HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » dogknob » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Tue Jun 16, 2009, 03:09 PM
Number of posts: 2,248

Journal Archives

Molly Ringwald on John Hughes (New Yorker)

This is not the already-posted 4/6/18 Vanity Fair piece by Yohana Desta. This is Ms. Ringwald's piece in The New Yorker


How are we meant to feel about art that we both love and oppose? What if we are in the unusual position of having helped create it? Erasing history is a dangerous road when it comes to artóchange is essential, but so, too, is remembering the past, in all of its transgression and barbarism, so that we may properly gauge how far we have come, and also how far we still need to go.

I added the bold to this.

Here's to the future of this administration...

...and to the futures of their families, friends, children, soon-to-be ex-wives (she wants that money before RICO gets it), and all other partners in organized crime!

Rebecca Solnit on Facebook...

I'm not deleting my FB account anytime soon. We are in a constitutional crisis/slo-mo coup (in part thanks to Facebook and Cambridge Analytica), and in responding it we will need to share information. FB is how I stay in touch with a lot of people (including many I am in touch with no other way), send out some news and analysis and occasional calls to action, follow many activists and find some news stories. Shutting down that capacity now would reduce my range and access to information and allies, and I doubt it would harm Facebook.

Use them. Try not to let them use you. Remember to disable Platform, which is how they pimp your data, use Adblock and Ghostery, don't click on the ads, and say as many bad things about FB as you can on their platform (and cheer their stock crashing). The time may come when we can say goodbye to a destructive and amoral corporation without saying goodbye to each other.

p.s. I'm glad people are outraged but they could've been outraged last June when most of this information was summarized in the NYRB or earlier when other versions of it appeared. I might add that all this data was to manipulate us. What makes people manipulable is lack of scrutiny of sources, being uninformed, herd behavior, unexamined assumptions, gullibility, jumping on bandwagons, taking slogans for ideas, etc. Critical intelligence, being well-informed, and researching what you're responding to are acts of resistance.


A Generation of Sociopaths: How the Baby Boomers Betrayed America


The baby boomers are conventionally defined as people born between 1946 and 1964. But I focus on the first two-thirds of boomers because their experiences are pretty homogeneous: They were raised after the war and so have no real experience of trauma or the Great Depression or even any deprivation at all. More importantly, they never experienced the social solidarity that unfolded during war time and that helped produce the New Deal.
I think there were a number of unusual influences, some of which won't be repeated, and some of which may have mutated over the years. I think the major factor is that the boomers grew up in a time of uninterrupted prosperity. And so they simply took it for granted. They assumed the economy would just grow three percent a year forever and that wages would go up every year and that there would always be a good job for everyone who wanted it.

This guy would have liked my boomer mom. She used to say that post-war actors were inferior because they had never actually experienced suffering; they had to make it up and it showed.
This is a generation that is dominated by feelings, not by facts. The irony is that boomers criticize millennials for being snowflakes, for being too driven by feelings. But the boomers are the first big feelings generation. Theyíre highly motivated by feelings and not persuaded by facts. And you can see this in their policies.

Oh yeah. Big Time.
More than voting, though, millennials have to run for office because people have to be excited about the person theyíre voting for. We need people in office with a different outlook, who see the world differently. Boomers donít care about how the country will look in 30 or 40 years, but millennials do, and so those are the people we need in power.

"I don't care 'cuz I'll be dead by then." Yep. Heard this A LOT -- from GenX'ers too.


Some good points here. I have been consistently found myself on the millennial side of the fence. This interview has a few holes in it, but maybe the book is better.

BTW I'm GenX, born the night of Altamont.

Mark E. Smith, Prolific Singer of Post-Punk Group the Fall, Dead at 60

Source: Rolling Stone

Fiercely independent Mancunian frontman used dry witticisms and plays on words to create singular musical career

"It is with deep regret that we announce the passing of Mark E. Smith," the band's manager Pam Vander said in a statement. "He passed this morning at home. A more detailed statement will follow in the next few days. In the meantime, Pam & Markís family request privacy at this sad time."

Part musical hypnotist, part ranting madman, Smith was a singular figure in post-punk. His Mancunian accent, dry witticisms and plays on words were one of the Fall's most constant characteristics. Their songs were odysseys into his ever-verbose psyche, marked by repetitive rhythms and melodies. His influence resounded in the music of Pavement, Sonic Youth and the early 2000s New York dance-punk scene.

A fiercely independent thinker noted for his temperamental nature, Smith ushered the Fall through countless lineups and guises as the band's sole original member. The group began with a slightly off-kilter take on the punk sound, in line with Britain's musical revolution of 1977, but quickly became artier, focusing on forceful rhythms that owe equal debt to skiffle, Krautrock and Smith's omnipresent oration.

Read more: https://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/mark-e-smith-post-punk-singer-for-the-fall-dead-at-60-w514673

Blind man... Have mercy on me


Excommunicate Me from the Church of Social Justice


Feeling a little leftier-than-thou today? How about some chill-out tips from a wedding website?

