Chocolate Kicks

I simply wait for the day that they drag me to some air-conditioned dungeon and leave me there beneath the fluorescent lights and soundproofed ceiling to pay the price for scorning all that they hold dear within their little latex hearts.

- Ignatius J. Reilly

Posted 4 days ago

cokekitty:

Angry Eye

The Angry Eye is an experiment conducted by Jane Elliot that serves to educate people on the effects of discrimination. By separating brown-eyed college students and blue-eyed students, Jane dehumanizes blue-eyed people, calling them “Bluey” and insinuating they’re stupid or somehow less than brown-eyed people. The point is to put a group of people on the receiving end of discrimination that they may not be familiar with. The Brown Eye/Blue Eye exercise is meant to demonstrate that discrimination (racism, homophobia, etc.) is a learned response, and that education is the solution to these problems.

I found the video really thought-provoking and I think I’m starting to understand the social justice people on Tumblr a little more.

“We are going to accuse them of not being as smart as we are. We are going to accuse them of not being as clean as we are. We are going to lower our expectations of them. We are going to force them to live down to our expectations of them, and when they do, we are going to blame their inability to perform, on the color of their eyes.” - J. Elliot

A guide of the video can be found here. 

Reblogged 1 month ago from cokekitty 4 notes

Running makes me feel better. Too bad this Coloradan altitude is killing my endurance. 

Posted 5 months ago

Politicalprof: Irony, Access and the Decline of Good Political Interviews →

politicalprof:

One of the remarkable things about watching media members interview politicians these days is just how bad the questions are. The journalist inevitably starts with a softball set up question that allows the candidate to offer some version of their stump speech for an answer. The journalist either…

I’m drunk. But I think this is true. At least a variation of truth I’m more accustomed to. (Lydia Davis, fix my grammar!)

Reblogged 5 months ago from politicalprof 122 notes
politicalprof: I hate that the “V” Guy Fawkes mask has become associated with the Occupy movement. That it appears to be at the choice of the Occupiers makes it so much the worse. Consider, for a moment, the political symbols embedded in the two photos above. On the left, there is a hard piece of plastic shaped into a deliberately grotesque form. It is a caricature of an attempted regicide and mass murderer who tried to blow up Parliament for religious reasons—namely, that he and his co-conspirators were Catholic and the regime was Protestant. (That the wearer is also apparently garbed in a Palestinian keffiyeh further complicates the symbolism.) The mask was subsequently co-opted for the character “V,” an actual bomber who manages to blow up Parliament … but no one really is supposed to mind because the regime is corrupt. The entire vibe is angry, frustrated and alienating: creepy people with angry intentions are in their audience’s face, insisting that almost anything is legitimate because the ruling regime is so vile. On the right we have a green field, a blue sky, and a man and a woman talking freely and happily. He is costumed (as the “V” protestors are); however, his costuming is evocative of American values and American memories: the experience of winning freedom from the British in the American Revolution. It has Thomas Jefferson, a “Don’t Tread on Me” flag and, seemingly appropriately in America, a do-it-yourself moving truck in the background. The people are smiling—proud to be asserting their opinions into the debate of the moment. I don’t care that what the Tea Partiers want is stupid. What I care about is that their symbols appeal to and evoke a shared American history and a deep appreciation for the mythologies that make Americans American. They invite others to join in a cause that is deeply culturally embedded. By contrast, the Guy Fawkes “V” mask does none of this.  The American wing of the Occupy movement needs symbols that engage and embrace the American public rather than alienating and intimidating it. Put another way, it’s easy to generate sympathy when college students sitting in a quad get pepper sprayed. It’s much harder when mask wearing who-knows-what-they-ares get attacked.  Drop the mask, people.  I do admit being enamored with the V mask myself. Yet while I don’t agree with PoliticalProf’s take on rooted symbolism, sympathy is a powerful weapon. And I can’t see myself hugging someone with that mask on. In any case, the symbols those two Tea Partiers are using invoke a “shared” memory for the privileged of this country. Just as the Occupy movement doesn’t choose to barrage Catholics or Protestants, the Tea Partiers selectively choose not to parade around with the chains and whips of slave masters. They’re all romantics.politicalprof: I hate that the “V” Guy Fawkes mask has become associated with the Occupy movement. That it appears to be at the choice of the Occupiers makes it so much the worse. Consider, for a moment, the political symbols embedded in the two photos above. On the left, there is a hard piece of plastic shaped into a deliberately grotesque form. It is a caricature of an attempted regicide and mass murderer who tried to blow up Parliament for religious reasons—namely, that he and his co-conspirators were Catholic and the regime was Protestant. (That the wearer is also apparently garbed in a Palestinian keffiyeh further complicates the symbolism.) The mask was subsequently co-opted for the character “V,” an actual bomber who manages to blow up Parliament … but no one really is supposed to mind because the regime is corrupt. The entire vibe is angry, frustrated and alienating: creepy people with angry intentions are in their audience’s face, insisting that almost anything is legitimate because the ruling regime is so vile. On the right we have a green field, a blue sky, and a man and a woman talking freely and happily. He is costumed (as the “V” protestors are); however, his costuming is evocative of American values and American memories: the experience of winning freedom from the British in the American Revolution. It has Thomas Jefferson, a “Don’t Tread on Me” flag and, seemingly appropriately in America, a do-it-yourself moving truck in the background. The people are smiling—proud to be asserting their opinions into the debate of the moment. I don’t care that what the Tea Partiers want is stupid. What I care about is that their symbols appeal to and evoke a shared American history and a deep appreciation for the mythologies that make Americans American. They invite others to join in a cause that is deeply culturally embedded. By contrast, the Guy Fawkes “V” mask does none of this.  The American wing of the Occupy movement needs symbols that engage and embrace the American public rather than alienating and intimidating it. Put another way, it’s easy to generate sympathy when college students sitting in a quad get pepper sprayed. It’s much harder when mask wearing who-knows-what-they-ares get attacked.  Drop the mask, people.  I do admit being enamored with the V mask myself. Yet while I don’t agree with PoliticalProf’s take on rooted symbolism, sympathy is a powerful weapon. And I can’t see myself hugging someone with that mask on. In any case, the symbols those two Tea Partiers are using invoke a “shared” memory for the privileged of this country. Just as the Occupy movement doesn’t choose to barrage Catholics or Protestants, the Tea Partiers selectively choose not to parade around with the chains and whips of slave masters. They’re all romantics.

