Cliven Bundy himself

I know many of the people who had been calling Cliven Bundy a hero tried to back down from that certain comments. I had thought I was going to write about those eventually, because when I was writing about Donald Sterling and Mark Cuban, it all seemed to relate. After all, Sterling has had racist business practices for a long time, but it was saying something overt that got him in trouble, because then it couldn't be ignored.

I imagine that Cliven Bundy has probably been a racist for quite a while, and that a lot of the people who had to back away from him kind of believe the same things, but they don't really say it, or think in those exact terms. They use code words like "urban" or "culture of work", and because those words don't specify race they think they are okay.

There is a lot to be said about how we fool ourselves or why we are happy to ignore things that happen as long as no one accurately states it, but I'm not going there yet. It does all connect though, which is worth keeping in mind.

Here is what Bundy said.

"They didn't have nothing to do ... they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do? They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I've often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn't get no more freedom. They got less freedom."

His statements were based on seeing African American in a public housing project, and it was specifically seeing old people and children hanging out on a porch. He then talked about how hard-working Mexicans were and what good families they have, so you could know that he is not racist.

I think when someone says something that is stupid and ugly the tendency is to dismiss it out of hand. Some people knew Bundy was scum all along, and some people were embarrassed by the association and fled.

That leaves unacknowledged racism intact. It leaves logical fallacies intact. It keeps it okay to have ugly thoughts okay, as long as you don't speak them. That is how the systemic problems stay in place.

One thing I appreciate about knowing the context of that quote is that he was looking at older people and children and complaining about them not working. I don't know the specific ages, but are we then talking about seeing the retired and the young hanging out while the other adults are off at work? Because that's not a racial thing; that's normal.

Of course, under slavery it wouldn't be normal, because then there is no retirement age, and since there isn't schooling childhood play time is abbreviated, but the objection in this case would not be to them not working, it would be to them not having to work all the time. Surely Bundy is not saying that black people have to work more than other people, right?

Well, maybe he is. After all, without slavery they are getting abortions, going to jail, and not having a family life. Of course, with all those abortions there shouldn't be all of those children hanging around not working, or even any young men to go to jail after a while, and is it possible that the old people and the young people that he saw were related? Like maybe those are grandparents and grandchildren, and then after work the parents will be there and they will all eat dinner together? I'm no anthropologist, but if you see children, that sounds like there could be families.

I am going to go ahead and leave more freedom under slavery, and not having anything to do without learning how to pick cotton alone, because I think those statements are stupid in a pretty self-explanatory manner, and I think there's something more important here in Bundy's defense of Mexicans.

It does seem in this case to be specifically people from Mexico, in this case, and specifically undocumented workers because they "come over here against our Constitution and cross our borders, but they're here, and they're people...Don't tell me they don't work, and don't tell me they don't pay taxes. And don't tell me they don't have better family structures than most of us white people."

There is this still this false belief that people who get assistance are not working and paying taxes. Many SNAP recipients are employed. Many of them are employed at Wal-Mart, and many of those employees are getting housing subsidies too. There are homeless people who have jobs.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/dec/11/barbara-lee/barbara-lee-says-60-percent-people-food-assistance/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/dec/04/facebook-posts/facebook-post-says-44-percent-homeless-people-are-/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2014/04/15/report-walmart-workers-cost-taxpayers-6-2-billion-in-public-assistance/

You can't rule out any of these people paying taxes. They may not be paying a huge amount, but assuming a lower income, whatever they do pay they are feeling. However, a nice family that is taking deductions for mortgage interest and property tax, children along with childcare or education deductions, and maybe some charitable donations (like tithing) pays a lot less in taxes than you might think.

Then of course, there is the grazing rights issue. I feel like the cattle and timber companies that use BLM land are getting away with a lot, compared to the usage fees, but Bundy didn't want to pay that. He didn't want to stop using it either, where someone else could pay the fees and get the benefits.

So honestly, my very first thought when he made his racist comments is that of course he would be pro-slavery. He does not believe in paying to use land; why would he believe in paying for labor?

There was more to it of course, and Rachel Maddow did a brilliant exposition on that, which you can watch:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2VK4k-bBag

There is a lot that is interesting there, but someone who wants to be cheap with his operating expenses for his own profit being supportive of illegal immigrants is really not surprising at all. Sure, he says they are people, and good people because they work hard and have families, but I suspect what he really loves is their lack of power.

Illegal immigrants will work long, hard hours in horrible conditions. You do have to pay them, but not very much. If they start causing trouble, it is easy to get them arrested or deported. They are easy to abuse. I think that's the way Bundy wants his black people.

We are still seeing that it is far too easy to abuse African-Americans, and we are seeing great efforts to keep that in place, that people are ignoring with double-speak and code words and urging the protesters to avoid violence when it is the cops who are bringing it. We need to look at these things clearly, not just jump away from the ugly and uncomfortable only when it is in the open.

Related posts:

http://sporkful.blogspot.com/2012/10/100-wrong-about-47.html

Bundy versus Ferguson

There have been a few comparisons made between the protests in Ferguson, Missouri compared to the Bundy standoff, and I have been thinking about it too.

