makes me feel at peace. When was the last time someone or something caught you off guard? Andrew did a buuuunch of progress on our thesis this afternoon after a few days of passive-aggressively telling him that I’ve been doing all the work in the last week. How much time do you put into maintaining your appearance and hygiene? I don’t want to take a lot of time since I’m usually on a tight schedule but I do put enough effort to look and smell nice, if that makes sense. Like I wouldn’t take hours to do my makeup and put up an intricate hairdo, but I will still make sure I don’t exit the house looking shabby. Are there any foods you eat daily? . . . Or wish you could? I have rice and some sort of meat everyday. When was the last time someone new entered your life? Start of the semester when we had a new wave of applicants joining our org. ^ What was your first impression of that individual? They all seemed nice and fun to be around, and I’m glad their batch has had amazing chemistry from the get-go. But because of the lockdown I never got to know them all that well so I’m a little sad about it, since I’m already graduating. Do you put much thought into your handwriting? No? It’s not really something I can control anyway haha. What are some of the top priorities in your life right now? Ugh I’ve talked about this so much on here that it’s almost stupid because I take these surveys to begin with to distract myself from my current anxieties only for the surveys to ask about said anxieties ksksksks. Can I say pass for now? Lol In general, how do you feel about romantic relationships? They’re nice, and it feels good to have a person you can share everything to, be affectionate with, who supports you in everything, etc. I’ve been used to being in one for so long now I honestly can’t imagine being single. Which emotional sensation inconveniences or bothers you the most? As if I haven’t talked about it on this single survey enough, anxiety. Are you capable of consoling others in their grief? It depends on how bad is the thing they’re grieving and how accepting they are of help. I don’t know if I’m capable of talking to someone who has lost a parent, but I’ll be able to talk to a friend who’s going through a breakup. Do you ever find it awkward to compliment another being? No. I can give compliments, but I’m unable to take them. When was the last time you had a new experience? What was it? Earlier this afternoon when my dad made me make a Paypal hahaha. Skskss plz stop reminding me of scary things Do you dress more for yourself, or to the expectations of others? A little bit of both. I want to look nice, but I also make sure I keep up with the trends so others think I look nice. What kinds of things tend to stress you out? The stuff I’ve mentioned throughout this survey... What is one way you cope when you feel like crap? I watch videos, I eat whatever I’m craving, I talk about it with my girlfriend, I hug my dog... I have a lot of coping mechanisms.

Name an insult you regularly receive, if there is one? My mom tells me so many insults on a regular basis I can put each one of them in a spinning wheel and give you whatever comes out lol. Name a site that takes up a lot of your time? YouTube. What is something you used to believe about life that you no longer do? That money was easy to acquire. It was certainly so easy to fantasize about as a kid. What is a lesson you have recently learned? I don’t recall picking up anything new lately. Realizations, sure; but I’m not sure about lessons. Do you have a tendency to look on the morbid side of life? Sometimes. When was the last time you went shopping? What did you buy? A weekend before the quarantine. I bought a couple of new tops. When you shop for clothing, how long does it take you? 10-15 minutes tops. I just pick out whatever looks pretty. What is something fun you have done within the past week? It’s been a horrid week. I can’t answer this question. What is something you hope you never have to do again? Stay at home with nothing to do for this long. How does the rain affect your mood, if it does? It makes me feel happy and at peace.

[adriennemareebrown]

what do we do with unthinkable thoughts?

who are we in our unthinkable thinking moments?

how do we adapt together if the clues to our next pivot are unthinkable?

maybe sharing these unthinkable thoughts will help?

i’ll start with the scariest unthinkable thought for me, which is that maybe we are in a state of collective suicidal ideation – the state of thinking about, even planning, the end of us. i have thought this thought many times, for years.

i have ideated suicide in the past, thought it didn’t much matter if i was here or not, and so it didn’t much matter how i treated myself or others. when i was in that phase of ambiguous commitment to life, i took risks with my mind and body that i couldn’t imagine taking now. i practiced cynicism and hopelessness, as if they were the measures of humor, of intelligence. it was a brief phase of my life, but during that time i believed in nothing.

i tried to exit.

i then had to choose life from deep within me. that’s why i’m still here. i want to live. i want to want to live. i think everyone chooses to move towards life or away from it, though some don’t realize that they are making the choice. capitalism makes it hard to see your own direction.

as i have watched the world respond to the pandemic, the borders between nations shift meaning in my mind. i can see which countries choose life, and which don’t. which countries have a majority life-minded citizenship, which countries/regions elect leaders who care for them. which countries pivot at the highest governmental level to protect their people, to guide their people to protect themselves – places with a variety of economies and exposure have found ways to move towards life.

i wonder about the movements in those countries, what it might feel like to live and organize in a place that chooses life.

choosing life means being able to admit we are wrong when new information presents itself about the dangers around and amongst us.

choosing life means committing to the adaptations to stay alive, rather than the stubbornness to stay the same.

the u.s., as a nation, does not choose, or love, life. not yet, and possibly never before now.

other nations, many amongst the most developed in the world, initially shrugged at COVID-19. then they adapted.

the u.s. response has been more egregious than a shrug; it’s been a flagrant disregard, running towards a category five pandemic tornado. it’s meant that those of us who want to live are watching in horror as the mutating coronavirus fills in the pre-existing grooves of collective suicidal ideation and the resistance of those who love life – with climate deniers and corporate polluters on one side, environmental and climate justice movements on the other. white supremacists and patriarchs on one side, solidarity movements in race, ethnicity, class, gender, ability and sexuality arenas on the other.

we are a nation not divided but torn – pulled towards life and pulled towards death.

when i get that torn feeling within, which in recent years comes very rarely, in twinges and whisps, i now recognize it as the suicidal tendency in me. it’s not the truth, not the only truth, not my truth, not the choice i want to make. but the tendency is wiley, using the voices of people i love to make itself heard. i have to be vigilant, listen between the lines, ask: who would benefit from my absence? who benefits from my self-doubt?

our nation has a tendency towards its own destruction, a doubt of its right to exist, that is rooted in our foundation.

i think our movements struggle inside this larger national suicidal tendency – we want to grow, but at the same time some of us don’t believe we will all get there, or get anywhere better, in time. that we can’t, and won’t, put forth the effort.

maybe the idea of our future generations experiencing peace and abundance is not enough to keep us going.

maybe we just need some more immediate signs of life.

maybe we are terrified.

i, we, have to be able to discern what is me/us, and what is fear.

which leads to my next unthinkable thought: do i really know the difference between my discernment and my fear?

my dear friend Malkia teaches me that there is the fear intended to save your life, vs fear intended to end it. what i mean by discernment is the set of noticings, fears, wisdoms, deductions, and gut tremblings that want to save, or even just improve, my life, versus the fear that makes me unable to do anything, which makes me unable to draw on my life force to take action.

do i think i am being discerning when i am actually frozen in place, scared to change?

am i too scared of standing out from the crowd to pause and discern right action?

am i acting from terror?

am i able to discern a decision or action that makes sense?

i was in italy when the pandemic really became clear as a threat to my well-being. i went to one of the places i felt at home. and once i got there, i again found myself freezing, in denial of next moves, as everyone asked me where i was and when i was going home-home or elsewhere.

in my frozen state i would hear just a bit of the news, the new numbers of crisis, and shake my head at the idiots in office, and then numb back out. having quickly identified who i blamed, i was even less able to feel any agency in me. i froze and delayed and froze until i was overwhelmed by the inquiries.

then i had an excellent therapy session where i noticed:

oh. i am afraid. i am afraid that the pandemic is on the rise everywhere and i am going to leave safety for a dangerous unknown. oh! i don’t know what to do!

as soon as i acknowledged i was afraid i was able to move into discernment. my fear became data – i am afraid because the numbers are clear that i am in a safer place than any of the locations i am considering going to. i should stay put, not because i am afraid, but because, as my fear is actually screaming on behalf of my informed intuition, this is the best place to be in this moment.

my fear made me freeze until i had to move. therapy helped me notice i was afraid, deepen my breath, and return to discernment.

i see the same vacillation between fear and discernment in our movements right now, with no therapist in sight.

we are afraid of being hurt, afraid because we have been hurt, afraid because we have caused hurt, afraid because we live in a world that wants to hurt us whether we have hurt others or not, just based on who we are, on any otherness from some long-ago determined norm. supremacy is our ongoing pandemic. it partners with every other sickness to tear us from life, or from lives worth living.

so we stay put and scream into the void, moving our rage across the internet like a tornado that, without discernment, sucks up all in its path for destruction.

our emotions and need for control are heightened during this pandemic – we are stuck in our houses or endangering ourselves to go out and work, terrified and angry at the loss of our plans and normalcy, terrified and angry at living under the oppressive rule of an administration that does not love us and that is racist and ignorant and violent. grieving our unnecessary dead, many of whom are dying alone, unheld by us. we are full of justified rage. and we want to release that rage. and one really fast and easy way to do this is what i experience as a salem witch trial, a false bid for justice, or the even faster method of lynching.

before i move on, i need to acknowledge that these are extreme terms, terms that refer to systems of death. i know that i am speaking of a social destruction, a significantly less extreme consequence – and i am trying to place my finger on a feeling of punitive justice unleashed in our movements.

in our movements, this feeling of punitive justice comes in the wake of call outs of leaders or those with some increased exposure or access. in the past week i have seen people called out for embodying white supremacy in the workplace, for causing repeated or one-time sexual harm, for physical, emotional or digital abuse, for appropriation of ideas and images, for patriarchy, for ableism, for being dishonest, for saying harmful things a decade ago, for doing things that were later understood as harm – for embodying all of the pain that supremacy holds. the call outs generally share one side of what’s happened and then call for immediate consequences. and within a day, the call out is everywhere, the cycle of blame and shame activated, and whoever was called out has begun being punished.

we are afraid, and we think it will assuage our fears and make us safer if we can clarify an enemy, a someone outside of ourselves who is to blame, who is guilty, who is the origin of harm. we can get spun into such frenzy in our fear that we don’t even realize we are deploying the master’s tools.

ah, audre, come in.

we’ve always known lynch mobs are a master’s tool. meaning: moving as an angry mob, sparked by fear (often unfounded or misguided) with the power to issue instant judgment and instant punishment. these are master’s tools.

we in movements for justice didn’t create lynch mobs. we didn’t create witch trials. we didn’t create this punitive system of justice. we didn’t create the state, we didn’t choose to be socialized within it. we want to dismantle these systems of mass harm, and i know that most of us have no intention of ever mimicking state processes of navigating justice.

the master’s tools feel good to use, groove in the hand easily from repeated use and training. but they are often blunt and senseless.

unless we have a true analysis of abolition and dismantling systems of oppression, we will not realize what’s in our hands, we will never put the master’s tools down and figure out what our tools are and can be.

oh – but you can’t say it’s a salem witch trial if it’s all Black and Brown and queer and trans people doing it…

oh – you can’t call it a lynching, because of the power dynamics! it’s a move against someone with more power.

but then – my third unthinkable thought – why does it feel like that? why do our movements more and more often feel like angry mobs moving against ourselves? and what is at stake because of it? why does it feel like someone pointing at someone else and saying: that person is harmful! and with no questions or process or time or breath, we are collectively punishing them?

sometimes we even do it with the language of transformative justice: claiming that we are going to give them room to grow. they need to disappear completely to be accountable. we are publicly shaming them so that they will learn to be better.

underneath this logic i hear: we are dunking her in the water to see if she drowns, because if she drowns then we know she wasn’t a witch. we are hanging him from the tree because then we can pretend we have exorcised ‘bad’ from our town. we are lynching to affirm our rightness.

which isn’t to say that some of the accused aren’t raging white supremacists in movement clothing. or abusers who have slipped through the fingers of accountability. or shady in some other way.

which isn’t to say that a public accounting of harm, and consequences, aren’t necessarily the correct move.

which isn’t to say we don’t believe survivors. because we must.

but how do we believe survivors and still be abolitionist? and still practice transformative justice?

to start with, i have been trying to discern when a call out feels powerful, like the necessary move, versus when it feels like the witch trial/lynch mob energy is leading.

it feels powerful when there have been private efforts for accountability. it feels powerful when survivors are being supported. it feels necessary when the accused has avoided accountability, particularly (but not exclusively) if they have continued to cause harm. it feels necessary when the accused person has significantly more power than the accuser(s) and is using that power to avoid accountability. it feels powerful when the demand is process and consequence based.

it feels like a lynch mob when there are no questions asked. when the survivor’s healing takes a back seat. when there is no attempt to have a private process. when there is no time between accusation and the call for consequences. and when the only consequence is for the accused to cease to exist. when the accused is from one or more oppressed identities. when it feels performative. when the person accused of causing harm does what the survivor/crowd demands, but we keep pulling up the rope.

no inquiry, no questions, no acceptance of accountability, no jury, no time for the learning and unlearning necessary for authentic change…just instant and often unsatisfactory consequences.

a moment on this: one of the main demands i see in call outs is for a public apology. to expect a coherent authentic apology from someone who has been forcibly removed from power or credibility feels like a set up. usually they issue some pr sounding thing and we use that paper as more fuel for the fire at their feet.

i have seen the convoluted denial-accountability-nonapology message from many an accused harm doer, especially when physical or sexual harm is involved. sometimes they are claiming innocence, sometimes they are admitting to some harm, rarely at the level of the accusation. sometimes they say they tried to have a process but it didn’t work, or they were denied. who knows what they mean by process, who knows if the accuser was ready for a process, who knows what actually happened between them, the relational context of the instance or pattern of harm, who knows?

the truth about sexual assault and rape and patriarchy and white supremacy and other abuses of power is that we are swimming in them, in a society that has long normalized them, and that they often play out intimately.

the truth is, sometimes it takes a long time for us to realize the harm that has happened to us.

and longer to realize we have caused harm to others.

the truth is, it isn’t unusual to only realize harm happened in hindsight, with more perspective and politicization.

but there’s more truth, too.

the additional truth is, right now we have the time.

the additional truth is, even though we want to help the survivor, we love obsessing over and punishing ‘villains’. we end up putting more of our collective attention on punishing those accused of causing harm than supporting and centering the healing of survivors.

the additional truth is, we want to distance ourselves from those who cause harm, and we are steeped in a punitive culture which, right now, is normalizing a methodology of ‘punish first, ask questions later’, which is a witch trial, lynching, master’s tool methodology. which, because we are in the age of social media, we now have a way to practice very publicly.

supremacy is the original pandemic, an infectious disease that quietly roots into each of us. we might have supremacy due to race, citizenship, gender, class, ableism, age, access, fame, or other areas where we feel justified to cause harm without consequence, sometimes without even realizing we’ve caused harm, because supremacy is a numbing and narrowing disease.

i want us to let go of the narrowness of innocence, widen our understanding of how harm moves through us. i want us to see individual acts of harm as symptoms of systemic harm, and to do what we can to dismantle the systems and get as many of us free as possible.

often a call out comes because the disease has reached an acute state in someone, is festering in hiding, is actively causing harm. i want us to see the difference between the human and the disease, to see what we are afraid of, in others and in ourselves, and discern a path that actually addresses the root of our justified fears.

this is not a case against call outs – there is absolutely a need for certain call outs – when power is greatly imbalanced and multiple efforts have been made to stop ongoing harm, when someone accused of harm won’t participate in community accountability processes, the call out is a way of pulling an emergency brake.

but it should be a last option. the consequences of being called out at this point are extremely dire and imprecise. the presence of infiltration in our movements is so documented and prevalent. call outs are an incredible modern tool for those who are not committed to movements to use against those having impact.

right now calling someone out online seems like first/only option for a lot of people.

i can’t help but wonder who benefits from movements that engage in public infighting, blame, shame and knee jerk call outs? i can’t help but see the state grinning, gathering all the data it needs, watching us weaken ourselves. meanwhile, the harm continues.

i don’t find it satisfying, and i don’t think it is transformative to publicly call people out for instant consequences with no attempt at a conversation, mediation, boundary setting or a community accountability process with a limited number of known participants.

it doesn’t make sense to say ‘believe all survivors’ if we don’t also remember that most of us are survivors, which includes most people who cause harm. what we mean is we are tired of being silenced, dismissed, powerless in our pain, hurt over and over. yes. but being loud is different from being whole, or even being heard, being cared for, being comforted, being healed. being loud is different from being just. being able to destroy is different from being able to generate a future where harm isn’t happening all around us.

we are terrified of how widespread and active harm is, and it makes us want to point the finger and quickly remove those we can identify as bad. we want to protect each other from those who cause harm.

many of us seem to worry that if we don’t immediately jump on whatever mob wagon has pulled up in our dms, that we will be next to be called out, or called a rape apologist or a white person whisperer or an internalized misogynist, or just disposed of for refusing to group think and then group act. online, we perform solidarity for strangers rather than engaging in hard conversations with comrades.

we are fearful of taking the time to be discerning, because then we may have to recognize that any of us could be seen as harmdoers. and when we are discerning, when we do step up to say wait, let’s get understanding here, we risk becoming the new target, viewed as another accomplice to harm instead of understood as a comrade in ending harm.

