#stop idolizing the soviet union | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

somethingusefulfromflorida · 4 years

Text

If John F. Kennedy had not been assassinated, how long would he have lived for?

His father Joseph P. Kennedy lived to be 81, and his mother Rose Fitzgerald lived to be 104. Of his siblings who died of natural causes, Rosemary lived to be 86, Eunice 88, Patricia 82, Jean 92, and Ted 77.

JFK was chronically unhealthy, so he would probably skew low compared to his siblings. He was born in 1917, so he probably would have died in the mid-90s at the earliest. Can you imagine the Democratic Party if Kennedy were alive through the 70s and 80s? He would have been our Reagan, idolized even more as an elder statesman than he is as a martyr.

If he had survived his assassination, he almost certainly would have won re-election in 1964, would have passed the Civil Rights Bill and fought for de-segregation like LBJ did. Nixon probably would not have been elected president if Kennedy lived, either Kennedy, Jack or Bobby. He ran against JFK in 1960 and lost, then ran for governor of California in 1962 and lost again; at the time, California was a Republican stronghold, so it was a big deal that he lost in his own home state. Following that humiliating defeat, he threw a hissy fit, declaring that the media was the enemy of the people and threatening to leave politics altogether, “this is my final press conference, you vultures won’t have Nixon to kick around anymore!” Everyone thought his political career was ruined, but he managed to drag himself out of the hole he dug and back to the limelight by being a more appealing candidate in 1968 than Barry Goldwater had been in 1964. If JFK was still alive in 1968, the media would never stop comparing Nixon to him, and he would have been laughed out of the primaries.

It’s also important to realize that he only became president with 43% of the vote. Segregationist George Wallace ran a frighteningly successful third party campaign as a Dixiecrat (a conservative southern democrat, as opposed to the rising liberal wing from up north), receiving 14% of the vote and winning 5 states. If Kennedy had survived, his anti-segregationist policies would have made it impossible for Wallace to get any traction, so Nixon would have lost in 1968 anyway. Nixon and his main opponent Hubert Humphrey both got 31 million votes, but without Wallace running as a spoiler, Humphrey would have received a huge bump in both the popular an electoral college votes, almost certainly winning the presidency, though it’s uncertain if he would still have become the nominee in this version of 1968; he was LBJ’s Vice President, but if LBJ never became president, then Humphrey would have remained a Senator.

Maybe LBJ would have run in 1968, which would have hurt Wallace’s chances even more, as Johnson was a very popular southern Democrat. Johnson and Kennedy were not friends, there are rumors that Johnson blackmailed his way onto the 1960 ticket, and Kennedy’s secretary claimed years after he died that he would have replaced Johnson on the 1964 ticket with someone else, so I don’t know if a surviving incumbent Kennedy would have endorsed him in 1968. I’s likely that Kennedy would have endorsed his younger brother and Attorney General Bobby Kennedy, who would probably have survived his own assassination attempt just due to the butterfly effect; Sirhan Sirhan shot him for his support of Israel and the engagement of US troops in Palestine, but also because he was JFK’s brother. Lee Harvey Oswald shot JFK for being anti-communist, which was also part of Sirhan’s motives in killing RFK. If JFK was never killed, the idea of political assassinations wouldn’t be as strong in the cultural zeitgeist, meaning it’s likely that Martin Luther King Jr and Bobby Kennedy both would have survived. MLK might have entered politics like AL Sharpton and John Lewis. Bobby would have run for president in 1968 or 1972.

The Democratic party was basically leaderless in our 1970s. Nixon won re-election in a landslide in 1972, and Jimmy Carter just barely eked by against Ford in 1976 because Ford lost all credibility when he pardoned Nixon for Watergate. If Kennedy assumed a leadership role in the 70s, it would have pushed the Democratic party into a much strong position going into the 80s. Ronald Reagan would have run earlier in this timeline; he was elected governor of California in 1966 and ran for president in 68, 72, and 76 before finally winning his party’s nomination in 80. Without Nixon and Ford, Regan would probably have run in 72 or 76, which means he would be the one who dealt with the Iranian Revolution, Oil Crisis, and Hostage Crisis, nuking his popularity and throwing a wrench in his economic plans, meaning he would be reviled rather than revered by the country. If Kennedy survived, there would be no Nixon, and a very different Reagan, meaning the entire last quarter of the 20th century would have gone differently,

How would the Cold War have ended if there was no belligerent Reagan followed by diplomatic Bush? Would Mikhail Gorbachev ever have come to power in the Soviet Union? He was chosen as the new leader in part because he was so young; his three direct predecessors had all died in office (Brezhnev, Andropov, and Chernenko, the last two having only served about a year each). I can’t even picture the Soviet Union without Gorbachev. Kennedy wanted peace and conciliatory talks with Khrushchev, so perhaps relations would have normalized and the fight between capitalism and communism would have ended diplomatically instead of at the brink of war. Maybe the Berlin Wall would have fallen earlier, the Vietnam War could have been avoided or else won by the south, and the international space station would have gone up in the 80s instead of the 90s. With enough Gorbachev-esque reforms, the USSR might still exist today, in much the same way that the PRC still exists (China is capitalist in all but name, they only claim to be communist to “uphold the revolution”). Of course, without Gorbachev, such reforms would have been unlikely; Glasnost and Perestroika were overly ambitious, and his repeal of the Brezhnev Doctrine directly led to the fall of the Iron Curtain and the rise of democracy in Eastern Europe.

From Kennedy to Obama, the Democrats only elected southerners, so it’s likely that if Kennedy had survived the northern progressive faction would have been in a much stronger position in the 80s and 90s, meaning no Bill Clinton, which means no Republican Revolution under Newt Gingrich. Reagan still influences the GOP to this day, and he disappeared from the public eye immediately after leaving office because he brain was turning to mush. Imagine if the Democrats had a Regan-like figure to hold up, to model themselves after. Democrats are listless and leaderless, they’re not blindly loyal to whoever is in charge, so it would be a difficult sell to get them to all rally behind someone as divisive as Kennedy (because he WAS divisive; southerners HATED him, he only held the south because he had LBJ on his ticket), but were it to happen it would change the course of not just American history but world history over the last 60 years for the better.

31 notes · View notes

csykora · 4 years

Text

[A candid photo of Igor kissing his very grumpy toddler’s forehead goodnight]

The Greens could feel they were getting older, and Coach’s rookies just stayed the same. Two had joined CSKA that year. One of them was another Sergei, who we’ll call Seryozha. He had grown up skating eagerly every day, just outside their training camp in the city of Arkhangel. He thought Igor “was one of the smartest people I've talked to on this earth," and is pretty sure his idol didn’t know he existed. (Having read Igor’s book, I can now confirm). The other was Sasha, and had been born on the other side of the world, in Siberia, before he was taken early for CSKA’s system.

Sasha did not like any of this any better than the Greens had before him. Picking up the tension between the team’s leaders and Coach Tikhonov, Sasha had no problem talking back when Tikhonov turned on him. After his first season, the same trick that had made Igor an officer was used on him, making him a real Russian soldier who could be shot for treason. Igor hadn’t fought it, but the whole team heard Sasha yelling down in Tikhonov’s office.

Quiet settled for a while when Sasha was privately promised a better position to soften the blow--the top right wing, at Igor's side. 30 was creeping up on Sergei. He, Igor, and Vova privately celebrated and mourned the upcoming '88 Olympics as the last time they might play together on the world stage before Sergei's clock ran out. Pretty soon Tikhonov would be ready to retire him, just like Kharlamov.

But there were still signs that replacing Sergei wouldn't be easy, on either side. One day in practice, Sasha was injured and the team doctor told him to just watch from the stands that night. Igor saw him leaving the locker room just as Coach came in. Coach demanded that he get his sweater on immediately. Sasha repeated what the doctor said, and Tikhonov repeated what he had said, but louder.

“‘I thought I had explained it clearly enough,’’” Igor remembers little Sasha saying. “‘I will not play. That is all!’” And he walked away. Igor had to cough and cover laughter as Coach stood speechless.

“Only his wife and his dog like [Tikhonov],” Sasha once said. “And I don’t understand how they do.”

In December of ‘87, Igor thought that with a little help, maybe he could score another point on Tikhonov. He reached out to the author of that article about the hockey program that he had read to the point of memorizing two years before. Their conversation turned into an interview. He admitted he wasn’t ready to share the deepest details, but even scratching the surface of the Soviet image was enough to attract attention. Igor decided he liked to think of himself as a bit of an author. All the papers were calling for more quotes, until Lena got fed up and unplugged their phone.

At practice after it was published, Coach Tikhonov screamed, “‘Comrades, I always thought that I was working with hockey players. But here, do you understand, it has become clear I was not right. Among us are writers! Larionov, for example, is a Boris Pasternak!’

I think we could safely say he was not pleased.”

Two months later, the national team headed to Calgary for the Olympics. Before the Games the senior players had asked as always--if we win, wouldn’t it be possible to train less this summer, to rest, to see our families during the coming year? Coach Tikhonov said they’d talk about it if they got him gold.

Journalists invited Igor to a press conference. They forgot a Russian translator, though, so when they asked the first question and he understood it, he decided not to bother pretending he didn’t speak English. They asked how his new literary career was looking (and whether he’d had any flare-ups of that tonsillitis). He told them what he thought was the truth, colder than it had been when he was 20.

“I do not hope for some kind of large and speedy change for the better….But, I am not losing hope. We shall see what we shall see.”

They still had the rest of the Olympics to play. Between periods in the first round, Coach Tikhonov took Sasha out to the hallway and began to lay into him for mistakes he may or may not have made yet. Sasha told him no again, so Coach Tikhonov punched him in the gut.