The experience of oppression does not grant supremacy, in the same way that being a powerful colonizer does not. Justice will never look like supremacy. I wish for a new societal order that does not revolve around relations of power and domination.


Discipline and punishment have been used for all of history to control and destroy people. Why is it being used in movements meant to liberate all of us? We all have made serious mistakes and hurt other people, intentionally or not. We get a chance to learn from them when those around us respond with kindness and patience. Where is our humility when examining the mistakes of others? Why do we position ourselves as morally superior to the lowly un-woke? Who of us came into the world fully awake?


When Everyday Feminism articles are shared among my friends, I feel both grateful that the conversation is sparking and also very belittled. Nearly all of their articles follow a standard structure: an instructive title, a list of problematic or suggested behaviors, and a final statement of hard opinion. The titles, the educational tone, and the prescriptive checklists contribute to the idea that there is only one way to think about and do activism. And itís a swiftly moving target that is always just out of reach. In trying to liberate readers from the legitimately oppressive structures, I worry that sites like Everyday Feminism are replacing them with equally restrictive orthodoxy on the other end of the political spectrum.


At this yearís Allied Media Conference, BLM co-founder Alicia Garza gave an explosive speech to a theatre full of brilliant and passionate organizers. She urged us to set aside our distrust and critique of newer activists and accept that they will hurt and disappoint you. Donít shut them out because their politics are outdated or they donít wield the same language. If we are interested in building mass movements to destroy mass oppression, our movements must include people not like us, people with whom we will never fully agree, and people with whom we have conflict. Thatís a much higher calling than railing at people from a distance and labeling them as wrong. Ultimately, according to Garza, building a movement is about restoring humanity to all of us, even to those of us who have been inhumane. Movements are where people are called to be transformed in service of liberation of themselves and others.


FBI raids Sovereign Health rehab

The recovery industry has come under fire of late for widespread insurance fraud, patient dumping and poor quality of care. Though many legitimate operators remain in the industry, long-time rehab consultants complain that recent changes in federal health care and lack of oversight by state and federal agencies are making it tougher for rehab companies to turn an honest profit. They say ďbody brokering,Ē in which drug-addicted patients are wooed to specific rehab centers with promises of cash payments, free health care and luxurious accommodations, has become increasingly common.

An investigation by The Southern California News Group recently found that the Los Angeles and Orange County area is known in the industry as Rehab Riviera, and is a key part of the national problem.


This is the place I went to in 2011; it was A LOT smaller back then. The "rehab industry" has really transformed parts of SoCal into a "boom town." (note: boom towns aren't a good thing... well, maybe for a couple of people)

Let me know what you think of this track I produced...

...for my friend Keith Jones. It's called "Ways of Spirit" and I did practically everything on it except for the singing and mastering.

After we did this track, I moved away for a while and Keith completed 9 other tracks with bassist/producer Fully Fullwood. These 10 songs are on Keith's debut album "It's about time..."

If you like this song, you can check out the rest of the album on Keith's website: https://keithjonesmusic.net/music

Was the Rise of Neoliberalism the Root Cause of Extreme Inequality? (UPDATED with link)



Neoliberalism sees competition as the defining characteristic of human relations. It redefines citizens as consumers, whose democratic choices are best exercised by buying and selling, a process that rewards merit and punishes inefficiency. It maintains that ďthe marketĒ delivers benefits that could never be achieved by planning.

Attempts to limit competition are treated as inimical to liberty. Tax and regulation should be minimised, public services should be privatised. The organisation of labour and collective bargaining by trade unions are portrayed as market distortions that impede the formation of a natural hierarchy of winners and losers. Inequality is recast as virtuous: a reward for utility and a generator of wealth, which trickles down to enrich everyone. Efforts to create a more equal society are both counterproductive and morally corrosive. The market ensures that everyone gets what they deserve.

We internalise and reproduce its creeds. The rich persuade themselves that they acquired their wealth through merit, ignoring the advantages Ė such as education, inheritance and class Ė that may have helped to secure it. The poor begin to blame themselves for their failures, even when they can do little to change their circumstances.

Never mind structural unemployment: if you donít have a job itís because you are unenterprising. Never mind the impossible costs of housing: if your credit card is maxed out, youíre feckless and improvident. Never mind that your children no longer have a school playing field: if they get fat, itís your fault. In a world governed by competition, those who fall behind become defined and self-defined as losers.

*snip* Lots more... http://evonomics.com/rise-of-neoliberalism-inequality/

"The Handmaid's Tale" in the age of Trump


Is ďThe Handmaidís TaleĒ a prediction? That is the third question Iím asked ó increasingly, as forces within American society seize power and enact decrees that embody what they were saying they wanted to do, even back in 1984, when I was writing the novel. No, it isnít a prediction, because predicting the future isnít really possible: There are too many variables and unforeseen possibilities. Letís say itís an antiprediction: If this future can be described in detail, maybe it wonít happen. But such wishful thinking cannot be depended on either.

Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next »