perhaps, most dangerously, we are, all together now, teetering on the edge of hopelessness. collective suicidal ideation, pandemic burnout, 45-in-office burnout, climate catastrophe burnout and other exhaustions have us spent and flailing, especially if we are caught in reactive loops (which include the culture of multiple daily call outs) instead of purposeful adaptations. some of us are losing hope, tossed by the tornado, ungrounded and uprooted by the pace of change, seeking something tangible we can do, control, hold, throw away.

the kind of callouts we are currently engaging in do not necessarily think about movements’ needs as a whole. movements need to grow and deepen, we need to ‘transform ourselves to transform the world’*, to ‘be transformed in the service of the work’**. movements need to become the practice ground for what we are healing towards, co-creating. movements are responsible for embodying what we are inviting our people into. we need the people within our movements, all socialized into and by unjust systems, to be on liberation paths. not already free, but practicing freedom every day. not already beyond harm, but accountable for doing our individual and internal work to end harm, which includes actively working to gain awareness of the ways we can and have harmed each other, and ending those cycles in ourselves and our communities.

knee jerk call outs say: those who cause harm cannot change. they must be eradicated. the bad things in the world cannot change, we must disappear the bad until there is only good left.

but one layer under that, what i hear is:

we cannot change.

we do not believe we can create compelling pathways from being harm doers to being healed, to growing.

we do not believe we can hold the complexity of a gray situation.

we do not believe in our own complexity.

we can only handle binary thinking: good/bad, innocent/guilty, angel/abuser, black/white, etc.

it is a different kind of suicide, to attack one part of ourselves at a time. cancer does this, i have seen it – oh it’s in the throat, now it’s in the lungs, now it’s in the bones. when we engage in knee jerk call outs and instant consequences with no process, we become a cancer unto ourselves, unto movements and communities. we become the toxicity we long to heal. we become a tool of harm when we are trying to be, and i think meant to be, a balm.

oh unthinkable thoughts. now that i have thought you, it becomes clear to me that all of you are rooted in a singular longing: i want us to want to live.

i want us to want to live in this world, in this time, together.

i want us to love this planet and this species, at this time.

i want us to see ourselves as larger than just individuals randomly pinging around in a world that will never care for us.

i want us to see ourselves as a murmuration of creatures who are, as far as we know right now, unique in all the universe. each cell, each individual body, itself a unique part of this unique complexity.

i want us not to waste the time we have together.

i want us to look at each other with the eyes of interdependence, such that when someone causes harm, we find the gentle parent inside of us who can use a voice of accountability, while also bringing curiosity – ‘why did you cause harm? do you know? do you know other options? apologize.’ that we can set boundaries that don’t require the disappearance of other survivors. that we can act towards accountability with the touch of love. that when someone falls behind, we can use a parent’s voice of discipline while also picking them up and carrying them for a while if needed.

i want us to adapt from systems of oppression and punishment to systems of uplifting and transforming.

i want us to notice that this is a moment when we need to choose life, not surrender to the incompetence and hopelessness of our national leadership.

i want us to be discerning.

i want our movement to feel like a vibrant, accountable space where causing harm does not mean you are excluded immediately and eternally from healing, justice, community or belonging.

i want us to grow lots and lots of skill at holding the processes by which we mend the wounds in our communities and ourselves.

i want satisfying consequences that actually end cycles of harm, generate safety and deepen movement.

i want us to hold Black humanity to the highest degree of protection, even when we have caused harm. i want us to see each other’s trauma-induced behavior as ancestral and impermanent, even as we hold each other accountable.

i want us to be particularly rigorous about holding complexity and accountability well for Black people in our movement communities who are already struggling to keep our heads above water and build trust and move towards life under the intersecting weights of white supremacy, racialized capitalism, police brutality, philanthropic competition culture, and lack of healing support.

i never want to see us initiate processes for Black accountability where those who are not invested in Black life can see it, store it, weaponize it. replace Black in that sentence with any other oppressed peoples and i still feel the same way. it is not strategic, and, again, it is rarely satisfying.

i want us to ask who benefits from our hopelessness, and to deny our oppressors the satisfaction of getting to see our pain. i want them to wonder how we foment such consistent and deep solidarity and unlearning. i want our infiltrators to be astounded into their own transformations, having failed to tear us apart.

i want us to acknowledge that the supremacy and suicidal ideation and hopelessness and harm are everywhere, and make moves that truly allow us to heal into wholeness.

because against all odds in space and time? we. are. winning.

we are winning in spite of the tsunami of pressures against us. we are moving towards life in spite of everything that wants us to give up.

we in movement must learn to choose life even in conflict, composting the bad behaviors while holding the beating hearts.

choosing life includes asking: do i have the necessary information to form an opinion? do i have the time to seek understanding? what does the survivor need? did a conversation/process already happen? is a conversation/process possible? how do we be abolitionist while gaining accountability here? who benefits from me doubting that movement can hold this? who could hold this well? what will end the cycle of harm here?

we must learn to do this before there is no one left to call out, or call we, or call us.

….

thank you deeply to shira hassan and malkia devich cyril for loving feedback on this piece.

* grace lee Boggs ** mary hooks

[srwestvikwrites]

Privilege is the Haven of Thorns

I wrote this post the week George Floyd was murdered. I was angry, and tired, and confused, and increasingly more apprehensive in my capacity as a person and as a writer as I was drawn in to the immense whirlpool of the zeitgeist gripping the internet and society. 

It was such a complicated and emotional time. I was wracked with guilt at not going to the BLM protest in Madrid because we had just opened up into Phase 2 of the desescalada and I was scared of COVID. I was furious at the denial of individuals in my home country of Singapore who refused to believe that just because our race riots were in 1964 and not 2020 that it meant we had no more issues of systemic discrimination or privilege to challenge. I was exasperated and uneasy and inspired at having been drawn into a massive shitshow about race that rocked the Tolkien fandom within the same timeframe.

All of this made me question my place and my purpose as an author writing a story like Haven of Thorns. It doesn’t dwell on these issues, but it draws on them, in the same way that my life doesn’t linger on the colonisation of my home country or the country of my ancestors (India) and yet is irrevocably shaped by this history. 

Haven of Thorns was always going to be a story taking place in the strange rivers of colonial legacy. It is a story of drowned histories and ghosts that reside in the very stones of a city and demons that linger inside people who were happy enough to let them back in. All of it is pushed along by the current of time, where history is not stagnant but forces change. It is about war, and it is about subtle discrimination, and it is about what we choose to do when we’re so hung up on our independence story that we refuse to acknowledge the rot in our roots.

I’m reproducing the post as I wrote it all those weeks ago, even though there are better ways I could have expressed my thoughts, and indeed some of these thoughts have new nuances now as I have drafted pivotal scenes in the story. There are other things I’d rather have focused on. The haven of thorns is more than mere privilege now. And perhaps one day I’ll expand on that.

But for now, this is a historical record of what I was thinking as it was all going down and I was trying to decide what sort of story I wanted to tell in the world I lived in as the person I am.

_________________________________________________

I’m not going to be coy about the metaphor anymore. This book was always going to be highly political. It has just become even more political. I cannot begin to describe how apt and how heartbreaking it is to be drafting my novel right now.

Some context should perhaps be given as to the kinds of politics that are informing this story. I began outlining the earliest iterations of Haven of Thorns at the height of the European migration crisis. While migration itself is not a main theme of the story – and where it does feature, it’s from a rather inverted historical power dynamic – the backlash against it was always present in the telling of the tale. The rise of the European right terrified me. I had never experienced open racism before until one incident when I moved to Norway in late 2015, where I was lucky enough to have an ally at the time, though I never learned her name. I have seen far too many swastikas misappropriated from their holiness to represent hatred, spraypainted on neighbourhood walls in Trondheim, London, and Madrid.

For many years, I likened racism and xenophobia and white supremacy to a contagion, even to possession (which may have been down to the title of this book I read during high school). My view on this has changed, now. For those raised into these ideas, sure, the demon metaphor may still apply. But for many, these corrupted values take root and fester because we allow them to.

The old first draft of Haven of Thorns was begun in the first week of November, 2016. I feel I have no need to elaborate on why this timing is significant. Globally, the sense of the triumph of ignorance and vitriol was palpable. Over the next few years, partially because I became more active on social media and partially because of the degree I was studying for, every day required exposure to injustices very often predicated on culture, ethnicity, language, and/or race.

Then in 2019 Singapore commemorated the bicentennial – our 200 year anniversary of being colonised. And once again I was confronted with the bizarre lack of acknowledgment of how blatantly race relations had been directed and segmented by the British, and how whatever the government line says, we have not bounced back from the wounds that gouged in our society. I interned at an NGO dealing with race relations, and it only illuminated what we’d rather cover up – the value judgements we make of people based off their skin colour, the god(s) the pray to, or the language they speak. When COVID-19 reared its head Singapore was lauded for their response, until it hit the migrant worker dormitories. That was a powder keg waiting to explode. And it is false and unjust to pretend that the conditions they are living in do not have their own origins in the petulant protests of those who unfairly profiled and characterised the workers and robbed them of better conditions, resulting in the tragedy that has taken place now.

Even climate justice and its link to ethnicity began to seep into the story, particularly during the early 2020 fires in Australia and how severely the Aboriginal peoples were affected.

As I write this post Minneapolis is up in arms, and Americans are out in the thousands across the country protesting for justice for George Floyd and the countless other black Americans who have been victims of the system and of police violence.

Growing from childhood to adulthood in the 2000s-2010s has meant growing up in a time when discussions about race, ethnicity, culture, and the legacies of our most backward perceptions and prejudiced notions have come to the forefront, both of activism and of violent action taken against others. How could I not be impacted, for example, by the horror of the massacre in Norway on 22 July? How could I not have felt the shadow of the War on Terror through the rampant Islamophobia in the media and in society?

The extent to which all these disparate ideas of politics and power and race and xenophobia and colonialism actually manifest in Haven of Thorns isn’t perhaps measurable in the amount I’ve discussed them here. But the core of this book is that the haven is privilege, and thorns are both the barrier of our ignorance and the spears upon which we sacrifice those who challenge it.  White privilege in the West. Chinese privilege in Singapore. Yes I fucking said it. To refuse to see that is privilege, in and of itself. One can feel hurt, to be associated with the violent ways these ideas manifest. Or, one can choose to acknowledge that feeling implicated by despicable acts is perhaps the spark to challenge one’s own biases.

This story is about breaking that thorn barrier and letting in the light, in all its unbridled blinding glory, to burn away the festering hatred we’ve allowed to take root in our flesh.

In the end an important theme in Haven of Thorns – perhaps the most important – is the power structures and prejudices that prevail when colonisation has ended, along with its associated forms of exploitation, and a state becomes self-governing. It’s about who remains in power, why they remain there, and what it means for those who do not have an equal share in that power. I’m not just talking about physical force. I’m talking about value judgments that disenfranchise people based on their inherent qualities. Things like language, religion, or skin colour. Having a voice and having the power to exercise and sustain what you advocate for are all very different things, and this is why these stories cannot be apolitical. A person’s life, their right to life, and their rights to liberty and equality should not be a matter of politics – and yet they are. Because politics is about power. And power is far too often exercised unjustly.

Blaming the old oppressor only works up to a point. At some stage, a country has to face what it has done and continues to do to itself, and whether they are going to choose to make collective, powerful, and perhaps jarring value changes for the sake of basic human rights and justice. After all, prejudice is learned. It can be unlearned.

While this tale focuses on the legacy of colonisation, these same principles lie behind the abuse of authority and the untended wounds of what has happened to the black community in America for centuries, itself founded upon ideas of racial superiority. The police brutality coupled with endorsement from the highest offices in the land is a horrific ugliness – but worse, is those who choose not to see it for what it is. Those who tweet #alllivesmatter. Those who say they don’t see colour. Those who question why race has to be dragged into everything. To quote Moses in Dreamworks’s The Prince of Egypt: “I did not see because I did not wish to see.” This is privilege. This is us inviting contagion into our societies and refusing to mask up and letting it kill us from the inside out. But unlike a contagion, this is discriminatory. That is the essence of it. The differential treatment is the point. If you question why people are burning and looting, why they aren’t being “peaceful”, why they don’t comply (they do – it doesn’t work, as anyone who watched the clip of the CNN reporter would know), why they are so angry – then you are in the haven of thorns. You just refuse to acknowledge it, because the only light seeping into your little puddle is filtered, screened, and you’d rather ignore the shadows cast by the thorns.

So many of the choices in Haven of Thorns hinge upon deciding whether to preserve or whether to overturn these vicious cycles of hatred. It’s so painful to see these struggles continue to be mirrored in the real world, happening to real communities at this very moment. Part of me wants to stop writing this, because I cannot begin to capture the true agony of what is happening, no matter how much I empathise. But another part of me knows that I am in a position of great privilege, and perhaps it is time I put my voice to something that truly matters. Add another line to the anthem that advocates for these deep-set value changes that we need to make on a domestic and an international scale.

In the first very first chapter of this story, the royal palace burns. It may just as well have been a police station.

[hollowcrovvn]

The Ostensive Fumblings of Being Human (part 3)

Pairing: Connor x female!reader Rating: T (please note rating change) Summary: Set two months after the ending of Detroit: Become Human, androids are living in government created “pop-up” communities while efforts are being made to integrate them into society. You are a grad-student volunteer with the Detroit Crisis Response Unit (DCRU), working to help with relief efforts. And now, finally it’s time for that coffee.

Notes: Disclaimer: I am obsessed with Machiavelli so it was only a matter of time before I threw him in here. And by obsessed I mean I loathe most of his points of view and like some of them. It's a love-hate thing. One of my first “date questions” is always on Machiavelli and I feel like it is very relevant given the upheaval and changes in the “government” in the end of the game as a result of the revolution.Though his bit on Moses is making me have all the Markus-needs-to-eventually-appear inklings. (part 1) (part 2) (part 3) (part 4) (part 5) (part 6) (part 7) (ao3)

It had started as just a regular conversation on interests, tucked in the back of the coffee shop where there were nice sleek couches to lounge in, but had divulged into an intense debate on one of the most important topics of the past-- Kindles.

“Okay. The world treated eReaders like the devil in the early 2010s. Now? Can barely find a printed book anywhere.”

“Which has cut down on mass deforestation since paper is no longer in high demand.” Connor noted, playing devil’s advocate so perfectly it was enough to make a conflict addicted girl swoon.

“Exactly! So why all the fuss back when? Cause of some preoccupation with nostalgia ? Even now you got guys like Hank who bemoan the loss of paperbacks, as if we’re all gonna forget how to read in the meanwhile.”

Connor smiled and reached out, plucking the sleeve of your jacket aka the remake of the 2003 Canada Goose brand. He sat back, looking pleased with himself as you grumbled into your second latte. Granted, it hardly looked like coffee at all but more like chocolate milk with the amount of creamer you’d had them use. You’d refused to order your usual, to Connor’s chagrin. He had not yet it seemed formed an opinion to what your actual favorite was.

“It’s different! They responsibly source the materials for those coats now.” you insisted, but Connor only smiled and smiled, refusing to concede to your point. As if he had any room to talk. This man had at least four different styles, alternating between professional, casual professional, street  and hipster circa 2010. He mixed them sometimes to interesting effects. You were pretty sure he spent the majority of his paycheck on clothes.Then again, after spending most of his life being forced to wear the same damn android branded attire, you could hardly blame his enthusiasm.

“One could argue the shift to electronics however, is contributing to the climate change phenomenon.” Connor added, picking up the paperback book in question that had started this conversation. It was one of Hank’s, which was shocking. The Prince by Machiavelli. You half wondered if it was meant to be a joke on Connor’s expense or if Hank had actually recommended something halfway decent, if not a bit pessimistic, for the Android to learn about.

You huffed, “So we’re killing the planet no matter what. Great. Cheery. I need another coffee.”

Connor’s LED whirled, blinking before settling a solid blue. “Your pulse is elevated to 97 beats per minute and your blood pressure has raised by 8 and 6 points in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, respectively. I would advise switching to water.”

“How do you know that's from the caffeine and not your innate magnetism .” you said, trying to lower your voice to a “sultry” level, but only managing to laugh.

“That would be highly improbable. I emit no traceable magnetic fields.”

Then the mother fucker winked .

You had begun to realize the parts of his personality you thought were intentional deadpan humor, were in fact, just deadpan facts. That one though? Definitely intentional . He picked up the book, thumbing open the pages that were dogeared and worn.

“Published in 1532, a political treatise by Italian diplomat and political-theorist, Niccolo Machiavelli. Considered one of the first books of modern philosophy, it’s topics range from human nature, military prowess, governments and history.”

He flipped to a specific page that you could tell had been once been highlighted and circled several times, now faded with time. Once upon a time, maybe Hank had noted it.

“Men judge generally more by the eye than by the hand, for everyone can see and few can feel.” he read aloud, perfect and clear. You shut your eyes and listened.

