Every Comic, Easily Archived

July 26, 2017 Blogging, Featured Comments (0) 475

It’s been pretty quiet around here, I know. It’s for a good reason–I’ve been pressing my nose firmly to the grindstone trying to finish revising a novel. Having just done that (at least for this draft) I should be back more often. In fact, I spent a few hours tonight updating my Comics Archive page, so you can easily access every single comic I’ve ever uploaded.

The whole site theme is new, you might notice, including a spiffy new portfolio where I can centralize all my creative output: Fiction, comics, essays, and even photography, a hobby I’ve been pursuing more recently.

I’ll be back again soon, but for now feel free to poke around, and let me know if you find anything that isn’t working properly.

(The comic below isn’t new, it’s a personal favorite from 2014.)

Continue Reading

First Amendment Friday: February 3, 2017

February 3, 2017 Featured, First Amendment Fridays Comments (0) 658

Fun fact: Donald Trump isn’t even three weeks into his Presidency! If you’re like me, you are already tired of winning.

Like the previous two weeks of Trump, this one has been overwhelming, especially if you’re concerned about the First Amendment. We’re going to focus on the big cases here, and maybe come back in a future week to some things that slip through the cracks.

If there was a theme this week in First Amendent News, it was “Conservatives Misintepreting the First Amendment.” So grab your handy study guide, and let’s dive in.

Does the Alt-Right have Alt-Rights?

A massive protest by students at UC Berkeley led staff to cancel a scheduled speech by Twitterless alt-right troll Milo Something-or-Other. The move ignited debates across the Internet and inspired our President, who has not yet made any statement about the alt-right terrorist who murdered innocent Canadian Muslims during prayer service, to threaten the university’s federal funding.

Despite outcry, of course, Milo’s First Amendment rights were in no way impinged. The First Amendment does not protect against opposing speech from fellow citizens, nor does it guarantee a podium and a microphone. It is a protection against punishment or censorship by the government — and it is likely, had Milo the courage to step out onto the sidewalk and engage his speech rights the way any other American may, that the government (in the form of police) would have protected him.

Instead Milo ran away, because alt-right trolls are cowardly, and claiming persecution fits his narrative and his brand better than, you know, using his freedom of speech. The protesters, meanwhile, fully engaged their First Amendment rights to assembly and expression, and responded to offensive speech in exactly the right way — by raising their own voices.

The First Amendment does not mean the police force thousands of protesters to keep silent so you can give your Nazi PowerPoint. That said, I’ll step off my soap box.

Religion, Refugees, and Resistance

Late last week President Trump kept his promise to ban Muslims from the United States with just about the sloppiest roll-out of immigration policy in US history. You may have heard of this one. In response, thousands of Americans turned up at airports across the country to protest. Notably, Presidential sycophant/Svengali Steve Bannon blamed these protests, which happened in cities like Indianapolis, Louisville, Omaha, and Nashville on the metropolitan coastal elites. One wonders where he thinks the coast is.

On Thursday, more than one thousand small business owners in New York City, most of Yemeni nationality, closed their shops for eight hours to join a protest at a federal courthouse in Brooklyn. Messages of solidarity and donations came from neighbors and supporters in New York City and worldwide.

There is debate as to whether Trump’s Muslim Ban (which, notably, extends only to nations in which Trump does not have personal business interests) violates the Constitution’s prohibition on religious discrimination, but many experts say it runs afoul of Constitution law in multiple ways. Immigration law is complex, and the President does have significant leeway, but several federal judges have issued orders suspending various elements of the ban on several rationale. Further court scrutiny is still to come, and the ultimate fate of the ban remains to be seen.

Trump Threatens LGBTQ+ Rights… or Does He?

The queer community watched Monday as reports emerged that Trump would reverse President Obama’s executive order protecting LGBT employees When word spread Tuesday that Trump would keep Obama’s policy in place, some in the community expressed cautious relief. Then on Thursday, the press obtained a leaked draft of an executive order protecting “Religious Freedom” that would legalize discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

Just another week with Trump in the White House.

Trump’s order would also limit women’s access to contraception under the ACA, and would present particular harm to trans Americans. The administration has stated he has “no immediate plans” to sign the order, though it’s up in the air what exactly that means — that he won’t sign it this week? Today? That he doesn’t have a pen in his hand at this moment? Who can say?!

This SCOTUS Nomination Gor-Sucks

Speaking of “religious freedom,” the likely next member of the Supreme Court (occupying the seat left vacant by the illegal and immoral obstruction of former-almost-justice Merrick Garland) has a lot of scary ideas. We don’t yet know his views on abortion since, like many lawyers hoping for a Supreme Court appointment, he has avoided the topic almost entirely.

What we do know is that the Religious Right is extremely excited about him, and we know that Donald Trump promised during his campaign that he would only appoint Justices who opposed abortion.

We know that Gorsuch was unhappy with the Hobby Lobby decision, which allowed employers to decide whether female employees can take birth control, because he didn’t think it gave the employers enough authority. And we know that he has strong opinions that Americans should not be permitted the autonomy over their bodies to decide when they want to die. Because, you know, God and stuff.

On LGBTQ+ rights, Gorsuch has expressed an opinion that it should be left to so-called states rights, and state legislators should have say over what queer people can do with their own bodies.

Oh, and he really hates liberals. In high school he thought it was a hilarious joke to compare liberals with fascists, and as recently as 2005 he published essays about how awful liberals are.

So… Not great.

The Collection Plate PAC

Sigh. Staying on the theme of so-called “religious freedom,” President Trump vowed to “destroy” the law that prohibits churches, as non-profit organizations, from engaging in unlimited lobbying and political advocacy.