The comparisons have mainly been in regards to the level of response. In the case of the Bundy standoff, the government side stood down. Even though Bundy has continued using federal land after not renewing his use permits years ago, so at least the seizure of property that remains on federal land is completely legitimate, the feds did not force the issue because they knew it would result in the loss of human life. They've had Waco, they've had Ruby Ridge, and they are careful with that.

The Bundy supporters were spoiling for a fight. They were talking about putting the women and children in front as human shields, to make the government killers of women and children, and they were armed and not just ready but apparently eager to fight. They attracted people who were so eager to kill that two of them went and killed three people two months later. Sure, the camp asked those two to leave because they were too radical, but when you are asking people to come ready to fight because you won't pay your grazing fees because you don't believe in the government, what do you expect?

The Bundy participants do not support the federal government, but they were still protected by it in their protest against having to pay to use land you don't own.

Let's look at Ferguson now.

police officer shot an unarmed man. Despite many attempts at obfuscation, it was not in connection with any crime. To me it sounds like an ego-gratifying show of force got embarrassing when the car door bounced off of the victim. There are so many issues to get to here, but I am trying to keep my focus small, for right now only focusing on the response.

There has been a much greater show of force. I do not believe for one moment that it is because the police are scared that the protesters will become violent. The protesters are not going out there armed, and their signature stance has been with the hands up in a gesture of surrender. That should prick the conscience, but not inspire fear for one's life.

Even if there had been some legitimate fear of physical danger initially, the first night that Ron Johnson was on the scene, when things were demilitarized, demonstrated that the protesters and police could coexist peacefully, and that there was not a need for tear gas, wooden bullets, rubber bullets, and pointed guns. But that was all brought back out.

I believe there was embarrassment again, and that doesn't help, but police egos should not take precedence over the public peace and safety.

The military equipment is frightening, and its origin in the "War on Drugs" makes it a good symbol for many aspects of the situation, but there are other things that are even more of a concern.

The removal of badges by police officers is a direct affront to the accountability that the protesters are seeking. They aren't afraid for their lives; they are afraid for their status quo. They are so afraid that they will trample the First Amendment.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

So curfews are set, people are told they can demonstrate but they can't stand still, tear gas is thrown into private yards, reporters are arrested and harassed, they are asked to stay confined to certain places, a no fly zone is declared, and the list goes on.

This is not for public safety. This is to prevent the redress of grievances, and the grievance is the lack of safety for too much of the public.

This is coming from state and local government. The federal government is committed to investigation, but a few comments on rights are drowned by reminders not to loot, which ignores how little looting there has been, and that has been thanks more to the protesters than to the cops. That is frustrating. It is worth remembering that when the federal government does have to step in, it is usually because of some issue with racism, and how often opposition to racial equality is referred to as "states' rights".

I wasn't sure that I was ready to write about Ferguson, and this still feels horribly insufficient, and incomplete. I'm just going to leave with another quote, from a newsreel about Jackson Mississippi during Freedom Summer:

"The Jackson Police Department operates with the best demonstration deterrent of any city in the country. In addition to Thompson's Tank, armor-plated and equipped with nine machine gun positions, the arsenal includes cage trucks for transporting masses of arrested violators, searchlight trucks, each of which can light three city blocks in case of night riots, police dog teams, trained to trail, search a building, or disperse a mob or crowd, mounted police for controlling parades or pedestrian traffic, and compounds and detention facilities to hold and house 10000 prisoners.

Along with these ironclad police facilities are new ironclad state laws, outlawing picketing, economic boycotting and demonstrating. Other laws to control the printing and distribution of certain types of information, and laws to dampen complaints to federal authorities."

Fifty years later, we're still don't have it right.

One more bad music video

There had been one video that always bothered me back in the day, and every now and then it would come to mind.

I speak of "Too Young to Fall in Love" by Motley Crue:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-LrO1AfCDo

What bothered me then was if they were thinking of themselves as a rescue force, where were they when she was starving? They just looked at her like she was trash at the end, but if they cared about her welfare at all, she should have been there sooner. The spitting of the food at the end kind of bothered me too, but in more of a rolling my eyes kind of way, whereas I found the overall story arc really disturbing.

I recently saw the video again, and it bothers me more, partly because I have more context, but also because I noticed something new.

First of all, one thing that I see better now than I did then is that the video is really low on content. There's a lot of posing and posturing, but even the fight scene is remarkably low on action. So, I think the running gag with the rice, of Tommy (I think) wanting to taste it, and then not liking it, was filler. It was a little gross, which can offend the sensibilities of a young teenage girl, which is probably why I remembered it, but it also went with a general air of disrespect.

It is rice that is spit out, going along with a general Asian theme - I think it is specifically supposed to be Chinatown, but mainly it is supposed to denote exotic and vaguely criminal. The new thing I noticed is that despite the presence of several Asian extras, the girl and the shady guy who takes her in are not in fact played by Asians. Yes, the video is using "yellowface". Granted, there was a lot less awareness then - this was a single from 1984 - but it kind of just figures.