“Every one sees what you appear to be, few--” he stopped abruptly, drawing your attention upward. He swallowed, his throat bobbing, “Few... really know what you are.”

His LED flickered yellow for a few seconds and then faded back to blue. You didn't really have the heart to tell him the quote was being taken wildly out of context, because it fit too well. It spoke to him. Let it mean what he wanted it to mean.

“This should be a very interesting read. Have you read it?” he asked, turning to the beginning of the book.

“Oh yeah, me and about 100 other people in PHI 1100. “Contemporary Moral Issues”. After I limped my way through the introductory course, I managed to do somewhat decent there.”

“Do you enjoy philosophy?”

“I tolerate it. Barely. With clenched teeth. I think it’s all well and good to “feed your mind” as Dolce would say, as long as your stomach is full. That’s not a common thing for the poor though so philosophy has always seemed to me as… well, a rich-man’s way to kill time.”

You swished the remaining dregs of your latte around in the bottom of your cup.

“I think it’s real easy to sit on high telling people they need to think of this, or that when you don’t have to worry about where your next meal is coming from.”

Connor gave a wry smile, “Then it is a good thing I don’t eat. I will need to read a few more selections before I form a more in depth opinion.”

“Knock yourself out, hipster. I’ll send you all my ebooks I had to get for the classes if you want.”

He perked up, the LED on his temple spiraling.

“My designation code should appear now on your phone for upload.” he said with excitement. His eyes held onto yours patiently, the intensity of it making you flounder, quickly grabbing your phone. Sure enough there was a message that a “RK800” unit was attempting to sync to your device.

[ allow synchronization? y/n? ]

You clicked yes and watched as the phone took on a mind of its own, files opening and flipping at rapid speed until it settled upon your digital library. You set the phone down carefully, eyes flicking between Connor and the device. He had that same far away look Josh got when accessing the web. It took only a few seconds before your phone flashed the words the same time Connor spoke them,

“Upload completed. Thank you, reading these should be very…” he paused, “Fun.”

“And I thought I needed to get out more.” you said, enjoying the bright look of wonder on Connor’s face as his eyes flickered back and forth, clearly already browsing the new selection.

“It doesn’t bother you, does it?” he said, tilting his head, “I should have clarified if you meant to send them now.”

“It’s definitely gonna take some getting use to if you make a habit of connecting to my phone, but nah, it doesn’t bother me.” you said, but Connor still looked skeptical so you continued,  “I’m a little jealous to be honest, woulda made reading those bricks easier if I knew you three years ago.”

“It is very efficient. However, no more so than any other academic assistant android you could have purchased then.”

You felt a twist in your chest at the way he said “purchased” so easily when you could tell by the faint grimace on his face that the idea was as disturbing now to him as a “deviant” as it was to you.

“I meant like a classmate,” you quickly added, “Like the way we are now.”

“You study urban planning, not philosophy. Perhaps I should browse those texts as well so we can have more “classmate” simulate conversations.” he said, tilting his head to the other side as if considering the idea further.

“We can always talk about you.” you said, “What do you like?”

His head tilted slightly further, he almost looked like a puppy when he did that, brown eyes soft and always, always curious.

“I enjoy solving cases with Hank-- Lieutenant Anderson. I enjoy calibrating my reflex drive with coin tricks. I like talking with--”

You held up a hand, “Whoa whoa, back up! Coin tricks?!”

Your sudden enthusiasm seemed to take him off guard, but within a moment he produced a quarter from his pocket. He let it slowly walk across his knuckles one way and then faster backwards. You watched, rapt in attention and smiling bright.

“What else?!” you asked and Connor gave a lopsided smile, standing up.

“I need a bit more room for this one. Okay. So-- first you flip.” he said and did so, flipping the coin up once in the air, “And then--”

He flicked it so fast from one hand directly into the other that you almost missed it. Your entire face broke open, “Ooooohh my god! Do that again!”

He was more than happy to oblige, this time flicking the coin back rapidly and then ending by catching it between two fingers.

“Okay you have got to teach that one to me.”

“I’m not sure if you’d be able to get it without a lot of practice, but-- here.” he took your hand in his, carefully directing you to hold your fingers in a scissor shape the way he had. His eyes were intensely focused as he moved you exactly where he needed, carefully stepping behind you and placing his hands on your hips.

“Stand a bit more grounded.”

He nudged your shoe with his and you complied, hoping he wasn’t registering the heat rising up in your face. Was he holding on just a bit longer than was really even needed? A bit tighter? You could just barely feel the brush of his shirt at your back, leaning towards it.

“Don’t move.” he said, a soft command. You stood back up straight.

He came around to stand at your side, not even noticing the small gathering of people who were now watching the pair of you.

“Alright. Ready?”

You nodded.

“Just... hold… still.”

He paused, LED whirling for a moment before he flicked the coin and it found itself, trapped perfectly between your index and middle finger. You all but squealed, laughing with unbridled delight.

“That was so freakin’ cool! Can we do it again?”

But before Connor could take the coin from you, a man pushed over to the sitting area and scowled.

“Hey. No fuckin’ tin-can’s. Did you not see the sign lady?”

You were caught off guard, but Connor immediately straightened.

“Sign? There aren’t anymore signs.” you said, remembering that there was no tell tale red sign with a blue triangle issuing that androids were not allowed when you entered.

“There should be. There was. Now we gotta deal with these plastic freaks acting like they own the damn city.”

He looked Connor up and down with measured disgust, eyes lingering on the LED that was quickly flashing yellow.

“You should keep your pet at home.” the man continued, “You don’t see people bringing their dogs where others eat.”

“Sir, I’m going to have to ask you to please return to your table.” Connor’s voice was more mechanical than you had heard it before, measured and even, despite the yellow light flickering.

“I detect levels of ethanol on your breath. A bit early for a nightcap, isn’t it?” Connor continued and the man’s expression switched quickly to shocked and then pissed.

“Keep your fuckin’ eyes off me, freak.” he said, shoving Connor, who did not even move a fraction. “Public intoxication is a misdemeanor under Section 750.168 of the Michigan penal code. I advise you take your coffee home, sir, and sober up .” Connor said, standing up way too far into this guy’s space to be mistaken for anything but an invitation that said, Hit me, do it. I dare you.

You moved forward, quickly slipping your arm between the two men, curling it around Connor’s abdomen. You slid your entire body between them, the asshole guy stepping back.

“Hey, he’s a cop . See?” you pushed aside Connor’s jacket, displaying the DPD badge on his hip.

“You wanna add assaulting an officer to that rap sheet he’s already typing up from his head?”

The guy noted the badge and despite his initial aggression, he took a step back.

“Whatever, bitch.”

You sighed, relieved he was backing off, until Connor lurched forward from behind you. You spun around, pushing your palms flat against his chest. He didn’t resist you, but he didn’t take his eyes off the guy either.

“Apologize to her.” he said, each word punctuated with rigid coldness, LED flashing red.

“Fuck you and your plastic-fuckin’ girlfriend.”

“Hey!” a voice drew all three of your attention up to a barista wearing a different uniform than the others, designating her a manager, “How about you all take a breather somewhere else before I call the real cops?”

“Fine.” you said, pushing back at Connor who had stepped forward again trying to outmaneuver you.

“It’s a nice sunny day and I’m not a fan of the smell of shit and espresso.” you said, giving the guy a glare of your own. You took Connor’s hand, ignoring any comments from anyone else as you headed out the door. Connor didn’t fight you, but walked briskly away from the coffee shop to the point it was now like he was leading you.

His grip was tight, unrelenting. His LED was still a vivid circle of red. Once you were far enough away, you dug your heels in and released his hand. He stopped, but still held on. He snapped his eyes to yours, looking confused and just so-- lost. Like he wasn’t even sure where he was or where he was going.

You didn’t even know where to start.

“… Connor, I am so sorry.”

What else could you say? You were the stupid one who invited him there. His brows furrowed tightly, anger still twitching in his lips as he shook his head.

“Don’t.” he said, voice strained, “Don’t apologize for them .”

His jaw was tight, working and unclenching. He was rubbing your hand in his own, a tick similar to his coin. People walked around you as you both were standing in the middle of the sidewalk, giving Connor nervous glances as they passed. He noticed finally and stepped to the side, filing into an empty alley facing the street.

“I need a minute.” he said, his pulmonary functions attempting to slow. You stepped closer, reaching up to gently touch his back. You stroked up once.

“Of course, just… take all the time you need.”

He was tense, every carbon fiber cord in his body ready to respond, to act. His LED began flickering, slowly turning yellow and holding.

“It’s becoming more common.” he said, disappointment evident in his voice.

“I’d say it was always common, people feeling safe to express their stupidity has just gotten worse.”

“Not that.” he said, sighing, “My… temper. Hank says I have a temper .”

A deviant android with a quick fuse, that wasn’t entirely unheard of, but yet Connor seemed disturbed more so by his own behavior than the other guys.

“I detected a significant jump in your pulse and breathing rate. You were upset. I upset you.” Connor said, going to release your hand. You snapped it back up before he could, squeezing tight.

“Connor. Look at me.”

He did.

“I wasn’t upset because of you, I was upset for you.” you said, searching his eyes, making sure you confirmed his understanding before you continued, “That guy was being a grade A dickhead and I… I made you show me those tricks and it just drew all that attention to you. It’s dumb and it’s unfair , but I should have known better.”

“I wanted to show you.” Connor said, insistent, “I knew it would make you smile. I… like that. When you were asking what I like. I like receiving positive feedback from you. It’s very informative.”

That got a laugh from you, quiet and resigned.

“Like that. I don’t know how I got you to do that, but I’m attempting to work it out. So far the data has been inconsistent.”

“Really?” you said, “How so?”

“You laugh even when I am actually not trying to be humorous.” Connor said, as if you were a bit silly for not knowing.

“You’re a funny guy.”

“Hank would say otherwise.”

Connor’s LED had returned to blue, holding steady.

“Your temperature is dropping. You should be getting home so you can warm up.”

“No.” you said, grinning. This time when he furrowed his brow it was not as sharp.

“Your current core temperature is not a debatable subject, ---. You are at 97.9 degrees.”

You hummed, “So question. When you do that, are you scanning my entire body or just the surface temperature?”

Connor opened his mouth, thought better, and then it closed it. You swore if he could blush he would be. You inclined your head expectantly.

“What else does the scan pick up?” you asked, both curious and enjoying the look of semi-panic rushing over Connor’s features. The blue LED flickered just for a moment.

“I know that you have not eaten in the last four hours and will begin to feel hunger pains in approximately the next twenty to thirty minutes.” he stated matter-of-factly, “You have a healed fracture on your left ankle, most likely from rolling it sometime within the last two years. Also, your pupils dilate when you look at me, indicating that you find me aesthetically pleasing.”

“Ho-kay.” you said, interrupting him and snatching your hand back, “You had me at the beginning there, I’ll admit.”

“Did I successfully embarrass you, ---?” Connor said, putting his hands into his pockets and following after you with a renewed smugness.

“Um. That’s such cheating. I can’t control my pupils!”

“Of course. I understand it is not conscious. Besides. I was designed to be pleasing .”

“Yeah? Then I’m gonna need you to tell me where to file a product complaint.”

Connor laughed and it sounded so human it infected your own smile.

“”Hello, yes Cyberlife?”, you continued, using your hand to mimic a phone, “”Do you take constructive criticism? Because your RK800 model is becoming a royal pain in my ass.””

“I’ve never had a bad review in my life!” he asserted, placing a hand over his chest in mock offense.

“That’s because you’ve only been alive for seven months! God. You’re an infant. I am literally on a date with an infant.”

Your laughter subsided when you noted Connor was no longer part of the chorus, turning to look at him, you found his own eyes trailed on you with the barest of smiles.

“This has been… different. Good, but different.” he said, choosing the words carefully, “I’d like to do it again.”

“Yeah, yeah, you smug bastard. You probably already know I’m going to say “yes” by the micro expressions of my eyebrows or some crap.”

Your joke was cut short as Connor stepped forward, gingerly reaching up and letting his hand trace the side of your face, thumb rubbing in gentle circles for a moment over the spot right next to your brow. His eyes were hooded, intent.

“No. I don’t think I see anything.”

He was so close-- god damn him for being so close. You couldn’t read his face at all on whether he was being serious right now or was being a tease. The LED light on his temple gave nothing away in it’s blue aura.

“Wait...right there.”

You felt your breath catch.

“I detect the forming of premature wrinkles.”

“Oh, you asshole. ”

You swatted at him, but he was too fast, dodging out of range with a school boy grin.

“I’m freezing and I’m hungry and I think you need to go home and think about what you’ve done.” you said, crossing your arms against the frigid breeze.

“I told you all of those things a minute ago.” Connor said, returning to arms reach long enough to offer his hand in what you assumed was to be a handshake. You scoffed and submitted, letting him take your hand again lightly. He squeezed and let go.

“I’ll text you later.” he said, mirroring your own words. For a moment it almost felt so normal. Just a boy and a girl on a date. It hadn’t turned out to be what you expected, but that was something you were beginning to think you could live with.

“You better.”

When had it become so hard to concentrate? You rapt your stylus against your desk, oblivious to the crowd and the constant hum of conversation as people moved around the facility. You hadn’t heard back anything from Josh regarding the files you brought, in fact, you hadn’t seen an android inside the DCRU office in several days. You leaned back in your chair, hoping to catch a glimpse but instead found yourself looking right into the pencil skirt of London Fog-- aka your supervisor, Miranda.

“You interested in getting out of here?” she asked, curly brown hair tied back in a bun. You think she must been a librarian in a past life based on how she dressed. Nothing else would explain those cat eye glasses.

“Depends.” you said, voice wary. She laughed, because honestly you didn’t have too much choice in it.

“We’re doing a quick run through. We’ve gotten reports that there have been some break ins through the fence perimeter around the--” she stopped, trying to avoid the word “camp” like most people in charge. It was not a good connection to form.

“-- housing facilities. Just need to assess the damage and estimate cost. The androids asked specifically for the director to come, but she is busy elsewhere.” Miranda shrugged, “If I have an intern following me, I look more important!”

Ah, the director. Cinnamon dolce.

Knowing that there was not much more discussion to be had, you picked up your tablet and your coat.

“Where’s the damage?” you asked, voice weary.

“We’ve got a ride to the other side of the facility all lined up for us.” Miranda said, flicking through some documents and sending them to your tablet.

“It’ll be a good learning opportunity!”

Sure. Yay. Fence maintenance.

By the time you arrived it became very obvious that this was not some accidental damage or wear-and-tear, this was a full on someone-took-pliers-to-the-fence-and-cut-a-hole damage. You recognized Josh out of the crowd of humans and androids. He gave you a faint smile and then turned his attention to Miranda.

“Was it a break out?” she asked, earning a narrow look from Josh.

“We’re not prisoners here. Everyone knows they can come and go as they please.” Josh said, voice edged with warning.

“So break in?” Miranda said, confirming to herself. You flipped to the incident report she sent to your tablet and began to jot down notes.

“It would appear so. But nothing was taken. No one has seen anyone strange around the homes either.”

The “homes” for lack of a better word, were simple modular buildings, stacked in sets of three with outside stair railings. A few androids stood on said stairs, peering over the side down at them. The entire facility sat in an old parking lot formerly used by GM back in the late 2000s. It had been sitting vacant for years now and taken by the government for use in the re-homing process.

The modular homes were efficient, if not always “cozy”. The androids were able to file comfort requests, but you’d seen the stacks. It was hard to imagine it was easy to get much of anything, but it was safe . Safer than outside, where humans might attack an android on the street. Here there were soldiers and fences that were meant to keep the outside world out, not them in.

Markus would have not accepted anything less.

“I don’t like that. Have the military units informed to be looking for someone who doesn’t belong and pull any CCTV footage from this area.” Miranda said, stepping forward and examining the fence more closely.

“Tracks say three people!” a voice yelled from above. There was a young looking blond man, standing at the very top of the modular complex. He quickly made his way down, easily constructing a safe path to the ground.

Josh smiled with familiarity, taking the hand offered to him by the man warmly.

“When did you get back into the city?”

“A few days ago. Glad to be back though. D.C. is somehow even colder.”

Miranda turned her attention back towards the two men, greeting the newcomer with nothing more than a faint nod.

“Simon. You said three people?”

Simon nodded, pointing to a variety of spots that now showed traces of mud and slush disturbance.

“Three. They circled in, came this way…”

He moved ahead, heading behind the modular unit. There was a good fifteen feet between it’s back and the fence.

“Then this way. Stopped here, but then one set of tracks keeps going while the other two circle back.” Simon’s eyes narrowed, giving Josh a strange look.

“Something isn’t right. I smell--”

A flash. Blinding and loud. So loud that suddenly your ears were filled with unbearable ringing. You felt your feet lift from the ground, heat bursting across your skin. There were quick flicks of pain, as if a hail storm had pelted you. And then you found the ground again, hitting hard to the concrete as the ringing just kept on. Something heavy fell on your chest, knocking the wind from you.