 It’s hard to get too upset about losing a law that really hasn’t been enforced in recent years. But it’s worth pointing out that, once again, there is no First Amendment violation in the law.

The law does not prohibit churches from political speech. In fact it solely addresses their non-profit tax status. Under the US Tax Code, specific types of activity are granted non-taxable status. Religious practice is one of those types of activity; political advocacy is not.

Nonprofits are permitted only a limited amount of political advocacy as part of their mission. Non-profit organizations that do a lot of lobbying therefore establish multiple corporate entities; the ACLU, where I was on staff as a fundraiser, existed as both a 501(c)(3) charity, which did little to no lobbying work and to which contributions were tax deductible, and a 501(c)(4) lobbying organization, which funds the political advocacy work and to which donations (including membership dues) are NOT tax deductible.

Churches nationwide, however, have been getting away with spending massive amounts of money on lobbying and political advocacy all under the banner of their 501(c)(3) tax status. Many people (myself included) have insisted that they should be subject to the same rules as other charities, but there has been little to no effort to enforce the tax code. Now Donald Trump wants to “destroy” the law that has not been enforced.

If churches are spending a lot of money on political advocacy, they should be paying taxes on that particular money. That’s the only question here, there is no “prohibition” on any type of speech or religious expression.

Continue Reading

You are one person, and your brain can’t handle the whole world.

February 2, 2017 Featured, In The News Comments (1) 720

As the resistance to President Trump approaches its third week, one of the most frequent comments I hear from protesters, in person and online, is how overwhelming this feels.

Every day there’s some new horrible thing — no, scratch that. Every day there are ten new horrible things to worry about and oppose, and the harder we fight on one front, the more likely it seems that something else will slip through the cracks.

It’s a lot. More, I think, than any human is really designed to handle. So even as you keep up the good fight, you need to be kind to yourself and know your limits.

Fieldstone Cottage

Doesn’t this look cozy and relaxing??

Humans are incredibly social animals. Our brains are pretty much entirely dedicated to social interaction, and for most of us the entire world exists in the social interactions with our peers and neighbors. Most of the incredible infrastructure and technology we’ve developed ultimately serves to further our social interactions, and there is no other animal, as far as I know, that will end its life because another of its species rejected it.

It’s important to recognize the power that has over us — and also to bear in mind that we are not evolved to have all the world’s problems delivered to us in real time, the way modern media makes possible. We’re evolved to have relatively small lives, focus on a finite number of family members and friends, and handle the occasional threat or crisis.

Think about humans a hundred and fifty years ago; most had no idea what was happening in the rest of the world. Even their newspaper was likely focused on local happenings, with a few stories of national interest. They hadn’t a clue what was happening in Mexico, let alone China or Pakistan or the Sudan.

Even just a couple of decades ago, most Americans got everything they knew about the world from the morning newspaper and the evening news. Yes, they knew more about the world, but it wasn’t a constant bombardment of push notifications and tweets and breaking news alerts.

Sure, we’re capable of more than that, but to care for yourself and protect your mental health, it helps to compartmentalize, and give your brain what it’s evolved for.

Find your little world, and focus on that.

Imagine for a moment that all your electronics vanished. Who and what would be left in the world around you? That’s the world your brain evolved for.

Take time, periodically, to focus on your family and friends. Get away from TV and Internet, set your smartphone aside. Play a board game, or a video game. Talk, face to face. Hug one another, take in sights and smells. Make memories.

For me, it helps to remember that even in the worst crises the world has ever known, people have found solace in their closest relationships: their family and friends. Don’t lose sight of that.

If you can, get out into the wilderness. A nature walk in your neighborhood is great, and very soothing. Even better is to get out into a remote part of the mountains or the forest, so far from civilization that you don’t even get phone signal. Camp out if you can. There’s a certain primal instinct that activates when you feel like it’s just you and the natural world. To me it’s almost like pressing the reset button on my brain. Nothing puts my life in perspective like a weekend deep in the woods.

Spend time with animals. If you don’t have pets, go to the zoo, or a farm. The crazy thing about animals is they have no idea all the big dramatic problems humans are stressing about. I worked at a zoo in 2001, and I very clearly remember taking a walk around the grounds on September 11 and realizing none of the animals had the slightest clue about the crushing shared trauma I felt. There was a certain peace in that.

My theory: Don’t get your news from a person on screen.

I don’t get any of my news from the television (or any video medium) and I recommend you follow that example. I have a theory that watching and hearing an actual human on screen tricks your brain into feeling like you have a relationship. You unconsciously pick up the emotions of the speaker, and that adds to your stress — it makes your world too big.

I don’t think the same thing happens when you read or listen to the radio or a podcast. Those things certainly stimulate emotional response, but I don’t think it triggers the same degree of social stimulation that TV does.

Mind you, I have no scientific research to back this up. It’s just my own pet theory.

I’m not saying don’t watch video — just don’t get your news that way. Video can be great for escapism, and when times get really stressful I like fun, frivolous entertainment. When I’m feeling stressed, I’m particularly fond of watching Hannah Hart’s My Drunk Kitchen on YouTube. Hannah’s fun and funny with just the right does of insight and perspective. She makes you feel like you’re friends — in a very good way, unlike your TV friends Rachel Maddow and Bill O’Reilly, who are constantly freaking you out.

When I was in college, and dealing with crushing (undiagnosed) anxiety disorder, I found a TV show called “Acorn the Nature Nut” on Animal Planet. On each episode, an Edmontonian named John Acorn would explore the wildlife in his back yard, and talk about animals like slugs and tiger beatles. It was incredibly soothing — I can’t find any full episodes on YouTube, but you can watch the intro song if you’d like:

For you, maybe it’s episodes of Mister Rogers (another personal favorite) or Bob Ross, or a sporting event. Maybe it’s home movies.