politicalprof:

I hate that the “V” Guy Fawkes mask has become associated with the Occupy movement. That it appears to be at the choice of the Occupiers makes it so much the worse.

Consider, for a moment, the political symbols embedded in the two photos above. On the left, there is a hard piece of plastic shaped into a deliberately grotesque form. It is a caricature of an attempted regicide and mass murderer who tried to blow up Parliament for religious reasons—namely, that he and his co-conspirators were Catholic and the regime was Protestant. (That the wearer is also apparently garbed in a Palestinian keffiyeh further complicates the symbolism.) The mask was subsequently co-opted for the character “V,” an actual bomber who manages to blow up Parliament … but no one really is supposed to mind because the regime is corrupt. The entire vibe is angry, frustrated and alienating: creepy people with angry intentions are in their audience’s face, insisting that almost anything is legitimate because the ruling regime is so vile.

On the right we have a green field, a blue sky, and a man and a woman talking freely and happily. He is costumed (as the “V” protestors are); however, his costuming is evocative of American values and American memories: the experience of winning freedom from the British in the American Revolution. It has Thomas Jefferson, a “Don’t Tread on Me” flag and, seemingly appropriately in America, a do-it-yourself moving truck in the background. The people are smiling—proud to be asserting their opinions into the debate of the moment.

I don’t care that what the Tea Partiers want is stupid. What I care about is that their symbols appeal to and evoke a shared American history and a deep appreciation for the mythologies that make Americans American. They invite others to join in a cause that is deeply culturally embedded. By contrast, the Guy Fawkes “V” mask does none of this. 

The American wing of the Occupy movement needs symbols that engage and embrace the American public rather than alienating and intimidating it. Put another way, it’s easy to generate sympathy when college students sitting in a quad get pepper sprayed. It’s much harder when mask wearing who-knows-what-they-ares get attacked. 

Drop the mask, people. 

I do admit being enamored with the V mask myself. Yet while I don’t agree with PoliticalProf’s take on rooted symbolism, sympathy is a powerful weapon. And I can’t see myself hugging someone with that mask on. In any case, the symbols those two Tea Partiers are using invoke a “shared” memory for the privileged of this country. Just as the Occupy movement doesn’t choose to barrage Catholics or Protestants, the Tea Partiers selectively choose not to parade around with the chains and whips of slave masters. They’re all romantics.

Reblogged 5 months ago from politicalprof 120 notes