Slava was the only one who saw, but he told the others. If thinking the team didn’t need him had snapped some key piece of Igor’s heart, the winter of ‘87 and ‘88 broke Vova’s massive one. They had won gold, again--and Vova had heard Tikhonov say that he wished he could coach the Canadians instead. Vova had swept more scoring titles, been named the best winger in the world, again--and Tikhonov had given a public speech about how Vova was proof that he, Viktor Tikhonov, and his physical training methods could make anyone a star. Igor was furious for his friend, and Vova was realizing nothing they did would ever be enough for Coach Tikhonov to stop hurting them.

They had nothing to do at Arkhangel, after eight years of doing the same nothing. One night in the spring Vova and Igor climbed out their bedroom window and hiked through the woods to a bar in the city. They sat beside a Canadian journalist and gave a short interview, Igor translating for them both.

By the summer of ‘88, Slava was done, too. He wanted permission to play in the NHL during the regular season, and he told everyone so. Officials told him no problem. And then they got out the red tape.

“You would not wish it on an enemy. Especially not on Slava, who is my friend. It was painful to look at him, irritated, disappointed by the word that had been given to him, grown tired from going from office to office, lost.”

When he complained, the Party told him if he wasn’t happy in Arkhangel he could always play in a Siberian labor camp instead.

But Igor was also busy, or trying to be, at home. He and Lena had their first baby, a daughter, Alyonka. Like her father, she was frighteningly small. If officials had thought becoming a husband and father would scare Igor into shutting up, like it had Lyosha, they were super wrong. The boredom, indignity, and constant inconvenience of Soviet life was bitterer now that he had to see it happening to someone else. When his daughter was sick, he couldn’t go home to hold her. When she was hungry, he might spend his whole day off wandering around the city, waiting in different lines to be told that there was nothing worth waiting for left. During parts of the season he could visit their apartment in Moscow in the afternoons, but couldn’t help cook or eat with Lena or stay to clean up and put Alyonka to bed.

Just like Tretiak had, he asked Tikhonov for time off next August--no days off, just nights, to be able to stay for dinner and drive back for training.

No.

“In August it was a life and death necessity for me to spend the night at the base? Well, the World Championship was not far off. Only eight months!”

Igor thought about it. He told the Greens that he was thinking about publishing another article. They were excited to read it, asking what this one would be about. He still wasn’t quite ready to say it, but he wanted them to know the moment was coming, so he just made them promise to read it.

Then he quit. In September he handed Tikhonov a letter explaining that he would play his last season with CSKA. They could let him go to the NHL during the regular season, or home to Khimik, or wherever he was wanted, as long as it wasn’t here. He went to the newspaper that promised him it could print fastest, and published it.

In his resignation letter, addressed to Tikhonov and now to the whole Soviet Union, he told everyone about the schedule (it was shocking, he said, that he and Lena managed to have a baby, when Tikhonov didn’t let him sleep beside his own wife); about how Tikhonov had made that schedule more important than Kharlamov, then Tretiak, and now Igor too; about Tikhonov punching Sasha; about the steroid injections he’d kept secret for Tikhonov for six years.

Those last two pieces were the wedge that any officials looking to shift the system needed. The papers published more pieces arguing one way and the other, which only made sure everyone heard about it. Fans and former players, now officers, stopped to pat Igor’s shoulder. Igor was informed that the legendary Tarasov, in his country retirement, had quite liked it.

Coach Tikhonov didn’t like Igor’s poetic inclinations any better this time. He was getting calls from all kinds of important people, and they weren’t going well. For the first time in years he was quiet, speechless. And then it became clear that was his response: he wouldn’t acknowledge Igor’s existence. He couldn’t take him off the roster now, but he could pretend he wasn’t there. No criticism in practice, no direction, nothing.

That was the difference between them, Igor wrote, both of their fatal flaw: Igor wanted to talk to everyone in the whole world, and Tikhonov had never learned how to talk to people.

The veteran players on CSKA’s second line found quiet moments to come up to Igor, and let him know they were on his side. Slava, still fighting for his own right to leave the team, came to Igor as soon as he’d read it, and took his hand. He told him Igor had done the right thing. Sergei and Vova embraced him and agreed.

Lyosha wasn’t sure it was right to share what had been said in the room, or to undercut Coach, who had kept him when he was at his lowest, and he was afraid of being sent to Siberia.

He told Igor, “You and I are not going the same path.”

And they did.

CSKA went on the road in October. In Sergei’s hometown Chelyabinsk fans hung over the rails and heckled Tikhonov, asking if he’d come to steal more children. His brothers Nikolai and Yuri were an institution in the city, and locals had consoled themselves over losing out on the full set by imagining that Sergei was doing well for himself and making a name for their city. Tikhonov turned away from the ice to try to shout at a fan like he did his players, and was swamped. Igor burst out laughing.

The next game, Tikhonov told the assistant coaches to tell Igor that Tikhonov still wasn’t talking to him but he could take a shift now, or whatever, not that Tikhonov cared. Igor caught the puck and carried it along the boards, expecting Sergei and Vova to chase him. Instead he hit a patch of bad ice, and then two of the other team landed on top of him on the way down. His right foot went the wrong way.

Now Tikhonov had a cast iron-excuse. Igor went home, and held his daughter, and waited and worried to hear what would happen if he didn’t heal in time for the next national team tournament--the Super Series, which would be the last warm-up before the ‘88 Olympics. It was out of his control, and he couldn’t bear that.

Igor has an explanation for what he did next that I’m sure felt sensible at the time. We, now, can gently set that aside. Igor had all the symptoms of a serious eating disorder, so for three weeks, he only drank water and honey.

Because, and I just can’t stress this enough, Igor, your bones heal in their own time anyway, he was back on the ice a month or so after that. Once again able to skate himself sick with CSKA’s reserve team, he started eating fruit and the occasional vegetable again.

The team doctor, who I guess had been hired on the basis of being able to say, “All good, Coach!” over an injured player faster than anybody else, cleared him to play. (Like a stopped clock, Igor maintains that the doctor--who Igor had seen point a concussed Vova in the general direction of the goal, roll players over the boards, and offered Igor mystery drugs--got it right this one time. Again, gently, we can question Igor’s medical fucking expertise here.)

It didn’t matter anyway. Tikhonov stood with arms crossed the whole time watching Igor skate, and said he was out of condition. He sent him home.

Igor was helpless again. His family wouldn’t get the pay from wins with CSKA, and now they were missing tournaments. Those could earn him $300, five months ordinary pay. He could train as much as he wanted alone--it wasn’t the same as playing with the Greens, and anyway now Tikhonov could always have a handy excuse to say he wasn’t back to his old self. All he had were his friends, who seemed sympathetic, but still hadn’t done anything.

Winter was coming on by now. He drove from Moscow to the training camp and walked across the grounds in the first drifting snow. Everything was quiet, cold, and clear, and he might as well have been twenty again, but this time he wouldn’t cross through the barracks door. Sergei, Vova, and Slava saw and came running down to meet him in the snow. They were glad to see him, worried for him, but they knew that Tikhonov was having his way.

I drove home along the Leningrad highway. I felt like shouting. ‘Where are your friends in a time of trouble? WHERE??? Can I expect sympathy from you, and nothing more?’...

Only my wife understood my despair.”

Main

Next>>

#green unit #cw disordered eating #igor larionov #slava fetisov #wayne gretzky #sergei makarov #vladimir krutov

15 notes · View notes

herochan · 6 years

Photo

The Greatest Female Marvel Super Heroes

The Marvel Universe is massive. There are thousands of characters from different realities, timelines, spaces, and places, all sourced from nearly 80 years of magnificent Marvel material. But across all of Marveldom, female Super Heroes have proven to be some of the most amazing, dynamic, powerful, sharp shooting, heavy hitting characters around.

With that in mind, Marvel decided to take the opportunity to spotlight a few of the most impressive women in Marvel Universe. So if you need to get up to speed on the invincible women of Marvel, you’ve come to the right spot.

Here are just a few of the greatest Super Heroes (who also happen to be women) ever. Check out the full list below.

Carol Danvers AKA Captain Marvel

Carol Danvers long dreamed of space exploration, so it’s fitting that she would grow up to become the leader of Alpha Flight and one of the most powerful spacefaring Super Heroes in existence!

She had an accomplished career even before gaining her powers, though. Working as an Air Force pilot, intelligence agent, and NASA employee, she investigated multiple attempts by the Kree and the Skrulls to disrupt the American space program. During a related battle, she was exposed to the Psyche-Magnitron, a Kree device that rewrote her DNA. This transformed her into a human-Kree hybrid and gave her powers similar to those of the Kree Mar-Vell, the original Catpain Marvel. Namely, she gained the abilities of flight, superhuman strength, and “binary” powers which, though largely dormant, give her the virtual strength of a sun.

For years she fought alongside Mar-Vell as Ms. Marvel. When he died, took over the moniker Captain Marvel as a tribute. In addition to leading Alpha Flight, she has also served as a leading member of the Avengers.

Natasha Romanoff AKA Black Widow

Black Widow aka Nat, is the epitome of everything that comes to mind when you think of a cool, always capable spy.

Born in the Soviet Union as Natalia Romanova, she was orphaned as a child. This difficult start then led Natasha down winding path to the Russian army and the Black Widow program, where she was trained to become a skilled assassin and enhanced with the Soviet version of the Super-Soldier serum. While her work required her to undertake some morally questionable missions, she ultimately defected to S.H.I.E.L.D., became an Avenger, and joined the forces of good.

Wanda Maximoff AKA Scarlet Witch

Scarlet Witch is definitely not someone you want to pick a fight with!

One of the planet’s most powerful magic wielders, she can manipulate chaos magic and warp reality. The complete history of her childhood is unknown, but she grew up in Eastern Europe with her twin brother Pietro (AKA Quicksilver). Local conflicts separated the twins from their parents, forcing Wanda to hide her growing powers. As they got older, Wanda and Pietro were taken in by the mutant master Magneto and joined his Brotherhood of Evil Mutants. Soon, however, they became disenchanted with the group and struck out on their own, with Wanda ultimately becoming an Avenger.