Your vision blurred, arms shaking as you tried to find something, anything to hold onto to make the world stop spinning. Someone was ontop of you, arms curled around your frame. The smell of thirium and smoke was thick in your nostrils and when your vision came to, there was blue andJosh.

All cradled in a backdrop of red flames.

[bountyofbeads]

Trump Focuses on Economy at Davos, Seeking a Counter to Impeachment https://nyti.ms/36cm7JC

Trump is with his “people” at Davos-the wealthy one per cent who are responsible for crippling recessions and the group who will not put their ample resources to work to make a difference in the huge challenge of climate change. They represent money but not wisdom and responsibility. Davos is a “ see and be seen “ opportunity not a forum for serious solutions to the world’s problems.

Also, what's not to love about Trumpnomics? More subsidies to big industries, less taxes for the rest of us and to social welfare programsw; shifts the federal tax burden from business to their employees and customers; rebalances regulations to favor business over employees, customers and the environment. Never mind that the National Debt grows more than the economy (GDP), even as infrastructure decays and more people are disconnected from the benefits of economic growth. Never mind the cost to society and the planet...

TRUMP TAKES A VICTORY LAP AT DAVOS, CROWING ABOUT THE U.S. ECONOMY AND IGNORING IMPEACHMENT

By Anne Gearan and Toluse Olorunnipa | Published Jan 21 at 7:46 AM EST | Washington Post | Posted Jan 21, 2020 |

DAVOS, Switzerland — President Trump trumpeted what he called "America's extraordinary prosperity" on his watch, taking credit for a soaring stock market, a low unemployment rate, and a "blue-collar boom" in jobs and income, in a presidential turn on the world stage also meant to make impeachment proceedings against him in Washington look small.

Trump ran through economic statistics with a salesman's delivery, crowing about growth during his three years in office that he said bested his predecessors and defied his skeptics.

“America is thriving; America is flourishing, and, yes, America is winning again like never before,” he told an audience of billionaires, world leaders and figures from academia, media, and the kind of international organizations and think tanks for whom his “America First” nationalism is anathema.

Trump is making his second visit to the World Economic Forum, which for its 50th anniversary this year is focusing on climate change and sustainability. A sign at the entrance to the press center notes that paint for this year’s installation was made from seaweed, and carpets from recycled fishing nets.

Trump, who has called climate change a hoax, did not directly address the theme during his 30-minute address here, although he did call for rejecting “the perennial prophets of doom and their predictions of the apocalypse” and later said he is a big believer in the environment.

He also made no mention of impeachment or U.S. politics, although he took a swipe at “radical socialism,” his term for Democratic ideas about health care, education and other issues. The Senate impeachment trial was set to open hours after he spoke.

In response to questions from reporters after his speech, Trump called the impeachment trial a “hoax” and a “witch hunt” that has been “going on for years.”

Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the forum, thanked Trump “for injecting optimism” into the discussion.

“We have many problems in the world, but we need dreams,” he said.

Trump received a polite but not enthusiastic reception in the hall. A few in the audience slipped out well before he wrapped up.

Even as Trump faces impeachment, his trip to Davos offers him an opportunity focus on his economic message. The U.S. economy has continued to notch solid growth and maintain a low unemployment rate, and the stock market has reached record highs in recent days. Trump signed a partial trade deal with China last week, easing global tensions over his use of tariffs.

But the president faces continued questions about his approach to foreign affairs. His decision to order a strike that killed Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani earlier this month — and his threat to impose a 25 percent tariff on European cars over a foreign policy dispute — have created more tumult in the Middle East and in the transatlantic relationship between the United States and its closest allies. 

Trump was billed as the keynote speaker for the annual business-themed confab in this Alpine ski town, but the main attraction was Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg, 17, who has sparred with Trump on Twitter.

Last year, Thunberg blamed world leaders at the forum for not doing more to combat climate change. She has since echoed that message while rallying teenagers worldwide to skip school and pressure global leaders to take stronger action to address the existential threat. 

In December, Trump insulted the teenager and Time magazine “Person of the Year” as “so ridiculous” and suggested that she “work on her anger management problem.”

Thunberg was quick to respond, updating her Twitter biography to describe herself as “A teenager working on her anger management problem.”

Trump had not yet arrived in Davos when Thunberg gave her first address Tuesday morning, saying that “without treating this as a real crisis, then we cannot solve it.” He was expected to skip her main speech later in the day.

Trump is an outlier at the forum for his views on climate change. The president has publicly criticized global efforts to combat warming temperatures and has made ridiculing energy-efficient products a key part of his reelection stump speech.

Ahead of Trump’s address, Schwab told the gathering that “the world is in a state of emergency” and that the window to address climate change is closing. Speaking ahead of Trump, he also reminded the audience that “every voice” heard at the forum deserved respect.

Trump was accompanied here by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow, and a delegation including his daughter Ivanka Trump and son-in-law, Jared Kushner. Also present is adviser and speechwriter Stephen Miller, whose hard-line stance on limiting immigration and denunciations of “globalism” infused Trump’s address to the United Nations in September.

“This is the wreckage I was elected to clean up,” Trump said of the “bleak” economic landscape he inherited.

He praised himself repeatedly, saying that his actions saved the global economy from the brink of recession, rescued the American manufacturing industry and reshaped the rules of international trade to reflect a fairer system.

He occasionally strayed from the facts as he tried to paint a picture of an economy in a shambles before he took office.

He described the 4.7 percent unemployment rate before he took office as “reasonably high,” even though it was well below the average unemployment rate in the United States over the past 70 years. He also took credit for additional funding that has been approved for historically black colleges and universities, saying inaccurately that the funding “saved” the schools from ruin.

He took a swipe at the Federal Reserve for its interest rate policies, saying his economic achievements came despite the rate-setting body. Although his attacks on the Fed have become common, the once-taboo practice seemed to startle some in the audience here.

Trump is using his day-and-a-half visit to lobby corporate chieftains for greater U.S. investment and to meet with leaders including Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan, Iraqi President Barham Salih and Kurdish leader Nechirvan Barzani. 

Although climate change and environmental stewardship lead the agenda here, a survey of chief executives released Monday shows that they do not count climate change as among the top 10 threats to business growth.

The financial services group PwC said climate change and environmental issues are ranked as the 11th-biggest threat to their companies’ growth prospects, the Associated Press reported. Trade conflicts and lack of skilled workers ranked higher.

The survey also found that 53 percent of CEOs predict a decline in the rate of growth this year, nearly double the percentage who said the same last year and a mark of how the trade conflict between the United States and China has soured business confidence.

Trump, however, painted a sunny picture Tuesday and invited global investment in the United States. He suggested that other nations would benefit from his approach to deregulation, but said, “You have to run your countries the way you want.”

He said he had confronted “predatory” Chinese trade practices and asserted that his tariffs, denounced by many of the CEOs and economists in the audience, have worked exactly as intended.

“No one did anything about it except allowing it to keep getting worse and worse and worse” before he took office, Trump said.

He said that the U.S. relationship with China has never been better, and that his personal bond with Chinese President Xi Jinping is a big reason.

“He’s for China, I’m for the U.S., but other than that we love each other,” Trump said to chuckles.

He received louder applause when he announced that the United States will join an initiative begun here to add 1 trillion trees worldwide.

Trump’s 2018 visit to the World Economic Forum came just days after he signed a bill lowering the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent — a move that will save businesses billions of dollars.

He largely steered clear of discussing domestic political issues during his speech to the forum in 2018, instead using his remarks to tout his accomplishments and encourage business leaders to invest in the United States. He did take a brief swipe at “the opposing party,” pointing out that “some of the people in the room” supported Democrats over him in 2016. He also drew a smattering of boos when he attacked the news media as “fake.”

This year, two leading contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination, Sens. Bernie Sanders (Vt.) and Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), have sparked growing alarm among the global elite with calls for a major restructuring of the economic system that they say has been skewed to benefit the wealthy.

Trump, who has made attacking “socialism” part of his reelection message, could find a receptive audience as he seeks to defend capitalism and tout his economic record to a group of business leaders. The president has regularly credited his administration with boosting the bottom lines of the country’s largest companies, occasionally bragging to top executives that he had made them very rich. More than 100 billionaires are on the official attendee list for the World Economic Forum, and Trump plans to meet with the heads of several multinational companies during his brief stay in Davos.

______

Heather Long contributed to this report.

*********

Climate Change Takes Center Stage in Davos

With businesses under pressure to act, solutions are emerging, but not fast enough, some participants fear.

By Stanley Reed | Published Jan. 20, 2020 | New York Times | Posted January 21, 2020 |

Even before catastrophic fires broke out in Australia in late fall, climate change was at the top of the list of priorities at the 50th anniversary of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, this week.

But those fires — preceded by others in California — along with rising sea levels, flooding and supercharged storms, are putting more pressure on the politicians, business executives, financiers, thought leaders and others who attend to show they are part of the solution to one of the world’s most pressing challenges.

In a nod to a younger generation most at risk and demanding action on climate change, Greta Thunberg, the Swedish teenager who has become a prominent environmental activist, is scheduled to appear. In a column this month in The Guardian that she wrote with other environmental activists, they demanded an end to investments in fossil fuels.

“Anything less than immediately ceasing these investments in the fossil fuel industry would be a betrayal of life itself,” they said. “Today’s business as usual is turning into a crime against humanity. We demand that leaders play their part in putting an end to this madness.”

Daniel Yergin, the oil historian and a regular attendee at the Davos forum, agreed that “climate is going to loom larger than ever before.” And Ian Bremmer, founder and president of the political risk firm Eurasia Group, said: “These issues are becoming more real, more salient every day, whether you are talking about Venice or California or Australia or Jakarta. These are real events with enormous direct human and economic costs.”

But an overriding question as the Davos gathering gets underway is: Will all the talk matter?

Mr. Bremmer, who plans to attend, said the forum could help force change because it brings together big players, like chief executives of banks, money management firms and hedge funds, who are rethinking their investments. Gradually — some say too gradually — financial firms are directing money away from oil companies and others associated with carbon-dioxide emissions blamed for environmental damage.

Financial institutions “see the future coming, and they are changing the way they invest,” Mr. Bremmer said. “That is going to require multinational corporations to act differently; it will lead to new corporations that will do better.”

While thinking on climate change may be shifting, by some metrics the corporate elite that always makes up a large contingent at Davos still has a lot of work to do. According to a study published in December by the Davos organizers, only a quarter of a group of 7,000 businesses are setting a specific emissions reduction target and only an eighth are actually reducing their emissions each year.

If so, they are making a major strategic error, according to Mark Carney, the departing governor of the Bank of England who planned to be in Davos. Companies that work to bring their emissions to zero “will be rewarded handsomely,” Mr. Carney said in a recent speech. “Those that fail to adapt will cease to exist.”

Some people in the financial industry said that environmental issues were being given greater weight in investment decisions despite setbacks like President Trump’s decision to pull the United States out of the Paris agreement on climate change. The president, who shunned the gathering in Davos last year, said he would go this time.

The number of people who are talking about fossil fuels as a real concern “has increased dramatically over the last 12 to 24 months,” said Jeff McDermott, chief executive of Greentech Capital, an investment bank focused on low-carbon technologies. “They are both looking at the risks of high-carbon companies and industries as well as the returns available from low-carbon alternatives.”

Mr. McDermott said that Davos was a good venue for sifting through such ideas. The conference organizers are also pushing an environmental agenda that supports an ecologist’s notion of persuading the world to plant a trillion trees to soak up carbon dioxide and prodding companies to announce ambitious targets for lowering their emissions.

Potentially, enormous sums could be used to influence corporate behavior. For instance, Climate Action 100+ said investors with around $35 trillion in assets had signed on to its program for pushing companies toward greater disclosure and action on emissions.

“I believe we are on the edge of a fundamental reshaping of finance,”  wrote Laurence D. Fink, chief executive of BlackRock, which has nearly $7 trillion under management, in a letter vowing to put sustainability at the core of the firm’s investment approach.

Many likely targets of investor and environmental initiatives may be available at the gathering at the Swiss resort. Among them are the chiefs of the world’s major oil companies, including Royal Dutch Shell, BP, Chevron and Saudi Aramco, who are expected to attend.

In recent months, some of these companies, especially those based in Europe, have been responding to the concerns of investors and other constituents with commitments to reduce their emissions or make investments in other environmentally friendly technology.

Repsol, the Spanish oil company,  pledged last month to cut its emissions to zero by 2050 through a combination of actions, including more investments in renewable electricity like wind and solar and, possibly, reforestation. And BP, the London-based oil company, said it was forming a business with other companies for recycling a type of plastic known as PET that is used in soft drink bottles and packaging. In the latest of these pledges, Equinor, the Norwegian company, said it would reduce emissions from its oil and gas fields and plants in its home country to near zero by 2050 by using electricity in its operations and other measures.

Mr. Yergin, who is also vice chairman of IHS Markit, a research firm, said that “energy transition” would be the “two most spoken words at Davos” about the sector.

Marco Alverà, chief executive of Snam,  an Italian natural gas company, plans to talk about recent experiments in mixing hydrogen, a fuel that does not produce carbon emissions, with the natural gas that the company delivers to users, potentially lowering their climate impact. Mr. Alverà said he was going to Davos because he thought it would be a “powerful forum” to make his points.

“I don’t think we will solve the climate challenge with taxes or a radical change in consumer behavior,” he said. “I think we can only solve it with business ideas that make business sense.”

The chemical industry, another sector that is integral to modern economies and a target for environmentalists, also plans to make its case at Davos.

A group of about 20 large chemical companies is working on low-carbon technologies, like making chemicals from carbon dioxide and biomass, said Martin Brudermuller, chief executive of the German chemical company BASF.

Mr. Brudermuller also said another large coalition in the sector was working on the plastic waste problem, with BASF turning discarded plastic into raw materials for its plants. Mr. Brudermuller cautioned that such problems, which involve not only new technologies but also organizing the collection and sorting of waste, are so complex and globe-spanning that only an effort of similar scope will succeed in solving them.

“A collaborative effort of companies, governmental and nongovernmental organizations as well as civil society is necessary to address the global challenge of mismanaged waste,” Mr. Brudermuller wrote in an email.

Awareness of these issue may be growing, but with global emissions continuing to rise governments are falling short on tackling them, according to a pre-conference report issued by the World Economic Forum. Many businesses, too, are failing to set effective targets, the report said. In 2006, Nicholas Stern was the chief author of a seminal study for the British government that set out the case for acting on climate change. More than a decade later, as he prepared to attend the 50th gathering in Davos, Lord Stern, chairman of the Grantham Institute at the London School of Economics, said there were reasons to be encouraged and to worry.

He said that the costs of wind and solar technology had fallen much more rapidly than anticipated. Electric vehicles, he said, were also making more rapid progress than expected, with most automakers talking about the end of the era of the internal combustion engine.

Such advances, he said, are opening attractive opportunities for investors and creating jobs.

He also said the growing activism of young people was crucial in pushing their elders to enact change. “Business people really feel that,” including those who attend Davos, he said, adding that he hoped such pressures would push companies into making commitments on emissions reduction at the meeting.

On the other hand, he said that the world had been slow to act and each report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the United Nations agency that tracks emissions, was more worrying than the last.

“I am really optimistic about what it is possible to do,” he said. “But I worry deeply about whether we will.”

*********

IN DAVOS, A SEARCH FOR MEANING WITH CAPITALISM IN CRISIS

By Ishaan Tharoor | Published January 20 at 9:35 AM EST | Washington Post | Posted January 21, 2020 |

DAVOS, Switzerland — The World Economic Forum, the most concentrated gathering of wealth and power on the planet, will begin once again amid a natural fortress of snow and ice in the Swiss Alps. President Trump is jetting in for a scheduled address Tuesday. Dozens of other world leaders are in attendance; a who’s who list of CEOs, fund managers, oligarchs and a smattering of celebrities will join the throngs cramming the pop-up pavilions and swanky hotel parties of the otherwise sleepy mountain town.

This year’s conclave will be the 50th since it began in 1971, marking a fitful half century of political turmoil and economic boom and bust. For years, Davos — that is, the conference of global leaders for which it has become synonymous — has represented the apotheosis of a particular world view: an almost Promethean belief in the virtues of liberalism and globalization, anchored in a conviction that heads of companies can become capable and even moral custodians of the common good.

The disruptions and traumas of the past decade have sorely tested Davos’s faith in itself. The archetypal Davos Man — the well-heeled, jet-setting “globalist” — has become an object of derision and distrust for both the political left and right. Financial crises, surging nationalist populism in the West, China’s intensifying authoritarianism and the steady toll of climate change have convinced many that there’s nothing inexorable about liberal progress. A new global opinion poll of tens of thousands of people found that more than 50 percent of those surveyed now think capitalism does "more harm than good."

