Uncategorized

On the Fate and Future of Elsewhere

 

Perhaps the title is misleading, seeming to imply something strange, mystical.  The idea of talking about a vague term like ‘elsewhere’ in a temporal sense sounding potentially both interesting and absurd, intriguing and pretentious.  But no.  No no no.  My ambitions today are barely even literary much less high-end philosophical.  No, I merely want to discuss my increasingly large and long-term series ‘Elsewhere,’ and where it is going from here.

 

Earlier, when series 1-3 of Elsewhere appeared, I was up to date on my research, ready to go with a day or two of refreshers and a general idea based upon individual history and the arc of a larger theme.  And yet this has caught up with me.  I have numerous other projects in the works (the many-times referenced biography project I am composing, as well as the new Recording Editorial History podcast, every Thursday at 9PM Western Standard Time on demospinradio.com), and as a result, and for the practical reason of making a living, these stories have slowed down tremendously.  The next part, the final section of Series 4 on Europe, will be on Scandinavia, with the title “Scandinavia, The Happiest Frozen Wasteland on earth.”  This should appear by the end of this week.

 

Subsequently there are two more Elsewhere series’ planned, Part Five on periods of world history so significant that they have been named (‘Bronze Age,’ ‘Iron Age,’ ‘Renaissance,’ ‘Reformation,’ et cetera), and this will be followed by Part Six, on all the modern day civil wars raging throughout the world.

 

The Elsewhere series, other than a few stray, intentionally provocative opinion pieces included herein, has been my most popular series by far, and I truly appreciate the apparent on-going interest.  It has taught me a great deal about the nature of the world and the cyclical nature of history, and I hope it has, thus far, provided you with at least a touch of the same.

 

Opinion pieces are easy to write.  One does not even need to base the commentary on their actual beliefs, merely a chronicle of what someone, somewhere, has claimed to be true.  This has always been the goal of Recording Editorial History, and in this sense it has provided a study more of reactions coming from disagreement, than anything to do with whatever opinion is being presented.  This shows the darkening tide of social divisions we face.  The history pieces, hopefully, provide a model of how we have already been there before, and how we eventually grew out of our intolerance and simply lived exhausted lives until the next controversy consumed everyone.

 

I have recently been marketing the possibility of a collection of Elsewhere for physical publication, and the problem is that it has mostly already been published.  Of course the pieces will be edited and modified for precision and perhaps a few added details, but it makes it a harder sell, especially when it is offered online for free.  Nevertheless, thank you for sticking with me.  Today, by the way, 6/18/2019, is the literal one year anniversary of this site.  I have decided that with this latest piece of barren self-promotion that I am done for the day–

Advertisements
Uncategorized

A Follow-Up and Promotion of The Feminization of Masculinity, and The Recording Editorial History Podcast

 

Apparently my recent piece on men bothered several readers.  No doubt they were the people alluded to within the narrative, or were simply young people who for some reason believe I was targeting them, personally.  Or perhaps they were merely a stereotype, the college kid pissed off by and protesting everything they somehow force themselves to find offensive.  Curiously none of the negatives responses came from women, perhaps further justifying my point (or, perhaps, women didn’t even bother to care).  Either way, I was amused by the negativity thrown my way on this particular piece.  If you have the opportunity and inclination, please check it out.

 

Additionally, this coming Thursday, 6/20/2019 you can listen to a supplement to this essay on the Recording Editorial History podcast, to be found at demospinradio.com.  The time is 9 PM Western Standard Time.  I live on the East Coast, USA, which makes it midnight here.  The podcast will be broadcast every week on Thursdays at this time, with the occasional week off and a rerun.  Sometimes topics will relate to a recent piece, like this one (although the recording was made prior to the composition of the essay in this instance).  Other times a wholly original topic will crop up, with occasional guests.  I hope you have the chance to tune in and catch me ranting.