The point is, as important as this fight is (and as much as you may feel like the world is burning down while your back is turned) it’s critically important that you focus on the small, immediate world in which you exist.

That’s what your brain is designed for. And you aren’t going to get very far without your brain.


Images from Wikimedia Commons

Continue Reading

Inside the Mind of the Alt-Right, the Internet’s Nihilist Nazis

February 2, 2017 Featured, Politics / Religion, Pop Culture Comments (4) 1072

A friend and I recently spent an hour or so dissecting the mind of the alt-right. Brian is a good workout buddy not only because he gets me to the gym, he also shows up with interesting topics.

This time around, he said he’d just had an epiphany: The members of the alt-right are frustrated pick-up artists whose misogyny fills them with hate.

In my experience this is pretty accurate, but I don’t think it’s quite that specific. I am, fortunately or unfortunately, pretty familiar with the alt-right. This is thanks to my early Internet adoption (when Usenet was one of the few interesting places), and several years of morbid fascination with 4chan.

My read is that young men (primarily) are led to the alt-right by a particular blend of toxic masculinity, animal instinct, and frustrated entitlement. Members of the alt-right are struggling with the very feelings of powerlessness and disillusionment they project onto left-wing “snowflakes.” It’s their chosen solution, a performative embrace of cultural talismans of power, that makes them pawns of fascism.

It all starts with the rules.

Let’s back up. First, what’s the profile of your typical alt-right troll?

Male. White. Intelligent, but not TOO intelligent. Just a bit above average. Young — usually not older than 30, and often too young to drive. Tech savvy; gamers and programmers are over-represented. This may be a product of the alt-right’s primary recruiting channels (4chan, Usenet, and Reddit) or it may be something deeper. Notably, I do not believe sexual orientation plays a prominent role — in my non-scientific observation, there are just as many queers inside the alt-right as outside.

There are certainly exceptions to this profile. There are certainly women, older men, and people of color inside the alt-right, but they are far less common, and I believe them mostly outliers. In my theory they are drawn into a community created by angry white men, motivated by a sense of tribalism and a desire to belong.

As an intelligent white male who generally understands how systems work, your future alt-right member grows up feeling like the world should pretty much give him what he wants. They regard themselves as masters of the world, in a way. They know the rules, they understand how things work. My theory here is that programmers are especially prone because they’re especially rule-oriented. They write code, which dictates how the world operates today.

This is where stuff like “Seduction” arises. If you regard the real world as a sort of Matrix with underlying program you can manipulate, then it stands to reason there are cheat codes for stuff like social interaction and sex. A peacock, three negs, then going caveman should unlock the next level as surely as the Konami code.

When it doesn’t — when knowing the rules doesn’t pay off the way it should, in love or money or fame, and our future alt-right member feels he isn’t getting what the world owes him, the result is a powerful cognitive dissonance, frustration, and anger.

The alt-right is about performance, not belief.

Clearly, none of this functions without a baseline of toxic masculinity. But toxic masculinity in itself does not forge the alt-right; most, if not all men in the United States grow up with toxic masculinity. The path to the alt-right, like the path to the Dark Side, originates with how one handles that cognitive dissonance.

The alt-righter’s response is to blame the rules. Maybe they decide their failures stem from cultural bias in favor of women and people of color; maybe it’s just that the rules are inconsistent and unfair. One way or another, they decide they will no longer obey those rules. They are above the rules, outside of them. They’ve taken the red pill; they can see the Matrix.

This is why a key aspect of the alt-right is the performative aspect. It’s not sufficient to sit at home and quietly hold alt-right beliefs, or even to join like-minded conversations on Internet forums. No, to truly embrace the alt-right, one must troll social networks and confront strangers. With your pepe avatar and a ready arsenal of memes, you unload racist invective and display your lack of empathy like a peacock spreading his tail.

The motivation is pure ego defense. Rather than process feelings of inadequacy and failure, the alt-righter grasps onto some alternative iconography that makes him feel powerful; some stimulus that will generate a predictable response and restore his feeling of being in control. There is nothing in American culture that fits this definition more than bigotry.

This is why trolling is a definitive aspect of the alt-right. The specific content, the argument itself, is totally unimportant. The only important thing is to keep their attention and make them behave the way you predict. Specifically, to make them angry.

Spend some time on 4chan, and you will find threads in which young trolls share screenshots of long trolling sessions, which generate a collective laugh. The longer they can keep a conversation going, especially if the target of their trolling responds with escalating anger, the more powerful and successful the troll.

Within alt-right culture, the worst thing to do is show an emotional response to provocation. This grants power to your tormenter. Strength comes from stoicism, from being the first who can accuse the other, “U Mad, Bro?”

The alt-right worship the anti-hero.

Brian mentioned a letter he’d read from an alt-righter, praising the film Taxi Driver and suggesting its creator would appreciate the alt-right movement. My question to Brian was whether he thought the letter’s author recognized Travis Bickle as an anti-hero, or related to him as an ordinary protagonist.

Alt-righters worship anti-heroes, but especially those anti-heroes who express a declarative philosophy that puts them outside society. Heath Ledger’s Joker looms large, and alt-right memes and artwork often place members of the movement in the role of “wanting to watch the world burn.” There is no greater hero to the alt-right, however, than Fight Club’s Tyler Durden.

Rarely do members of the alt-right recognize the inherent tragedy of anti-heroes. Brian asked me whether I believe they even understand what an anti-hero is, or if they outright mistake them for the protagonist. Here he and I diverge; he thinks they know full well what an anti-hero is, and choose to embrace them. I think many of them mistake sociopathy for bold individualism, and (like stockbrokers quoting Gordon Gekko) completely miss the point.