And still, it remains that for the plot line of the video, her actual welfare was not important. Yes, there is the assumption that she will now be sleeping with the "bad" guy, but surely the band wasn't fighting for virginity. She is contaminated now because she belongs to him. That she is now clean and fed, and would have a bed to sleep in, just makes her a prostitute.

It does, except again, I don't think the band is really arguing for chastity. It would seem the issue is that she is tainted by this guy, but that takes her out of the equation, making her an object in relation to the band and to the other guy, but not a subject for herself. That's only a music video, and not even well-done music video, but it taps into some things that have always been there, and are still around.

I have more things I could say about both the sexism and the racism, but I think that's it for today. There is so much going on right now that knowing the proper order to put things in just keeps getting harder. I may simply do some stalling this week.

Related posts:

http://sporkful.blogspot.com/2014/05/racist-music-videos.html

http://sporkful.blogspot.com/2014/05/sexist-music-videos.html

Band Review: Birds In The Airport

There is a bit of keyboard work on the Birds In The Airport EP How's It Going To End? that reminded me of Reggie and the Full Effect. My first thought was that James Dewees pulls from so many different genres and styles that this was a completely unhelpful comparison, but that may not be the case.

Like Dewees, Tom Breyfogle is a multi-instrumentalist who supports many other acts while also creating his own music. Watching a video of Breyfogle recording "The Sky Is Falling Down" you get a good sense of how he could be helpful to many bands in a variety of ways. Listening to the EP, you get a further sense of his versatility.

I first checked out Birds In The Airport on the recommendation of Third Eye Blind's Alex Kopp, though at the time only "Under The Mushroom Cloud" was available. It was brilliant.

Musically there are echoes of the '60s and sock hops in it - I can imagine Peter Noone covering it - but instead of surfing the theme is nuclear war. However, there still is dancing and a relationship, and even if it was mainly folk music that referenced cold war fears, they were a part of that time period.

Between the title, those two tracks and "The End", a dramatic instrumental piece, I started thinking that it was a concept EP all about the end of the world, except for the other two tracks.

"Little Black Dresses" and "Quiet On The Set" are not overtly about global destruction, but there is an alienation to them that doesn't exactly turn an apocalyptic theme on its head. Perhaps enough coldness before the bomb lets you feel optimistic about the bomb, at least if you have a friend.

Maybe sometimes you just need your dog.

Musically and intellectually, there are good things here.

http://www.birdsintheairport.com/

https://www.facebook.com/birdsintheairport

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCNEe6VRA1fuot02YIwTl9_Q

https://soundcloud.com/birdsintheairport

https://twitter.com/BirdsinAirport

Band Review: Hyatus and Candy Wilson

I wrote Monday about "crashing" the Class of '89 reunion. Among the many good parts of that reunion was the music, and I wanted to write a little about that.

The band booked at B3 that night was Hyatus. They are primarily a cover band, though there might have been some original material later, or they sang songs I didn't recognize.

Hyatus had a wide repertoire of songs from our youth, and did a good job with them. I can see them doing well at lots of different types of events. There were a few things that they did to bring people more into the performance. One was traveling the space, with guitar players walking through the dance floor, circling tables, and keeping things lively in that way. I made a joke about a walking bass line, but I think it was only 6-strings who did it.

The other thing they did for audience involvement was to invite people up to sing with them. There is no way that they could have predicted getting Candy.

Candy Wilson (formerly Freeman) is an Aloha Class of '89 alum, and she is a singer and songwriter. And she has an amazing voice. Hyatus kept calling her back, and it really did add to the fun.

I do have one point of disagreement. At one point the band said something about her having the voice of an angel. I get it. Her voice is beautiful and she was dressed in ethereal white. Still, there is something a little more earthy than angelic about her voice. I think she might be up for some deviltry, is all I'm saying.

I am treating the two together because right now there is not a lot of information on either. Both Candy and Hyatus have Facebook pages, and Candy has some Youtube videos of her performing at the fair, but should be releasing an album soon.

Great night everyone!

https://www.facebook.com/HyatusPortland

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Candy-Wilson-SingerSongwriter/445502528928222

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwyOeKUnktHbgKkYTEiaVFA

The Affordable Care Act and You

This is sort of a departure for me.

I work for Regence Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Oregon. I recently participated in Innovation Week there, and blogged about it here. While working on that, it occurred to me that the presentation I recently gave to my team might work well as a blog post, even without the PowerPoint format. I'm not sure where this would fit in with work/life balance, but I am giving it a shot.

There is still a lot of misunderstanding about the Affordable Care Act. When asked about the Act being in effect a few months ago…

• 12% thought it had been overturned by Congress
• 7% thought it had been overturned by the Supreme Court
• 23% didn’t know

I had my group go through a quiz together that you can find at http://kff.org/quiz/health-reform-quiz/. Feel free to take it before continuing here.

My group did okay. The one that surprised me the most is that a majority of people did think that health reform law would establish a government panel to make decisions about end-of-life care for people on Medicare. I thought this one had been pretty well debunked. Fortunately, it is one of the more interesting stories, so a large chunk of the presentation was spent going over the topic.