Uncategorized

The Feminization of Masculinity

 

Related image

Let’s talk about men. You remember men, right? Hairy, unkempt, foul-smelling, crude. We can think up a thousand other mostly derisive adjectives and find a thousand different ways that men believed those negatives were in fact a major advantage. Who knows, some men may even belch or fart out their replies with rhythmic syncopation (something requiring hours and hours of hard work just to get the syllables right).

 

Of course those were not the only men we used to think of back in those not too distant days of yesteryear.  And let us dismiss those hovelling pieces of shit who try to beat, control–even rape women out of jealous possessiveness (really just unconscious acknowledgment of their inadequacy).  Those people are hardly men.  Those pathetic cowards deserve no other title than the one I just gave them, if not worse.

 

Men were often thought of as heroes.  They were brave.  They took care of their families.  They sacrificed every nuance of their being to build for a better future.  Or at least that was another cliche.

 

The idea of ‘the patriarchy’ is as old as human society, and is more than a little valid as both a criticism and a defense on the rise and fall of civilization.  Men, at first to give them their due, have often worked extremely hard and with self-sacrificing dedication to develop and somewhat achieve the ideals they suffered for the betterment of humanity.

 

Men have notoriously been the greatest artists and most brilliant writers and, for all the modern day dismissal of this idea set in a time gone by, if we were to narrow it down and avoid gender prejudice, it would be difficult to dispute such a conclusion.  Now of course this does not mean that there are no female artistic geniuses or that in many instances you can point out the superiority of women’s work, but the history of gender relations offers an even better explanation.

 

For the bulk of human history women were denied the opportunity to compete with men.  They were often treated as vessels, as incubation chambers for the next generation of male leaders.  Education was limited, opportunities were certainly suppressed, and the condescending culture only allowed women to develop a subtle, manipulative intelligence on how to get their men to do their bidding.

 

Meanwhile men, at least ideologically, regardless of how reality usually undermined this, were allowed to pursue their own ambitions, free in their youth to believe they could become anything they wanted.  Oh how times have changed.

 

There was certain vengefulness to the dawn of the many feminist movements.  This does not disregard, of course, the political and philosophical validity of these endeavors, but it does provide us a window into how we have become such a confused and broken society.  Here is a brief timeline:

Image result for radical feminist movements

Related image

Image result for early feminist movements

Image result for early feminist movements

Image result for radical feminist movements

Related image

Image result for radical feminist movements

Related image

 

Image result for radical feminist movements

Image result for women feminizing men

Image result for feminized men

Image result for women feminizing men

Beyond the images, how did this come to be?  Of course we can make the case that men needed to evolve, both socially and morally in relation to women, but the transformation of men from this

Image result for macho guys 1950s

to this

Image result for feminized men

creates a troubling picture, at least in the broadest sense.  There have always been people who have felt more comfortable in different skin, and there has always been individual transformations that both men and women have had to make in order to be themselves, but the absolute incursion of this change upon now two entire generations of boys reflects a type of social engineering out of dystopian fantasies.

 

The height of the feminist movement emerged out of the endless protests of the 1950s through the 1970s.

Image result for feminist movements 1950s

Image result for feminist movements 1960s

Related image

And of course there were counter-protests, anti-equal rights amendment crusaders, like Phyllis Schlafly,

Image result for feminist movements 1950s

leading crusades every bit as female-centered as those fighting to be free.

Image result for feminist movements 1970s

Image result for feminist movements 1970s

And yet the virulence, on each extreme end of these protests, has metastasized into something absolutely cancerous, the once nearly declared “war against women,”

Image result for feminist movements 1970s

still a legitimate concern with the radicalization of misogynist groups like the Incels,

Image result for incel

has also watched the birth of slightly more subtle misandry groups

Image result for misandry

Image result for misandry

Most of this hindsight is all talk, blather on both ends of the stick seeking to sound more important than they every might possibly become.  Just like there are numerous men today who wish they could live in a creepy The Handmaid’s Tale (https://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?isbn=9780860688662&n=100121503&cm_sp=mbc-_-ISBN-_-used) world