Jessica Jones

Jessica Jones is everyone’s favorite sarcastic, leather jacket-loving private eye.

When Jessica was a child, her father accidentally crashed the family car into a military truck. A canister filled with an unknown, experimental material crashed through the windshield and into Jessica’s lap. Her injuries sent her into a coma, but she ultimately recovered and discovered she had superhuman physical strength, the ability to fly, and enhanced resistance to injury. Her parents were killed in the accident, and she later suffered mind control and manipulation at the hands of the villain Killgrave (AKA the Purple Man), all of which scarred her emotionally.

For a period, she adopted the Super Hero name Jewel and fought villains alongside the Avengers. But that kind of crime fighting didn’t suit her, so she started Alias Investigations, a private detective firm where she now puts her cunning intelligence to good use.

Ororo Monroe AKA Storm

With the ability to manipulate weather patterns, Storm is one of the planet’s most powerful mutants.

She is the daughter of a Kenyan princess and an American photographer, though both parents were killed in a plane crash when Storm was young. Finding herself an orphan, Storm had little choice but to wander the streets and pick pockets to survive. However, her latent mutant abilities eventually manifested, giving her the opportunity to save the life of Prince T’Challa (the soon-to-be Black Panther), and to come into contact with Charles Xavier, who asked her to join a new version of the X-Men. Since then, Storm has built a legacy as a freedom fighter and a mentor to young mutants.

Kamala Khan AKA Ms. Marvel

Ms. Marvel is a Pakistani-American, Muslim teen growing up in New Jersey that idolized the Avengers and, in particular, Captain Marvel.

When she was exposed to the transforming Terrigen Mist, her Inhuman powers manifested, giving her the ability to extend her limbs, grow in size, and shape shift in other ways. She began fighting villains under the name Ms. Marvel as a tribute to Carol, who ultimately became her mentor.

Ms. Marvel continues to fight alongside the Avengers and the Champions while, all the while, facing the everyday struggles of being a teenager.

Shuri

Shuri is the sister of T’Challa and the princess of Wakanda. Unfortunately, she spent much of her early life forced into the shadow of her brother, but after stopping an invasion of Wakanda and helping T’Challa recover after being attacked by Doctor Doom, Shuri stepped into her own.

She took the spotlight and, for a period, served as the Black Panther, proving herself to be a true hero. Though the mantle eventually went back to T’Challa, Shuri has continued to demonstrate her talents as a brilliant scientist. And, by ingesting a heart-shaped herb that grants her enhanced physical strength and donning a suit made of vibranium, she fights villains as a hero in her own right.

Gamora

After watching as Gamora’s parents were killed and her people wiped from existence, the Mad Titan Thanos took in the young women as his adoptive daughter. The Titan then raised her to be the “deadliest woman in the galaxy,” training her as an assassin.

Gamora became a highly talented fighter, practically unkillable, though Thanos’s tortuous mind games and punishing training took their toll. Eventually, Gamora broke ties with Thanos, joining the Guardians of the Galaxy in part as a way to seek redemption for the violence she had committed while still under his influence.

Jean Grey

She’s certainly not a woman to be underestimated.

Jean Grey had her telepathic mutant abilities first manifest at age 10 when she witnessed a close friend die. Her parents sought the advice of Charles Xavier, who is himself a mighty telepath. Xavier treated Jean and introduced her to the astral plane, at which point a part of her mind manifested as a Phoenix and her telekinetic powers grew.

She joined the X-Men and, while on a mission, was noticed by the Phoenix Force, which believed her to have unlimited potential. Ultimately, the Phoenix Force would take over her body and powers, and she would find herself in an extended struggle to retake control from it. However, when Jean was later killed, it was the Phoneix Force that resurrected her.

Janet Van Dyne AKA the Wasp

As a young socialite, Janet met Hank Pym, a brilliant scientist and the original Ant-Man, when her father (who was also a scientist) consulted him about a device he was building. Janet and Hank hit it off, and she eventually married him and began fighting villains at his side as the Wasp.

She wore a suit that, like his, used Pym Particles to allow her to shrink to the point of being microscopic or, alternatively, to dramatically grow in size. She would also sprout antennae and gain the ability to fly when at her smaller size. Janet became a founding member of the Avengers, and in fact led the team for an extended period; Janet even gave the team their name. These days, Janet mentors Hank’s previously unknown daughter Nadia, who is also a genius scientist and has taken over the mantle of the Wasp.

Laura Kinney AKA X-23

Wolverine has spent much of his life as a loner, with few people who could truly relate to the struggles he has faced. But the one person who might understand him is Laura Kinney.

Created from Wolverine’s stolen DNA, she was made to be a perfect killing machine. The leaders of a top-secret program tasked Doctor Sarah Kinney with recreating the Weapon X experiment that transformed Logan into Wolverine. Laura was born as a result of these experiments, and was trained to be a cold and unfeeling killer. But X-23 isn’t the type to allow her fate to be determined by others, and she eventually escaped. Though she led a bit of a checkered life after that, she found her way to Charles Xavier and, later, the Avengers Academy.

Doreen Green AKA Squirrel Girl

If you’re looking for a hero who has both fighting prowess and an endlessly spunky, optimistic spirit, you’re in luck!

For unknown reasons, Doreen Green began to develop odd, squirrel-like features at a young age, including buck teeth and a bushy tail. She soon gained the relative strength and agility of a squirrel which, taking into account her human size, gave her formidable powers. To escape the taunts of her classmates, she began spending much of her time in the woods, where she bonded with the squirrels there and learned to communicate with them.

She saved the life of a squirrel named Monkey Joe, who encouraged her to use her abilities to help others. Due to her interest in science, she idolized Tony Stark and soon found herself in a position to fight Doctor Doom by his side. This launched her on the path to becoming an unbeatable Super Hero and an Avenger.

105 notes · View notes

catsnuggler · 6 years

Text

I guess I'm glad I was never too much into the punk scene. There's a lot of good to it, and there are a lot of good punks, but they're the punks who understand punk isn't about being a tough guy, it's about sticking up to unjust authority and having solidarity with other folks crushed under it. Honestly, I think the unfortunate though not necessarily inherent prevalence of the "tough guy" and "edginess" stuff in punk, and the prominence of punk in anarchist circles, is what's driven a lot of formerly good, formerly anarchist people to eiko-phasch and poest*-lehft knighilist circles. Also depression and a sense of hopelessness at the seeming lack of ability to effect change, more for the latter one though. There's also a strong sense of individualism among anarchist circles that sometimes thinks it has to be exclusive with more collective, communal mindsets when it doesn't, and so you get igoists who, instead of being communist like they often claim to be as well, they pretty much want to screw off into the woods or whatever, maybe read a little of that Dessert book out there before ripping the pages out to put in the campfire one night (in case you hadn't caught on, yes, I'm purposefully misspelling things so as not to get flak). There needs to be a sense of cohesion, even, I daresay, a sense of discipline in the form of a formal organization for anarchists. Particularly speaking, a platform. And while I'm also skeptical of Leninists, particularly the ones who still seem to think the Russian Federation, a state idolized by some fachismos today, is exactly like the Soviet Union and anything they do is anti-imperialist instead of, perhaps, for its own imperial gain, and just because the US is definitely evil doesn't mean the RF isn't - I recognize there are a lot of Leninists who are good, smart, non-braindead people I'd much rather work with than the anarchists who want to fuck off into the woods, the anarchists who stop being anarchists and turn eco-fash and fuck off into the woods, or the post-left nihilists who lean against a wall, smoke their cigarettes, and all blow smoke in my face and ask ever so condescendingly why I think there's even a point to anything anymore, because these anarchists and former anarchists are, frankly, shit, and not gonna do anything good. The Leninists and I agree on which states are bad, even if we disagree on whether all states are bad, and we're agreed on the objective of communism, so I'm more inclined to work with them.

Also quick PS again, I'm not against punk itself, though I'm not in that crowd; it's just some people seem to have started there and taken the wrong messages from it.

#though that being said i don't have the ability to do a damn thing at all right now #so these are bold words for someone who is currently useless quite frankly

3 notes · View notes

fannicroy · 6 years

Text

&&. announcing her royal highness, ( xue jin ), the ( 34 ) year old ( princess ) of ( china ). she is often confused with ( fan bingbing ). some say that she is ( self-centered & overly confident ), but she is actually ( compromising & patient ).

Okay so here is Jin Xue, the sister to the emperor of China.

The Jin family has been ruling China the past five decades, meaning the Qing dynasty is very much going strong and has been the last five hundred years.

( this is like that task about modern history lol. if u don’t give a shit about what hshq china is like skip a few bullet points )

I decided that while the head of the state has been his imperial highness throughout the last hundred years, the cultural revolution and rise of communism still happened. The monarchy did not fit into the image of a communist China but getting rid of such a figure as the emperor would have been an unnecessary risk. When the emperor’s influence and power slowly disappeared at the turn of the 20th century, most of his power was transferred to the prime minister of China.

The imperial family became a postcard motif. Their job was to agree with the prime minister and guide the people. They kept everything from their numerous buildings to their limitless wealth --- except for their political power. The members of the imperial family didn’t even meet with other political figures unless they were invited to dine with the foreign dignitaries and the prime minister.

After the death of both Zhou Enlai and Mao Zedong, the country was without a strong political figure that the majority of the people would have believed in. China’s economy was still more or less in shambles albeit steadily growing. Since the disarray within the Communist Party of China didn’t seem to disappear quickly; people were getting accused of this and that, arrested and persecuted, Xue’s father saw it as an opportunity to reclaim some of the family’s original power.