Evolution of a misconception 

1991 – The Patient Self-Determination Act requires health care providers, including hospitals, hospices, and nursing homes to provide information about advance directives to admitted patients.

2003 – The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act began providing reimbursements for end-of-life care discussions with terminally ill patients.

2009 – Rep. Earl Blumenauer (with three Republican cosponsors) proposes standalone bill to reimburse office visits discussing end-of-life issues, including living wills and advance directives, every five years for Medicare patients. Proposed in April, the standalone bill was soon tabled and inserted into the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act that was being worked on.

July 16, 2009 – Betsy McCaughey, former lieutenant governor of New York, called it “a vicious assault on elderly people” because it required the elderly every five years to be told “how to end their life sooner.”

July 24, 2009 – McCaughey wrote an op-ed saying that presidential advisor Ezekiel Emanuel did not believe the disabled should be entitled to medical care (this was false). Within a few days, representatives like Rep. John Boehner were being quoted about government-sponsored euthanasia.

August 7th, 2009 – Sarah Palin first uses the phrase “death panel” on Facebook.

March 2010 - The provision was removed from PPACA prior to it becoming law.

January 4, 2011 - A proposed Medicare regulation to pay for end-of-life care consultations was also deleted.

Many of us with aging parents can imagine the value of our parents having coverage for periodic talks with their doctor about potential issues and options. Many of us can probably also imagine those parents getting irritated, feeling threatened, or saying something about how we will be relieved when they are gone.

There were multiple factors that contributed to the confusion. We can't ignore politics, but access to healthcare is an emotional issue, there have been changes and developments as the law was being worked on and enacted, and healthcare in general is a complex system with many moving parts.

I was lucky in that I had examples from personal knowledge of people dealing with various issues in three of the four states that we cover. (I'm sorry but I have no stories from Idaho.)

Washington: Politics was an issue for Tara Dublin, whom you may remember as a popular DJ, but who has been open about her financial struggles since losing that job. When the Washington exchange opened she signed up quickly, and tweeted about her happiness to have health care again. She was abused for this - not just because people who followed her were displeased, but because there were people specifically looking for positive references to the new exchanges so they could spew inaccurate vitriol.

http://www.momsrising.org/blog/my-story-facing-unemployment-as-a-mom

https://twitter.com/taradublinrocks

Oregon: The constant changes led to some confusion for my sister Maria. We kept hearing stories of the Oregon exchange not working at all, so she used the phone number to sign up, but that just led to them sending her paperwork with her options that she was supposed to complete online. The site worked perfectly. I still have no idea how. I am curious about what will happen with the Oracle litigation. Something was going wrong, but it did not have to prevent signing up. I wonder whether there were people who could have used that information.

Utah: Finally, a friend in Utah ran into an issue with his signup. He has a disability that does not completely prevent him from working, but can hamper it, which I believe is why he was on Medicaid at one point, then he got off of it. The best option for him at the time of the deadline was to go back onto Medicaid, but there was a $2000 penalty for re-enrolling.

He was very upset. He was talking about the government valuing minorities over the majority, and moving to Australia. Ultimately, the penalty is a quirk of Medicaid, not the Affordable Care Act, and it probably won't affect that many people, but when you suddenly need $2000 it hurts. He has calmed down, and is not emigrating now, but I am not sure that he is completely reconciled to the law.

My group does not work directly with creating plans or assisting customers, so some of this might feel like it is interesting but not directly relevant. The main thing that we knew was that as we waited for programming to be completed it led to weeks where there was not a lot for us to work on followed by weeks of trying to catch up. I hoped the presentation would give us a broader picture.

For one thing, I had noticed some changes in some of the plans we were auditing, with less exemptions and increased coverage for preventive care. These are good things.

Just by knowing that we do work in insurance, people may ask us questions, and if we can give them clear answers and dispel some confusion, that is a good thing.

Most of all, there are a lot of reasons to feel good about working for a non-profit corporation. We have heard horrible stories before about insurance companies dropping customers after a major accident or illness, about letters that falsely told customers their old plans had been dropped and only provided the most expensive options as alternatives.

I remember shortly after Moda bought the naming rights to the Rose Garden there were two letters to the editor in the Oregonian. One Moda customer had just received notification that his rates were going up, and another was told that his medication was no longer covered. It might be coincidence, but it's hard not to be suspicious.

For our company, our core values are focused doing well for our members and for health care. There is no overriding commitment to shareholders, because we have none. We can feel good about working for Regence.

https://www.regence.com/

Related posts:

http://sporkful.blogspot.com/2014/06/innovation-week.html

http://sporkful.blogspot.com/2012/07/normal-0-donald-trump-is-big-fat-idiot.html

Tweeting cake

I focused on some recent and specific incidents in the Stolen Labor post, but there has been a long history of paid journalists taking their ideas from Twitter without attribution. Some practices are more egregious than others, and I am not going to get into that today.