Related image

let us not doubt that there are women with equal and opposite oppressive fantasies about men that have nothing to do with B & D sex games:

Related image

But all of these issues relate to merely perverse gender politics, horrible people doing horrible things to mostly other horrible people for horrible, horrible reasons.  What I’m saying is that people of these absurd degrees do not deserve our acknowledgment.  But what does matter, what has had an enormous impact on the modern world does come out of the post-hippie era feminist movement.  It is the new approach to child-rearing, not just among mothers, but into that swinging, selfish drug haze of the 1970s, where children were suddenly more often left alone to fend for themselves because mom and dad were out getting high or swapping spouses or involved in weird new-age cults that attempted to offer simpler meanings to life.

Related image

Image result for latchkey kids

Image result for latchkey kids

What about me?  some parents would even shout at their children, bitter and hating the fact that they wound up living a life they had been protesting since they were young.  I don’t want this!  We can still hear these echoing screams, the drastic rise in divorce rates (of course most divorces happen for very good reasons and of course more people still together should probably have long since separated), which comes with increasingly frequency over something as insignificant as a single fight, or the fact that one or the other does not know how to cook, or some other excuse other than I simply don’t love you anymore.

 

Some women became rather predatory at this time too, angry loons with merciless agendas to raise a new generation of wholly subservient and helpless males.

Image result for mothers scolding boys

Image result for mothers scolding boys

Image result for mothers humiliating boys

With new ideas on freedom, men, boys, have been taught to shut their mouths and do as they are told.  They are taught they are stupid, taught that they can’t do anything right.  The waves of liberation that once inspired young women have spoiled into their middle age, with far more conservative world views regardless of how liberal they might on the surface pretend to be.

 

So-called ‘helicopter moms’

Image result for helicopter mom

or their even more malicious brethren, bulldozer parents

Image result for bulldozer parents

are creating an entire society that refuses to take responsibility for anything.  Sure, they can blame their parents for plenty (broken environment and economy comes to mind), but there is always a moment when children need to grow up and take charge of the world.  Instead . . .

Image result for hipsters

Related image

Related image

Image result for hipsters

Image result for hipsters and cell phones

And this is the level of distraction.  The men . . . the men–and most women know this, being honest eventually about what, if anything, any longer attracts them in a man–the men are a bunch of whining pussies.  In the past whenever a guy made a sexist remark, and a woman got upset, he could just pat her on the ass and tell her to lighten up.  Now, should a women make a similar slur against a man, they are just a whining gaggle of hens.  They go to the bathroom together and stare in the mirror.  They giggle and gossip and laugh uproariously at nearly everything women say because they fear being called sexist for not appreciating her sense of humor, or for simply not thinking she is funny.  They will even be the first to scorn men, getting ahead of the women (who sometimes have no interest in condemning the man in question).  They shout about gender equality with the sort of urgency women once exuded when it was a new issue.  And yet the men fall flat.  They try too hard.  They make fools of themselves, often.  No one respects them anymore.

 

It is less the year of the woman than the era of the death of man.  We really should mourn this far more than inevitably we will, but new generations continue to arise and transform their parents’ prejudices into the worst of all sins.  Get ready, man-pussies.  Your kids will swing their own wrecking ball.

 

 

 

Uncategorized

The Debut of the Recording Editorial History Podcast!

Exciting news (for me, anyway, ambition and ego merging).  On Thursday June 12, 2019, at 9PM PST, the new podcast version of Recording Editorial History debuts on www.demospinradio.com.  Of course I am east coast USA, which makes this a midnight debut, but I figure people wandering around online at any given hour might give me a chance.  Listen, learn or disagree!  Hear what I sound like and be throughly disappointed!  Come to realize, perhaps, that some seemingly logical essay I wrote sounds froth-mouthed insane being spat out in my frantic tones!  Or, expect more of the same as here, which is how I think of it, with potential for a much larger audience.