Each year, the forum is accompanied by an unsurprising airing of cynicism in the media. “It is [a] family reunion for the people who, in my view, broke the modern world,” Anand Giradharadas, an author and outspoken critic of billionaire philanthropy, said in a TV interview last year. Can Davos “keep its mojo?” the Economist asked over the weekend. “Once a beacon of international cooperation, Davos has become a punchline,” the New York Times noted.

Klaus Schwab, the forum’s octogenarian founder and executive chairman, is convinced that the current moment needs more Davos, not less. In the run-up to this week’s meetings, he announced a new “Davos manifesto,” calling on companies to “pay their fair share of taxes, show zero tolerance for corruption, uphold human rights throughout their global supply chains, and advocate for a competitive level playing field.” Such an ethos, Schwab contends, will go a long way to redressing the world’s inequities and may help governments meet the climate targets set by the 2015 Paris agreement.

“Business leaders now have an incredible opportunity,” Schwab wrote in a column published last month. “By giving stakeholder capitalism concrete meaning, they can move beyond their legal obligations and uphold their duty to society.”

Schwab’s extolling of “stakeholder” capitalism — a riposte to the profit-maximizing Western orthodoxy of “shareholder” capitalism — is supposed to be a call to action. Activists, though, may argue that it’s not enough.

In a study timed in conjunction with the World Economic Forum, Oxfam found the world’s billionaires control more wealth than 4.6 billion people, or 60 percent of humanity. “Another year, another indication that the inequality crisis is spiraling out of control. And despite repeated warnings about inequality, governments have not reversed its course,” said Paul O’Brien of Oxfam America in an emailed statement. “Some governments, especially the U.S., are actually exacerbating inequality by cutting taxes for the richest and for corporations while slashing public services and safety nets — such as health care and education — that actually fight inequality.”

And some Davos attendees concur. “The economic pie is bigger than it’s ever been before in history, which means we could make everyone better off, but we’ve chosen as a society to leave a lot of people behind,” Erik Brynjolfsson, director of the MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy, told my colleague Heather Long. “That’s not just inexcusable morally but is also really bad tactically.”

Reading from a totally different script, President Trump is expected to wax lyrical about the success of his economic and trade policies. In the past, his bullying measures and fondness for tariffs have ruffled the Davos set.

“Although the president has been inconsistent in how he has carried out his worldview, he has made clear that he has no plans to back away from his strong-arm tactics even as they have increasingly antagonized American friends and foes alike, leaving the United States potentially more isolated on the world stage,” wrote my colleagues Anne Gearan and John Hudson.

Trump is also likely to be challenged in Davos by a growing cohort of climate activists and policymakers. On the same day of his speech, Swedish teen campaigner Greta Thunberg is expected to berate politicians and finance executives who still invest in fossil fuels. Although Trump almost certainly will not heed Thunberg’s call, representatives of major companies attending the forum are desperate to show how they are adapting their business models to accommodate climate concerns.

Two years ago, Schwab drew criticism for what was viewed as an awkwardly ingratiating speech to welcome Trump to the forum. Now, he’s more at odds with the U.S. president, not least on the urgency of the climate crisis.

“We do not want to reach the tipping point of irreversibility on climate change,” Schwab told reporters last week. “We do not want the next generations to inherit a world which becomes ever more hostile and ever less habitable.”

*********

Trump Focuses on Economy at Davos, Seeking a Counter to Impeachment

President Trump made his first appearance on the international stage since the House sent impeachment articles to the Senate, on the day his trial is set to begin in earnest.

By Annie Karni | Published Jan. 21, 2020 Updated 7:01 a.m. ET | New York Times | Posted January 21, 2020 |

DAVOS, Switzerland — Before the Senate impeachment trial began in earnest on Tuesday, President Trump was more than 4,000 miles away from Washington, in this glitzy Alpine village, driving a competing narrative — one that had nothing to do with pressure on Ukraine, abuse of power or obstruction of Congress.

In his first appearance on the international stage since Speaker Nancy Pelosi sent articles of impeachment to the Senate, before the senators who will decide his fate even arrive at the Capitol building, Mr. Trump addressed the World Economic Forum, focusing on the success of the global economy — and taking credit for it.

“America’s economy was in a rather dismal state,” Mr. Trump said. “Before my presidency began, the outlook for many economies was bleak.” In fact, the economy’s recovery after its plummet was central to President Barack Obama’s legacy.

But Mr. Trump called the growth under his leadership a “roaring geyser of opportunity,” and proclaimed that “the American dream is back bigger better and stronger than ever before.”

In his 30-minute address in front of a global audience, Mr. Trump did not mention the impeachment trial back home. But he delivered what amounted to a version of his campaign speech minus the red meat to his base, speaking little of international alliances other than touting America’s supremacy in the world.

Mr. Trump highlighted the first phase of his trade deal with China and another with Mexico and Canada, accomplishments he thinks are being overshadowed by a focus on an impeachment trial he is trying to dismiss as a “hoax.” And the audience appeared receptive — to his face, at least — having warmed to him over the past two years because they have benefited from his policies.

“Lev Parnas is not a topic of conversation at Davos,” said Ian Bremmer, president and founder of Eurasia Group, a political research and consulting firm.

Mr. Parnas, an associate of Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, has been on a nonstop media tour over the past week, asserting that Mr. Trump was fully aware of the pressure campaign to force Ukraine to investigate Mr. Trump’s political rivals. Democrats have not ruled out trying to call him as a witness.

The open question, as always with Mr. Trump, was how much he would stray from his script and the escape offered by the world stage, and vent his grievances about his legal and political predicament at home. But in his morning address, he stuck largely to his prepared remarks, claiming that his approach was “centered entirely on the well-being of the American worker.”

The president also took a swipe at people demanding action on climate change, the lead agenda item at this year’s conference. Mr. Trump announced that the United States would join the 1 trillion trees initiative launched at the World Economic Forum. But he also declared that “we must reject the perennial prophets of doom.”

Former Vice President Al Gore, who attended Mr. Trump’s speech, declined to comment on his remarks.

It was not clear whether Mr. Trump would try to stage a surprise meeting with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, who is also attending the international forum, even though officials said the optics of such a meeting would be unhelpful to Mr. Trump.

In Davos, however, Mr. Trump may find the right audience for support if he sticks with efforts to counter the impeachment narrative at home. There was less anxiety rippling through the one percent set about him on Tuesday than there had been when he first arrived at the annual forum two years ago, fresh off an “America First” campaign filled with promises to rip up international agreements and alliances.

This time, there’s more concern about some of the progressive Democrats running to replace him. Through regulatory rollbacks, tax cuts and the success of the global economy, the president who ran as a populist has benefited many of the chief executives gathered here, even those who have taken public positions against some of his policies.

“There are lot of masters of the universe who think he may not be their cup of tea, but he’s been a godsend,” Mr. Bremmer added. “It’s interesting to hear Mike Bloomberg saying he would fund Bernie Sanders’s campaign if he won the nomination. Very few people here would say that.”

Mr. Bloomberg, the billionaire former mayor of New York City, who is himself running for president, has said he is open to spending $1 billion to defeat Mr. Trump, whoever emerges as the Democratic nominee.

During Mr. Trump’s colorful career in New York real estate, entertainment and business, he never cracked the Davos set, whose Fortune 500 chief executives dismissed him as something of a gaudy sideshow.

But the balance of power has shifted. And with progressives like Mr. Sanders and Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts emerging as top-tier candidates in the Democratic primary, a crowd that once rejected Mr. Trump is now more willing to consider him one of their own.

Mr. Trump has happily embraced them back. When he signed an agreement at the White House for the United States-China trade deal, for instance, Mr. Trump credited himself with helping big banks and business.

“I made a lot of bankers look very good,” he said, and told attendees to send his regards to Jamie Dimon, chief executive of JPMorgan Chase.

There are however, still major points of contention ahead during the love-to-hate-it conference for Mr. Trump, who plans to spend almost two days here in bilateral meetings with leaders of Iraq, Pakistan and the Kurdish regional government, as well as sitdowns with corporate chieftains. (The forum is also Mr. Trump’s first trip abroad since the drone attack that killed Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s most important military official.)

Global warming and climate change top the agenda items for the conference. A star speaker on Tuesday, alongside Mr. Trump, is the 16-year-old climate activist Greta Thunberg, who has said she wouldn’t “waste her time” speaking to Mr. Trump about climate change.

Mr. Trump withdrew from the Paris Climate Accord, and his administration has expanded the use of coal, downplayed concerns about climate change and rolled back environmental protections.

The president mocked Ms. Thunberg, who has Asperger’s syndrome, a condition on the autism spectrum, after she was chosen as Time magazines  Person of the Year. “So ridiculous,” Mr. Trump tweeted. “Greta must work on her anger management problem, then go to a good old fashioned movie with a friend! Chill Greta, Chill!”

Attendees at the conference said they fully expected Mr. Trump to take another whack at her while she was here.

In 2018, Mr. Trump was the first sitting president to attend the forum since President Bill Clinton did so in 2000. Last year, he abruptly canceled his plans to attend, citing a partial government shutdown.

This year, the administration delegation includes Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, as well as Robert Lighthizer, the trade representative. Other members of the administration who were expected to attend the forum were Wilbur Ross, the commerce secretary; Elaine Chao, the transportation secretary, and Eugene Scalia, the labor secretary.

Mr. Trump was also expected to be joined in Davos by his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and his daughter Ivanka Trump, both senior White House advisers.

*********

Ms. Thunberg is the only adult in the room speaking truth to power. Greta is not an extremist, although her demands will be portrayed as extreme. Unfortunately for all of us, she’s a realist. It’s past time to pay lip service to the problem of climate change and global warming, because, as Greta so often says, our house is indeed on fire.

Greta Thunberg’s Message at Davos Forum: ‘Our House Is Still on Fire’

By Somini Sengupta, Reporting from the World Economic Forum in Davos | Published Jan. 21, 2020 Updated 9:45 a.m. ET | New York Times | Posted January 21, 2020 |

DAVOS, Switzerland — Greta Thunberg on Tuesday punched a hole in the promises emerging from a forum of the global political and business elite and offered instead an ultimatum: Stop investing in fossil fuels immediately, or explain to your children why you did not protect them from the “climate chaos” you created.

“I wonder, what will you tell your children was the reason to fail and leave them facing the climate chaos you knowingly brought upon them?” Ms. Thunberg, 17, said at the annual gathering of the world’s rich and powerful in Davos, a village on the icy reaches of the Swiss Alps.

Her remarks opened a panel discussion hosted by The New York Times and the World Economic Forum. The full transcript is available here.

“Our house is still on fire,” she added, reprising her most famous line from an address last year at the forum. “Your inaction is fueling the flames by the hour.”

Her remarks came at a time when climate change and environmental sustainability rose to the top of the talking points of many of the executives and government leaders assembled at Davos.

Ms. Thunberg, a climate activist known for speaking bluntly to power, rebuked the crowd for promises that she said would do too little: reducing planet-warming gases to net zero by 2050, offsetting emissions by planting one trillion trees, transitioning to a low-carbon economy.

“Let’s be clear. We don’t need a ‘low carbon economy.’ We don’t need to ‘lower emissions,’” she said. “Our emissions have to stop.”

Only that, she said, would enable the world to keep temperatures from rising past 1.5 degrees from preindustrial levels, which scientists say is necessary to avert the worst effects of climate change. She and a group of young climate activists have called on private investors and governments to immediately halt exploration for fossil fuels, to stop funding their production, to end taxpayer subsidies for the industry and to fully divest their existing stakes in the sector.

Scientists have said emissions must be reduced by half in the next decade to reach the 1.5-degree target. The opposite is happening. Global emissions continued to rise, hitting a record high in 2019, according to research published in December.

Her address began barely an hour after President Trump’s speech at the forum, which barely mentioned climate change, except to implicitly describe climate activists as “heirs of yesterday’s foolish fortune tellers.” Ms. Thunberg did not address him directly, except to remind the audience that the United States will withdraw from the Paris climate agreement by the end of this year.

Ms. Thunberg took pains to distance herself from politics. “This is not about right or left. We couldn’t care less about your party politics,” she said. “From a sustainability perspective, the right, the left as well as the center have all failed. No political ideology or economic structure has been able to tackle the climate and environmental emergency.”

*********

[outlyingthoughts]

Portrait of Livia: Summer 19

Livia;

There are millions of babies born each year, on a planet rotating on itself in an ever expanding universe, an ever expanding population on a pressure-cooker-like planet. Infinitely small on the human scale, and yet our daily interactions, anxieties, priorities remain overwhelming. Weirdly sometimes all things and concepts stop making sense, like words you repeat a little too much, syllables and letters mashed up seem irrationally meaningless when we give them too much attention. In the same way, all the things and concepts that makes us, all those pains and losses sometimes lose sense when we overthink them, millions of breaths and tears shed but when laying mind clouded, nothing makes sense anymore.

When our minds trip on reality, the game is to wonder what is more irrational: giving up on years of socialization and society overall because nothing really matters or pouring too much meaning and fear in a life and future that is infinitely smaller than all things around us? Atoms, on their own, mean so much more than us, tiny pieces of matter that constitute the universe, far more significant than all the thoughts that will ever cross our lost neurons. Because life and things of the nature will irremediably travel across ages and spaces without me, you, us: humanity and what we give meaning to, society and expectations don’t really mean anything.

Obsessed by our irrelevance, we kill our souls over our empty meanings and fill our brains with more worries. As irrelevant as we are, the pain and wounds of being a living mortal remain the most vivid reality of our lives. One occurrence in an infinite number of realities and hypothetic dimensions, we end up here. Silver lining in the elevator, the higher we get, the more my heart presses against my chest, the fear of height and breath-taking view leave me at loss of words. Far away from home, in a city that goes too fast, we take a break from our priorities, gaping at the Tokyo view.

There are moments in our everyday life, where we just stay silent, either scrolling aimlessly and endlessly or lost in our own mental universes. In any case, I know I could remain in this floating in between. Alone and yet you’re here because with time you became an extended part of my brain. Seating in that in between, I watch the busy night from a rooftop and you’re tensely silent.

Night views make me happy, they used to remind me of lonely yet blissful nights on my balcony back in middle school, now they remind me of our first year at uni and falling asleep to the peaceful Den Haag skyline . For years, I dreamt of bigger and farther away city escapes, cutting shapes of metal in the neon darkness of megacities. One common dream of living in New York and I adopted yours of visiting Tokyo: You have a special bond with Japan, it ties you to the music you love, to love in general and million memories.

There’s a kanji on your shirt and your heart on your sleeve when you tell me about the things that make you happy. In this massive universe you’re drowning into, you absorb its darkness and exhale soft words that make us all feel okay, there is a nostalgic tint in the way you love nature that evoke great forests and empty spaces, magnificence of the Nature and how tiny we are. A recurring theme that darkens your mind is how insignificant we are, how manipulative are the things around us, tricking us into believe things, walking on eggs unsure of how truthful is our understanding of our surrounding; afraid of our own conspiracy theories, you smoke to forget but it drives the doubts further. Another friends of us once said: “what if weed is controlled and taboo within our societies because governments know it brings people to enlightenment or at least allows them to see the wider truths?”.��I don’t want to know for sure as it’d either mean that we’re sickening our brains or current governments are sickening, or maybe both are true? See? tripping and overlapping realities, maybe the Matrix is the reality ? And while I try to flee from my own mind games and thoughts labyrinth, you dive deeper on a trip to the truth, as aching as it is, a desire for fairness and justice powering you. 

No matter what, you find a way to escape, there is a distance in your eyes and a thousand kilometers in your silences, road trips to yourself because we’re too aware of the current climatic crisis to afford actual trips to peaceful northern landscapes. Still, from the Hague or Tokyo, we can distinguish the stars, trap their shapes into constellations that we don’t really want to believe impact our lives and shape our beings. Yet in a mystical search for meaning, looking at the stars to decipher our nonsense existence actually provides a bit of cohesion; us so small and useless and celestial bodies so big and widely stretched out yet still useless, one maybe guiding another, at least did: didn’t the great explorers use the sky as a map to walk or sail the earth? Ask Christopher Columbus, maybe we should blame our current US “world domination” on the stars that guided him to the Americas. Still, maybe we can’t afford to put all the fault “in our stars, but in ourselves, that we are underlings”. Maybe that’s why the world around us is so fucked up, maybe we all escape somehow, us from shitty environments we were brought up in, our world leaders escaping from their responsibilities and the heritage of past centuries’ rise of capitalism, ruins of colonialism, rejection of minorities and normative discourse preventing us all from seeing larger truths, starting from the Western centered way we were taught in school to the coming crises challenging to our generation and ignored by current leaders.