The reason I mention it is because back in May someone had suggested maybe just tweeting nothing but pictures of cake for a day to throw the news cycle off. It was never scheduled. I'm not sure that things have slowed down enough to where it would not be completely irresponsible to take a day off from news. I was ready though.

There was a picture that came to me with it, of chiffon dresses in pastel colors, maybe white gloves and hats, and a quiet murmur of conversation accompanied by red punch and delicious cake.

That isn't going to happen like that. People are spread out physically in the first place, and who even wears pastel chiffons anymore?

However, there is an important point or two in there, and it's worth remembering as more and more terrible things happen, with increasing frequency and plenty of responses to make you weep for humanity.

Take time to get together. I am probably not going to travel to associate with people whose tweets I like and admire just because I like and admire them -- that's not practical for time or money -- but there are lots of people that I love right here, and it nourishes my soul to spend time with them. So a few weeks ago we had people over for ice cream sundaes, and I'm trying to arrange a lunch date with some other friends via e-mail.

Make time for cake. Good nutrition is moderation, but there is a mental uplift in getting a treat that goes beyond the sugar spike. It can be overdone, but the other extreme isn't any good either.

It can be true that this is a horrible screwed up planet, but that is not the whole truth. We need to keep in touch with the good parts too.

25 years later

Saturday night I went to a high school reunion. It was not for my class, but I was not exactly crashing, either.

Official reunions basically happen every ten years, and the way they happen is that the student government for that year uses Classic Reunions to throw it. They did a great job for my 10-year reunion, but the value had really gone down by the 20-year reunion, and since a lot of us are connected via Facebook now, many people did not even bother going. There was still a good turnout, but I could see room for improvement.

Anyway, with Facebook many people have held less formal events, and that was good, but I was invited to a 25 year reunion for the class of '89. I was class of '90 of course, and the person who invited me was someone else who was invited, not among the organizers. I was thinking I shouldn't go, but others were encouraging, and obviously I went, and I'm glad I did. There were a few things that I wanted to go over.

One thing that is worth mentioning is that I have been going through this period of seclusion, and it has just felt right. I have chosen not to attend some concerts and things that I kind of wanted to go, but I just didn't have the emotional energy for it. I do have something coming up at the end of September, so I thought one more month of seclusion would be about right. This kind of felt too early, but it worked out.

Part of that was giving up on some things, like trying to look cute. Honestly, no one seems to expect it of me anyway; there is no precedent of it happening. So one thing I saw from that is that really, no one cares how I look, and the other thing I was free to notice is that a lot of other people have social anxiety over this kind of thing too. They have varying levels of how nervous they get, but maybe no one really has time to judge each other because they are too busy worried about their own shortcomings. While that does have an upside, if we can get to where we all love and accept each other and ourselves, that would be even better.

I was amazed by the attendance. I thought of it as more of an unofficial thing, so not really something that people would travel very far for, but they did. In some cases it was combined with travel that would have happened to see family, but still, they came! And there were people that I have not seen for the entire 25 years, some of whom I am friends with on Facebook, but some of whom I did not even know were on Facebook (and some who are kind of on, but hate it). That was great.

It is an interesting experience to see a face or a name that is kind of familiar, and then the blanks fill in, and you remember waiting at the bus stop or being in the cafeteria, and all of the pieces start falling into place.

Being a year younger than the class, there were people I did not know well, or some whom I did remember but I did not expect them to remember me really, so here are some highlights and lowlights of that.

Most embarrassing moment: Jami had indicated he was coming, and so I saw him and gave a big smile and the blank look should have tipped me off, but he wasn't Jami, he was Mark. They're not exactly twins, but it wasn't that light, I don't really know Mark at all, and I have only seen Jami a couple of times. Then later when I did see Jami I assumed it was Mark again, and did not greet him right away.

Next most embarrassing moment: Dyan's husband had me going for a while that he had sat behind me for 12 years of school and I had forgotten him. This was not as bad as it could have been because he was so unfamiliar that I was trying to figure out how I could be drawing such a blank more than feeling guilty. No grudges, anyway.

Also, I feel a little disappointed that I have forgotten how to dance. I think there was a time when I was not horrible.

Pretty good moments: Just catching up. For some people it was from only about five years ago, but I spent the first part of the evening catching up with people where we didn't see each other as much in high school as in junior high, so it was kind of more than 25 years.

Really good moments: I would probably not have periods of seclusion if there were not some self-esteem issues, and maybe this was more noticeable because I was the younger class, and there is some age stratification in high school, but it's kind of amazing that people remembered me and cared. It's the easiest thing to feel invisible when you are a teenager (except for those moments when you have done something humiliating, and you feel too visible), but really, we have no idea of our place in this word.

Best moment: I managed sport teams, and three of my basketball players and one of my soccer players were there, and their hugs were good, but seeing them hug each other so hard was something else entirely. It did bring back memories, but even more than that, seeing in the here and now that all of that teamwork and camaraderie still had a pulled them together. It's not that we have all stayed in touch, and there are a lot of miles between, but there is love too. I'm glad I got to see that.

So thanks for organizing Meredith, Greg, Chris, Diana, and Corey. You did a good thing.