 

The first commentary deals with racial problems and misunderstandings.  It is a monologue adaptation of several pieces written here.  Please, listen and make comments.  Send me hate mail or marriage proposals (I would laugh at both).  Thank you for your continuing interest, and I look forward to offering this additional version of variations on the truth.

Uncategorized

Lou Dobbs: The Cartoon Prophet of Irrational Blindness (Revised and Reprinted from 11/26/2018

 

The current Elsewhere series has been far more intensely researched than most of the others.  This is not to state that I have simply invented historical incident in order to tell a story.  And while ‘editorial history’ seems to imply that the so-called facts are opinion based, the pieces I publish on here have different distinctions.  In fact, some of them are editorials and, like with Elsewhere, others are history.  And while there are unquestionable judgments parsed throughout the text, those are based upon what did and did not occur, on the realities versus the myths that develop around the past as we get further and further away from it.

 

Today I will republish an older piece, one that is less relevant today than when I wrote it, but provides a good example of the ‘editorial’ side to these histories.  The final part of Elsewhere Series 4, on Scandinavia, will appear within the next few days.  So please, enjoy this, probably the meanest piece I have written since the birth of this site:

 

Related image

Related image

I would like to take a moment to discuss an angry, hysterical fool named Lou Dobbs from FOX Business News.

 

Remember way back when Lou Dobbs was some sort of business anchor on CNN?  He seemed like a real asshole at the time, ranting and raving vitriolic hatred of Mexicans as though more than one of his wives had left him for a caballero.  He hated those south of the border, from Mexico all the way down through South America, and I am sure he probably hates people from most other nations too.

 

I also remember Lou Dobbs with a fine, more salt than pepper conservative hairstyle (featured above)–a decent enough looking man, with a booming voice and an arrogant confidence in the truth of whatever gospel he decided to peddle on any given day  (it eventually devolved into the same clearly racist diatribe against his extremist perception of liberal ideology).  Now his hair seems to have regained its color (or some color, orangey off-brown) after years of at least looking dignified.

 

He left CNN in some kind of huff, replaced by women, or another hour of Wolf Blitzer or Anderson Cooper.  The very pleasant Christine Romans replaced him as chief business correspondent.   Lou Dobbs was rapidly becoming irrelevant.  He had once been network vice-president at CNN.  He was one of its founding newscasters.  Now he seems to be little more than a cranky old man shouting his be-spooked opinions at an indifferent television set, blaring out things that frighten him.

 

Fox News eventually hired him (or Fox business news, but Dobbs’ style of paranoid blame is far more at home in their prime time line-up).  He was given a new sort of freedom at Fox, aware that his new home was more interested in hiring personalities and opinion makers.  He was allowed his to vent not just his rage, but his modesty suppressed bitterness, his partisan contempt, which undermines anything he might have to say.  Any theory the man has about business, or politics, or the validity of living a certain lifestyle, is now by nature a question mark.  But Fox News loves his talk show, frenzied interviews with unreliable conspiracy theorists, hosted by a cruel man putting everyone down and shouting conspiracy theories that only a handful of other kooks will believe.  And in the Trump era this is a growing audience, which gives a 73-year old man the ability to righteously loath America while pretending to be a true patriot.

 

If we were to go back in time we would see the slow evolution of the modern newsman through the fractured lens of Lou Dobbs.  He was the son of a failed propane salesman, born in Texas.  When his father’s business drained every penny that they had, the Dobbs’ moved to Nowheresville, Idaho, and seethed with contempt over what they perceived was a bitter world out to get them.

 

Lou was a smart boy, and he worked hard, got terrific grades, and eventually went to Harvard, where he graduated with a degree in Economics.  After leaving college, the true asshole that the man continues to be began to make itself known.  His first job was working with a special interest group promoting anti-poverty programs in Boston.  Sounds honorable too, like the noble work of a talented young man looking to save the poor from misery.  After all–Lou Dobbs knew what it was like being poor, having such a profound failure as his primary role model.