It started with the military. The imperial family had kept a private one throughout the years as protection but now it could be used to seize power. The one who held the most military power was the man in charge, and when there wasn’t a prime minister, there wasn’t just one person in charge of the country’s army. The party couldn’t unify quickly enough to stop the emperor from taking control of their army. USA saw the change in power as a chance to improve the two countries’ relationship while the Soviet Union believed it would push China further away from them. USA was much more vocal about their thoughts, which gave the emperor more confidence and influence.

The hard part was getting people to believe that the imperial family was the best for them. Many still idolized Mao and wanted someone like him --- something his imperial highness most certainly wasn’t. The imperial family began an extensive campaign and used propaganda shamelessly to get people to support them. As quickly as possible, the emperor banned the communist party, which spread the power to new, smaller, and more easily controllable political parties. The renouncement of communism brought China closer to the west in the 1980s, and when the monarchy was returned to Russia, China was there to support it and help the Romanovs. China has been balancing between the two countries throughout modern history.

( okay now about xue herself lol )

So her father died some time ago, so now her older brother is the emperor.

She grew up watching her father build a nation up from dust and she admired him very much. Her admiration turned into a drive later, and she has always worked hard to do well by her father. She got into politics after graduation, and has never regretted her decision.

She is a relatively social and curious person. While she absolutely loves her own country and its culture, she has always wanted to explore foreign countries and cultures. She is somewhat like an ambassador for China --- she mainly works outside of her home country. Xue and her brother work like a well-oiled machine: his concerns lie within their borders while she pays more attention to what’s happening elsewhere in the world. She very often makes moves and decisions without consulting him --- and he doesn’t mind, they usually agree on most issues and her judgment is generally trustworthy.

She chooses the people she respects very carefully: for her, age and experience are the main factors. She doesn’t care if someone is a monarch of some sorry excuse for a country --- as the Chinese emperor’s sister she practically has just as much power if not more. She has her opinions and she will voice them even if she knows they’ll make people narrow their eyes. She doesn’t mind if someone questions her views and offers another one, what she cannot stand is when people tell her that her opinion might hurt someone’s feelings or that it’s not appropriate for the situation.

She doesn’t bring them up unless she thinks they should be brought up. She is diplomatic enough not to tickle the bear when it’s not necessary.

Her straight-fowardness can be mistaken for rudeness but she doesn’t see it that way. For her rudeness is excessive use of sarcasm or unnecessary comments. She herself keeps her mouth closed if she has nothing of importance to say.

#half way through this intro i realized i know way too little about china's history ajghajkghakg #hshqintro

6 notes · View notes

keywestlou · 5 years

Text

LIVER AND ONIONS

My Mother. So many years gone. We all love and miss our mothers when they are gone. Whether 1 day, 1 year, or 35 years as in my case.

Certain things bring Mom to mind. A dish she cooked. A meal I ate last night.

I stopped at Shana Key for dinner. Knew what I was going to order before I even arrived. Liver and onions. I had them at Shana Key for the first time a month ago.

My Mom infrequently cooked liver and onions. Each time however, oh so good! I don’t think I had liver and onions in the 35 years my Mother has been gone till Shana Key a month ago.

Just as good! Mom in my mind as I enjoyed the meals.

Continue to miss her dearly!

Before Shana Key, it was Aqua. For Aqua Idol.

A full house. Great performers. I enjoyed.

Bria Ansara one of the performers. Each time I hear her sing, I enjoy her even more!

Bria is a professional entertainer. Sings fridays and saturdays at A & B Lobster Houe. Bourbon Street on monday and tuesday evenings.

Teaches school by day. Taught Robert and Ally art at Montessori. They loved her!

Some coronavirus updates.

The time may come when we will be quarantining ourselves in our homes. Authorities are starting to tell us to prepare. Special foods, etc.

Amazing! Just like preparing for a hurricane. We in the Keys will have no problem getting ready should the necessity arise.

Money becoming an issue. Bills. As we all are aware, money is “dirty.”

Funny because last night that is exactly what passed through my mind as I was watching Aqua Idol. I had a pile of bills in my hand. To place in pails indicating support for various performers. The thought occurred dollar bills could be a virus carrier.

An article on the internet this morning advised the virus could live up to 9 days on paper money.

The People’s Bank of China last month began disinfecting currency deposited at their banks. Bills were first placed under ultraviolet lights. Then “quarantined” for one week before being released back into circulation.

The banks for years have been pushing “digital” money. I have opposed it in this blog the same number of years for reasons not important at this moment.

The banks may finally win. Digital cash in effect is the use of a credit card. We become a “cashless” society.

Assume for the moment that coronavirus impacts the U.S. big time. Will we do what China did? Declare martial law and place people in full blown concentration camps?

The thought is the concentration would not fly. Certain experts believe that finally the NRA will have proven of some value. Their thoughts are so many American are armed that they will oppose any effort to quarantine them in concentration camps.

Notice how Trump tries to minimize the coronavirus danger. Nothing worse than the flu, will be gone on its own in April when the weather gets warmer, etc.

Doesn’t fly. The numbers clearly indicate the risks should not be minimized. The flu kills 1 in 1,000. Coronavirus will kill 1 in 30.

Mentioned yesterday the Centennial Bank on Whitehead had been robbed tuesday. The perpetrator has not yet been caught. The police and FBI continue their search for him.

Turns out Biden won Maine, also. California not yet decided. Only 55 percent of the vote counted.

The tabulation so far is 10 states for Biden, 4 for Sanders.

Winston Churchill will forever be remembered. England’s strength during World War II. He had to deal with the Soviet Union thereafter.

Churchill made his famous Iron Curtain speech following the war at Westminster College in Fulton Missouri. His words historic. Never to be forgotten.

“From the Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an Iron Curtain has descended across the continent.”

Enjoy your day!

LIVER AND ONIONS was originally published on Key West Lou

0 notes

diarrheaworldstarhiphop · 7 years

Photo

There is a 7-ton statue of Vladimir Lenin in Seattle. It’s 16-feet tall, made of bronze and has resided in the city’s eclectic and very free-spirited Fremont neighborhood since 1995. Tourists flock to see it.

This week, protesters did too.

In a twist on the recent calls to remove Confederate monuments, Seattle’s Lenin statue has attracted renewed scrutiny this week after an impromptu protest by activists supporting President Trump, who has endured blistering criticism for insisting “both sides” — that is, the white nationalists who staged their rally in Charlottesville and the demonstrators who opposed them — share equal blame for the mayhem that was caused. The violence, and Trump’s argumentative response, has fomented division within communities across the country.

On Thursday, Mayor Ed Murray joined critics in seeking the removal of a monument that has long been a subject of curiosity and controversy, saying the deadly violence last weekend in Charlottesville should serve as incentive to remove all symbols of racism and hatred, “no matter what political affiliation may have been assigned to them.”

Murray, a Democrat, also has taken aim at a Confederate memorial in the city’s Lake View Cemetery. Both are privately owned.

“We should never forget our history,” he wrote in a prepared statement, “but we also should not idolize figures who have committed violent atrocities and sought to divide us based on who we are or where we came from.”

As Kurt Schlosser wrote this week for Geek Wire, the Lenin protest “seized on the chance to point out left-leaning Seattle’s supposed hypocrisy” while debates take place in other American cities over whether to remove memorials honoring figures celebrated by the Confederacy and those who condoned slavery.

Lenin led Russia’s Bolshevik Revolution in 1917 before founding the country’s Communist Party. Countless suffered and died during the civil war that ensued, a fact highlighted by those who think the statue should come down. As one observer mused on Twitter, “He only killed a few million people. Why isn’t the left tearing down his statue?”

The sculpture’s path to Seattle has little to do with Lenin’s communist ideology, according to local accounts.

It was created in Slovakia by artist Emil Venkov between 1978 and 1988, when it was installed in the city of Poprad, not far from the Polish border. A year later, as the Soviet Union broke apart, the statue was taken down.

It was discovered in a junkyard by Lewis Carpenter, an American visiting from Washington state, who was said to be so enamored with its artistry that he leveraged his mortgage to finance the purchase and ship it home to Issaquah, 20 miles east of the Seattle. It was moved to Fremont after Carpenter’s death in 1994 (Venkov died in June) and now occupies a small parcel maintained by the local business community.

Carpenter’s family still owns the statue and, according to the Seattle Times, has been hoping to sell it for many years. The asking price is $250,000.

Here’s the thing about Fremont: It’s a little wacky — in the sense that it’s a diverse and unique community that’s known for celebrating the solstice with a parade of naked cyclists. A lot of hippies and artists live there, and they’ve dubbed Fremont “center of the universe.”

The statue is a fixture in their community, one they festoon with holiday lights each December. It’s “tangible proof,” Fremont residents explain on their website, “that art does outlive politics.”

Here’s more:

“If art is supposed to make us feel, not just feel good, then this sculpture is a successful work of art. The challenge is to understand that this piece means different things to different people and to learn to listen to each other and respect different opinions. From an artist’s standpoint, all points of view are valid and important.”

So what happens next?

It’s possible Seattle’s city council will take up the issue in coming weeks, if only to debate whether the legislative body should be on record as having taken a stance, said one city staffer who spoke with The Washington Post on the condition of anonymity.

“We’ve taken up less-consequential issues in the past,” the staffer said, noting that Seattle is a municipality keenly aware of its status as a “progressive bastion,” and of the example it sets for other municipalities in the state and across the country.

Ultimately, because these memorials reside on private property, both would need to be removed by their owners, voluntarily. So Murray, Seattle’s mayor, has few options other than voicing his opinion.

“At this point,” Murray’s office told The Post, “there are no next steps imminent.”