From what I can tell, the alt-right recruits most followers when they are young. Very young. It begins during the early teens, when emotions and sex drive both run their hottest, and when feelings of shame and failure and inadequacy are at their most powerful.

The alt-right as chimps in a bonobo society

Brian drew a parallel between rape and alt-right membership, the thesis being that both are attempts to reclaim power after sexual rejection. That got me thinking, as often happens, about humans as animals and the influence of our baser instincts.

A dramatic and interesting contrast exists between our two closest animal relatives, chimpanzees and bonobos. Chimp society is violent, and stresses on chimp tribes often lead to brutal attacks. Bonobo society, in contrast, is entirely non-violent but hyper-sexualized. Introduce any stress to a bonobo group (a newcomer, a food source, or any other social disruption) and the response will be a literal orgy. They have literally replaced violence with sex as a means of social sorting.

Bear with me, I promise I’m going somewhere with this.

This leads to a question I’ve seen some raise: Are humans more chimp, or bonobo? We have traits in common with both. Look at the murder rate among our primitive ancestors, however, and an interesting trend emerges. Experts place the murder rate among the earliest true humans at a level consistent with most other mammals, but as our species evolved that rate shot up to 30 percent, extraordinarily high but consistent with other primate species — except bonobos. That rise in the murder rate correlates roughly with the concept of property ownership — the point at which many experts say humans turned from a matriarchal, free-love society to one where men expected to own access to reproductive resources (ie, women).

I’ll phrase that in a shorter, simpler way: When men decide they own women, they either get the sex to which they feel entitled, or they turn to violence. To be clear, I’m speaking of animal instincts here, so it should not be interpreted to excuse any behavior. We also have an instinct to shit wherever we stand, but to maintain a society we learn to use the toilet.

Here’s where we come back to the alt-right. See, that instinctive behavior, the idea of men owning women, the braggy, chest-puffing machismo is something American society, what some would describe as liberal society, has worked hard to purge. As a culture, we have deemed that unacceptable, but it retains a power over our animal instincts and urges. Humans will always be vulnerable to the political strongman for exactly that reason.

To the alt-right, that social compact by which we devalue machismo in favor of egalitarianism is just another rule they are above, one more aspect of the Matrix that those of us who are “blue pilled” cannot see. Thus they embrace sexism and male domination (“Gorilla Mindset,” if you will). They embrace tribalism in all its forms — racism, xenophobia, Islamophobia — and reassure themselves that anyone who claims otherwise is only pretending, only trying to abide by the rules.

This is not an especially new phenomenon; Rush Limbaugh is an early example of an alt-righter, with his screeds against the “Feminazis” who were “Pussifying” American society, and his rants about how liberals value consent above all else. Rush never particularly cared about what he was saying, as long as he could keep the attention of his listeners, and as long as their anger made him powerful. His politics were never defined by classical conservatism, but a performative display of lack of empathy. He, and his listeners, are classic alt-right.

From 4chan trolls to fascist pawns

 

Given this background, it isn’t hard to understand what attracts the alt-right to fascism and totalitarianism. Beyond a simple reinforcing of those base animal instincts, fascists are dedicated to the rules. By instituting draconian policies with no exceptions, the alt-right can reassert their mastery and control of the world they believe they understand.

Interact with them enough (hard as that can be) and you’ll gradually realize that their primary objection with liberals is that our compassion leads us to inconsistency. Because bleeding heart snowflakes are so concerned with people’s feelings, we make all kinds of exceptions that make the rules no longer apply.

Affirmative action gives people of color an unfair advantage over white people. Immigration is allowing outsiders access to limited resources that should go to real Americans. Women’s equality runs counter to the natural order and denies alpha men the sex to which they are entitled.

Way down deep, at the heart of it, is the same consistent theme of ego reassurance: The world hasn’t been fair to me. I haven’t received what I believe I deserve. I don’t want to feel like a failure.

This is, to me, the defining feature of the alt-right, the thing that sets them apart from conservatives, Republicans, true fascists, white nationalists, and the rest of the Right. It is perhaps ironic, perhaps predictable that it’s the exact accusation they most often level against their perceived enemies: They are special snowflakes who haven’t received the participation award they think they deserve.

The problem, of course, is they also become useful idiots for more nefarious forces — the true fascists, whose interest isn’t ego defense so much as actual power, or wealth, or racial purity. Your true motive is irrelevant when you’re embracing and voting for fascism and white nationalism; the end result will be the same.

Is there a practical lesson here?

So if we assume my theory holds — and I’ve done my best to sell it here — is there anything we can learn to undo the power of the alt-right?

I’m honestly not sure.

There are certainly lessons in how to deal with an alt-right troll:

  1. Don’t take anything he says as an actual argument, but understand that the central goal is (a) to show you how he’s outside the rules, and (b) to feel powerful by taking up your time and triggering your emotions.
  2. When an alt-right troll responds to something you say by demanding you “prove it” with links to news articles or other sources, understand that the motivation is just to waste more of your time and keep the conversation going. Nothing you link will prove anything.
  3. Understand that the ultimate reward for the alt-right is a strong response of any kind. Milo Whathisname isn’t upset when his speeches are cancelled by massive protest, he’s delighted — because he made that happen, and it makes him and his followers feel powerful. 10,000 people got mad, bro!
  4. Know that the best way to deal with the alt-right is to ignore them. Their deep insecurity and desire to feel powerful means something like an on-camera punch in the face will traumatize them, which is satisfying — but their need to reclaim power means such public embarrassment will motivate them to terrible ends. Were Richard Spencer not in the public eye, I would fully expect his next action to be a shooting spree or bombing.