 

But Lou disagreed with many of the liberal platforms these economic planners wanted to implement and he started, briefly, his own right-wing economic revivalist movement that saw the elimination of poverty as a statistical concern.  If you were to remove unemployment and other government benefits all together, then people need not be counted.  America could have the lowest unemployment rate of any nation in the history of the world if only the dirty, the filthy, the lazy and the unlucky were no longer treated as citizens.

 

Dobbs returned to Idaho after this, briefly attended law school, but dropped out when he learned that the US Constitution violated his own ideas on how the nation should be run.  He then moved to Los Angeles, got a job as a ‘cash-management specialist,’ which is basically a stock trader for a bank.  He made some wild and unlikely investments, but the man knew what he was doing.  He was very successful.

 

But Lou hated the backroom reality of his otherwise important job.  He was certainly respected by his bosses, but he wanted to be in the public eye.  Lou Dobbs wanted to be famous.  He got married to the girl he was dating in high school (they divorced a few years later), had a kid, then moved to Arizona.  There he got his first taste of television, joining a local news team as a police and fire reporter.  This experience exposed him to some pretty awful things, and he increasingly wanted to place blame for all social problems on a group of people.  But this was not allowed in the meant-to-be judicious newscasts of the early 1970s.

 

Within a few years Dobbs was the chief anchor on his Arizona station, until he left for the same job in Seattle for a whole lot more money.  And then, in 1979, Ted Turner got in touch with Lou, and offered him a job as the chief economics reporter of his new 24-hour news network.  He was even given his own show: Moneyline.  The title annoyed Dobbs, who was otherwise very excited about his national exposure.  He had wanted to call it The Lou Dobbs Show, or Lou Dobbs Tonight, which is what it was eventually called as his increasingly controversial and panicked views made him more and more popular.  He has kept the same eponymous name since he arrived at Fox in 2011.

 

At CNN, at first, Dobbs was heavily relied upon.  He was involved in program development and even the hiring of correspondents.  And the more this went on, the more sour Lou became, annoyed at the growing multiculturalism in the news room.  There were stories of Dobbs using racial epitaphs to the face of Hispanic and Black co-workers, and he insisted, as much as possible, having white male Republicans reporting the stories he wanted aired, or so some people claimed.

 

It started to unravel shortly after the shooting at Columbine high school in 1999.  President Bill Clinton was giving a speech in Littleton, Colorado, discussing the tragedy and trying to promote a time of healing.  In a rage, Dobbs demanded that his producer cut away from the “anti-gun nonsense” of the President and the meaninglessness of this amoral man trying to comfort children (a paraphrase of his actual words), and return to the regular broadcast of stock market futures, and how the Democrats were destroying everything that was America with their open border policies that they couldn’t possibly believe in.

 

The then president of CNN, Rick Kaplan, overruled Dobbs on this issue and, on the air, clearly seething, Dobbs said through clenched teeth that “CNN President Rick Kaplan wants us to return to Littleton.”  Within days Lou Dobbs announced that he was leaving CNN to start Space.com, a website on everything astronomical.  This was something Dobbs was utterly unqualified to do, and seems to be the moment, perhaps, when the man lost his mind, like the ‘mad as hell’ Howard Beale from the classic film Network (and the now classic stage play starring Bryan Cranston).

 

When Rick Kaplan left CNN in 2000, Ted Turner asked Dobbs to return, which he did, now hosting a broader news program at first called Lou Dobbs Reporting.  This eventually morphed into CNN News Sunday Morning,  and Lou was returned to daily evenings with Lou Dobbs Moneyline.  In 2003 he finally fulfilled his self-referential dreams by becoming host of Lou Dobbs Tonight, a more general title that gave him, he thought, the freedom to talk about anything.