Apart from the miracles of Nature, art also connects you to the rest of your world, tears bled into ink then sung in studios: music; proving you that other people feel such ways. I relate to this feeling, but this is not about me. The primal surge that music creates in most humans makes it hard to not add a layer of personal thoughts to its discussion. And you know how personal it can be, as you make playlists for every single one of us, like a teenage lover in the 80s, you pour your love onto us, one carefully chosen song at a time. Playlists as effective coping system. Memories roll before your eyes, just like the modern Japan landscape before ours right now. Sometimes, you’ll venture to tell me how music makes you feel and it’s probably even more elevated that how high we are, on the rooftop of a skyscraper; just like music, architecture is an art you are sensible to, and soon this manmade landscape will make you ache with nostalgia, it’s odd to think that for years, you’ve dreamt of visiting this country, blissful waves of hope and bright future where you can move freely and visit this place for the first time. Now your first time here is almost over and like a song attached to a person about to eclipse from your life, a twinge in your chest shuts you out of our world, deep into yours. Calm and peaceful because there’s nothing we can do against time flying faster than our hearts, you surrender and try to envision what artists think when they write those sad songs you add into our playlists, your curiosity in people’s thought is another escape from your own racking brain.

Sometimes, I’ve felt lost in time and spaces, consumed by the fear that no one’d ever feel nor understand that aching pressure in my chest and pinches in my guts: empathy and intense feelings due to my surroundings and people I love. Yet one day you told me you knew how I felt because you felt the same way, overwhelming pain that seizes one’s soul and tears it down with nostalgia and empathy.

It was a suffocating but clear night back in my old room, in my old life, on a summer break that felt like a too-long pause on the sideline of the highway I’m living on now. We were on the phone and gazing out, I was trying to collect in my head memories dripping of bliss, epiphany of why I’m so much happier now, because I know I have you all and you told me: “I get my happiness through you all”. Told me that your parents don’t understand why you keep talking about your friends but it’s because you live through them. I’ve rarely felt this happy in my life, because never had anyone phrased something i relate this much too. And I knew staring into the dark, that as far as I was from our new home, as hard as being surrounded by the ghost of my past was, the bond that we had created over the nine past months was an everlasting one, if you will, full of sisterhood, care for each other and faith in friendships. As much as it’s hard for you to believe in and trust people, we have a lifetime to work on our insecurities.

No matter the dozens of atrocities we see, whether they are corrupted leaders showing you the worst of humanity or couples fighting their ways to hatred, making me fail to understand love, somehow an intuitive faith for the future convinces me that we’ll be alright as long as we have faith in our friends and loved ones. You swiftly swing from one side to other on your seat deep in your thoughts as deep as I am in my fears of loveless life. Sharing and caring, as hard as it gets, is the only cure we found so far. You’re a sponge and hopefully we, your friends, provide the sun you need to cast a brighter light on your life, because we all care about you, all of us that have stuck around, here to stay as long as the stars and pressing global warming will allow us to.

Still swinging on the metallic chair of the rooftop bar, eyes deep into to the dark, you sip a peach flavored tea, small reminders of home. The wheels turn fast and hard behind your eyes, they calculate, divide and jump into conclusion by the minute, and I wonder what is dividing your Libra soul again. There’s guilt in your aura, it’s in the weight crushing your shoulder, in the way you carry your pains around. Under pressure, we all want to pop the champagne bottle that you are, release the bubbles, let you be bubbly and pure like this foamy and rich liquid instead of the tame version of Livia you serve us because you’re afraid of the million powers you hold in. Being so intense in a world empty of meaning makes you absorb the surrounding’s emptiness, only confusion appears to cloud what the world sees in you, full of light and brightness: dark only because of the world we live in. A paradox you say it yourself.

In the thousands lives and adventures that we’ll have, I know there’ll be this question hanging out from your eyes, one that questions what you are and what world we are in. Unsettling in my small certitudes, we know there is still a whole world we have to tear down to make room for our vision. The struggle is the path, the hardened way to our glistening futures, and as you reflect all the energy of Tokyo, boiling under your skin, I know there are neon lights to film, pavements to run onto and lyrics to shout from the top of my lungs. And stories to tell my kids on how “your mom and aunties Livia & Zeineb went to blah blah or used to make random ass movies” or whatever is our next adventure, we’ll tell them. 

[dyingunknown-blog]

BEGINNINGS + GENDER

As said in the introduction: this is a selfish blog where I rant about myself and my feelings. Here goes my first ramble. Within this ramble contains bits of: gender, femininity,  sexuality and eating disorders. Y’know, the usual mix of edgy Tumblr content. I am posting this in celebration of Pride Month (!!! YAY!!! I HONESTLY LOVE PRIDE MONTH) but also because I’ve had this build up in my heart for too long. 

A NOTE BEFORE I BEGIN...

I know you (reader) cannot hear me doing this, so imagine me (author) taking a deep breath, filling my semi spacious lungs, and releasing all that pent up air with a heavy sigh. 

Here we fucking go. Here’s to tip of the iceberg, from 4 years of pent up gay shit to recent moments of gentle gender dysmorphia. Do not expect my writing to be fully coherent, nor written in the best grammar. I am writing for my own therapeutic needs, because I gotta get some of this energy released and I have nowhere else to dump this. This piece is a full on rant, as in I literally wrote this angrily tapping away at 2-4 am. However, I’d like to mention that I mean no offence to any parties, and simply want to vent out some of the deep thoughts I’ve been pacing around for the past few years. Feel free to send me a message regarding your personal feelings, or to just chat. I’m always here as a friend and listener <3 

WHERE IT ALL BEGAN...

I think I owe myself and you (reader) an explanation on where things began to really start. The main “spark” that got me going and prompted me to start this blog was when I found myself unable to stop playing songs by Dorian Electra. Actually-- to be honest-- it was the music videos that really got me going. The glorious explosion of just “QUEER” screaming and banging its head at my 13 inch Mac Book Pro got me extremely inspired to actually do something about the gross reactions of confusion that were occurring in my brain and body. As Dorian Electra put it, “You know I’m not straight, but I’m gonna give it straight to you.” So here’s my best shot at “giving it straight.” 

By the way... I’m from a fairly traditional family with high hopes for me, so the most freedom I can really grasp onto is starting an anonymous Tumblr blog at 2 am laying naked with just my underwear on. 

PERSONAL TOPIC 1: GENDER...

So here’s the thing, I stick to my biological birth gender like it’s my lifeline-- my comfort zone-- I guess, if anything. I personally feel like gender and sexuality have their own little symbiotic (or perhaps parasitic???) relationship, where one’s gender impacts their sexuality-- but I can also accept that my understanding is probably not politically correct. I can say, however, with a heavy heart: 

I am utterly fucked when I think about my gender and sexuality. 

I’ll take it easy first and rope down my feelings towards my gender and its definition. I jokingly scream in the halls that gender is a social construct, but let’s be honest-- is it not?  Other than our dongle-longs and hoochie-has, what makes a woman different from a man? I mean maybe it is just the sausage and the grapefruit, but I’d like to argue that... Just kidding, the more I think about it the more I fall into a rabbit hole where I can’t figure out what a male is and what a female is. I mean what are they? Is it based off of the definition I provide for myself, or what society conveniently slams into my face? Is the LGBTQ+ community the people who get to decide or is it the Westboro Baptist Church??? 

Note: these are not a rhetorical question, please answer this to your opinion because I’m in desperate need of some kind of direction beyond biology. I accept all ideologies and concepts. I’m just hella confused. 

Ehem.

Anyways, my own battle with gender goes beyond not knowing where the “line” is, or if it even exists (again, I’m still not sure if this is a personal question or something based on society...) It also goes into where I stand on this polarised scale. See-- I have a bean, a hole, and melons. Alas, in slightly more proper terms, I have a clitoris, vagina and breasts. So what does that mean for me? Am I automatically a woman? For the first 17 years of my life, I would respond to that question with a VERY confident nod. Pink was once my favourite colour, I like boys, dresses, cute animals and romcoms. My physical body only went to assure what I already knew. Now? I’m not so sure. As it is more acceptable nowadays to be “queer,” I’ve slid into the an identity crisis where I realise I’ve never revelled in the fact that I had tiddies, nor felt comfortable about having a coochie. I used to blame my confusion regarding my comfort in my biological gender on the growing queer influences in my life-- after all, everyone wants to be special and sometimes being apart of the LGBTQ+ community is the best way to stand out, especially when it’s being shoved in your face with media. Everyone who comes out of the closet is faced with incredible amounts of love and attention, and my younger self thought “maybe I should get on the boat” hence, labelling myself as bisexual for the longest time without truly feeling like I am (until in recent years.)  I blamed my confusion in identity and sexuality on the attention whore who lived inside of my heart. My feelings were only justified as true this year, when I found myself staring at myself in the mirror and couldn’t help but to feel unhappy with what I presented myself with. Undies clad with a slightly cropped black muscle tank, I could see the linings of a “V” line on my lower abdomen and felt kinda hot about it. I did the annoying fuckboy pose (you know, the one where the guy is biting his shirt to reveal his oh-so-humble six pack) and found it... kinda fun? I did have a 36D underboob flail around, but my focus was more on my bottom half, with my Victoria Secret blue lace underwear and masculine illusion.  It wasn’t like a grand glorious moment, nor was it like I was the tomboy of the house and everyone just “knew” and I only had to convince myself. Instead, it was an anti-climatic moment where I realised “fuck, I have another problem on my hands that I can’t ignore anymore.” 

I don’t know if I truly identify as female or male. Honestly, I don’t really think I need to identify myself, but that’s the 30% of my consciousness who is super queer, chill and cool. See, the other 70% of my mind is going in a frenzy screaming, because I just lost one of my key defining attributes. Think that episode of Spongebob, where Spongebob’s brain cells are screaming and throwing papers around the office setting of his brain.

Another question has also become increasingly relevant in my journey of finding my “true inner zen self.” 

Who am I choosing my gender for?

In 2018, and most of the years before, I adored being loved by boys and having guys waggle their dicks like dog tails for my tits and ass, but in 2019, I randomly figured out that I never liked my boobs for anything but that. I mean having an hourglass figure was always (and still is) a goal of mine, but I question for what reason. I’d like to say it’s for personal aesthetic appeal, but it wouldn’t be surprising to me if I just do it so people will like me more. In fact, I battled with bulimia for the very reason of: I don’t know what the fuck I want or like, but  the crowd likes “skinny thick” girls so lets do that by purging. Am I currently wearing a waist trainer and corset on top of each other because I like the outcome, or because the people around me like me more for it? I’m trying really hard not to segue into the alluring topic of toxic femininity, because I can rant for HOURS AND PAGES about that, so I’ll just say: I don’t know if I’m being a girl for myself or because I’ll be more liked for it. 

In all honesty, the truth regarding my gender became clearer the more I self conscious I became. In 2018, I fell into the trap of sending boys nudes (apologies for the TMI and sorry family if you somehow came across my blog and are currently reading this.)  I liked it for a millisecond. Why? Because it felt good to have someone desperate for me. That millisecond died off real fast. My own thoughts pooped my nude Alpha Female party with insecurity and fear of how my body compares to other girls my age. Three days after the first nude I sent I realised I hate my body. I felt empowered in the moment (honestly I do love the feeling of tease. I still do send ohohoho raunchy pics for the pure euphoria of just having someone crave me) but overall just left the experience with lingering guilt and self hatred. I wasn’t sure if I was doing this to please myself or others. I also abhor taking nudes, because I do not think I embody femininity and dislike my body for that very reason. Identifying as male makes me far more comfortable than as identifying as a female. I might have tits, I might have soft facial features, but I just don’t like how I mentally feel like I can’t compare to the unrealistic standard of femininity that women uphold. I spent my whole life trying to  tick the boxes under “female,” but always felt like I was just doing the bare minimum... Hence my past is full of desperation, the need to show skin for the sake of proving I’m “sexy” and being perfectly fine with getting mislabeled as a slut at school. Nowadays, I show skin because I’m comfortable and am learning to love my body. I am not okay with slut shaming in general, but I am most definitely not okay with being called a slut either because I’m still a fucking virgin. So hun, I really do wish I could call myself a slut and have that much game, but I’m very far from that.

Anyways, uh more on my gender crisis:  I’ve also always adored mens fashion and absolutely revel the aura of being the “alpha.” Ever since my middle school days, I’d secretly snoop around and envy the men’s section of Barney’s and Saks, because it just looks so damn cool. Excuse my lack of “high quality language,” I can hear my English teacher sighing about my lack of “professional” or “appropriate” language, but I really can’t express my feelings regarding mens fashion other than it’s fucking cool. I must say though, my style of clothing and expression of self doesn’t stop itself at mens fashion. In fact, I enjoy dressing to exhort a more dominant presence, whether it’s with a short denim skirt and tight crop top or a loose fitting silk blouse and skinny jeans with a belt. So I guess in a way, my fashion and what I feel comfortable in explains my gender for me. A little bit of both and a little bit of neither. Although the next step would definitely be playing around with my hair and piercing, but I think my traditional family would whoop my ass to the moon if I do it now, and I can’t say I’m not scared of regrets. I just want to discover myself a little more this year...

Regardless, I just wanna further clarify that I don’t feel comfortable being put as female, male or hell-- even androgynous.

And I gotta say, after holding this in and denying it for 4 years, it feels damn good to type it out and admit it.

 In deciding to be a “gender”, there are standards. Deciding to be anything comes with the price of standards. I just can’t personally handle not being able to fit into the standards there are for them... Especially now since people are so bothered on being politically correct, so if I’m “not being properly androgynous” or “not properly female,” I’ll get shit on, and if I’m not accepted by the mass majority, I’ll feel societal hate mixed with self hatred. 

I also want to say that sometimes I don’t feel like I have the right to be confused or declare a gender because I’ve been on the judgemental side before. 

In middle school one of my close friends moved away, and soon later began to label themselves as gender fluid. It was such a new concept that I initially thought that they were doing it as a publicity stunt, but slowly realised that it is indeed who they are. I wasn’t hateful, but I can’t say I’m innocent, even if it was when I was far younger and less understanding. I remember when they first started using their current pronouns, I was confused on how to utilise them and initially disregarded them. Today, I regret my ignorance. Misgendering can always be a mistake, but it can also be extremely spoiled, belittling and condescending. So even though I know someone that probably went through a similar journey as I am today, I feel guilty asking them about it because of the shit I gave them when I was 14.

 Additionally, I’m scared of being wrong about myself. I can’t describe it too well, but I’m just scared that I’ll slip up a wrong opinion and then be automatically thrown into the can of “special snowflake wannabe LGBTQ+” when in reality: I truly feel like I’m not of “cisgender” or anything normal. I don’t want to dip too deep into my history with crippling anxiety and experiences with depression, but I will say that I can’t help but to hate myself for being queer too.. Alas, I’ll have to learn how to get over that and continue loving myself, but what the hell am I going to do now? 2k words later and things aren’t exactly clearer, but I can (somewhat) confidently say that I know what I’ll do (for now.) 

As of today, June 17, 2019, I have decided to not give a fuck and to simply just identify with the LGBTQ+ community. I don’t feel comfortable identifying as male, female, neither, both, gender fluid, or anything else. I will simply put off gender and let people call me by whatever pronoun they want.

I just wanna be me. 

Until I find out something else, or become more comfortable with myself, or gather the confidence to “come out of the closet” and stop being so selfish and finally decide what the hell I am, it’ll probably just be like this for awhile.

And honestly? I think I’m okay with that.