I will be incorporating the music from that night into my band reviews for the week. Otherwise, I just need to reflect on possibilities for the class of '90's 25th.

Band Review: Tom Barrow and The Mantells

Tom Barrow followed me on Twitter a while back, and so I added him to the list for review. As I started listening this week I saw that in addition to doing his own thing, he also sings for The Mantells, and had a few of their songs on his Soundcloud page. Also, that number of songs just increased, because the Mantells had a new EP coming out. It did not feel right to ignore that, so I am reviewing both. It was the only solution.

There is a somewhat similar sensibility between the two projects, but I would say in the group it gets a bit funkier. This is perfectly logical, because on his own Barrow is acoustic guitar, which tends to be more mellow. Paul Simon fans would probably enjoy him. "Space To Rent" feels laid back, and "Tipsy" is much more sober than you would expect based on the title, but you are more likely to be able to dance to "How To Say It".

Favorites are "Key To The City" by The Mantells, and "Schoolyard Games" for Tom Barrow, but the music overall is easily accessible and worth checking out.

Everyone is from Manchester.

https://www.facebook.com/Tombarrowmusicmanchester

https://soundcloud.com/tombarrowmusic

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHr4iUkAkl9i2u7YfjQDMkg

https://twitter.com/tombarrowmusic

https://www.facebook.com/TheMantells

https://soundcloud.com/themantells

https://twitter.com/TheMantells

Band Review: The Background

I'm afraid this will be a short review, as this week has not been going the way I would want.

The Background is a four member band out of Dallas, Texas. They list themselves as Pop/Rock. They kind of remind me of pop punk, as there is a youthful energy to the sound, but sometimes pop punk can sound vapid, and there is enough heart here to prevent that from being the case. Some songs will add layers with piano or cheers or some extra element to make the music more rich, and I think that's what helps it work out.

Currently unsigned, they have recently released an EP, Sunrise, and it is worth a listen.

If you are near Dallas, they will also be playing at Sons of Hermann Hall on August 23rd.

http://www.wearethebackground.com/

http://thebackground.bandcamp.com/

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDD64CcH2Ec1KaLaon01WnA

https://twitter.com/thebackgroundtx

Understanding satire

Assuming that if someone disagrees with you it is because of a flaw in their understanding is the sort of thing that really holds back humanity, so I'll stress once more that "You just don't understand satire" is really condescending. However, that alone would not have inspired this post.

Instead it comes from the comments that always seem to follow, where not understanding satire is paired with needing a sense of humor and never having heard of "A Modest Proposal". The problem with this reasoning is that "A Modest Proposal" is not a laugh riot.

It's actually pretty horrible, and I don't mean horrible in a "He wants people to eat babies! That awful, awful man!" way. It is horrible in exactly the way that satire is supposed to be, which is what makes it work.

Through English exploitation, agricultural regulation, and other factors, the Irish economic situation was dire. Some people did very well, but there were many people who could find no employment other than begging, and they were ragged and starving, including children. Swift references that, and very logically explains how the poor being able to sell their children for food solves all of this. Details like food preparation, time periods, and projected numbers are all covered and sound completely reasonable.

Of course any normal person recoils at eating babies, but as he points out that these children are not provided for, and that their lives are misery, it raises the question that if eating them is wrong, why is letting them starve right? Because that is what happens under the current situation, and it is set up that way so some may profit; is this superior to cannibalism?

There are features of satire that are adjacent to humor. "A Modest Proposal" is clever. The line about the landlords having the most right to the children as they have already devoured the parents? That's pretty on the nose. There is parody of the common tracts of the day. It can be offensive. There is the twist where the author gives you something you were not expecting. All of those things sound like it could be funny, but it really isn't comic.

Maybe this means that people actually don't understand satire. I read a few student comments that they were surprised upon reading the essay, because they were expecting satire, and then they realized what Swift was doing. I am going to interpret this as meaning that they were expecting satire to be funny and then realized that it was more effective the way it was. Or maybe they came around to the practicality of eating Irish babies, but I hope it wasn't that.

Satire works by taking what is familiar and everyday, but combining it with something repulsive that we cannot accept, but not so far removed from what happens in the status quo, thus making us question our acceptance of the status quo. So Animal Farm has funny parts and it is so clever, but if you are not disturbed by Boxer's death, it is less effective. Brazil can have laughs, but is it a comedy?

Obviously it can be easy for satire to go wrong, and I think it is useful to look at a failed satire as well, so I refer to Bret Harte's poem "Plain Language from Truthful James", otherwise known as "The Heathen Chinee."

Harte was sympathetic to the Chinese immigrants in California, who faced a great deal of prejudice and abuse. In the poem, two white men and one Chinese man play euchre, and while the Chinese man said he was not familiar with the game, and while at least one of the white men was egregiously cheating, the Chinese man is winning, which is because he is cheating too. The other cheater complains about being ruined by "Chinese cheap labor" and then physically attacks him.

The poem became very popular. Opponents of Chinese immigrants quoted it all the time. The first time I saw it was in Best Loved Poems of the American People, and there was no disclaimer that it was satire; so I just thought it was really racist.