>leftists stop to defend the statue in terms of artistic merit and press the challenge to respect different opinions

gee its almost as if it reads like a conservative defense of a Robert E. Lee statue

we also should not idolize figures who have committed violent atrocities and sought to divide us based on who we are or where we came from

-The genius seattle mayor without realizing that any and every national leader is guilty of violent atrocities.

By this logic, the libraries named after barack obama should be renamed out of respect for his victims because he bombed weddings in yemen.

also the statue should stay. No monuments should be torn down.

#seattle #monument destruction

40 notes · View notes

aion-rsa · 5 years

Text

Watchmen: Jeremy Irons, Ozymandias, and the Mystery of Adrian Veidt

https://ift.tt/2CaBe9S

Jeremy Irons explains his take on Adrian Veidt on HBO's Watchmen, and we give some perspective on the history of Ozymandias.

facebook

twitter

tumblr

This article contains major spoilers for Watchmen episode 3 and the book.

The worst kept secret in TV is finally out. Watchmen episode 3 reveals what most of the audience knew all along: Jeremy Irons is playing Adrian Veidt, formerly the superhero known as Ozymandias. While there’s still plenty of mystery surrounding Veidt on the HBO series, notably what project he’s working on while he’s toiling away in “captivity” in some unknown location, the official confirmation of his identity means that it’s time for some of the larger Watchmen pieces to start falling into place.

For those unfamiliar, Adrian Veidt was a member of the second generation of masked crimefighters in the Watchmen universe, first rising to prominence in the mid-1960s alongside the second Silk Spectre (who is now FBI Agent Laurie Blake, played by Jean Smart), the second Nite Owl, Rorschach, and the superhuman Doctor Manhattan. Like nearly all heroes in the Watchmen universe, Veidt has no metahuman abilities, but is an Olympic-level athlete with a vast fortune and a keen mind that earned him the nickname “the smartest man in the world.”

As a young man, Veidt idolized Alexander the Great, the Macedonian general who had conquered vast swathes of the world before his death at 33. Veidt spent his early adulthood following in Alexander’s footsteps, searching for meaning in the hope that he could achieve a lasting legacy that would match that of his hero. But ultimately, Veidt became disillusioned when he realized that Alexander had “not united all the world, not built a unity that would survive him.” After a hashish-fueled vision, he adopted the superheroic identity of Ozymandias. “Thus began my path of conquest,” Veidt recalls in Watchmen, “Conquest not of men but of the evils that beset them.”

But within a few years of costumed adventuring, it was clear to “the smartest man in the world” that he wasn’t making enough of a difference to stop the inevitable march towards the collapse of civilization, whether via nuclear war or environmental catastrophe. So Veidt devised a plan to unite the world’s governments by convincing them they faced attack from extradimensional entities. A carefully orchestrated smear campaign led Dr. Manhattan to leave Earth for an exile on Mars, and he murdered Edward Blake when the super soldier and government operative stumbled on his plan...a plan that required the deaths of three million New Yorkers via the creation of a genetically engineered, giant, psychic squid (its effects are still being felt in the HBO Watchmen universe).

Irons was unfamiliar with all of the wild details about Veidt’s past when took on the role. “I was a complete virgin,” he says. “No idea at all. I hadn't heard of it. I hadn't seen Zack Snyder's film. I hadn't read the graphic novel.”

But it was an extended pitch from Watchmen executive producer and writer Damon Lindelof that got him on board.

“I listened to Damon go on about this story and I couldn't understand most of what he was saying and couldn't believe the rest of it,” Irons says. “A man of huge energy [and] wonderful imagination. And at the end as we were wrapping up, I thought, well, fantastic enthusiasm, fantastic mind. This is going to be very interesting. And so I went away and I read the graphic novel to get a sort of idea about this world and then went ahead Damon's ideas.”

When we last see Veidt in the comic, he was a 36-year-old man privately celebrating his victory, as the United States and Soviet Union, previously on the brink of turning the Cold War very hot, had agreed to set aside their differences in order to combat the perceived threat of alien squids. HBO’s Watchmen picks up 34 years later, and the Veidt we meet here is older and perhaps more eccentric than the one we left in the book. He’s also in a mysterious undisclosed location with a series of identical servants following his orders to the best of their ability.

“You can play sort of two dimensional stuff in a graphic novel, [but] you have to add different colors I think,” Irons says. “And I think there was a desire that I play him as a little quirky and bizarre, maybe with a touch of humor to counterpoint what else was happening, which of course I had no idea of because I was where I was, on my own with these two rather tedious people who looked after me.”

While Watchmen episode 3 does finally reveal that Irons is playing Veidt, the circumstances of his “captivity” remain a mystery. He seems to be very much alive, despite a newspaper headline in episode 1 that read “Veidt Declared Dead.” The reasoning for that is revealed in HBO’s Peteypedia supplemental materials, which reveals the full text of that newspaper article. Among the other details, it’s revealed that Veidt hadn’t made a public appearance since 2007, and “was declared missing in 2012” just as Trieu Industries was finalizing its purchase of Veidt Enterprises. Despite the publication of Rorschach’s journal, Veidt’s culpability in the giant squid incident and the millions of deaths associated with it, was dismissed by the public.

Irons was given a fairly complete picture of Veidt by Lindelof, who told him all the details that will be revealed up through episode eight of the nine episode series. It was enough for the actor to form a clear picture of the character and his essential qualities, which he sums up as “enigmatic...inconsistent...human.”

read more: Watchmen Episode 3 Easter Eggs Explained

“I think [Veidt] may be slightly larger than life, but apart from that magnification, he is pretty like most of us in some ways where we have secrets, we have things we're trying to do that perhaps other people can't understand. We appear to behave in a rather odd manner sometimes,” he says. “So, I didn't see it as being that different to me. The slightly different rules, maybe [a] slightly different purpose, a slightly different location to the one I normally live in, but I think there's a truth behind him and an essential, accurate human nature.”

We even get to see Irons put on the memorable purple and gold costume of Ozymandias, mask and all, in a moment on the show that is simultaneously eere and faintly triumphant.

“It's very interesting that superheroes wear masks and costumes,” he says. “It sort of removes them from everyday reality and perhaps gives them a feeling of power and they do the same as soldiers...and with the policemen. It sort of puts them into that role where they behave perhaps differently than they would at the table with the kids...We see what happens when he has his costume and we see him put it on. We don't see what he then goes off to do. I think it’s his ultimate persona when the costume comes on. I felt a bit bizarre as an actor, but there we are. There's elements I suppose of all costume that can make you feel a bit bizarre.”

read more: Watchmen - Laurie Blake's Joke Explained

With the mystery of Veidt’s identity solved, the next piece of the puzzle is just where the hell he might be and what he’s up to. With each episode, his circumstances become more surreal and his actions more outrageous. The Veidt mystery has so far remained a side story in HBO’s Watchmen, and Irons tried to keep that sense of isolation as he was reading the scripts.

“I was not aware, as he is not aware, of what was going on elsewhere. So I just lived in this rather large house trying to keep myself busy, interested, and trying to have some effect on my future,” he says. “I've read a bit of the other stuff but I thought, 'I can't cope with this. I don't know what this is. I don't need to know this.’ So I just concentrated, as we do in life. We just live our own lives, don't we? We're sort of aware that other people have other problems and they're doing other things, and we read about this in the newspapers, but in the main, we just go down our road.”

The mysterious road of Adrian Veidt continues on HBO’s Watchmen on Sunday nights at 9 pm.

Keep up with all our Watchmen news and reviews here.

Mike Cecchini is the Editor in Chief of Den of Geek. You can read more of his work here. Follow him on Twitter @wayoutstuff.

Read and download the Den of Geek NYCC 2019 Special Edition Magazine right here!

facebook

twitter

tumblr

Feature

Books

Mike Cecchini

Nov 3, 2019

Watchmen

HBO

Jeremy Irons

from Books https://ift.tt/2oENYCu

#aion-rsa #Books

0 notes

teachanarchy · 8 years

Link

Augustus Invictus is a libertarian, you see — you can tell by his name.

The august and invincible politician is representing the Florida Libertarian Party in his run for Marco Rubio’s US Senate seat.

Invictus first entered the media spotlight in October 2015 when details of his hobbies came to light: The libertarian politician has been accused of supporting eugenics and of being expelled from a cult for “sadistically dismembering a goat in a ritualistic sacrifice.”

Nothing to see here, you know, just that typical libertarian drama — eugenics and animal sacrifices.

In March 2016, Canada barred Invictus from entering the country because of his ties to neo-Nazis. A 32-year-old lawyer, Invictus represented Marcus Faella, the former head of the neo-Nazi group American Front, in court on domestic terrorism charges.

“What is a libertarian doing defending a notorious neo-Nazi leader?” one might wonder. A glance at Invictus’ official campaign website might raise a few more questions:

Yes, the symbol Augustus Invictus openly uses on his site is a bird perched atop the fasces, the Imperial Roman weapon used by founder Benito Mussolini to symbolize fascism.

The world is witnessing the dangerous rise of a new — or perhaps not so new — libertarian-fascist alliance. Invictus is by no means the only example.

Case Studies

Investigative journalist Jane Mayer caused quite a stir in January 2016 when she revealed that Fred Koch, the father of libertarian billionaires Charles and David Koch, helped build the third-largest oil refinery in Nazi Germany in the 1930s. His project was personally approved by Adolf Hitler, and the oil refinery fueled German planes, helping the Nazis carry out a campaign of genocide and destruction across Europe.

Mayer’s book Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right also divulges that Fred Koch was such an admirer of Nazism, he “hired a fervent Nazi as a governess for his eldest boys,” as the Washington Post puts it. The newspaper of record describes libertarian leader Charles Koch as having been “toilet trained by a Nazi.”

As I detailed in an article about the Koch-Nazi collusion, Koch senior joins a long list of US business elites and corporations — many of whom are libertarian-leaning, naturally — who have worked directly with the Nazis.