As to preventing their rise? Keep an eye on your kids, I guess. If the primary motivator is avoiding feelings of inadequacy and powerlessness, then our best hope is to teach our children how to process those feelings in a healthy way.

I guess what I’m saying is we’re all counting on those Feminazis to Pussify the country before it’s too late.


Disclaimer: I wrote this in a big hurry and I’m pretty tired, and I sure hope it makes sense. If you liked it, I’d love if you would follow me on Twitter and consider supporting my work at Patreon.

Continue Reading

People Matter. Enough Already with the Macro-Analysis

January 31, 2017 Featured, Politics / Religion Comments (0) 623

I don’t understand how a person can watch refugees sent back to the nation they fled, families separated, children handcuffed, and write 1,200 words about how it’s a “head fake.”

On second thought, yes I can. Because we live in the era of the “30,000 foot view.” In our modern age, data is available and accessible, and big systems-wide analysis dominates our media. But when we reduce humans to data points — whether it’s Jake Fuentes writing about a systemic power takeover, Nate Silver forecasting election outcomes, or Barrack Obama assuring us we’ll all be fine — we lose sight of the individual experiences and stories that actually matter.

Mr. Fuentes might have a point about the Trump team testing America’s appetite for fascism. In fact, I think he does. But what he might regard as a “head fake” or dry run does serious harm to actual people.

Dozens were detained in airports nationwide, some for days. Reports say they were subjected to interrogation tactics, and pressed to sign away their rights Others, fleeing religious persecution and fearing for their lives, were turned away and sent back into harm’s way. Seniors, some with very little language access, were kept from family members waiting for them right outside of customs.

All of these are real human beings, experiencing real suffering, at the hands of a government whose sole rationale for existence is to protect the rights and well-being of the innocent. They are more than data points, more than pawns in the game of global politics. To describe the policy that harmed them as a “head fake,” to imply it is a distraction, is to minimize their experience.

Closing the Empathy Gap

The world is big, and data analysis can reveal illustrative trends that are useful to governance and policy. When we let that data stand in for actual lived experience, however, we initiate a kind of cognitive dissonance that sews distrust and disdain for government.

This was likely one of President Obama’s greatest shortcomings. Time and again we watched our President stand at a podium and tell us what a success the ACA was, or how job growth figures revealed the strength of our economic recovery. And those things were certainly true, from a macro-analytic scale. The trouble is, it wasn’t the whole story.

For those people whose premiums were skyrocketing out of reach, or those in communities folding up for lack of industry, macroeconomic trends are at best meaningless. At worst, they sound like outright lies.

Imagine living in a bombed out Rust Belt town, surrounded every day by the signs of industrial collapse and economic ruin. Every time the President talks about the economy, he’s touting job growth numbers, and record GDP. Contrast that with your lived experience, and of course you are going to feel passed over. Of course you are going to feel resentful.

To be clear, I’m not joining the ranks claiming we need to “listen more to the White Working Class,” which is most often code for endorsing white supremacy. What I am saying is that macroeconomic analysis has its utility, but that a government is obligated to also understand the human stories behind the figures.

A Product of the Shrinking News Media

I suspect that the movement toward macro-analysis is, like many of the issues that plague our current political discourse, a result of the reduction in staff and scope of the modern news media.

It comes down to simple math: With fewer beat reporters available to meet and interview individuals, it’s easier and more cost-effective for editors and anchors to rely on data analysis. Why send reporters to talk with laid off workers, when you can cut together a serviceable story from the Bureau of Labor Statistics web site?

This is not to suggest there aren’t dedicated journalists out there doing the hard work of speaking with actual humans. Trump’s Muslim Ban yielded a particular outpouring of real human stories, possibly because those victimized were condensed into major city airports, convenient for networks and newspapers. This is one thing that makes Fuentes’s “head fake” argument so wrong-headed; for once, the human cost of a bad policy was readily visible.

That said, there are reporters working to get those stories every day — there just aren’t nearly as many as there used to be.

It’s increasingly questionable whether Americans really know our country at all. The tendency to substitute broad demographic statistics for individual engagement lies at the heart of many recent narratives —the Democrats’ failure to recognize Rust Belt disenchantment, liberal America’s shock at the power and prevalence of white supremacy, White astonishment and denial at the abuse of Black communities by police… The list goes on.

We have an obligation, as a society, to focus not only on the big picture but on the millions of small pieces that make it up. Humans are not data points. Families are not clusters. Trends are not universal.

We need to take more time to pay attention to one another, to recognize and value the lived experience and inherent value of each individual human. We are, after all, a government of the people, for the people, by the people — not “a statistically significant sample” of the people.

Continue Reading

Anti-Trump Images for Free Use Everywhere

January 31, 2017 Artwork, Featured, Politics / Religion Comments (0) 792

I am making these anti-Trump images available for free use anywhere and everywhere. Commercial or non-commercial use, with or without attribution or modification. The original images are public domain, and the adaptation is mine, so there are no rights issues.

I’ve set up a Redbubble shop where you can buy these as vinyl stickers — but feel free to make your own if you prefer.

Share, share share.

(Click an image in the gallery to get the high-resolution version)

Creative Commons LicenseThis work by Christopher Keelty is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at http://christopherkeelty.com.

Continue Reading

First Amendment Friday: January 27, 2017

January 27, 2017 Featured, First Amendment Fridays Comments (0) 463

Congratulations, Internet! We made it to another Friday, a whole week into the Trump Presidency. Only… 207 more weeks to go. Hoo boy.

It did take almost an entire week for Steve Ganondorf Bannon to declare the press officially “the opposition party.” In the meantime, Trump and his surrogates have mainly stuck to veiled threats toward the “media.” American reporters may all be headed to re-Ned-ucation soon, but so far it’s all talk. So let’s turn the eyes of liberty elsewhere.