Harte was embarrassed by this, and he did try and write a make-up piece, "Wan Lee" but Wan Lee had some honesty issues too, so Harte's sympathy may have been hampered by his own prejudices.

The poem is not a great poem, in terms of meter and clarity, but it did have elements of parody and some of the things you would expect to see in satire. I think its problem was that nothing was horrible enough. Hypocrisy, complaining about cheap Chinese labor, beating the laborers, having riots where Chinese people were killed and their property destroyed, that was all ordinary and acceptable. If only Bill Nye had cheated, but he blamed it on Ah Sin, would they have cared then? Instead of helping, Harte added fuel to the fire.

It may have simply been a situation where satire was not going to be effective. Satire is not for everything. Humor is not for everything.

And most importantly, humor and satire are not synonyms. Repeat that as many times as it takes.

Colbert, Zepps, and Park: One more time!

In March I wrote about the CancelColbert hash tag. This included a reference to Suey Park's interview with Josh Zepps, and the way he condescended to her, talked over her, and called her opinion stupid right before she cut the interview short.

As I was writing about attempts to silence women, I had been thinking about Zepps' attitude a lot, and just as I posted, there it was in my timeline again.

It came from Nick Katkevich, asking first about Zepps not being fired, and then if he had ever apologized to Suey: " As a fellow white bro, I know it's hard to reflect on our privilege, but its got to be done"

Zepps: It does. I reflect constantly on my privilege. The solution to bigotry is robust dialog, not pouting censoriousness.

Me: That's why talking over her telling you about her experience, instead of listening to her, was so rotten.

New person (over 2 tweets, errors are his):

she didn't relay her experience she spent 5 minutes insulting anyone that was white 1/2

and then when shut down acted all offended and refused to expalin why. 2/2

Me: Seeing his mind was closed, and it was, she moved on. Feel free to do the same.

The reason that I think this is kind of perfect is that the new guy is telling me what I saw, even though I saw it. Of course he's on Zepps' side!

I did rewatch the interview, because I am conscientious like that, and I stand by my previous evaluation.

First of all, I notice that Zepps quoted the foundation name, knowing that was repeating the offensive language, and he seems to enjoy doing it. I had not picked up on that the first time.

Secondly, the tweet he uses from Park specifically says that they are going for an apology, not cancellation, and her first response is really talking about why you use severe language (like "cancel") to get a response.

Next up is Zepps asking if she understands satire, which is a remarkably condescending question, but I will have more to say on that later. Park nonetheless gives a reasonable response about how you should punch up instead of down with humor.

Zepps asks whether it doesn't make more sense to go after Snyder than Colbert, and Park refers to her efforts in that area. This is where she first mentions white people, though it is specifically white liberals, and says that there are things they can do and that the backlash is more this feeling that they can't have fun anymore, which I think is an accurate assessment.

In giving that background, Park refers to the term "orientalism" which is a real concept that refers to real things that continue to be an issue, but Zepps calls the term stupid, and that it would be silly to get mad over the use of the word. He probably means it would be silly to object to the use of the word "Oriental" while she is talking about people doing the things that would fall under "orientalism", but then he needs to point out that it wasn't Colbert himself, it was the show's PR, which is not that strong a point, and talks over her some more.

(A lot of his points are things I addressed in my original post, which I will link to at the end.)

This is where Park points out that as a white male he is not in a position to understand how people of color might feel about it. Zepps interrupts again to say that being white doesn't mean he can't think, Park calls him out for being patronizing, Zepps tells her she can have an opinion but it's a stupid opinion.

At this point Park tells him that she is not going to enact the labor, and why, and the interview ends.

Responding to my new friend, this is not five minutes of insulting whites. (I am a white liberal, if anyone was wondering.)

Telling me that I do not understand racism the same way that someone who experiences it is accurate. The truth can be used as an insult, but I don't think that's the case here, and I doubt it would have been said at all if Zepps had been offering any respect. Judging only by this interaction I would say Zepps is a horrible interviewer, but maybe he is more respectful with men.

Actually, listening respectfully to all people might be a good point for Zepps, but there were two different points I had in mind. One came from a later segment, and I remember hearing him ask whether he can't have an opinion about women or racial minorities, or something outside his experience. I believe he pointed out that he is a minority in one way, being gay.

There are lots of straight people with opinions about gay men, are those opinions more relevant than the personal experience of those who actually are homosexual? Talking over someone to tell them why they are wrong about their life and their feelings before they even have a chance to tell you where they are coming from is rude, of course, but it is also arrogant and shortsighted, and really surprising for someone who makes his living as an interviewer on a network other than Fox.