Other examples abound. In June 2014, shooters in Las Vegas shot and killed two police officers before leaving a swastika and a “Don’t tread on me” flag on their bodies. The latter is of course the infamous Gadsden flag, a prominent sign of libertarianism. The fact that the shooters willingly juxtaposed the two symbols does the work for us.

Again, this raises the question: What are libertarians doing aligning themselves with Nazism? Libertarians are — or at least purport to be — opposed to state tyranny, and fascists embrace it, the trope goes (I use the term “libertarian” here in the American sense, which is invariably right-wing, not in the ostensibly left-wing European or Latin American sense). How, then, are these views reconciled?

Part of it can be explained by reducing the alliance to realpolitik, to a congruence of right-wing interests, to the finding of a common enemy in the Left.

Another case study involving the Kochs is instructive here.

Journalist Mark Ames detailed in an investigation for Pando how, in the 1970s, the libertarian publication Reason repeatedly gave a platform to Holocaust deniers and Nazi sympathizers. The Koch Brothers have given millions of dollars to the Reason Foundation, and David Koch sits on its board of trustees. Moreover, an article by Charles Koch appeared next to one by Holocaust denier James J. Martin in a 1976 issue of Reason, Ames revealed.

In previous reports, Ames also documented how Charles Koch funded a libertarian school called the Rampart College, where the Holocaust-denying Martin taught pseudo-history, euphemistically referred to as “historical revisionism.” The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum notes on its website that the Koch-funded libertarian school’s publication Rampart Journal published articles “claiming that the Allies overstated the extent of Nazi atrocities in order to justify a war of aggression against the Axis powers.”

Despite its putative anti-government ideology, Reason and many in the libertarian movement have ahistorically characterized the mass-murdering Nazis as supposed victims in World War II because of their brutal defeat at the hands of the Soviet Union. For much of the war, historian Richard Vinen notes “the eastern front was the scene of almost all the serious fighting,” and, between 1941 and 1943, Soviet “troops were the only ones to fight German forces on European soil.” Vinen estimates that it was in fact the Red Army, not the U.S. or the U.K., that was responsible for approximately 75 percent of the Nazi soldiers killed, wounded or captured in World War II. Right-wing historical revisionists like Martin portray the crushing of Nazism as a crime of communism.

This phenomenon is not isolated to the US. Dutch demagogue Geert Wilders’ far-right Party for Freedom, along with the far-right Freedom Party of Austria and UK Independence Party, among others, all employ libertarian rhetoric. So too does the “alt-right” website Breitbart, and its star Milo Yiannopoulos.

More and more self-declared libertarians want their respective states to harshly crack down on (non-Western) immigration, deport “undesirables,” and systematically discriminate against Muslims — all in the name of “protecting freedom.”

Nor is the West alone. In India, one sees another prominent example of the burgeoning libertarian-fascist alliance in figures like Narendra Modi, a simultaneous diehard neoliberal and Hindu nationalist.

Yet the problem runs even deeper than this. It is not just that fascism and libertarianism share a common enemy; actually existing libertarianism ultimately strives for the same, or at least similar, social relations endorsed by fascists.

Theorization

Fascism, in a nutshell, is the wielding of the bourgeois state in order to crush the progressive elements of liberalism (e.g., capitalism’s inherent tendency toward globalization and the destruction of feudal relations), replacing liberal capitalism with an authoritarian capitalism that embraces capitalism’s most reactionary elements.

Fascists seek to return to a capitalism unblemished by liberalism, one that wholeheartedly embraces its roots in white supremacy (or, in the case of India, Hindu supremacy) and patriarchal right, in which white men can exercise their “superiority” and face no resistance from more highly skilled immigrant workers, from better educated women, from exploited laborers in the Global South who will do the same work just as well for significantly less pay.

The notion that libertarians are actually, in principle, opposed to state tyranny rests perilously on a false presumption.

In US reality, actually existing libertarianism similarly opposes the progressive elements of liberalism enforced by the bourgeois state. The hatred of both the fascists and actually existing libertarians is ultimately directed at the bourgeoisie, not the bourgeois state, because the former is the defender of liberalism.

The means by which this phenomenon works itself out differs, but produces the same results.

Fascists hate the bourgeoisie because it is imposing liberalism upon the masses, while libertarians hate the bourgeoisie simply because it is imposing something on capital — yet, at the end of the day, both hate the bourgeoisie, even if for distinct reasons.

More basically, then, from a pragmatic perspective, libertarian ideology conveniently grants the fascist just the alibi they need. A fascist can justify their desire for a segregated, white-only community with an appeal to libertarian principles (“It’s our right to do so; if you try to stop us it’s aggression, force, tyranny”).

Gun-toting white separatists can build their communes and rail against government tyranny when it tries to stop them. They can organize their “decentralized” Patriot paramilitaries (the quintessence of the libertarian-fascist alliance) to hunt down Latina/o workers who are crossing the border in search of a job, because neoliberal policies destroyed both of their respective local economies on behalf of international capital.

Murray Rothbard, the founder of so-called “anarcho-capitalism,” exemplifies how this intersection of interests and ideology works itself out.

As he worked his ideas out more and more over the years, Rothbard eventually came to identity as a “paleolibertarian” — that is to say, a libertarian who openly rejects the progressive elements of liberalism and fervently embraces the most reactionary elements of capitalism.

Rothbard idolized individualist anarchist (the uniquely American strand) Lysander Spooner, who was an abolitionist yet simultaneously insisted the revolutionary war against slavery led by Abraham Lincoln was one of “militarism, mass murder and centralized statism.” The Austrian School libertarian hero associated himself with white supremacists and fascists.

As the New York Times put it, “Rothbard applauded the ‘right-wing populism’ of David Duke, a former Ku Klux Klan member [and leader] who ran for governor of Louisiana, and ridiculed ‘multiculturalists,’ lesbians and ‘the entire panoply of feminism, egalitarianism.'”

In his 1992 essay “Right-Wing Populism,” libertarian founding father Rothbard spoke highly of the fascist David Duke and articulated an eight-point program. Point 4 follows:

Take Back the Streets: Crush Criminals. And by this I mean, of course, not ‘white collar criminals’ or “inside traders” but violent street criminals – robbers, muggers, rapists, murderers. Cops must be unleashed, and allowed to administer instant punishment, subject of course to liability when they are in error.

This is actually existing libertarianism in action.

To the fascist and the libertarian, the Left is trying to combat this tyranny of capital, so the Left is the enemy.

In both fascism and actually existing libertarianism, it only capital that has rights. In Western white fascism, it is only white men who have capital; in actually existing libertarianism, it is preponderantly white men who control the vast majority of capital.

The means by which the tyranny of capital manifests itself in each system differs, in form, but the same social relations exist, in essence.

Just as capitalism degenerates into fascism in times of crisis, so too does libertarianism.

Update (March 27, 2017):

I was notified that this essay had been posted on the “anarcho-capitalism” subreddit. The thread immediately became a cesspool — and textbook example — of the libertarian-fascist alliance.

A user, aptly named “TheAwakenedSaxon,” exemplified the points I articulated above, declaring openly, “Fascism is a response to communism and as Mises (a Jew) pointed out, fascism is infinitely better from any remotely right-wing pro-property perspective than communism.”

“Why did capitalists in the Spanish Civil War side with “fascists”? Because they were opposed to communism,” the user added.

TheAwakenedSaxon, who uses the “Don’t tread on me!” slogan and snake symbol, also defended repressive state anti-Muslim policies, writing, “Yeah, protecting freedom by keeping out Muslims is such a contradiction, right? Oh, wait, no, that’s just basic logic, because when people who support Sharia law become the largest demographic in your country, little boys are going to enjoy the freedom to be molested, women are going to enjoy the freedom to be property, and fags are going to enjoy the freedom to take a one-way flight off the top of the tallest building. Such freedom, wow!”

“A Nazi is better than a leftist who is happy to allow in millions of Muslims for no other reason than ‘because diversity’ or ‘tolerance’ or some nonsense justification for dooming their entire nation to being majority Muslim in 40-100 years,” the anarcho-capitalist subreddit user continued, while riffing on the fascist’s favorite myth, that of “white genocide.”

Another user, likewise appropriately named “Pinochet-Heli-Tours,” posted a link to a lecture on “Reactionary Liberty,” by libertarian writer Robert Taylor.

Taylor, an erstwhile contributor to PolicyMic, runs a website and penned a book called “Reactionary Liberty: The Libertarian Counter-Revolution.” He wrote clearly on his website that he is “thrilled by the rise of the AltRight.”

“In their root-and-branch rejection of liberalism, combined with an identitarian (rather than abstract) approach to the Right, I see them as natural allies to reactionary libertarians,” Taylor said of the so-called alt-right — a euphemism for the contemporary white supremacist, neo-fascist movement, coined by neo-Nazi Richard Spencer.

“Although less popular than the AltRight, the NeoReactionary (NRx) movement has also had a tremendous influence on me, adding much-need iron to the anemic philosophy that passes for libertarianism today,” Taylor added. “A large number of those that make up these movements are former libertarians as well.”

Robert Taylor is the poster boy of the libertarian-fascist alliance. He concluded the “About” section of his website explaining, “In just over a decade, I started off as a traditionalist conservative and went from a nihilistic, atheistic libertarian to a radical reactionary who only attends the Latin Mass.”

And this brings us full circle. Augustus Invictus, that goat-sacrificing eugenicist, is back! In February, the libertarian fascist wrote on Facebook that he was reading Robert Taylor’s “Reactionary Liberty: The Libertarian Counter-Revolution.”

Accompanying the Facebook status, Invictus quoted extreme-right Italian philosopher Julius Evola, who wrote, “To . . . call oneself ‘reactionary’ is a true test of courage.”