[A brief aside: I have a Patreon page, and I would love your support! I’ve been blogging for more than ten years here, and have never yet turned a profit. Patreon makes it very easy to commit to as little as one dollar a month, so if you like what I’m putting into the world, please consider becoming a patron!]

Women be Marchin’

The Women’s March on Washington, and worldwide “sister marches” on Saturday, January 21, were very likely the largest protest action in the history of… well, the world. Estimates put the number of marchers in the United States between 3.3 and 5.4 million. That’s roughly one to two percent of the nation. and worldwide estimates range from around 250 to 350 thousand. Good job, everybody!

I marched in the New York City Women’s March. You can see some of my photos here, and read some suggested next steps for marchers who may be wondering where to put that energy now.

Side note: I only today learned that there was a Women’s March in the French Revolution, in which the ladies marched on Versailled and evicted the King. I don’t know if that reference was intentional, but I sure hope so.

PA Supreme Court Hears Rapper Charged with Threatening Police

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is considering the case of Jamal Knox, who raps under the name Mayhem Mal. Knox, a 22-year old resident of Pittsburgh’s East Liberty neighborhood, was arrested and charged after, well…

“The case began with an April 2012 traffic stop in the city’s East Liberty section, when Knox, now 22, drove away after telling an officer he did not have a valid driver’s license. Following a chase in which he hit a parked car and a fence, police found 15 bags of heroin and $1,500 on Knox and a stolen, loaded gun in the vehicle.”

Yikes. But none of that is what this case is about! Seven months after that, police found a rap video on YouTube in which they say Knox threatened them. Knox’s lawyers say the video is a protest, and protected free speech under the First Amendment. Police counter that the lyrics, which include references to “cop killer” bullets and Richard Poplawski (who killed three Pittsburgh officers in 2009) constitutes a true threat.

For more on Knox’s case, Lily Hirsch has a terrific write-up over at The Establishment.

Third Time’s a Charm for Colorado Religious Discrimination Bill

The Colorado House has, for the third time in three years, defeated attempts to pass a “Religious Freedom Bill” that would legalize discrimination.

We’re going to see a lot of these in 2017, so get ready. “Religious Freedom,” in this context of course, means turning gay people away from your business. Because as Jesus said, it is easier for a fat man to fit through the eye of a needle than to bake a cake for two dudes getting married. Or something like that.

Meanwhile, back in Pennsylvania, a restaurateur in Annville allegedly kicked out a black student after calling him a racial slur. The student, Rickey Lee Bugg Jr, says the owner of Just Wing It told him “Trump’s President… so I can say what I want.”

In point of fact, that is not [yet] the case. But who knows? Once they get a taste of legalizing discrimination, the GOP may try to push us all the way back to the 1950s.

Quick note here for the unaware. The First Amendment does not apply to speech or expression in pursuit of profit. That’s considered commerce and therefore, under the Constitution itself, may be regulated.

Federal Court Hears Suit on Concealing Actors’ Ages

Maybe it’s insensitive of me, but I’m going to call this the “Jenna Maroney” Law.

A federal court is hearing a challenge to a California law, passed last year, that prohibits commercial casting websites from listing actors’ ages. The law was promoted by Screen Actors Guild President Gabrielle Carteris, who was 29 when she landed the role of 17-year-old Andrea Zuckerman on Beverly Hills, 90210. Carteris was able to conceal her age, but believes that sites like IMDB today deny actors that opportunity.

Most experts warned California legislators at the time of passage that the law wouldn’t withstand scrutiny. The First Amendment protects the right to list virtually any information, including the age of an actor. If you’re an actor going out for a part that is *ahem* a bit young for you, better act fast.

 

Continue Reading

What Hillary Clinton Could Learn from Charity Fundraisers

January 23, 2017 Featured, In The News, Politics / Religion Comments (0) 257

[Up front, a disclaimer: This is not a “why Hillary Clinton lost” post. I’m as sick of those as you are. This is sharing some thoughts on a lesson I think we might learn, and improve on in the future.]

In addition to my various creative endeavors, in my day job I’m a nonprofit fundraiser. I don’t talk about it much because, frankly, I don’t think most people would find it especially interesting. But I’ve been doing it for about 15 years, and I’ve learned a lot of things.

The most important lesson I’ve learned as a fundraiser, I think, is talk with the donor about the donor. A lot of people, when they want to convince someone’s support, they start listing great things about the organization. How long they’ve been around, the great staff, the many people they’ve helped, and so on. But that’s wrong.

People want to hear about themselves, not about you.

Donors don’t want to support an organization, they want to do something good for the world. When you see a hurricane or a flood, you don’t give to the Red Cross because you’re worried about the organization. You give because you want to help the victims.

In that respect, philanthropy is a selfish act. Donors want something from their donation–they want the knowledge that their gift is doing good, and the feel-good feeling that comes along with that. For that reason, a good fundraiser doesn’t talk about how great the charity is. They talk about how great the donor is. Don’t talk about “me,” “we,” or “us.” The important word is always “You.”

Credit is due here to Tom Ahern and Jeff Brooks, from whom I learned this rule. In Brooks’s book How to Turn Your Words into Money, he goes so far as to present a template for a fundraising letter that is just the word “You” over and over again. From there, says Brooks, you fill in the blanks.

What can successful politicians learn from fundraisers?

So why do I bring this up now? Because I’ve been reflecting on the 2016 Election, and how Hillary Clinton failed to follow this rule.