[pinarworks]

HUMANS ARE NOT THE VIRUS AND ECOFASCISM IS BAD FOR YOU Text: Pınar Üzeltüzenci From economic to environmental panic and finally the current pandemic it seems like this century will be remembered as the age of global crises. Before panic over COVID-19 replaced the panic over climate crisis as the primary threat to our existence, we have seen the rise of new forms of exposure-intensive activism from the likes of Greta Thunberg and UK based activist group Extinction Rebellion. As COVID-19 spread from Asia to the Western world, it has ceased being a talking point about Asian’s dirty habits into a global emergency - sorry non-western world, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. Nevertheless, the prominent catastrophic tone of late climate activism, as well as the media, seem to be interpreting the virus as an environmental/moral problem, framing it as the result of human wrongdoing against nature. The tendency to portray COVID-19 or global warming as a punishment, or an act of revenge from mother nature, has supported familiar far-right talking points. The Christchurch shooter who killed 52 people in June 2019 identified himself as an ecofascist in his manifesto. Just two months later, Patrick Crusius who shot 22 people to death in El Paso, Texas, wrote his own, in homage to Christchurch. In this manifesto, he mentions the danger faced by the USA because of the environmental crisis and “consumption culture’’, revealing the eco-fascist motivations behind the horrendous attack. The evil muse to all this is Anders Breivik, the Norwegian extremist who murdered 69 young Labor Party members in 2011, whose manifesto also made references to humanity losing its pureness by the taint of inferior races. This emerging movement might be posing a greater threat than imagined, since it’s ideological framework percolates into everyday discrimination and manifests as the moral policing of social life, as well as other narratives on the rise such as patriotism, anti-immigrant policies and racism. Academic Betsy Hartmann defines eco-fascism as “the greening of hate,” a term which implies an effort to cover something ugly with something nicer, cleaner, prettier. This approach naively assumes that the green movement is fundamentally incompatible with the fascist movement, on the grounds that one of them is profoundly good and the other profoundly evil. This assumption is ripe to be challenged; because ideas of pureness and cleanliness have long been an important, in fact innate part of racist ideologies. The drive to preserve a pure environment is an essential part of the totalitarian fantasy. A fantasy in which land, race, air and even the intestinal organs are expected to keep up with an impossible standard of “purity”. That’s why we have to problematize the idea of pureness/cleanliness first, so that we understand why these terms are darlings of the far-right and what political implications they make for racist ideologies. From the Hindu Caste system to the ideology of Hitler’s Third Reich; the fixation to keep the body and the environment clean and pure, has historically served an ugly purpose. The notion of “pureness’’, tends to imply what’s considered impure, contaminated, intoxicated and suggests a totalitarian understanding of bodies that need to be under perpetual surveillance to be disciplined, controlled and reduced in numbers. The idea that purity and cleanliness are inherently good, functions to underline class differences and ultimately racial discrimination. After all, we live in a society in which colours, food (just as I am writing this, the Turkish government declared a two day curfew. This caused widespread panic, many people ran to the markets in crowds. Some observers from the white-Turk twittersphere condemned panic buyers for buying snacks polite society considers unhealthy or redundant), body parts and even adjectives are hierarchically regulated and work in favor of certain living beings. In this hierarchy those who are fortunate enough to ratify their ‘’humanity’’, come first. But this is an ill-defined category that can easily be misused to justify injustice. Slavery was rationalized through coding black people as unveloved cousins of “humanity” (read: white European). A more recent manifestation of this long saga in Turkey, is Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s proclamation in October 2019, questioning Kurdish people’s right to a country by disputing the humanity of YPG supporters. The category of “humanity’’ is often mobilised with an internal hierarchy. Such arguments were put forth by the leading figures of the eugenics movements. One such figure, Ernst Haeckel, became an instant hit within the nascent Nazi movement by arguing that “lower” humans evolved from different species. The Nazi Party’s fixation on pureness reflected on many political regulations involving a strict strain of environmentalism under the motto “blood and soil’’ both of which needed to be kept uncontaminated (from other people, coming from other lands, their blood and their bodies). Fascism and environmentalism went hand in hand in many instances like this. Owning a land, owning a body, owning the right to things through land and body are all totalitarian fantasies that refuse mingling with others hence “getting dirty’’. Eco-fascism historically relies on the idea that the environment can only be preserved if we spare it for a handful of people who really care about “mother nature”, overseeing the fact that nature is not pure in itself. Needless to say both the authors and the imagined beneficiaries of this utopian vision tend to be overwhelmingly white. This narrative has recently resurfaced with the spread of COVID-19, this time targeting Chinese people and blaming their dietary habits as the sole culprit for the global pandemic. The doomsday narrative of climate activism can sometimes get lost in translation or be wilfully misread by those who see land as race- something that must be defended and preserved in a ‘’pure and natural’ state’’. This fixation on pureness/cleanliness reaches beyond traditionalist politics which fethishise Norse mythology and return to the “virgin wheatfields” of the countryside. The notion of hygiene has long been a way to underline social status differences in urban life as well. The pressure on “individual change towards a cleaner and green future’’ also works in favor of class division through moral pressure in everyday life. Single usage plastic, especially bags and straws, may now be the most frowned upon thing in the world. In İstanbul for instance, everybody knows someone who is so ready to preach bartenders about putting plastic straws in cocktails, or someone who complains about Arab tourists being “dirty’’. Cleanliness is imagined as a moral imperative especially for city life, free from the effect/impact of education, class, gender, race and other major/minor grifts within the complicated stratas of society and it’s not even always about climate change. Labeling people “uncivilized’’ just because they don't stand on the right side of the moving staircases of the subway or leaving garbage behind, is a popular and often unquestioned metropolitan etiquette, so is naming them “peasants’’, “dirty animals’’, “savages’’ etc. Judging other people’s competence in constantly upgrading their decorum is sadly very common. It’s fair to say this expectation shares important similarities with the eco-fascism movement. They go hand in hand with hubris, elitism and other forms of discrimination. People who don’t do the “right things’’ in this binary logic, should please leave the city, ultimately the country. Here in İstanbul it's the unwanted Syrian population and the ‘’obnoxious’’ Arab tourists, people who are not ‘’smart’’ enough to wash their hands regularly or buy the right kind of food to eat in quarantine, as well as immigrants from other parts of Turkey who can’t speak “proper” Turkish: mostly Kurds. We see, the values that make a good human are accessible through certain capitals: racial, cultural and economic. This narrative of division, “deserving to live somewhere’’ by assimilating, resonates in a direct correlation between climate change and overpopulation. This also reinforces the idea that a form of natural cleansing is the solution for the environmental crisis. A process of “natural selection’’ in which species that cannot survive will naturally be wiped out. In this envisioned “distilled’’ future, the first ones to go of course would be the uncivilized non-human immigrants, black people, the poor and those who don’t have enough social capital to enable surviving the very conditions they are blamed for. But controls over means of survival are in a few hands and they are working to create a clean and pure future: a totalitarian utopia. This might be why many white supremacists and right-wing radicals are into catastrophic environmentalist narratives: A better nature for them means a whiter, (racially) cleansed future. Eco-fascism suggests that the most practical way to protect life on earth for human beings is to reduce human population. Carbon footprints are measured, and unprivileged people are exposed as the most responsible. In this vision, a research studying the great carbon footprint created by asthma patients’ plastic inhalers becomes conceivable. People who already carry the burden of racial/moral discrimination are once again blamed for not being moral enough and being too careless: Africans for Ebola, Chinese for Corona, homosexuals for AIDS. Protecting life means reserving it for certain people, people who come first, people who are worthy of it. People who are considered “human beings’’ enough. That’s why the discourse of population control harms disadvantaged groups first; immigrant, uneducated, poor and non-white people. Through declaring war and drone operations on other people’s homelands and not opening borders for them to flee war and oppression, through turning people into objects of negotiation and reducing them to pieces of paper, through not allowing them documents that would dress them up as ‘’human beings’’. All this cruelty is performed with the justification of protecting humanity from a vermin invasion. This dehumanising discourse is the first and most important step of setting up a eugenicist apparatus of population control. In a world that relies on rationality, science and “practicality’’, total solutions may equate to annihilation. This may sound very rational to some, because it is so clean cut and scientific: The earth has restricted resources left, it is way overpopulated and it’s too late to turn it back. Someone will do the math: Reduce the population! As the El Paso shooter wrote in his manifesto: “The decimation of the environment is creating a massive burden for future generations. Corporations are heading the destruction of our environment by shamelessly overharvesting resources, If we can get rid of enough people, then our way of life can be more sustainable.’’ That’s why the apocalyptic narrative dominant in climate activism needs to be abolished. Because people can do some very interesting things in times of crisis, as the saying goes “extraordinary times need extraordinary measures’’, and in a post-holocaust world, people are alarmingly good at rationalizing. To bring about cultural and spatial change, climate activism must also challenge the mainstream narratives of consumption which ignores class, race and gender. We have to recognize that this fight is first and foremost political and we have to start targeting the leaders, the rich, the corporations and the state. Otherwise climate activism may very well stay as a movement in which people are divided in two, as right doers and wrong doers, this will only end up in misanthropy and resentment that eventually labels vulnerable people as “parasites’’. This is the state of mind which justifies mass deportations, wars and ultimately mass shootings and murders. We can’t talk about climate change without talking about occupied lands, disability, displaced populations and gender equality. It’s a crisis yes, but it’s not transcendent. It’s important, yes; but not more important than any ongoing human rights struggle. It’s naive to assume that certain discourses would circumvent established connotations and reach transcending solutions; on the contrary, language has historicity and people interact on affective grounds. In the center of this world, stands whiteness with all its blinding “brightness’’, and this prevents everything, even climate change, from being a universal matter. Associated Press’s excisement of Ugandan activist Vanessa Nakate from an image (which featured Greta Thunberg with other young white activists) then defending the motive as being ‘’purely on composition grounds’’ is just a small example of how whiteness still stands as an invisible threshold in every little action. We must never forget what historical connotations the ideas of ‘’purity’’ and ‘’cleanliness’’ carry and how the collective unconsciousness remembers and interprets them. Overreading is a must and the historical baggage of environmentalist narrative cannot be challenged without being intersectional. http://www.mangalmedia.net/english/humans-are-not-the-virus-why-ecofascism-is-bad-for-you

[omfgtrump]

The Two Viruses: Part 4

Last minute newsflash: After the writing of the piece, The Don announced that Easter will be the return to normalcy despite what scientific advisers say. Pence was once again astounded by The Don’s connection to the spiritual world and told him that his brilliance in understanding that America and Jesus will be resurrected on the same day is why the Evangelicals love him so much. To  which Tho Don replied: What does Easter have to do with Jesus? I just want to see all the pretty ladies in their bonnets and if the virus is still around they can use their bonnets for masks.” More on the greatest Easter parade ever in my next piece.}

As the specter of devastation looms over this country, our incompetent president was asked to rate his performance on a scale of 1-10, and saw fit to give himself a 10 out of 10. My only surprise was that he didn’t say, “Too bad you can only give yourself a 10, because it would definitely be an 11, or maybe even 12.”

The most powerful country in the world is being brought to its knees by an invisible microbe. Talk about David and Goliath.

The Don, the most bigly man in the room, but small minded and petty in all ways, has been usurped by one the shortest guys in the room, Anthony Fauci, a.k.a. Tony.

To watch Fauci twist and turn, bite his bottom lip, put his hand to his head when The Don speaks, is to bear witness in real time to the pathology of The Don and the horror show of his presidency. You can see Fauci looking at The Don with imploring eyes as he meanders in to disinformation and false promises thinking: Please, pretty please with a cherry on top. Please, don’t say that. No, no no!

That was the case with his unsubstantiated aggrandizement of the promise of chloroquine, an anti- malaria drug that is also used to treat Lupus and Rheumatoid arthritis.

The Don called the drug “very powerful” and “It’s shown very encouraging — very, very encouraging early results”

None of this has any scientific validity and caused a run on the medication which negatively impacts people who need to take the medication to treat their Lupus and arthritis.

So Fauci, the man who has been battle-tested like no other-starting with the AIDS crisis, once again walked to the podium and with a resoluteness that should shame every single Republican lawmaker, gently contradicted the president with something called “facts”.

Can you imagine what The Don feels when that happens? No one tells the president he is wrong! And on national TV to boot!

Don’t you wonder how many times after the press conference The Don has to be talked out of firing him? His staff probably preps him before the briefings: “Mr. President, at some point, Tony may clarify a few things you say, so don’t pay much mind.”

“I don’t see why that’s necessary, as I am a very stable genius and have great instincts for things like science. Like with climate change. My gut definitely tells me it is a hoax. And why can’t I just fire him? I fired Comey and everyone thought that would be the end of my presidency. I booted out traitor Vindman and not a peep from the Secretary of Defense. You know my base would be just fine. They think I am doing a great job (unbelievably, most Republicans support his handling of the crisis) and they probably get bored when Tony is speaking. Got to admit he is pretty boring, such a dweeb. I don’t know how anyone so boring could get to be so important. And he is getting way too much TV time. Let’s do a few of the press conferences without him-bring him down to size.”

I had a dream last night that The Don was locked in a room and the key was thrown way.

The reason The Don tolerates Tony is because he is terrified. He has finally realized that he can’t connive, spin, and lie his way out of people dying. But if you understand his pathological narcissism you also realize that he can’t stop lying, making false promises and blaming others. During national crisis a leader unifies: The Don is incapable of that as he is all about sowing division and conquering. There is no WE for him, just “I”.

He attacks reporters telling them they have asked a nasty question. Most recently NBC’s Peter Alexander asked:

“What do you say to Americans who are scared?”

“I say that you’re a terrible reporter,” Trump answered.

Too bad Alexander didn’t say, “Mr. President, you are a terrible president. Incompetent to the core, lacking any decency and capacity for empathy”.

I can dream, right?

Think about that answer. The President of the United States responding to a question about how he can be a calming influence and reassure people. Basically, his response is: “Fuck you, you fake news asshole. How dare you ask me a question like that? You are just stirring up trouble. Now people are going to start thinking they aren’t safe. You are a traitor to our country! We really need to ban these reporters. Get them the hell out of here.”

He could have just said: “Of course people are scared. It is normal to be scared. During this time we need to put aside our differences and support each other. This is so hard.”

Instead he berates a reporter. God, do I wish dreams could come true as locking him up in a room seems so the least we can do during this crisis and frankly, in the realm of my dreams, that’s a relatively benevolent solution.

His insistence in referring to covid- 19 as “The China Virus,” is another case in point. China was deceitful about revealing what impact the virus was having there, but the U.S. knew about its devastating effects in January and The Don just called it a hoax and denied its severity. If we had dealt with this then, we would be in a much different place now. In fact, one can say that The Don’s behavior was no different than the president of China’s. The fact that we had advanced notice of what was going on and did nothing until recently is the fault of the president. It’s the old reliable playbook; the “crooked Hillary playbook, where you blame someone of the very thing you are guilty of.

And while The Don plays his petty politics of grievance, hospitals do not have enough masks for doctors, there is an unconscionable shortage of ventilators and rather than operationalize a war-time initiative by not just invoking the DPA, but ordering it to mobilize, the now self-proclaimed “War-Time President” is leading us in to battle the same way doctors without masks and protective gear are fighting the virus.

Let’s have a shout for two American patriots Senators Burr and Loeffler, who, in mid January, were briefed privately about the potential devastation of the virus and continued to feed the public pollyan-ish information while divesting of significant stock. Heinously, Burr and Loeffler did virtually nothing to protect the health and safety of their constituents or of Americans in other states. Burr even went so far as to co-write an article for Fox News.com bragging about the country’s readiness.

And wouldn’t you want to see the stock transactions of The Don, his family and his cronies as well? As MAGA crowds are known to cheer: “Lock them up!”

from WordPress https://ift.tt/2wARCBq via IFTTT

[pardontheglueman]

Shattered: Inside the Doomed Campaign of Hilary Clinton

Just 200 days or so into Donald Trump’s presidency and America is flirting, somewhat comically, with the prospect of nuclear war. Trump, a crooked businessman turned reality T.V. star, turned am-dram leader of the free world, and the equally irrational and despotic leader of North Korea, Kim Jong un, have each spent the past week escalating a preposterous war of words that threatens to death spiral out of control at any minute. Trump is clearly having the time of his life, endlessly bragging over the size of his nuclear arsenal and fantasising out loud about a forthcoming nuclear climax. His latest tweet of terror boasts that ‘Military solutions are now fully in place, locked and loaded, should North Korea act unwisely’. That Trump should appoint himself judge, jury, and executioner on the matter of sensitive international relations between nuclear powers is enough to make us all soil ourselves. If the Cuban Missile Crisis was near tragedy, the showdown with North Korea is being replayed as farce. A surreal image re-occurs of Trump dolled up as Major Kong from Kubrick’s Dr. Strangelove re-enacting the movie’s classic closing scene where a perfectly cast Slim Pickens whooping, hollering and waving a cowboy hat, Bronco rides a nuclear bomb into black and white oblivion!  

As we contemplate an American presidency (quite possibly the last ever!) that seeks to ban Muslims from entering the States, that is on a suicide mission to withdraw health cover from 25 million Americans by repealing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”), and that has already succeeded in curtailing the U.S.A.’s participation in the Paris Climate Accord, all while under Senate and grand jury investigation into the administration’s fraudulent/corrupt/treasonable links with Russia, there is an urgent need to make sense of just how America got itself into this unholy mess.

After all, The Donald didn’t get to be Commander-in-Chief by accident! There is an awful lot of blame to go around; an initially amused, fawning and feeble media, encompassing not only the Murdoch extremists at Fox but also the liberal pundits currently doing penance nightly on CNN. F.B.I. director James Comey played his part too with an inexcusable intervention, just ten days before the election, which gave a game-changing kiss of life to the Republican populist (still reeling, then, from the public airing of his sordid sexual confessions on the Hollywood Access tapes), while Trump’s collusion with Guccifer 2.0 and Julian Assange brought a whole new meaning to the term Axis-of-Evil and ensured that Clinton was continually on the defensive as polling day drew closer.

As for the role of America’s two established parties, the GOP stood squarely behind a candidate with a self-confessed history of sexual assault who just happened to be a lifelong racist, while the tranche of leaked emails from Clinton’s Campaign Chair John Podesta confirmed the suspicions of many activists by revealing how the Democratic National Committee had sought to undermine socialist challenger Bernie Sanders’ pitch for the party nomination. And, finally, there was the small matter of Hilary Clinton’s own culpability in allowing Trump to triumph. How did a supposed presidential shoe-in run such an inept campaign that she contrived to snatch inglorious defeat from the jaws of victory?

Should you wish, Dear Reader, to spend your last few moments on earth boning up on exactly how Clinton fumbled the ball in the act of touching down (rather than adopting the fruitier suggestion of Roger McGough in his classic poem At Lunchtime), then Shattered, authored by a couple of real political insiders in Jonathan Allen (Politico, Bloomberg & Vox) and Amie Parnes (senior White House correspondent for The Hill newspaper), may be just the book to while away a nuclear winter or two!