Many people looked down on Park's ending the interview. I have seen people refuse to engage, and it often seems abrupt; there are two things to remember. One, and there were some links about this Wednesday, is that activists, especially women, get a lot of abuse, which takes a toll. They have a right to decide how they are going to spend their energy. It is important as a matter of self-care, and it is important as a matter of effectiveness. I found a quote that is helpful recently:

"The function, the very serious function of racism is distraction. It keeps you from doing your work. It keeps you explaining over and over again, your reason for being. Somebody says you have no language, so you spend twenty years proving that you do. Somebody says your head isn't shaped properly, so you have scientists working on the fact that it is. Somebody says you have no art, so you dredge that up. Somebody says you have no kingdoms, so you dredge that up. None of that is necessary. There will always be one more thing."  -- Toni Morrison

That's not to say that it is always intentional racist derailment, but they may not be interested enough to listen, or even if you could get somewhere, it still might not be the best use of what is always limited time.

I have tried engaging a few times, when someone else had stopped. Usually, they just don't want to understand.

One woman, after not getting the response she wanted from one activist (not Park), started claiming abuse and warning people, because she had started getting all of these spam messages and email problems, which clearly meant that they were malicious hackers targeting her now. This happened right around the time of Heartbleed.

I knew, but did not come right out and say, that even if the person she was mad at was capable of wreaking all this havoc, this woman was not worth the effort. Instead, I told her about Heartbleed, because it is good to know that information, and she was clearly not computer savvy. She eventually accepted that she had not been sabotaged, but she remained offended. After all, when she accused them of attacking her computer, they did not take her seriously at all!

Was that worth my time? If she changed her passwords and it somehow saved her bank account, maybe, but it was really irritating. Fortunately, I am not prominent, I don't have anyone trolling me, and I am not overextended at this time (though this last week has come close). That's not true for everyone.

I have noticed lately that worse things are happening more frequently. It wears you down. For anyone who decides that it is not worth speaking out, I can't blame them. If someone decides to take a hiatus, I understand. For now, I am here.

For that other bit of condescension though, that really needs it's own piece. Tomorrow we talk about understanding satire.

http://sporkful.blogspot.com/2014/03/canceling-colbert.html

http://heartbleed.com/

Stolen labor

There is a one day delay in getting to the incident I referred to Wednesday, because something came up that is time-sensitive.

Of course Wednesday was talking about efforts to silence women. I don't have time to work with all the aspects of the dehumanization that comes into play in its many aspects. There is a trend in society now to not value people or there work.

That can be something as simple as people not paying for music because they don't have to, even though they like the music and the people that make it. It can take the form of not paying interns, or offering to give freelancers exposure instead of money, because you can get away with it.

Sometimes, it can go like this:

http://walidah.com/node/369

I felt sick when I read this. I contributed to that Kickstarter. I felt like it was an important story, which is still true, but the tellers are falling into some of the same historical patterns that have created the story. I don't think there are bad intentions, but there is a lack of realization of where there should be credit, and permission, and boundaries.

The filmmakers do seem to be learning from this, and trying to adapt:

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2014/07/whitelandia_portland_filmmaker.html#incart_m-rpt-1

That is still ongoing, but already better than the next story:

http://chiefelk.tumblr.com/post/93517003309/giveitupcca-on-july-12-2014-it-was-brought-to

In the college's own response they refer to plagiarism, and then put it aside. There are horrible messages here for the students, and again, over and over there is this erasure, and discounting. Sometimes it is accidental and sometimes it is malevolent, but when you erase people in the process of doing projects about the erasure of people, there is a special level of amazement.

Tomorrow one topic that will come up is enacting labor, and so today's post is probably helpful for providing examples of what the costs can be, and why it is not always worth it. However, the real reason that I am posting this today is for this:

http://www.youcaring.com/nonprofits/teach-in-summer-fundraiser/212206

They are trying to turn a negative into a positive, to raise the same level of funding that someone thought their work was worth if done by someone else, and then to expand the educational efforts, because they will not be silenced.

Please help them out.

Band Review: The Bedroom Hour

The Bedroom Hour is an unsigned band from West London. Their album Hinterland was released about two weeks ago.

Listening to that along with 2013's Themes, my first thought was that Hinterland was a move into a more reflective and experimental music, but the foreshadowing was there. The haunting guitars run through all of the music, and there are really beautiful instrumental bits that are never overpowering.

Perhaps nothing predicted "Ww/Me", but that really means there is nothing like it. I don't even know how to describe it. There is a guitar thread running through it that reminds me of Billy Idol-era Steve Stevens, but there are other sounds that are very futuristic, and since the vocals are still kind of going in the haunting vein, maybe it's the percussion that grounds it.

The music is thoughtful and affecting, and that's what you carry away, but there is nonetheless some rock to it. That can especially be heard on "I See Suns" and "Tyrannosaur."

So, it's interesting to listen to. My personal favorites, "X Marks the Spot" and "Slow Motion Cinema" are on the older release, and yet I feel like there is a maturation and growing confidence going on with Hinterland that bodes well for The Bedroom Hour's future.

http://www.thebedroomhour.com/

https://www.facebook.com/thebedroomhour

https://www.youtube.com/user/thebedroomhour?feature=watch

https://soundcloud.com/thebedroomhour

https://itunes.apple.com/gb/album/themes-ep/id639762289

http://www.thebedroomhour.bigcartel.com/

https://twitter.com/Thebedroomhour