The name of Julius Evola, a self-declared “superfascist” with extensive links to the genocidal Nazi regime, came up in February, when The New York Times exposed that President Donald Trump’s chief strategist, Steve Bannon, had cited Evola in a 2014 speech at a Christian conference at the Vatican.

As I previously wrote in an article on the far-right, white supremacist views of Steve Bannon, Trump’s right-hand man and the former head of Breitbart:

Benito Mussolini, the founder of Italian fascism, greatly admired Evola. The Italian leader of the extreme right-wing Traditionalist movement wrote for fascist publications and journals, espousing anti-democratic and anti-egalitarian ideas. Evola was virulently racist and anti-Semitic and openly claimed that non-European races were inferior. He also condoned patriarchal domination of women and advocated rape.

A big fan of Nazi leader Heinrich Himmler, Evola spent years in Nazi Germany, where he gave lectures. He personally welcomed Mussolini to the Wolf’s Lair, Hitler’s military headquarters. In a post-war trial in 1951, Evola denied being part of Mussolini’s fascist movement, which was apparently not bombastic enough for his tastes; instead, he proudly declared himself to be a “superfascist.”

There is no longer any need to dig to find libertarians’ links to fascism; libertarian leaders are making those links very clear.

#sexism #fascism #libertarianism #politics

1 note · View note

courtneytincher · 5 years

Text

The War Against Endless War Heats Up With Koch-Soros Salvo

Photo Illustration by Elizabeth Brockway/The Daily Beast/GettyIn “one of the most remarkable partnerships in modern American political history,” the left’s favorite enemy, Charles Koch, and the right’s favorite enemy, George Soros, are combining forces and finances to fund a new think tank, in Washington: The Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft that aims to end the American “forever wars” that have defined the first two decades of this millennium, and move past the foreign policy that led to them. Why Conservative Media and the Far Right Love Tulsi Gabbard for PresidentThe Institute is named in honor of John Quincy Adams, who when Secretary of State, wrote on July 4, 1821, an admonition to his fellow Americans to try not to spread American power abroad: [America] goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own… She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself, beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force… She might become the dictatress of the world: she would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit.This advice was revived by revisionist socialist historian William Appleman Williams in the late 1950s, and became a credo for anti-imperialist activists on the left. Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., who while serving in the White House under John F. Kennedy, had been hostile to Williams, later began to reference Adams’ advice himself during the Vietnam War era. And in our current era, it is often referred to by writers in the pages of The American Conservative. Following Quincy’s approach, the Institute promises to work on “ending endless war,” “democratizing foreign policy,” and favoring diplomacy. The use of armed force,” its principles assert, “does not represent American engagement in the world.” Their attempt to build a bi-partisan think tank composed of opponents of the exercise of U.S. power abroad and of any military intervention, especially war, is not a new phenomenon. But it is a new attempt—this time with real money behind it in a $3.5 million first-year budget, including $500,000 each from Soros’s Open Society Foundation and the Charles Koch Foundation. Founding member and anti-interventionist scholar of the U.S. military and foreign policy Andrew Bacevich notes the group will invite “both progressives and anti-interventionist conservatives to consider a new, less militarized approach to policy” instead of “endless, counterproductive war.”That’s a position as old as the American century, and one again having a moment after 17 years of war in Afghanistan, and with 5,200 U.S. troops still in Iraq. It is one certain to gain support among editors of The Nation on the left, and The American Conservative on the right—both magazines that have published anti-interventionist articles by Bacevich. When the latter magazine debuted in 2002, I wrote that much of its content “could just as easily have appeared in the flagship publication of America’s left.” Both magazines have featured writers who oppose U.S. globalism, supported protectionism, and as the editors of The American Conservative put it, “point to the pitfalls of the global free trade economy” and warn against U.S. “global hegemony.” In today’s United States, those themes are even more invoked by many Trump supporters. What the think tank urges, it is clear, is opposition to any U.S. leadership that seeks to use American power on behalf of its goals, including that of democratization of authoritarian and totalitarian regimes. They see the problems in the world arising from the leaders of America seeking expansion of a hegemonic U.S. empire.Koch Brother Joins Fight to Stop America’s Involvement in the Yemen WarThe roots of this line of thought—which opposes U.S. power abroad in nearly all circumstances, and ascribes the world’s problems to American leaders seeking expansion—began in the 1930s, before Pearl Harbor, when influential figures of both the left and right belonged to the isolationist America First Committee. Its ranks included Norman Thomas, leader of the Socialist Party in the U.S, and conservative businessmen Robert E. Wood of Sears, Roebuck; H. Smith Richardson of the Vicks Chemical Company, and Chicago Tribune publisher Robert R. McCormick. Earl Browder, head of the American Communist Party, did not belong to the Committee, but had the Communist Party create its own new peace group (it ended it after Germany invaded the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941).After the end of World War II, as Harry S. Truman forged a bi-partisan coalition to assert American power to both fight Communism in Europe and to help Europe rebuild through the creation of NATO and the Marshall Plan, he received fierce opposition from the left and the right. Truman’s former Secretary of Commerce, Henry A. Wallace, worked along with Communists who favored a soft policy of cooperation with Stalin, and who accused the United States of aggression and favoring war. On the right, Robert A. Taft, the senior Senator from Ohio nicknamed “Mr. Republican,” initially opposed the Marshall Plan and, as did Wallace, opposed NATO. When the Communists in Czechoslovakia staged a coup in 1948, overthrowing one of the only countries in Eastern Europe that had a democratic pre-war heritage, Taft argued that the country rightfully belonged in Russia’s sphere of influence, the same argument made by Wallace. The Soviets, said Taft, were “merely consolidating their position.” No wonder Wallace said that Taft’s foreign policy “was most liable to keep the peace.” A Truman adviser, Joseph P. Jones, put his finger on the strange alliance when he wrote that the most outright opposition to Truman’s bi-partisan foreign policy came from “the extreme Left and the extreme Right… from a certain group of ‘liberals’ who had been long strongly critical of the administration’s stiffening policy toward the Soviet Union, and from the ‘isolationists,’ who had been consistent opponents of all foreign-policy measures that projected the United States actively into World Affairs.” The left-right alliance re-emerged during the heated and sometimes violent opposition to the Vietnam War. A formal attempt to build unity was started by the Old Right libertarian Murray N. Rothbard, and his free market colleague Leonard Liggio. They started a journal, aptly titled Left-Right, that I wrote for and which sought out anti-interventionist articles from both sides. Rothbard’s writings could be found in right-wing and libertarian outlets, as well as in the preeminent mass left-wing magazine, Ramparts, and the intellectual New Left publication, Studies on the Left. At one anti-Vietnam War rally, Liggio spoke alongside the late then-Marxist historian Eugene D. Genovese, who was well known for saying at Rutgers University during a teach-in, that he “welcomed the impending victory of the Viet Cong.” During Bill Clinton’s presidency, the left-right alliance appeared yet again while the U.S. supported the 1999 bombing of Serbia’s military infrastructure and it its capital city of Belgrade during the Kosovo war, as Serbs were undertaking massacres of the Bosnian Muslim population, and the Milosevic government of Yugoslavia engaged in repressive and violent acts against Kosovo Albanians. Leftists in the U.S. supported the opposition of the radical International Answer group, an offshoot of a Trotskyist communist sect. Pat Buchanan spoke at rallies opposing the bombing alongside the self-proclaimed Marxist columnist, Alexander Cockburn. A new group formed a website to tie their movement together, antiwar.com. After its founder Justin Raimondo died this week, National Review noted in his obituary that, “Like his political idol, the radical libertarian Murray Rothbard, Raimondo always had some new cockamamie left-right alliance against the respectable people in mind.” During the war in Iraq and the long war in Afghanistan, an informal left-right alliance again emerged. International Answer and Pink Code on the left held demonstrations, and on the right, Pat Buchanan spoke out frequently, always with a tinge of anti-Semitism, as he wrote about the Jewish administration members who brought us into the war—avoiding mention of all those in the Bush administration who weren’t. There’s Been a George Soros for Every Era of Anti-Semitic PanicAs Armin Rosen details in an investigatory report in Tablet, Charles Koch has already funded anti-interventionist foreign policy institutes at universities, including a prominent one at Harvard led by Stephen Walt, who co-authored with John Mearsheimer an influential 2007 book, The Israel Lobby. As Rosen writes, Koch’s main goal is to “build an intellectual and policy infrastructure to advance their ideas because their views often haven’t had much support within the Republican Party.” During Obama’s presidency, attempts were again made to forge a left-right coalition against an interventionist foreign policy. It was hard to accomplish, since Republicans and conservatives had a deep hatred for Obama, and Democrats a fierce opposition to any attempt to continue the previous Bush administration’s policies. Nevertheless, two leftist figures, Medea Benjamin of Code Pink and Wisconsin socialist scholar Paul Buhle, tried to do that with a Feb. 2010 conference called “A Left-Right Alliance Against War.” Working with Buchanan supporters, they sought to found a “patriotic antiwar movement” that they hoped would gain the support of business and military leaders “who have become opposed to extreme militarism.” Participating was Doug Bandow who worked in the Reagan administration, Jesse Walker from Reason magazine, and Daniel McCarthy from The American Conservative. Liberals attending included Nation magazine editor Katrina vanden Heuvel, Ralph Nader and Michael McPherson, representing Veterans for Peace. The group hoped to work as well with Ron Paul’s supporters and Pat Buchanan’s followers, thus bringing together paleoconservatives and libertarians.Buhle and co-author Dave Wagner believed for the first time, “we’ve arrived at that moment” when a left-right alliance could be created, and lead to “dialogue between Right and Left and even for common action against the war.” No other hopes existed for “confronting the war-drunk leadership of Republicans and Democrats alike.” Despite the goals of these few stalwarts, without important intellectual participants and no real money behind the group, nothing came out of their attempt. Now, with a president who himself leans to isolationism, a new institute combining opposition to the old mainstream foreign policy from both right and left, he and Soros obviously believe they finally have a real chance to change U.S. policy in the anti-interventionist direction. Elliott Abrams, now working on the Venezuelan issue in the State Department, told Rosen that “the isolationist arguments have more of an audience at both ends of the political spectrum,” and he feared that one should pause before saying “they can’t have any impact.”The institute also will work to urge Trump to soften a hard line towards Iran, and especially to get the U.S. to go back to the Iran deal negotiated by President Obama. One of its founding members, Trita Parsi, formerly head of The National Iranian-American Council, worked hard on behalf of the Obama policy. Leaving that group, he intends to carry on his work of changing U.S. policy towards Iran and urging Trump to follow that path through the Quincy Institute. Bacevich notes that if Trump follows their lead, and by “ignoring those who call for yet more war, he just might begin the process of repairing the damage done of late to this nation’s credibility.” A person close to the Quincy group told The National Interest, “Trump may come to realize that he can count on this diverse coalition, including the Quincy Institute, to back his moves to end endless wars.”Perhaps Columbia University Professor Stephen Wertheim and Mark Hanna of the Eurasia Group Foundation put it best, writing that if Democrats are smart, instead of just attacking Trump, they should offer “a genuinely pro-peace message-standing firmly against Trump’s bellicosity as well as decades of bipartisan military intervention.” It should be easy, they think, since Trump promised a new non-interventionist policy and failed to deliver it. Of course, not all their arguments are wrong; one can strongly oppose U.S. support of Saudi Arabia’s horrific war in Yemen, and still favor a strong leadership role for the United States. One thing is certain. Existing think tanks like The Heritage Foundation, Brookings Institute, American Enterprise Institute and the Carnegie Foundation will now have a serious run for their money. And indeed, Trump may listen to what they say. Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.

