Kate Smith, etc.

 I'm not sure who was the first to shout "Kate Smith!" in a crowded hockey stadium, but it's a question worth asking. Certainly there are many who consider themselves left of the dial who are also petty people, but most of the people I know or know about who are working for change now don't have a lot of spare energy to research, let alone campaign against, offenses of a singer popular decades ago, as they are too busy fighting for things like housing, employment, and access to health care. Let's call that point A.

Point B: As any hack stand-up will tell you, hockey is a sport widely understood to be predominantly played by and enjoyed by white males, and it has a reputation for indulging physical violence more than most sports do. Now, who would be most interested in establishing a hot-button issue that might unify or even mobilize a group they perceive as being white males who might be receptive to violent behavior? I'm not sure what a left-leaning agenda gains from poking this particular bear. So as usual, it seems to me that it's the scumbags with power who have the most to gain from pursuing new ways to drive wedges and foment discord among groups of working people -- particularly at a time when a lot of working people are pushing back against the moneyed and powerful.

Point C: Before getting all riled up about how nothing is safe and no one is sacred, maybe the thing to be thinking about is not how hyper-sensitive some people are, but rather, just how many of our nation's sacred cows were involved in some very problematic shit. Some were steeped in it, while some simply walked in with a bit on their shoe; but it all got shit on the carpet, and it all helped us grow accustomed to the smell to the point of near passivity about it. So instead of freaking out over the uppity-ness of those calling such offenses out, consider another perspective. Namely, "Goddamn, look how racism, sexism, bias, and ugly thinking has been woven into damn near every move we've ever made as a nation!" If that doesn't give you real pause, you might not actually be as American as you think.

Point D: All people are flawed, and all people are problematic. This is the truth of us, despite decades of A&E Biography et al simplifying the lives of the influential for easier public consumption. The best way to honor someone we perceive as "great" on some level is to recognize that their life, like everyone's, is/was a balancing act between their flaws and limitations and their capacity for greatness. That the best lesson a life lived well can offer us is how they got past all the bullshit -- internal and external -- that threatened to capsize them and pull them under. These are the real lessons best taken from those we admire -- seeing them as they were as clearly as we're able. I like statues. I especially like that birds shit on them. I think of it as nature's way of reminding us of that balance I'm talking about.

Point E: Fuck hockey, fuck all pro sports (that corrupt, murderous, soul-taking industry), fuck meaningless, compulsory patriotism, fuck blind, two-fisted, uncritical allegiance to any person, place, or idea, and most of all, fuck any and all who would divide us by introducing arguments for the sole purpose of playing into and shoring up our fears and prejudices. In situations like this, "Who called the tune?" is just about always more interesting -- and relevant -- than whatever gets everyone so steamed in the first place.

Finally, Happy Borgnine Saturday! Because despite everything, it is Borgnine Saturday, and that's something worth celebrating.

© 2019 Wyatt Doyle, all rights reserved.

Astonished, But Not Surprised

The above video was sent to me by a loved one, headlined with a quote from the video: "Is it possible to be astonished, but not surprised?" With so many Americans inflamed by an controversy any child with a cursory understanding of our Constitution could resolve definitively, I might ask the same thing.

To me, there is only one response:

He's wrong. The question isn't whether the Cordoba Center is in "good taste," or if allowing it to exist is somehow "pandering"; the only question is, do we or do we not stand behind our Bill of Rights? If we do, we must accept that we will sometimes find the ways our fellow Americans choose to exercise those rights upsetting, offensive or distasteful. And registering our displeasure about that is another freedom afforded us by that same Bill of Rights.

As a proud and patriotic American, I'm not willing to allow any religion, philosophy or popular movement to subvert that excellent document—directly or indirectly—by dictating which specific Americans those freedoms should or should not be guaranteed to. Bow to those pressures, and our freedoms lose all meaning.


© 2010 Wyatt Doyle

CURRENT EVENTS HOMEWORK: AFGHANISTAN by Andy Biscontini

You have eighteen months to demonstrably answer the following questions:

(Demonstrative graphs and diagrams are acceptable, but must be accompanied by synopses not to exceed one thousand words.)

1. Is it possible for the United States to establish responsible relationships with or facilitate the establishment of relationships between enough population factions within Pakistan and Afghanistan to establish a functioning economic system? If so, do we expect some kind of cut in return?

2. If Afghanistan has a future as a non-narcotic agricultural society, is the most obvious relationship not one of supplier to Pakistan’s densely populated urban areas? If so, would it then be Pakistan’s interest and responsibility as purchasing (consuming) economic partner to maintain the health of Afghani society, with implicit potential for cultural influence?

3. If the only thing the U.S. gets out of the whole thing is the satisfaction of fostering the development of healthy and benevolent sovereign societies, does that justify the expenditure of blood and treasure?

4. Wouldn’t it be cool if Britain agreed to shoulder the investment in urban Pakistan that could help finance the reorganization of agriculture in Afghanistan? If so, would that be a preferable use of their suddenly scant pounds as opposed to their current military presence in Afghanistan, not to mention a heartwarming shot at post-colonial reconciliation?

5. Is it called “market-making” when you create a market for healthy food and agricultural products while setting non-exploitative terms with your providers? If not, why?

6. Is it rare for people from healthy societies to want to blow everything up?

©2010 Andy Biscontini

Round and round she goes

Every Dog's Day trailer
Uploaded by andybiscontini

Thanks to the good folks at indiepix, "Every Dog's Day" is now available for rental via Netflix.

As the primary authorial voice behind it, I feel a certain ambivalence to the fact that much of what it satirizes has only become more relevant in the five years since it was shot insomuch as, while I'm glad it's relevant, I kinda wish it weren't...

So if you, like me, prefer to laugh at the global and economic mess we're all in rather than cry about it, put us in your queue.

And as always you can order it directly through indiepix. Download it for only $7.95 or order the DVD for $24.95.

In the meantime, send some good wishes to our good friend Niko, who played Vlad, and happened to have arrived in Tblisi, Georgia to visit family and friends two days before the goddamn Russians blew up the airport.

Uncle Steve brings it.

Stephen King in TIME magazine:

"You know, I just filmed a segment for Nightline, about [the movie version of his novella] The Mist, and one of the things I said to them was, you know, "You guys are just covering — what do they call it — the scream of the peacock, and you're missing the whole fox hunt." Like waterboarding [or] where all the money went that we poured into Iraq. It just seems to disappear. And yet you get this coverage of who's gonna get custody of Britney's kids? Whether or not Lindsay drank at her twenty-first birthday party, and all this other shit. You know, this morning, the two big stories on CNN are Kanye West's mother, who died, apparently, after having some plastic surgery. The other big thing that's going on is whether or not this cop [Drew Peterson] killed his... wife. And meanwhile, you've got Pakistan in the midst of a real crisis, where these people have nuclear weapons that we helped them develop. You've got a guy in charge, who's basically declared himself the military strongman and is being supported by the Bush administration, whose raison d'etre for going into Iraq was to spread democracy in the world.

"So you've got these things going on, which seem to me to be very substantive, that could affect all of us, and instead, you see a lot of this back-fence gossip."

Read the whole thing here.