One of the most common complaints I heard about Hillary was that she was “too ambitious.” This was from both Trump voters who hated her, and reluctant Democrats. Now, I will not discount the role sexism plays in this assessment. It’s classic sexism to regard ambition as a negative quality in a woman.

However, I think there may have been something else at play here as well. Hillary Clinton talked about herself a lot. I wonder if this created a perception that her campaign was about her, rather than about the voters, and if this might be what some voters meant when they said she was “too ambitious.”

Obama, and even Trump, talked more about the voters

I’ve been trying to recall how often, during his first Presidential campaign, Barack Obama even mentioned the fact that he would be the first Black President. I’ve asked friends, Googled, watched some old speeches, and I don’t think he ever mentioned it once. Other people did, certainly, but I don’t think Obama himself ever addressed it.

Hillary, by contrast, mentioned her opportunity to become the first woman president quite frequently. If it came up in every speech, that would not surprise me.

I don’t fault her for that, any more than I would fault Obama for mentioning his own historic opportunity. I mention it not because of his race, or her gender, but because that focus made Hillary’s rhetoric more self-oriented than Obama’s. Even the slogan, “I’m with Her,” put the focus on the candidate herself, rather than the people she sought to serve. While it would lack the clever double-meaning, “She’s with You” may have worked better, from that perspective.

In some respect, Hillary’s experience might have worked against her. Yes, she ranked among the most qualified candidate ever to run for President. And yes, as a woman she was under an unfair obligation to state her qualifications. But every time she recited her remarkable resume, she was talking about herself instead of talking about the voters.

The remarkable thing here is, if we analyze the rhetoric of Donald Trump, narcissist though he is, he did better. When Trump took the podium at any of his rallies, he talked a lot about the voters and his promises to them. I lack the resources to count the number of times each candidate used the word “You,” but I bet Trump far outpaced Clinton.

The candidate as cipher for voters’ hopes and dreams

There’s a particular similarity some commentators have pointed out between Barack Obama and Donald Trump. I’m paraphrasing here, but the similarity is that supporters of both candidates tended to attribute views neither candidate ever actually expressed. Each was, to some extent, a policy cipher onto whom voters could map their own wants and desires. In 2016, I had a Facebook friend explain to me how Donald Trump was going to eliminate the federal deficit and pay off the debt–during the same period when Trump himself promised to build a wall across the southern border and deliver massive investments in infrastructure.

I suspect part of the reason Trump and Obama presented this opportunity is because they talked more about the voters than about themselves. In contrast, by presenting so many concrete policy positions, Hillary won the allegiance of voters like me, but she also clearly defined herself. That stripped voters of the ability to attribute their own values.

At least I think that might be the case.

It’s possible that political strategists already embrace the same rule as fundraisers. Certainly, in 2016 fundraising is a priority role for political candidates–if not their primary responsibility. But it’s not something I’ve heard pundits comment on. I suspect it’s something to which candidates and strategists may want to pay closer attention.

 


Photo: Wikimedia Commons

Continue Reading

Women’s March: Welcome to the Resistance. Here’s What to Do Next.

January 22, 2017 Civil Rights, Featured, In The News Comments (0) 556

Congratulations, ladies [and gentlemen, and non-binary folks], you did it! The Women’s March brought three million people into the streets in the largest protest movement in American history. In a world of television and Internet and home delivery, you got people out of their homes and into the streets. Do you know how powerful that is?

You stood, and you marched, and you chanted, for kindness and equality and decency — and you brought your kids! Their understanding of American democracy is so much richer for it — they will grow up seeing themselves as active participants with a voice and a responsibility. That’s amazing.

But what do we do now? You’re probably still buzzing with adrenaline and patriotic fervor. You’re looking through photos from yesterday. Maybe you’re thinking about framing your sign. But one protest does not a movement make, and there are places you can put that energy where it will go to good use.

I can’t provide you with a definitive list (ie, I’ll definitely leave out some worthwhile causes) but here are some suggestions.

A young man at the New York City Women's March, dressed in costume as a minuteman and holding a sign that reads "I'll take King George over Trump."

1. Don’t stop protesting!!

It may be a while before we get another three million people out in the streets — but there are protests, rallies, and marches happening all around you, all the time. Your voice, your time, and your body are the most powerful contribution you can make to most movements.

Two women at the New York City Women's March, holding a handmade collage featuring images of famous and notable women.

…and if you are a white person, as we’ve discussed before, your presence at a protest will bring credibility, attention, and safety. Police are far less likely to abuse white people, the media is more likely to both cover the protest and actually take time to understand the message, and other Americans are more likely to take your demands seriously, and not label you a riot.

Yes, that sucks. But it’s reality. Meet the new “post-racial” America, same as the old super-racist America. But hey, this is something you can help change!

You can join almost any protest, whether you see it on TV or walk past it on the street. Even if people look angry. Just ask “Why are you protesting?” and if the answer is something you agree with, say “Is it all right if I join you?” The answer will almost certainly be, “Yes, here’s a sign.”

2. Learn about some intersectional movements.

Did I mention that three million people in the streets is incredible? In fact, there are a lot of other movements that would love to have even a tiny fraction of that support. And now that you’ve been one of those people out marching in the streets, you may find yourself with a revised perspective on their approach and tactics.

Might I suggest Black Lives Matter?

I know, I know, you’ve seen the fights with police, and people think the name is divisive, and you think maybe you read something about one of those terrorist gunmen having ties with the group, and etcetera.

That’s why I say learn about the movement. Did you know Black Lives Matter has a platform with six clear and simple demands, including reforming our criminal justice system, greater investments in education, and action on income inequality? That all sounds… pretty familiar.

At the core of it, though, the Black Lives Matter movement is about exactly what it sounds like. For too long, American society has treated the lives of Black Americans as worthless, or worth less at least than the lives of white Americans. That has to end — and isn’t that something you can march for?