from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines

July 09, 2019 at 09:38AM via IFTTT

#Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines

0 notes

thewebofslime · 6 years

Link

This past winter, my husband Adam brought up a news story about a cult leader in Brazil who had been arrested for sexual assault. “That’s not the guy you went to see, is it?” “Of course not,” I answered, “my guy wasn’t a cult leader.” It took several more mentions before I decided to read this story for myself. The predator turned out to be “my guy,” indeed — John of God, whom I’ve credited with helping me find myself. “Did you go there when you hit rock bottom?” Adam asked. “My rock bottom was a decade long.” It came out as a joke; we both laughed. But I wasn’t kidding. My current life as a wife and mother of two girls bears little resemblance to the decade in question — the period of hopelessness and stagnation that enveloped most of my 20s. I needed a good therapist and antidepressants (which I eventually got to). Before that, like many, I turned to spirituality. I studied reiki and meditation. I read Eckhart Tolle, Abraham Hicks, Gary Zukav and countless others. And I traveled from New York to Abadiânia, Brazil, to meet João Teixeira de Faria, known as João de Deus or John of God. For years I referred to that trip as visiting an ashram. In reality, it was the compound of a medium who claimed to channel the spirits of doctors and saviors. Related Video: Growing Up in an Apocalyptic Cult 0:00 4:08 'Nobody even knew it was a cult until way later' John of God wasn’t the first healer I sought out. During my “rock bottom” days, I dropped $200 on a charlatan in Queens, New York. She told me I’d been cursed and wanted me to cough up 200 more for her to de-curse me. Another time, someone recommended a Russian mystic to my mom, who was desperate to help me. He was a Soviet immigrant like us and lived in a dark Brooklyn apartment crammed with Russian Orthodox depictions of Jesus. When I went to see him, he offered to “manually release” my curse, as he held his hands alarmingly close to my crotch. I politely declined, payed him and left. John of God was seemingly on a level above everyone else. I got introduced to him through my uncle Misha, who was fighting cancer. Misha was more sarcastic than pious. He was well-read and took an interest in everything worldly. I would never have expected him to go the spiritual route ― until he got sick. My dad accompanied Misha to see the healer in Brazil. They returned hopeful and with an air of peace. Though I wasn’t physically ill, I wanted to go too. My spirit was broken. My depression first took hold when I immigrated to America at age 8. I restrained sobs in my new, crowded Brooklyn classroom. I pined for the lost order and familiarity of my childhood in Riga, Latvia. It wasn’t a perfect place by any means. Most Jews there, like my own ancestors, were killed during the Holocaust. My family lived in a communal apartment with strangers. The infamous Soviet lines for food and toilet paper were very much a reality. But it was all I had known. In America, I faced bullying and, perhaps, a lifelong identity crisis. Who did I have to be to be liked and accepted? I changed my name — Asya to Jessie — and I hardened myself. Or so I thought. View photos Me in second grade in the Soviet Union. (Courtesy Of Jessie Asya Kanzer) More At 21, when I ended up in a bed I didn’t want to be in with an internship supervisor I didn’t even find attractive, I was bewildered. I had been miserably toiling away in business school, looking for an out. This film production internship was a godsend. I cried as he took off my clothes, the word “No” stuck in my throat. Why did I go to his claustrophobic apartment in the first place? How naïve was I to think he would actually do what he said ― show me the film he was working on? I buried that incident as best I could. But my trust in myself was gone. For the next few years, I struggled to find my footing. When a car ran a red light and crashed into mine, my concussed brain got a much needed respite. I barely minded the scar on my face. Living with my parents, I tried my hand at various jobs. Nothing stuck. I couldn’t make a relationship work, or friendships for that matter. “You’re too high-maintenance,” my best friend told me as I gave her a hard time yet again for having a life away from me. “I need a break.” I wanted my monkey mind to shut up. I wanted to stop picking my skin, making it bleed over every blemish. I wanted to be normal. Using the insurance money I got from the car accident, I purchased airfare for my pilgrimage. I booked an English-speaking guide who would lead a group of us to “The Casa” where the healing took place. I read everything I could about John of God. I filled my suitcase with the light-colored clothing we were supposed to wear there. And I waited in anticipation to leave my broken self behind. View photos Me outside The Casa in Abadiânia, Brazil, where John of God could be found. (Courtesy Of Jessie Asya Kanzer) More Alone in Abadiânia for two weeks, I settled in at a simple pousada (guesthouse) that was walking distance from The Casa. It was a small rural town — quiet, filled with untamed nature. I slept with a broom nearby because strange giant bugs liked to settle above my bed. There was no television or internet to distract me from what I came to do: heal. Meeting the medium was a solemn process. Hundreds of people in white flocked to The Casa every morning — some in wheelchairs, others frail from chemo. In an orderly line, we waited to go before him so he could prescribe our cures. Mine was as follows: Five trips to the local sacred waterfall Four months without sex, alcohol or black pepper Four bottles of blessed herbal capsules A translator quickly scribbled these directions on a small piece of paper. I met many kind people, some of whom journeyed to see the spiritualist yearly ― folks who had dedicated their lives to a commune for the disabled, women with cancer who still had the most positive outlook … and myself, the original me who wasn’t eaten up by fear or loneliness or self-pity. I liked her. View photos En route to The Casa in Abadiânia. (Courtesy Of Jessie Asya Kanzer) More For three hours a day, I sat in meditation in the “current room,” helping to conduct energy for healings. It felt special, purposeful. I napped, hiked, and stood under that freezing holy waterfall. I prayed in front of The Casa’s triangle — a big wooden wall hanging whose three sides represented faith, love and charity. And then I went home. I was ready to start anew, but it took a lot more trial and error to get myself together. I often appealed to the spirits that John of God purported to channel, surrounding myself with crystals from Abadiânia and with a replica of that magic triangle signed by the man himself. As an actress-waitress, I moved to Los Angeles — only to realize I longed for ordinary family life. I became a 30-year-old social media peon back in New York. I read the Tao Te Ching and lived simply. I found love. Uncle Misha passed away a year after my trip. My mom had a photo of him on her mantle that was taken in Brazil — he was resting his chin on his fist like Rodin’s “The Thinker.” He looked whole. Then, in December 2018, João Teixeira de Faria was arrested on charges of rape and statutory rape. Hundreds of allegations were brought against him by women and girls from all over the world, including his own daughter. Even more shockingly, he was accused of running a baby trafficking scheme, where young sex slaves bore children he sold to hopeful parents overseas. Allegedly, the “handmaids” were murdered after 10 years of service. In another disturbing twist, activist Sabrina Bittencourt, whose work led to John of God’s arrest, ended her life by suicide in February. She had left Brazil after receiving death threats from his followers and was living under protection in Barcelona, Spain. She was the mother of three. The guru I sought after getting date-raped was likely a rapist himself — and a madman. I had fallen for him, but I was in good company. Renowned spiritual teacher Wayne Dyer sang John of God’s praises. My idol Oprah Winfrey interviewed him in 2012 and said she felt humbled and filled with a sense of peace. My father and my uncle believed in him, too. When people are sick, whether of body or soul, they will do anything to get better. It was devastating that a “miracle maker” took advantage of those most vulnerable. I’d been a cog in a machine that gave power to a monster. My beatific memories of healing were a farce. I felt lost, yearning to recalibrate. I began the process of erasing John of God from my psyche and from my home. I trashed his magic triangle, which hung in my daughter’s nursery. A delicate rose quartz crystal went in the garbage as well. I kept another crystal from Abadiânia, though. It was heavy and solid. It made me think not of John of God, but of myself — the strong self I started to rediscover there. I remembered also the godly travelers who came together in hope — it was they who brought the peace. I have realized that no one trip or person can fix those of us with demons. It takes a commitment we try to uphold daily — whether in an ashram, a therapist’s office or, like me, in a house in the suburbs, with a husband, two kids and a cat.

#TheWebOfSlime

0 notes