Allen and Parnes are well versed in their subject, having co-authored HRC: State Secrets and the Rebirth of Hilary Clinton in 2014, and have clearly made full use of their contacts book for this sequel. By interviewing more than 100 sources connected to the Clinton campaign (albeit, on the condition of anonymity), Allen & Parnes are able to dissect a campaign which, they contend, was in crisis even before Clinton had officially declared her candidacy for the Democratic nomination.

At the heart of this book is the question of how and why a savvy operator like Clinton, a candidate of whom Barrack Obama declared ‘"I can say with confidence there has never been a man or a woman more qualified than Hillary Clinton to serve as president of the United States of America.“, failed to understand and navigate the cultural and political groundswell that was sweeping established neo-liberal politicians into the dustbin of history, while Trump, having read the tea (party) leaves was positioning himself as a pseudo-nationalist friend of the working class (being ultra careful not to ostracise his acolytes in a birther movement that included Klansman David Duke and his neo-Nazi cohorts).

What do you get if you bring together Robby Mook and Hilary Clinton? Answer: Donald Trump as leader of the free world!

The authors are keen to make the case that the Clinton campaign team was deeply divided and, as a result, dysfunctional from the outset, with too many apparatchiks in the warring factions (”The Mook Mafia”, “The State Crew”, “The Consultants” and “The Communications Shop”), all competing to catch the boss’ eye, and all equally afraid to stand up to the prospective president and tell her a few home truths. Shattered is as much the story of the shared confusion and cowardice of Clinton’s key staffers, as it is a story of her historic failure to smash through the ‘glass ceiling’ to become America’s first female president. And therein lays the problem with the book itself.

Weighing in at just over 400 pages, Shattered is a comprehensive, well-sourced, but ultimately dull account of how not to conduct a political campaign. Allen and Parnes certainly get their ducks in a row, confidently navigating the twists and turns of a mind-bogglingly inane race for the Whitehouse, and there are a handful of juicy nuggets for the political nerds and policy wonks to chew the fat over. Nevertheless, despite discovering that Glen Caplin, an ultra-loyal Democrat tasked with the ‘most soul-crushing job in modern political history’- that of sifting the hundreds of thousands of leaked Podesta e-mails in search of the next scandal that could derail the Clinton campaign, worked out of an office dubbed “the room of tears”, or that Bill Clinton’s mysterious on-off mistress was codenamed “the energiser”, this is a political blockbuster that only rarely comes to life on the page. I like Bernie Sanders as much as the next born again Corbynista, but rather too much time (250 pages worth!) is spent on his battling Clinton for the Democratic nomination, and, the authors, in devoting entire chapters establishing Robby Mook, Clinton’s campaign manager, and analytics guru, as an improbable fall guy, only serve to delay the entry of the real villain of the piece, Trump, until the reader is almost past caring.  

In all honesty, not even F.Scott Fitzgerald at his pre-Hollywood peak could have polished this worthy study of Mook’s over-reliance on analytical data into something resembling a political thriller, nor indeed turned a polarising figure like Clinton into a more engaging personality and somebody we could all genuinely empathise with. As Clinton confides to an aide, just days before the election, ‘I know I engender bad reactions from people, and I always have. There are some people in whom I bring out the worst. I know that about myself, and I don’t know why that is’. At which point, the reader is sorely tempted to cry out ‘Hey, Hilary, think on, maybe pocketing $225,000 for a speech to the Wall Street bankers who destroyed the world economy has got something to do with it’. Thankfully, the occasional Bill Clinton anecdote or intemperate outburst enlivens a plodding narrative and the writers, for once, are up to the job of capturing the essence of the charismatic “Big Dog”- ‘His handle on politics was as natural as Jimi Hendrix’s feel for the guitar’- being the best line in the whole book.

The media reacts to Trump’s victory - watch out for the bad language!!!!!!

It’s impossible, though, not to feel a degree of empathy for Clinton as election night turned from triumph to disaster and the expected victory party became, instead, a wake for American liberalism - ‘At the start of the night the Javits Center was electric: it had the buzz of a debut performance on Broadway’, until, that is, Steve Schale, a political strategist in Florida called in with a message that Trump’s numbers there were unreal. In rural Polk County, Trump had increased Mitt Romney’s 2012 total by a massive 25,000 votes, while in Pasco County, important because of its Rust Belt retirees, he outperformed Romney by 30,000 votes. ‘You’re going to come up short’ Schale warned his devastated colleagues.

Clinton did, it’s worth remembering, win the popular vote by 2.8 million ballots, despite Jim Comey’s unethical and unprecedented “October surprise”, while in any other presidential election in the nation’s history a Russian stooge like Trump would have been railroaded out of Washington on the first day of campaigning never to return. However, these are strange times, times well beyond Clinton’s understanding. Even though veteran Senator Bernie Sanders ran Clinton close in the race for the Democratic nomination with a grassroots campaign that targeted political elites and globalisation, the Clinton camp ignored the smoke signals from Rust Belt states like Wisconsin, where the radical socialist beat Clinton by 59 percent to 40 percent among white voters (63 percent to 36 percent among men!) in the Democratic primary. Come the presidential run-off with Trump, Clinton was tragically devoid of a strategy to counteract his patriotic pose, still unwilling to re-think neo-liberalism’s role in muck-spreading grotesque levels of inequality across the country, confiding wistfully to old friend Minyon Moore ‘I don’t understand what’s happening with the country, I can’t get my arms around it’.

We love Tumblr & Statione

[aspartanlife]

Weekly Thoughts - 7/24/17

Back after a week away in Bozeman, Montana, which has successfully given me my yearly geographical crisis. That being said, I am always reminded that no city can match the vibrancy, diversity, and energy of New York. 

Here we go:

Arable Land & Real Estate

As Climate Change sets in, it seems to me that there will be few resources as valuable (and scarce) as water and land (specifically arable land). I wonder what an investment vehicle either directly or indirectly looks like (taking into account what land will become more valuable as it gets hotter & weirder)

Outdoor Supreme 

I spend more time that I should obsessing over how incredible the business model of Supreme is and how their collaboration structure manufactures demand in a way I have never seen. Given the explosion in the Outdoor Industry, I wonder if a company/brand can become the Supreme of the Outdoor Industry collaborating with established brands like Patagonia, Arcteryx, Filson, etc. The closest I have seen to this is Topo Designs. Huckberry is disruptive, but they are more of a new Backcountry.com in their biz model. 

Next Patagonia

Related to that, I have been thinking deeply about which brand becomes the next Patagonia (Fiercely independent, stewards of the industry/environment their industry plays in, & HUGE following among both outdoor enthusiasts and people that do not give a single fuck about the outdoors). Brands and companies do not last forever and I am very curious to see which the next one will be (again, loving what Topo is doing in the space).

VC & Sexual Harassment

Not much to say except, it’s a shame. A huge shame and to blame SF and the Valley is to ignore that it is happening all over and give others a pass. One thing that this problem does is make me firmer in my resolve to want to work in this industry because the only way to make it better is to replace the trash with those who are not.

The “Next Silicon Valley”

Continuing on the theme of Valar Morghulis, I have also been thinking about where the next tech hub will be once SV relinquishes the title (which WILL happen). My bets are here:

Seattle/PNW - Rise of Amazon as first trillion dollar company (you heard it here probably 50th) along with great universities, talent, and incumbent tech companies. Everything needed. I would bet on this if I could since other areas have a lot more hype.

Los Angeles - Big tech companies creating liquidity for angels, great universities, great weather, great local government, it factor, and fast growing city with high and well-supported immigrant population. The hype machine is in LA and I am #longLA too.

Austin/TX - There have been some articles about SV quietly moving to Texas. Texas is changing dramatically demographically and politically. It has very favorable tax laws for the SV/Libertarian Tech Brogrammers. Great research universities. Houston could be a dark horse for this too. 

NYC - I am biased but NYC has economic and industry diversity, world class universities, and is generally where people want to move when they move to the States (see hard-working immigrant factor). I want NYC to succeed but it’s been a lot slower than expected. Still, I think NYC has a really high ceiling.

The “Next Boulder”

Being in Bozeman for the last week and thinking acutely (now that I reflect on these notes) about change. I wonder what the next great small city or town might be. Boulder has unique advantages given it’s proximity to Denver, but it’s getting very fucking expensive. A few places, I could see take the torch:

Bozeman, MT - Uni town, great outdoors, influx of Californians (for better or worse)

Fort Collins, CO - Similar prox to Denver, Uni town, Shift could happen

Asheville, NC - All the CO breweries moved here, Uni town, Mountains and Outdoors

Bend, OR - Outdoors, outdoors and proximity to NW and Cai

San Luis Obispo, CA - Uni town, halfway between LA and SF

Burlington, VT - Uni-town, Outdoors and growing, East coast proximity

Portland, ME - Coastal, Proximity to Boston, Outdoors

Santa Fe, NM - Highly educated Lab folks, Outdoors, Creative Arts Scene 

[schraubd]

The Epidemiology of Antisemitism

The New York Times has hired conservative columnist Bret Stephens, lately of the Wall Street Journal, to provide an additional conservative perspective to the Grey Lady. Controversy immediately erupted, first over Stephens status as a climate-change denier, and then more recently over a 2016 column that characterized antisemitism as "the disease of  the Arab mind" (it came in the context of an Egyptian Olympian who refused to shake the hand of his Israeli competitor). NYT Cairo Bureau chief kicked off the discussion with this tweet:

Not cool: new NYT columnist @BretStephensNYT once wrote about the "disease of the Arab mind". https://t.co/duylYvCQSd (h/t @hahellyer)

— Declan Walsh (@declanwalsh) April 15, 2017

And his colleague Max Fisher succinctly articulating what I think is our legitimate squeamishness at hearing an entire group of people characterized as possessing a "disease of the mind."

@declanwalsh @BretStephensNYT I guess we just all have to agree to disagree as to whether it is acceptable or correct to call racial groups pathologically "diseased."

— Max Fisher (@Max_Fisher) April 16, 2017

Now, I've responded to a Bret Stephens column once, and it was not one I was impressed by -- a tiresome bit of neocolonialist claptrap seeking to establish which peoples are sufficiently civilized to deserve self-determination. So I don't have any particular interest in defending Stephens per se. That said, this controversy did interest me because of an angle I don't think I've yet seen explored: the widespread literature on the "epidemiological" approach to racism. I first came across this view in an article by prominent Critical Race Theorist Charles Lawrence III, but it is hardly restricted to him. It is a perspective that is at least familiar to anyone who spends significant time in the literature on contemporary racism and prejudice. The epidemiological view treats racism as, well, a disease -- a public health crisis that demands intervention. Among the motivations for articulating racism in this way is the belief that an epidemiological approach steps away from the focus on conscious choices (we don't choose to be infected) and with it, the politics of blame (we don't view cancer patients as being morally inferior because they have a disease). Rather, thinking of racism as a disease channels our focus onto (a) the devastating social consequences that can occur when racism is widespread and unchecked, and (b) what we can do to check the spread and, eventually, find a cure. As it turns out, the use of the epidemiological approach for antisemitism has deep roots -- deeper, perhaps, than its use to analyze racism. Re-reading Lawrence's article while writing this post, I discovered that it actually contains a significant discussion of antisemitism as disease, as an epidemic -- and one that he investigates through the specific case of Black antisemitism right alongside the parallel case of Jewish racism.  Even more interestingly, a 1949 book by Carey McWilliams on "Anti-Semitism in America" claims to have found "hundreds" of examples of antisemitism being defined in epidemiological terms -- a "theme" that runs through descriptions of what antisemitism is. Among the statements he found was the claim that antisemitism is, simply, "a disease of Gentile peoples." Under this view, then, the rhetoric of epidemiology and disease is meant to be gentler -- not stigmatizing to those it labels, not concerned with separating out the bad people from the good. But as Fisher observes, there is at the very least another set of tropes associated with "disease" rhetoric that is not so benign. Under the latter usage, "disease" connotes those groups which are dirty and mutated; those who need to be isolated, sequestered, or purged. Rhetoric of various outgroups -- including Jews, Arabs, immigrants of all backgrounds -- being "diseased" and therefore dangerous has a been a staple of racist fearmongering for generations. Again, it is not for nothing that we squirm when we hear talk of a group being "diseased". I don't think that Stephens was intentionally referring to the literature on the epidemiology of racism. But leaving his particular case aside, here's my question: Do the concerns of Fisher et al mean that the epidemiological approach is inherently tainted and must be abandoned? If not, what interventions are necessary so as to use the method (and its necessarily attendant rhetoric of disease, infection, and so on) without triggering these problematic associations? My familiarity with the epidemiological approach gives me some sympathy towards it -- I think it is at least a useful way of thinking through how racism and antisemitism operate, how they spread, and how they should be combatted. Yet at the same time, my familiarity with how rhetoric of disease is used to degrade and dehumanize means I am sympathetic to the concerns that it would do so here. The questions in the previous paragraph are those made entirely in earnest, and I in turn invite earnest replies. via The Debate Link http://ift.tt/2pKQS3K

[renew-a-steadfast-spirit-in-me]

In honor of Earth Day and the March for Science — both on April 22 — I only felt the topic was appropriate: especially for individuals like me.

I am currently a journalism student at one of the most conservative universities in Texas — but my eyes have been opened, and I cannot be stopped.

Three months ago, I started transitioning to veganism. Two months ago, I chose a cognate in environmental studies. Just last weekend, I put a green activism decal on the back of my car where a Marco Rubio and a “Keep Texas Red” decal stuck for nearly a year this past spring. People from home blame my changes in views on the university I attend.

I blame it on life.

It is so easy to look around and be blinded. However, once you really begin to pay attention, you will see that she is dying. She has been infested, and we are the parasites. She is suffering with a terminal illness, but I will not pull the plug. She is Mother Earth, and I will stand up for her.

I will stand up for the hibernating polar bears and denning wolf pups who can now be killed in their own homes, legally, as of two weeks ago. I will stand up for the seals who are slaughtered daily for their fur. I will stand up for the Great Barrier Reef — the biodiversity hotspot of the Earth — that is currently in its last stages of life. I will stand up for every living plant and animal that is now on its last breath because of us.

This is not a political issue anymore, and it never should have turned into that- this is a life issue that we all should take seriously.

Events that should take hundreds to thousands of years are happening in a matter of months, and we can be blamed for that.  Sure, the Cuyahoga River is not on fire this time. And, there might not be a big enough focal point right now for anyone to care about what is happening. But look around and pay attention, and the detriment of our planet can be easily seen.

Glaciers are receding. More and more superstorms are being formed. Famine and drought are increasing. Diseases are spreading at a quicker pace. Monarch butterflies and bees are endangered. There are now gas bubbles of methane captured in ice.

Fish may be depleted by 2050. A Yukon river completely changed its course last spring - and this was the first occurrence for any river in the world since the 1800s. There is a garbage patch in the middle of the Pacific Ocean estimated to be between the size of Texas and twice the size of the United States.

But the worst environmental crisis of them all: there are still people who do not believe in the cause.

Because of the new "anti-science administration" (as I've heard people call it), policies are changing and funding is being cut. But, what better investment is there than an investment into your own home?

Climate change, pollution, invasive species and habitat loss would not have such an incredible socioeconomic impact on us if the water was not polluted, or the species were not forced from their own homes, to begin with. The price we have to pay is our own fault.

I agree that if politics must be involved, policies should be changed. But, they should be changed for the enrichment of our environment. I agree that if policies must be involved, budgets should be altered. But, they should be altered for land preservation and wildlife conservation. I believe there should be a shift to a more environmentally-sustainable society. And I believe this shift should matter to every single one of you because this is our home, and I know most people don't want to live in a home that has even the slightest possibility of caving in on them.

Until this shift happens, we will remain the parasites that kill our host.

We will continue to spend over $120 million yearly, just in the U.S., on the impact of invasive species … that we caused. We will continue to spend trillions of dollars each year on air pollution across the globe … that we caused.

This is all because it makes sense to destroy the home we live in, knowing our landlord will make us pay for it later - rather than keeping it tidy and without damage in the first place to avoid any repercussions. For most individuals, the damage they make will not influence their actions until they are permanently evicted from their home.

But for others, those of you who take care of your home, I want to thank you.

Thank you, Andy and Rachel Berliner, for creating the option of a plant-based diet. Thank you, Jill Stein, for being the foundation for a green future. Thank you, Margaret Atwood, for writing “MaddAddam” and for informing others of environmental crises. Thank you, Rachel Carson, for “Silent Spring” and for the movement it created. Thank you, to famous individuals like Olivia Wilde, Neil Young, Carole King, Leonardo DiCaprio, John Denver, Emma Watson and Pete Seeger for your activism.

And thank you, Mother Earth, for your selfless love — and for continuing to give us our food, our water, our air and our shelter — even after you see us throw each of these gifts away, immediately after we unwrap them in front of you.

Once again, thank you, Mother Earth.