To be fair, you don’t have to join Black Lives Matter. I just think you should. There are lots of other progressive movements — LGBTQ rights, environmental protection, economic justice, education, anti-war, anti-incarceration, and plenty more — that desperately need more voices to help achieve their goals. Get out there.

A young woman in a headscarf at the New York City Women's March holds up Shepard Fairey's "WE THE PEOPLE" poster featuring a woman in an American flag headscarf.

3. Raise up the voices of those with less power.

White folks, brace yourselves, because this one might upset you to read.

The Women’s March, powerful and inspiring as it was, had some pretty serious issues with racism. Organizers failed in their moral obligation to seek out and include minority voices among their leadership, and responded to critics by silencing them. Not great.

A young woman at the New York City Women's March, atop her father's shoulders with a sign reading "The Future is Female!"You might think such complaints are petty, or divisive, or detract from the central message. But look: Lots of activists have dedicated their lives to protest movements, only to be ignored. When a movement like this rises up, only to be dominated by the voices of white people who are relatively new to this, and push other movements further to the margins, they have a valid reason to be upset.

Again, as white people in America, we have a privilege: People will listen to us, especially when we get together in a group on the street. Cripes, the Tea Party got news coverage for rallies that were sometimes less than a hundred people.

We have a responsibility, a moral obligation, to raise up and amplify the voices of people who do not share our privilege. That doesn’t mean just welcoming people to attend, it means actively involving people, recruiting them even, to share leadership in a movement. In 2017, there is no excuse for failing at that.

I’m not here to say “the Women’s March is bad.” I’m saying they failed, in a major way, and we should all learn from that. We have to do better.

4. Spread the message.

Three million people is a lot, but it’s still only one percent of America. I am already seeing questions and debates on Facebook, as marchers share their photos and friends and relatives respond with confusion and/or disagreement.

A young woman, dressed in costume as the famous "We Can Do It!" poster at the New York City Women's March

It can be intimidating to stand up against opposition from friends and relatives. Lots of people avoid “politics on Facebook,” but if you were out to march yesterday you probably feel strong enough about it to engage.

Here’s a tip: State your position, clearly and boldly, and don’t get into back-and-forth arguments. If you need to clarify a point, do so, but avoid “You’re wrong and here’s why.”

Why? Because the goal is not to force other people to agree with you; it’s to express your position and let others make up their minds. Back-and-forth, which almost always gets bitter and personal, makes everybody look bad. You don’t need to defend yourself, just be the boldest, proudest voice for what’s right.

The same goes for all of your other social interactions, not just the electronic epicenter of 2017 culture. Be brave. Have faith that seeds of thought take time to germinate, and sometimes people who disagree with you today — violently, even — will tell you years later how you helped them see the light.

Share your photos, your signs, and your opinions. Do so with pride. Then sign off, and go play with your kids.

A young child rides his father's shoulders at the New York City Women's March

5. Get involved in politics. 2018 is coming fast.

Personally, I think the message of the Women’s March is bigger than any political party. It’s about humanity and culture, and equating it with “Get more Democrats elected” seems to cheapen it.

On the other hand, the new Republican President is the one who galvanized this movement, and the Republican party of late has taken a position in direct opposition to most of what Women’s Marchers stand for. So let’s get some Democrats elected!

For starters, an organization called Indivisible is here to help Americans participate effectively in opposing the Trump agenda. If you‘re looking for the most effective way to get involved, they have an easy-to-navigate web site to help.

Another group, Swing Left, will help you find the contested House district that’s closest to your home. Remember, every single member of the House of Representatives is up for reelection in 2018. Yes, many districts are gerrymandered beyond hope, but on the bright side House districts are small, and turnout for mid-term elections is tiny. Mobilizing only a small number of voters to get out and cast ballots will make a difference, and your direct action might be the key. That’s how the Tea Party did it in 2010, so look no further for proof.

Women protesting at the New York City Womens March

6. Get Woke, Stay Woke.

Yeah okay, people who describe themselves as “woke” are usually the worst. But it’s the only word I know that easily encapsulates an understanding of the vast world of social justice.

I’ll point you to a piece I wrote after the election, How to Easily be a White Ally to Marginalized Communities, that included some tips for expanding your understanding of social justice, AKA “Getting woke.” In short, you need to be reading and listening to the voices of marginalized people. White people [like me] can be a helpful [*ahem*non-threatening*ahem*] point of entry, but we can only take you so far.

One fun read is “The 8 Wokest White People We Know,” at The Root, which illustrates some examples and provides positive role models for white folks.

Incidentally, I highly recommend becoming a regular reader of The Root. A Black-owned, Black-operated, and Black-oriented magazine, it pulls no punches and is guaranteed to expand your perspective and hit you right in your latent-racist white feels.

The cool thing is, the “woker” you get, the less guidance you’ll need about how you can take action. Instead you can begin to serve as a guide for other people, helping them along the path to fighting against racism and sexism and shaping our future America into a place of equality and opportunity.

You know, that thing we’ve been lying to ourselves about being all along.

Young women in pink pussy hats prepare for the New York City Womens March in front of a wall of Donald Trump signs

Hi! You can read this and similar pieces at my home page, where I make a tiny little bit of money from your visit. I’d love if you’d follow me there, and on Twitter. Thanks!

All photos accompanying this article are my own, taken at the Women’s March in New York City yesterday (January 21, 2017). They may be used under Creative Commons License 4.0 Attribution-NoDerivs (CC BY-ND). In other words, you can use them without having to ask, but please make sure to credit me as photographer and don’t change them around without my permission. If you feel like it, I’d love to know where you do use them.

Continue Reading