 

The rapid decline of Lou Dobbs’ career at CNN came shortly after the election of Barrack Obama.  Dobbs could not believe it.  A black man–a Kenyan he declared on live TV.  Dobbs was the first mainstream news host to promote the birther theory, and he circled back around to this every single night.  He grew angrier and angrier, believing America was being thrown away, overtaken by savages and foreigners and what happened to the good old American way when the white man was in charge and kept everything safe?

 

In late 2009 Dobbs abruptly announced his “immediate departure” from CNN.  He gave no reasons, and later promoted the theory that he was pushed out because of his views.  This is a curious response, as Dobbs told no one at the network he was leaving prior to his live statement.  In a later interview, between his shrieks about how unfairly he had been treated, he declared that he was considering running for President.

 

After that Dobbs spent a number of years in the sewer of right-wing talk radio, far more at home promoting new conspiracy theories and reaching an angry audience wanting to be told who and what to hate.  More than most, Lou Dobbs provided this fuel.  He could probably be peripherally blamed for a number of hate crimes, although I am personally against charging someone who says something with the crimes it may have inspired in some lunatic listening.  He even announced on the air that he desperately wanted a job with the Treasury Department, claiming that he could “do more good than the clowns currently in position.”  He blamed the economic slowdown of 2012 not on the corruption of banks, or the cost of war, but on Obama himself, claiming that the President was bankrupting the nation on purpose to help his Muslim brothers take over the world.

 

Lou also wrote about these ideas in mainstream magazines like Money and US News and World Report.  He would even occasionally have a mean-spirited editorial in the New York Daily News, generally a repetition of whichever conspiracy he was peddling on the radio that week.

 

By the time Dobbs was hired by the FOX Business Network he had radically shifted his political views.  He started trashing George W. Bush as “a failure” and “a disgrace,” and increasingly shifted more and more to the right, eventually sinking into the bowels of nativist ranting.  He shouted about the need to close the borders, warning of all the Muslim terrorists that were trying to sneak in, and the invasion of Mexicans and other Spanish-speakers who (although he never explained exactly how) were going to destroy America.  Everything on his show was now an apocalypse theory, all the things he was scared of being the spark that would kill the fewer and fewer things he cared about.

 

When Donald Trump ran for President, Lou Dobbs saw a savior, a personal messiah.  This was the deity America needed, and the government needed to be changed in order to give this heroic man absolute power.  After all, Trump knew how to make money.

 

The birther theory remained in full effect, and the Muslim/Mexican/Black/Jewish/George Soros/Illuminati/New World Order, et cetera ideology spread until, conspiracy theorist himself, Donald Trump was elected president of the United States, giving the erratic Lou Dobbs justification, finally, for his public hatred campaigns.  No longer would he talk about money (Trump was in place–everything was going to be fine, he said).  He even had the President on his show a few times, Dobbs melting into submissive worship, begging his lord for a blessing.

 

And now Lou Dobbs has become so petty, so small (or perhaps he always was), so hysterically emotional and resentful of his own hurt feelings (something he projects onto other people, claiming that liberals are the ones always whining about something that offends them), that he will go after anyone or any idea that does not fall absolutely in line with his fascism. 

 

On a personal note, Lou Dobbs reported me to Twitter when I responded to one of his overtly racist tweets with one that threw the same idea back in his face, declaring his own Irish ancestors illegals in their time and that, perhaps, his own rights to citizenship should be revoked.  Of course this was stated far more harshly.  In the end, I was suspended for “offensive and hateful speech,” which made me laugh out loud for longer than was necessary.  I thought, “this small-minded motherfucker.  All he does is criticize everyone he disagrees with, and comes to extreme solutions and conclusions without even caring about the issue.  Yet he can’t take it himself.”

 

In the end, I guess, the angry old man Lou Dobbs is just a whining pussy who thinks that his opinions are gospel truth.  Before too long some younger, sharper right-wing commentator with a background in making money will have his job.  How much longer can Dobbs and his writers convince people to be paranoid?  How much longer can this germ of a human being possibly be listened to?